[Kevin Pallier]

Golf Magazine has ranked it as high as #2 in the World (it currently sits at #7). GolfWeek and Golf Digest have it as a Top10 US course.

Having recently been through the USA on a whirl-wind trip I was fortunate to see a good cross section of quality layouts and PB was underwhelming for mine.

I’ve made two visits to PB over a 10 year period and I can’t for the life of me work out why this course is so revered ? Is it because of the fact that it is a public access facility in that one can pay US$500 for the “privilege” of playing it ?

Yes it has a great setting - yes holes 6 through 9 + 18 are “great” holes but what other holes in the routing make it worthy of a World Top10 course ?

I am obviously missing something and would like to understand as to why it is so highly regarded ?

[Ronald Montesano]

I'll chime in before the others do.  I think you'll get two types of responses:  the California boys who have played it numerous times and understand its nuances and charms (and have a bit of nostalgia, as Paul Cowley indicates in another thread.)  These blokes tend to support Pebble's stature.  You'll then receive input from those who decry its status, calling its placement a flawed ranking.  No one disagrees with the holes that you mention; the main debate rests on the inland holes and the conditioning.  If the course is fast and firm and the wind is up, it seems, the course plays quite differently from wet and soft and calm.  What course doesn't play differently, you might ask.  Good question.

I'd love to play Pebble Beach, but not for the asking price.  Truth is, there are plenty of other public-access courses with similar vistas, superior challenges and lower green fees.  Pebble set the standard, but must now serve as a mentor to the younger hot-shots.

[Matt_Ward]

Kevin:

I hear what you say but try to realize this ...

PB is vastly overpriced and much of the dissension is tied to what people pay and often times the turf conditions in the past can be underwhelming to say the least.

Let me point out that I would not have PB among my personal top 10 in the USA but it would make my second ten for sure.

Kevin, so much of PB is tied to the turf quality -- does the course play much more differently from a time in say January to when things dry out. The answer is 100% yes.

You also have very tiny targets to hit irons to -- failure to be in the right place can prove quite vexing -- failure to keep the ball below the hole is also advantageous when the greens are quite quick. Yet, there is also one other dimension to consider -- the wind. PB can be quite tame when the wind is down and the course is not that quick. Players shooting 62's there are not uncommon. But , if you bother to check out the tapes from the '72 and '92 Opens (the 4th rounds in each) you can see what wind on such a layout can mean.

I don't see Pebble being among the very elite courses in the world -- but I also don't concede as its detractors often chime in that the course is vastly overrated. I see the case from both groups and would split the difference and have the course below where it resides now but not that far down the overall totem pole.

Ron:

Few courses have the kind of smallish targets that PB provides. Just a hair degree of firmness and anything more than a breath of air blowing can mean a major difference -- let me also point out that none other than both Nicklaus and Watson have both concurred that if left with one round to play they'd opt for PB. That's not praise indeed. You do have ocean vista holes at other courses, but many have greens the size of Kansas with little to distinguish them when contours and internal positioning is factored. I don't disagree that the overall price at PB is out of site (save for celebrities and titans in industry).

[Andrew Summerell]

Kevin,

I've played it a few times now & do not believe it to be a top 10 course in the world architecturally. In saying that, I do believe it deserves a spot somewhere between 30 to 50 in the world, which would mean it's still a special course.

I understand what Matt is saying regarding turf conditions, but for mine it's just not strong enough architecturally over the entire course. Of the 70 or so world top 100 courses I've played, I would consider about half of them stronger architecturally.

Of course, you may be stepping into a hornets nest here Kevin.

[Ronald Montesano]

Matt, both Tom and Jacko won US Opens at Pebble Beach and Tom played there a ton while at Stanford.  During their formative years, Pebble was THE yardstick.  It no longer may be/is.  Both of those titans hit the ball inordinately high and would have been able to attack those smallish greens you distinguish.

I commented in the other thread that I thought you could bring back a bit of the fear to the player of today by adding slope to fairway drive zones.  Still coming in with short iron?  Fine, but here's a bit of sidehill or downhill/uphill to make things dicey.  I think it could be done in lieu of shrinking fairways and adding bunkers.  I am also for repositioning fairway bunkers to accommodate technology.  I've seen bunker repositioning performed most recently by Ian Andrew at Cherry Hill, a course in Canada that hosted the Canadian Open and the Canadian PGA (in a year that Ray Floyd, Jim Thorpe and Ben Crenshaw all played the tournament).

[Adrian_Stiff]

I was extremely dissappointed when I played it, although that stretch from 7-10 is amazing +18 of course. To me it has 10/10 holes and a lot of 5/10 holes.  It gets bonus points for the history, like others.

[Kevin Pallier]

You also have very tiny targets to hit irons to -- failure to be in the right place can prove quite vexing -- failure to keep the ball below the hole is also advantageous when the greens are quite quick. Yet, there is also one other dimension to consider -- the wind. PB can be quite tame when the wind is down and the course is not that quick. Players shooting 62's there are not uncommon.

Matt

Thanks for your posts and I appreciate that you dont hold it in as high regard as some. However - I can name numerous courses though whose greens are quite small. That factor alone doesn't give it enough kudos for World Top10 status IMO particularly when most of the greens and greensites aren't what I'd say "awe inspring" designs.

....<snip>let me also point out that none other than both Nicklaus and Watson have both concurred that if left with one round to play they'd opt for PB. That's not praise indeed.

Both Nicklaus and Watson can have PB for their last round - if I could secure it - pen me down in Monterey for a game at Cypress Point instead 

[Kevin Pallier]

Kevin,

I've played it a few times now & do not believe it to be a top 10 course in the world architecturally. In saying that, I do believe it deserves a spot somewhere between 30 to 50 in the world, which would mean it's still a special course.

I understand what Matt is saying regarding turf conditions, but for mine it's just not strong enough architecturally over the entire course. Of the 70 or so world top 100 courses I've played, I would consider about half of them stronger architecturally.

Of course, you may be stepping into a hornets nest here Kevin.

Andrew

Glad to see a fellow Aussie sees PB in somewhat of a different light. Indeed I may have stepped into a hornets nest  

Lets put PB ranking into some context currently #7 in the World per Golf Magazine (US).

Better than Merion ?
Better than Sand Hills ?
Better than NGLA ?
Better than Pacifc Dunes ?
Better than Fishers Island ?

No way is PB better than any of the above US courses that I've seen.....

Ok - lets see some O/S courses
Better than Royal Dornoch ?
and dare I say it Royal Melbourne (Composite)

What is so good about PB - that it deserves such a lofty ranking ?

[ed_getka]

Kevin,
    Good to see you putting your "graduate work" to good use.

Pebble Beach is a stern test for a US Open, but I have thought less of the course architecturally as the years go by and I have seen more great designs. Some speak of nuance, but I just don't see it. There are some greens with some fairly significant slope and you obviously have to be below the hole on those. The water views are nice, but I am surprised more people don't comment on the houses and buildings as they often do about Pasatiempo. I'll take Sand Hills all day every day over Pebble Beach.
 
Have fun with Ash on Monday. I wish I was there with you guys at NSW.

[ChipRoyce]

Like the topic - will be interesting to see how this discussion plays out.

I agree with the assertion of 10 holes that are 10/10 and 8 that are just 5/10. I think too much value is placed on the scenery and not on the GCA itself.

Last time I suggested this, I was shouted down by much of the treehouse that made the claim that the scenery is part of the GCA.

[Ronald Montesano]

Educate me, please, as I've never played the course...is any part of Pebble Beach on sandy soil, or is the base much more earthy than Bandon, Sand Hills, Cypress Point, Praire Dunes, Kiawah and other US-based sand courses?

[Mike Jansen]

It is ranked that high because Pebble Beach wants it that way.  There are golf raters out playing here all the time... the more they are taken care of the more they write about it, the higher they rank it.  I'd say 80% of people who have had the chance to play both Pebble and Spy numerous times agree that Spy is the better golf course (architecturally, conditions...), yet it barely cracks the Top 50.  Why would Pebble want it known there course is second rate in their own quartet of  courses?

[Adam Clayman]

It's likely some of the recent changes have hurt Pebble's greatness, Altering the 3rd, 5th and 15th, but, I challenge anyone of those who have cited holes at Pebble with inferior GCA to expound and illuminate the rest of us with specifics, Please?

And I'm sorry, but anyone opining that Spy is better GCA, must respond with their case. That statement alone should have that person seeking out more knowledge.

[Andy Troeger]

At least we are getting the annual "Pebble-bashing" thread out of the way early this year. I don't get why so many people see so many of the inland holes as inferior to the "less-great" holes on any number of top courses, save perhaps the 15th. Other than Cypress, I haven't played anything that compares, including Spyglass.

[Ronald Montesano]

What this thread truly needs is more precision and less flirtation.  If you don't like the inland hole(s), tell us why not.  If you support their existence as top 10 holes, indicate your reasoning.

A)  Some of us haven't played it and need exacting proof (one way or the other);
B)  Inaccurate and generic commentary is a waster of digital space;
C)  The course is so high-profile that an approximate or precise verdict from this site will go a long way, at least in our GCA world.

[Andy Troeger]

What this thread truly needs is more precision and less flirtation.  If you don't like the inland hole(s), tell us why not.  If you support their existence as top 10 holes, indicate your reasoning.

A)  Some of us haven't played it and need exacting proof (one way or the other);
B)  Inaccurate and generic commentary is a waster of digital space;
C)  The course is so high-profile that an approximate or precise verdict from this site will go a long way, at least in our GCA world.

Without meaning to be flip--search the archives. This is covered every year by a slightly different group of folks. There have been a couple lengthy threads that are good reading if you're interested in the topic.

[Jud_T]

Matt,

Excellent points about the conditioning... I played it in a drizzle in the winter...Will definitely try to make it back in the summer to try to catch a dry spell...The cost shouldn't be a factor in people's opinion of the course, only of it's value.  If value were the only criteria, we'd all get seasonal memberships at Lawsonia and call it a day (not a bad option since they finally decided to sell beer    ).  As for the pedestrian holes, greater minds than I have pointed to the 12th in particular.  

[Ronald Montesano]

Forget the archives...do it now, as tony gray has chosen with Chambers...put the holes up, one by one, tee shot, fairway shot(s), green angles, to support your position.  This devil's advocate sits firmly on the fence, waiting for supporters and detractors to make their case.  If you don't have time to do such, get off the thread.

[Andy Troeger]

Forget the archives...do it now, as tony gray has chosen with Chambers...put the holes up, one by one, tee shot, fairway shot(s), green angles, to support your position.  This devil's advocate sits firmly on the fence, waiting for supporters and detractors to make their case.  If you don't have time to do such, get off the thread.

See ya...

[Adrian_Stiff]

It's likely some of the recent changes have hurt Pebble's greatness, Altering the 3rd, 5th and 15th, but, I challenge anyone of those who have cited holes at Pebble with inferior GCA to expound and illuminate the rest of us with specifics, Please?

And I'm sorry, but anyone opining that Spy is better GCA, must respond with their case. That statement alone should have that person seeking out more knowledge.

I preferred Spyglass to Pebble Adam, I have played those courses once only. I played Pebble in a cart and I wanted to walk, maybe I lost something that had I walked would have improved things. Spyglass I loved that first 5 and the rest of the course was pretty good too, It's hard to expand my reasoning other than I thought it looked nice, played tough but fair and there was not much to say bad, some great fours at the end as well. Pebble has moments of brilliance obviousy because of the brilliant vista, I thought the 1st was 5/10 and could be anywhere, 2nd quite nice say 7/10, 3rd was dull 5/10, 4 I liked the quiirky green 8/10, 5 was the old hole another could be anywhere 5/10. 6 i think i did not rate but my opinion on this hole not being good seems monority, I did not like the blindness, the skyline.. I saw no ocean so 6/10 7-10 wow all 10/10. 11 is say 6/10 12 I thought was too narrow a green 5/10, 13 was ok 7/10 14 I did not like at all 5/10, 15 is ok but could be anywhere 6/10, 16 not bad 7/10, 17 was a 5/10 for me (a real dissapointment) 18 was wow. My opinion might change with mutiple plays, perhaps I missed good bits in the holes ive rated lowly. Overall my dissapointment was in the blandness of many holes (too many), perhaps I expected too much with PB and was not expecting so much out of SH.

[cary lichtenstein]

I must have played Pebble over a 100 times and loved every single round. If I had one course to play for the rest of my life, and only one, I would play it every day.

The price is ridiculus, I stopped going there in 1992, so I assume the price is way beyond what it was. But the greens were so tricky with all the poa, what a pleasure figuring out every shot.

It was not the hardest course, but who wants to be beat up every day?

[JESII]

I'm in the camp that was underwhelmed...but I don't think anyone thinks of it as anything short of a great, great course...just that we all can think of 10 or 20 we would prefer to play for any number of reasons...



Ronald,

Re: specifics...the top courses on my personal list have one or at most two holes that I see as mundane where Pebble has #1, 3, 11, 12, 13 and 15...and a few others that only register with me as good holes.

[Anthony Gray]

  The fact is that IT IS PEEBLE BEACH. It is an awesome golfing experience. For those that can seperate golf design from golfing experience it may not hold up to the press. But very few golfers are like that. The PB experiences is supperior to others for many of the above reasons. Many just cannot block out the location,location,location. The views, accomdations and atmosphere. And why would you want to? Adam Clayman's experience of watching the ashes of a former astronaunt being placed in still water cove speeks volumes. That does not happen at a place that is not super special. Top 10 in many ways.

  Anthony

 

[Mike Hendren]

It's likely some of the recent changes have hurt Pebble's greatness, Altering the 3rd, 5th and 15th, but, I challenge anyone of those who have cited holes at Pebble with inferior GCA to expound and illuminate the rest of us with specifics, Please?

And I'm sorry, but anyone opining that Spy is better GCA, must respond with their case. That statement alone should have that person seeking out more knowledge.

Agree 100%.  Pebble doesn't excuse many poor golf shots like other highly rated courses.  I think the 2nd and 3rd are grossly underrated.  The second gives the player an opportunity for an early leg up (which he'll need later), but any miss from the tee creates a dilemma for the second shot.  The third calls for the player to accurately judge line and distance, though the new bunkers on the outside of the dogleg are lamentable.  If you don't accurately judge from the tee, try hitting that green from the rough.  The greenside bunkers there are surprisingly deep as well.  The 4th is a classic straight away short hole.  Most people whose opinion I respect liked the original 5th, but the current 5th would be a standout anywhere else.    The 11th is a nifty uphill short hole that is an excellent test of short iron distance and I like the downhill 12th better than most.  The shot is almost unfair given the shallow nature of the green but anyone other than the low handicapper is forced to pick his poison distance wise.  The new bunkers at the 15th are unnecessary and that hole offers a little respite before the finish - but also offers disaster for anyone who slightly pushes their tee shot..  The 16th and 17th are underrated in my book.  The 16th requires the player to again judge line and distance from the tee and the approach begs to be below the hole.  I think the 17th is one of the great par threes in the game - tremendous elasticity based upon tee and pin location.  The fact that it witnessed two of the greatest shots in championship golf history is no coincidence.    

I find the routing brilliant and one could argue that the architect made better use of the coastline at Pebble than did the architects of Spyglass and Cypress Point Club down the way.

In total, I'd consider the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 15th, 17th, and 18th to be world class golf holes and only the 1st pedestrian.  

I'm a huge fan.

Mike  

[Ronald Montesano]

Rate the final three greens:

16--TV doesn't do it justice, does it?  Incredibly sloped...susceptible to the breezes...what else?

17--The hourglass is almost a metaphor for the grounds...it is such a famous symbol that perhaps its worth gets lost in its fame.

18--I complained about it in another thread and was corrected by at least two posters...what does it have that makes it good?  The fronting bunker does nothing for me.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()