Top Ten Reasons Cypress Point Club Can't Carry Augusta National Golf Club's Jock

[Mike Hendren]

Augusta National Golf Club's:
1.  Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2.  Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3.  Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4.  Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5.  Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6.  Greater visual intimidation
7.  Blind shot requirements
8.  Uneven fairway lies
9.  Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.

My next thread:  Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock.

Bogey

[Brent Hutto]

My next thread:  Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock.

Hmm, I've lost count. Are there ten holes at CPC with ocean views?

[Peter Pallotta]

Bogie - I don't know either course well enough to comment, but I will defer to you and your opinion (with trust and respect) if you'd be so kind to answer these two questions:

If one course, call it Course X (or, say, Augusta National) has greater elasticity, more interesting and challenging green surrounds, a really good -- and superior -- set of par 5s (a great feat in and of itself, IMO), contoured/fun greens that, in a consistently more meaningful way, 'work backwards' to the fairway in terms of ideal/required approach angles, and demands more frequently that shots be shaped both left and right, and this from canted/uneven lies, how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?

Thank you
Peter

[JESII]

...how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?

I believe Mark Twain said it first...



scratch that...either Robinson Jeffers of Francis McComas did...and I'm being liberal with Big Sur and the Monterrey Penninsula.


scratch again...Robert Louis Stevenson.

[JMEvensky]

Bogie - I don't know either course well enough to comment, but I will defer to you and your opinion (with trust and respect) if you'd be so kind to answer these two questions:

If one course, call it Course X (or, say, Augusta National) has greater elasticity, more interesting and challenging green surrounds, a really good -- and superior -- set of par 5s (a great feat in and of itself, IMO), contoured/fun greens that, in a consistently more meaningful way, 'work backwards' to the fairway in terms of ideal/required approach angles, and demands more frequently that shots be shaped both left and right, and this from canted/uneven lies, how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?

Thank you
Peter

I think it's a trick question.

[Peter Pallotta]

Show off...

Always saying more in 5 words than I say in 150, aren't you Jim?

Why don't you just mention that you're also a two-time Mid Amateur champion, add that into the mix if it makes you feel better...

I liked you better as JES, when your none-too-subtle put-downs were at least 'anonymous', since I didn't know anyone named JES.

Peter

For my next thread: Why My 150 Words are Better than Your 5

A trick question, JM? Ah, no my friend, an 'artful' one! 

[Jim Nugent]

What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?

Thank you
Peter

I also don't know either course.  But here are some possibilities:

1.  Better par 4s.  They make up over half the course.
2.  Better par 3s.  Add them to the par 4s, and now you usually have around 80% of the course.
3.  More strategy.
4.  On top of better par 4s in general, better short par 4s.
5.  A more spectacular site.
6.  Easier to play for the average golfer (less sidehill, uphill, downhill lies).  

But Bogey's last line in his post suggests he will answer your question himself.  

[JESII]

I was strung up for operating under a psuedonym or else I'd be the same old anonymous dick...

Must have been trying to persuade Tom Doak into a 10 year contract...I'm sure I'll be able to pay him by then...

As to CPC holding ANGC's jock...the truth is, there is an entire world of golf architecture junkies that say the ocean at Cypress, or Pebble for that matter shouldn't impact their architectural ranking...and amazingly they all log in here under one name PAT MUCCI[/color]...

[Rick Sides]

Mike,
Have you played both?

[Mike Hendren]

Rick, I have played Cypress Point Club once and walked it as an observer with an esteemed foursome (Huckaby, Cirba, Duran & Childs) on another occasion.  I have not played Augusta National Golf Club but watched practice or tournament rounds on 6 occasions.  

Peter,  Cypress Point is visually stunning and either unaltered or faithfully restored.  I'm gonna let the cognoscenti populate the imminent thread on its superiority.  A smart-arse could opine that without the ocean it and Mackenzie's Palmetto Golf Club are closer in the ratings than you might think.  By smart-arse I mean me, not Mucci.

Frankly, I love playing devil's advocate (btw, I only recently learned that term's origin as the party responsible for presenting a counter-argument to proposed sainthood of a faithful Catholic) when it comes to Augusta National Golf Club.  After returning there last spring for the first time in 20 years (and frankly having been educated by many friends and thoughtful students of golf course architecture such as yourself since my last visit) I left convinced of its greatness notwithstanding a few warts imposed upon it over the past few years.  I am absolutely in awe of some of the shots required by that golf course:  

The approach to one - check out Tiger's scoring history there
The drive at the second.
The pitch to either wing at the second - watch the better players use every inch of an extremely wide fairway to enhance the angle
The approach to the third - watch how long players practice pitching from behind that green during practice rounds
The tee shot at the fourth - absolute jail above the hole.
The tee shot at the fifth.
The approach at the fifth - perhaps the most underrated hole and green in the game of golf due to its isolation from tv cameras and the balance of the course
The tee shot to a back right pin at the 6th.
The approach to apparently nothing at the 7th.
The mountainous skyline second at the 8th  
The tee shot into oblivion at the 9th and 10th.
Uphill approaches off hanging downhill lies at the 9th and 10th.
The frightening approach to the 11th - if it's too tough for Hogan.....
The frightening shot at the 12th - watch how long it takes the players to pull a club.  I thought these guys were money from 155.
The requirement to hit a fade off a hook lie from the 13th fairway.
Access to pins on the 14th green
The second or 3rd to the 15th - diamond crunching stuff
The inability/unwillingness of the world's greatest players to access a back right pin at the 16th
Access to pins on the 17th green - an amazing number of 3's and 5's there have decided the tournament
The mountainous approach to the 18th.  Painswickian.

Oh my.  Trevino loved Merion.  I love Augusta National Golf Club whether her legs are shaved or not and regardless of her complexion.  I'm all in - 100% smitten even though she's unobtainable (and might not really be superior to CPC )

Bogey
 

[George Pazin]

Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...

Looking forward to the converse thread. Might I suggest a point:

1) Pacific Ocean. Rae's Creek.

[Mike Hendren]

Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...

George, give me some examples.  I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

They are two entirely different golf courses with different architecture and cultures.

They are both fantastic in their own right.

If you had to play either one, for the rest of your life, you wouldn't be unhappy and you wouldn't feel deprived that you couldn't play the other.

[Sean Leary]

Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...

George, give me some examples.  I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.

Mike

Pure Gold...

[George Pazin]

Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...

George, give me some examples.  I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.

Mike

Payne's comments yesterday just really rubbed me the wrong way. For a club that has made huge proclamations of rights of privacy recently (think Martha Burk - and I support them, not her, btw), to have him commenting on Tiger's private life struck me as about as hypocritical as it gets.

The course is certainly worthy of praise, even with changes I don't always agree with.

[Mike Hendren]

George, you are correct.  Payne undermined my premise rather quickly yesterday. 

Cheer, my friend.

Mike

[George Pazin]

Thanks, Mike. It was especially disappointing to me, as it undermined the sense of Southern genteelness.

Back to the courses...that's the fun stuff.

How do Cypress Point's par 5s stack up against one of the best sets of par 5s in the world? Does anyone have a better set than Augusta? Maybe PV? I love Oakmont's, but there are only 2...unless one counts #1, #2, #3...

[Adam Clayman]

CPC is playable year round. While their maintenance presentation is not Augusta's, if it were, that would take away at least one of your criticisms. The greens with in greens comment doesn't ring completely true either. It's proximity to the Ocean allows for greater winds.

I will concede that since ANGC came after CPC they had the upper hand in being able to create something better.

[JESII]

I will concede that since ANGC came after CPC they had the upper hand in being able to create something better.

Worthy of its own thread for sure...interesting comment.

[Jordan Wall]

Augusta National Golf Club's:
1.  Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2.  Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3.  Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4.  Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5.  Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6.  Greater visual intimidation
7.  Blind shot requirements
8.  Uneven fairway lies
9.  Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.

My next thread:  Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock.

Bogey

We all make our drunk mistakes...

[Mike Hendren]

How do Cypress Point's par 5s stack up against one of the best sets of par 5s in the world?

George, in my sophomoric opinion the only compelling shots among Cypress Point Club's par fives are the drive at the second where the player has the option to bite off as much of the diagonal carry as he chooses and the tee shot at the 6th where a big slinging hook started over the carry bunkers on the outside of the dogleg makes the green reachable in two.   I know the 5th gets a lot of praise, but often it's summarized by the fact that one can't see the myriad of bunkering when looking back down the hole.   

The 13th and 15th at Augusta National Golf Club are well-chronicled (as for the latter I think the hole would be rather pedestrian over flat ground - the dropping elevation change makes the hole).  I like the second as well based upon its placement in the round - the player has a little breather after the brutally hard first and perhaps a chance to regain a stroke lost at the first or bank a little store credit in anticipation of the very difficult 4th and 5th.  I would like to see the fairway bunker moved back toward the tee and along the left hand side as originally designed.  As for the 8th, I'd rank it with the 5th among the most underrated golf holes in the country.   Every shot there offers a demanding option.  The fairway bunker must be challenged to yield any opportunity to reach that green in two and even then the second is so daunting given the blindness and extreme uphill orientation.  Jail awaits left and more often than not the big hitter leaves his second right of the green with a nearly impossible pitch to get close.  Extreme fairway width at the top of the hill gives the more timid - or perhaps more strategic, player the option to approach the green with a full spinning wedge from far right.   Finally, it is a joy to watch approaches, be they with fairway metals, bumped short irons or full wedges as the ball simply refuses to settle on the green.  Again, its place in the routing is ideal as the player pressures himself to make 4 in anticipation of the difficult stretch of 9 through 12. 

My $0.02.

Mike

[Mike Hendren]

Augusta National Golf Club's:
1.  Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2.  Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3.  Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4.  Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5.  Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6.  Greater visual intimidation
7.  Blind shot requirements
8.  Uneven fairway lies
9.  Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.

My next thread:  Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock.

Bogey

We all make our drunk mistakes...

Funny, that's what the cognoscenti thought at Pentecost. 

How 'bout a real rebuttal young man.

Mike

[Terry Lavin]

I have been to the Masters but haven't played Augusta.  I've played Cypress and loved it.  Cypress has those unbelievable ocean holes and some phenomenal inland holes.  Awesome bunkering, lovely design, fabulous routing, riveting eye candy.  And it's not nearly as good of a golf course as ANGC. 

[Peter Pallotta]

This thread reminds me that I tend to believe the most important element in determing the nature and quality of a golf course/golf design is the fundamental INTENTION of its architect(s), i.e. what philosophy do they operate under/want to see made manifest, what kind/degree of greatness are they trying to achieve, how do they envision the golf course serving the golfer etc.  We often talk around here about various types/degrees of design 'bells and whistles' -- I tend to think that, compared to that initial and fundamental intention on the architects' part, it's ALL bells and whistles.

Peter - The Speculator on Golf Courses He Has Never Played.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Mike H..
As much as the tiitle of the topic made me bristle at first, when reading your ten reasons...
I have to agree with just about all of them.
Number two...the short game issue kind of goes along with the green within a green concept, so I put them as one.
The short games requirments of CPC  are superbly challenging without creating putting surfaces that are " tricked " up.

But I simply cannot argue with the other opinions.

Whether or not this makes ANGC the better course, or the one I would rather play..I dont believe that was your intent to even question with this thread...