A Bit Of Pinehurst In Pacific Palisades.......

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Taken from a line by Peter Osterhousse, (sp) The famous crowned greens of McRiviera. The only thing one needs to add is pine frowns.

Looking back on the Mc8th

George Thomas, Welcome home!

[Paul Richards]

Tommy:

That's wonderful!

Mc8th indeed!!

[Mike_Cirba]

And who says these guys don't know their "classics"?  

[JakaB]

Would somebody please tell me whats wrong with this green and whole hole....Am I spose to not like it just cause Tommy and at least one of 600 members tells me too.   Looks like a fun test to me...chipping areas...split fairway...high shot...low shot...options...stategy....whats wrong with all that.  p.s. If the pros bitch about it...it just makes it all the better.

[Geoff Shackelford]

Jaka,
Actually, the pros like the hole because it's easier to them than the old one-way eighth, which is the reason Peter Oosterhuis and Peter Kostis were so critical on the telecast. This was once a double fairway hole. Meaning there should be options desirable for different hole locations, weather, etc... There are no options. That's a problem. Everyone is going left. Why? Many reasons that are pretty obvious to most people in advance of the tournament.

Plus, the green doesn't look like anything on the rest of the course, yet they declare it a restoration. "George Thomas, welcome home!"

Geoff

[brad_miller]

Geoff, you me right off the tee, left as the pic shows?

[Mike_Cirba]

JakaB;

In a word, "incongruity".

It's like sticking a Dr. Dre rappin', rhymin' couplet in the middle of a Seamus Heaney poem.  

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

It goes back to continuity of architecture. If continuity is not important, then why not build large water hazards on the Old course? Wouldn't it be fun?

The old 8th at Riviera was a wonderful golf hole designed by George Thomas, Riviera is/was a wonderful golf course designed by George Thomas. And to sell the work to the general public the Fazio organization and the club are claiming they appreciate both those facts and they are also claiming they are in fact restoring George Thomas. That is a misrepresentation. They should simply tell the truth, that this was their creation and not really an attempt to restore the old hole. And that like the water hazards at the Old course it is their opinion it is more fun and better than the original. Simply be honest.

If John aka BarneyF likes it . . . . . . .

If the scores continue to be low, there isn't a chance in hell the course will get the US Open and all this work will be for naught. We will have down grade TF from Open Doctor to Open Resident or maybe one of those phsychic healers in the Phillipines -- lots of chicken blood, guts, and theatrics but no results. Advantage Torrey Pines.

[Geoff Shackelford]

Brad,
Yes, right fairway off the tee, left in the view above.

Tom Mac,
Well said. Though I do think that some of those involved actually think they are "restoring" while others just use the term to glorify their name or justify making changes suggested by the USGA staffers. It's a shame. Many people buy into the sping of course, and that's why the Fazio is doing this work in the first place, publicity, getting his name on famous courses, etc... (the press release lists Pine Valley as one of his renovation jobs, I wonder how the members feel about that?).  The majority of the media will buy into the restoration spin, thankfully the CBS crew and the more astute golf writers have not bought into it. I'm surprised the press releases fail to share the information that this is pro-bono work (you know, sort of a this-is-for-charity slant on the spin), but then, someone might just question their motives...
Geoff

[JakaB]

Geoff,

Thanks for your explanation...and I can say that I agree the course would have been better served by having a consistancy in the design of the greens if it is to remain a tribute to any one man.  I admire your crusade as I am sure it does not come risk free...what scares me about this site is when architectural rougues like TommyN post pictures from the most ridiculous bad angles with headings such as 'This is SHIT'....insult the character of good people practicing a difficult trade...and generally make arguments based on feelings and not facts...sometimes the Emperor has no clothes...and sometimes the serfs wear shades...but bad photos and emotional arguments always tell lies.

[Ken_Cotner]

Geoff and others,

From the photo, it appears a back-left hole location would encourage the player to try the right fairway.  True or no?

Thanks,
Ken

[JohnV]

JakaB or whatever your name really is, the reason for the disparaging comments on this hole are:

1) The green is so out of character with all the other greens at Riviera it is a joke.  It rolls off on the edges ala Pinehurst, but then they didn't even go all the way and make chipping areas below, perferring heavy rough.

2) The baranca that has been grassed in is so easy to recover from it almost isn't a hazard.  It was orginally a sandy wasty area that someone would want to avoid at all costs.

3) There is absolutely no reason to go to the left on this hole as that fairway is blocked by a bunch of trees that make it difficult to hit and you wouldn't get any benefit from taking the risk.

I played Riviera in 1997 and again last month.  All I can say is that almost all the changes are ugly or bad or both.  For anyone to characterize them as reflecting what George Thomas would have done is ridiculous.

The "one member of 600" happens to have studied Riviera and George Thomas more than any other person in the world.

[SPDB]

I've never seen Riviera, so I can't really engage in this discussion. But I do have a question. Is there any single change/restauration that Marzolf did which any of you actually like/agree with?

[JohnV]

The new 5th tee may be ok, although I didn't go up there and take a look.  But then they went and planted bunches of sea grass on the hillside below it when there is none anywhere else on the course so it looks dumb.

Probably the first one of the two new back tees on 12 is ok,  for the pros both might be.

[Tim_Weiman]

JakaB:

I've been a critic of some of Tommy's bunker pictures, but can't fault him one bit on this one.  The picture not only illustrates the changes that were made, but also makes fairly clear - at least to those familiar with Riviera - how much out of place this green is with the rest of the course.

As Tom MacWood suggests, using the word "restoration" in connection with this kind of work is inappropriate.  I take no pleasure in personally criticizing Tom Marzolf but both the work itself and any description claiming "restoration" only invite criticism.

This kind of work is not something the Fazio organization is good at.  They would be better off focusing on new projects and staying out of this game.

[Geoff Shackelford]

SPDB,
The new tee on 9 works well and brings the bunkers into play at just the right distances to be interesting. The rest of the new tees or add-ons are flawed for various reasons. All of the mistakes, which range from minor to major, show a lack of real thought along with not much awareness of what can makes the course more difficult but still interesting, and a real lack of regard for strategy in general. I guess what I find even more shocking, is that the aesthetic side, the Fazio's groups supposed strength, is so weak. Riviera has a sanitized, sterilized look these days, much of having to do with not having carried out this project more thoughtfully. One key to "restoring" the lost holes was the return of a sandy, nasty barranca. To create a hazard with some teeth. Instead, it looks like a turf nursery shaped in the vein of circa early 1990's Nicklaus designs.

Geoff

[Don_Mahaffey]

Geoff,
My brother, Ron, was the assistant Supt. at Riviera 1990-91 and I took full advantage of his position to play as often as possible. I was always in awe of the bunkers. They were rugged, with thick Kikuyu lips, unlike anything I had encountered growing up in the Palm Springs area. The pictures of the new bunkers look like they have gone with an entirely different style. I know the restoration talk is a joke, but what gives with the new look? They can't possibly be considering "restoring" all the bunkers with this new style, can they? If so, how can anyone prefer the new look to the old style? And, I don't buy the "it took decades for the bunkers to get like that” theory. There is no question that they did change some over time, but the new bunkers are entirely different and would never evolve into what is there now. Granted, I have only seen pictures of a few of the "new" bunkers, but can you say what is in store for the remaining bunkers?

Thanks

[GeoffreyChilds]

Don - it would be very depressing if all the bunkers were changed.  That aerial showing the the new ones around the beautiful old ones was pretty striking.

Geoff-  On #8 the play is clearly to go to the right side off the tee 100% of the time.  It leaves a longer approach but it seems like a pretty simple one given the much easier tee shot.  My question is if they had REALLY restored the hole as it was originally built would the option STILL have been to go right 100% of the time because given todays equipment its just a simple hole from that side?

I've never seen the course or any old pictures of the 8th hole.  I know the barranca was sandy and nasty and looked infinitely better but would it still be a nasty hazard today? How was the green changed and did that change affect the potential decisions as to which way to play off the tee?

What were the choices given the original hole and would they stand up to todays equipment? Should they have just left the hole as it has been since the flood?

Thanks

[Mark_Fine]

I played Riv last year and #8 was being worked on.  I agree with Geoff, there did not appear to be any options on that hole off the tee - you just go right!  But I wonder, if this were a debate, how would the other side defend all their actions?  Are they really that clueless and if so, why?  Why do we see things as black and they see things as white?

[Geoff Shackelford]

Don,
I'm very concerned that the rest of the bunkers will be transformed over time. Either way it'll be spun as restoration, so we won't know what the true goal was. Many more new bunkers are being talked about, many suggested by Tom Meeks of the USGA. I can only imagine how bad they'll be. Could you see how bad they looked from the blimp shot yesterday??

Geoff,
Lot of questions! I'll say this, for a long time many of us have said that restoring the old 8th would be very, very tricky and that possibility would exist that it might not work out. It would require time, patience, creativity and a knowledge of strategy to pull it off. EVERYTHING done displays the opposite and that is why it has failed. Maybe that'll make for a good "In My Opinion" article!

Mark,
I'm no so sure the "other side" sees this as a failure. Keep in mind, in the initial Fazio Master Plan, it states that they could restore the old #8 fairway to have "potential to create more tent areas in the U.S. Open by playing hole on right fairway only."

So with that in mind, I'd say it's been a huge success.

As for seeing it so differently, I'm finding those with the strongest opinions on this issue are the ones who base their opinions on information and study. The club has tried to spin things by saying everyone is entitled to their opinion. True, but aren't some opinions much better informed than others? Geoff

[Mike_Cirba]

Don Mahaffey,

It's sort of ironic.  Completely new style bunkers were built by the same architect/contractor on another classic course just outside Philadelphia under the heading of "restoration" and we heard the exact same thing....oh, just wait...in time they'll look just as good as the old.

Sure.  Uh huh.  Right.

[Mark_Fine]

It could be the old "foot in the door" move - He starts with one hole that looks completely different from the others, than slowly (or quickly    ) moves on to additional holes.  

One thing Fazio is good at is making his golf courses look pretty and his golf holes (good or bad) are always in harmony with one another.  I'm sure he must be fully aware this one is "out of harmony" with the rest.  Makes you wonder doesn't it!  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

As per John V's discussions, the new 5th tee, which I have to say reminds me of an ancient Aztec or Mayan pyramid where slaves were sacraficed.

I'm going to start calling it "Manchu Pichu."

To make matters even worse, this golf hole may now be considered a par 3 for John Daly, because of it. (the height of the tee.) It's both out of place and totally artificial looking.

[A_Clay_Man]

Out of place for the palisades, definitly, but you should see all those types of shapes here in the four courners. Sheryl and I saw some huge step-like plateaus which were staggered from the ancient river that flowed at intermitant levels. There were a series of them unlike this last pic which I assume is the only teeing ground like it at the Riv??

[Geoff Shackelford]

You look at this landscaping effort on #5 and you wonder if maybe it's better that they didn't try to create a sandy, grassy hazard look in the barranca. It would have turned into a hair plug lateral.