Jakab said;
"I think that when the hole was built it was both too long and too difficult...It would have been a much better hole if the green was placed further from the ocean but the view and framing of the hole won out....a mistake of Faziotic proportions that technology has corrected."
And then Shivas said to JakaB;
"barney, are you saying the green should have been in the isthmus, and that the short/left and long/right areas should have been chipping areas? Interesting... and brutally hard."
And then JakaB said to Shivas;
"Shivas,
Exactly...now that would have been genius...and ballsey to boot. No way in hell was that green placed next to the ocean so an easy bailout would be available...the hole was comprimised architecturally simply for the view."
And JakaB followed that up with;
"As a point of note...I don't have a clue what an isthmus is..so the design credit should go to Shivas.... "
And then Shivas said to JakaB;
"that would be a helluva hole, wouldn't it? Give new meaning to the "death long" concept, huh?"
That's perhaps one of the funniest exchanges I've ever seen on Golfclubatlas.com. I never really understood why CPC's #16 is one of the most famous and respected holes in the world but now I know--it's the view--it's just so nice to look at and so photographable although the green site is basically a mistake in placement.
Let me see if I have the options right for the way it should have been.
The golfer weighs the options of;
1. Do I want to hit the ball directly at the isthmus green with Pacific and/or beach just short and also just long with something like a 7-4 iron depending on conditons?
2. Do I want to bail out left of the green with about a 9 iron to lots of land and chip onto the green from the left?
3. Do I want to take out a 3w or driver and risk carrying it all the way across the Pacific inlet purposely missing the green with one of the more demanding shots in golf for the glorious reward of being able to chip back to the isthmus green from the right?
I thought the idea, emanating from some on Golfclubatlas, of redesigning another famous hole, Pebble's #18th to have a redan green was good--but it certainly wasn't quite this creative.
What in God's name could Mackenzie/Hunter/Hollins have been thinking of when they designed #16? What a colossal mistake they made despite what a million or two golfers think of the hole as it's always been.
I hope CPC is reading Golfclubatlas--they should get on this isthmus green redesign thing like yesterday!! And if golfers don't like the hole or understand it at least CPC could still say they have the highest risk purposeful bailout area option golf architecture has ever known.
JakaB and Shivas;
You two are architectural stunners but my advice would be don't give up your regular jobs just yet!