Is 16 at Cypress Point Really THAT Good?

[Mark Saltzman]

It is probably sacrilege to ask the question, but is the 16th at Cypress Point really that great a hole?

Don't get me wrong, the 16th at CPC is the hole more than any other in the world that I would like to play (I even have a framed aerial hanging in my bedroom).

From what I can tell never having played it, it is stunning, it is very long and it is very hard.  I know nothing about the actual green contouring.  The bunkers floating so far off of the green would likely be criticized if this were a modern design.  Further, the bunkers long could be criticized as being overly penal -- shouldn't there be somewhere to miss?

Everything I've read says this is one of the greatest holes in the world.  It is a thrilling shot.  It is a heroic shot.  If you lay-up, you will be made fun-of for years to come.  The shot evokes strong emotions.

If we replaced the ocean with a man-made pond, can't similar holes be found all over the state of Florida, and wouldn't it then be criticized as overly penal?

I don't believe the hole should be looked at in a vacuum, with no consideration of the beauty of the site.  But I also don't believe a beautiful site means a hole is great (just look at Trump LA)... so what is it about this hole that makes it so good?


A couple of thoughts from fellow discussionists whose opinion I greatly respect...

Golf Digest ranked it as the best par 3 in the world but personally I don't agree.  If you take away the Ocean is it still a great hole?  I think 15 is a better par 3 and think #9 is maybe the best hole on the course.  

I'm not sure I know what you meant when you asked the question, but I'm sure it's more about beauty than difficulty or strategic merit.  I've played harder par 3's and numerous par 3's with more strategic merit, but none more beautiful. (Let's be honest, here -- for stronger players there is NO strategy whatsoever to #16 -- you go straight at it, plain and simple, and it's such a long shot that you aren't really thinking about ball placement on the green -- ANYTHING dry is just fine!)

[Bob_Huntley]

Marc,

It really is a great hole. The green is huge  and there is a great deal of room to avoid the bunkering. The most  likely mis-hit shot when the wind is blowing is to plonk it onto the beach left of the green. When playing for the first time and trying to make sure of a certain score you can play it safe short to the left; most first timers have a bash at it.

Like many others I find the 15th equally as good a hole but who wouldn't, with a short iron versus a three wood to safety.

Bob

[Tim Bert]

The hole is beautiful and fabulous. I wouldn't want one on every course I played but it is one of a kind in its stunning beauty. Well, ok, 15 is every bit as beautiful but 16 stands alone for its intimidating beauty.

I took the road less traveled, and I took some mocking and criticism for it. Based on my attempt after my ball was safely in play out left, I made the right choice. Still, the decision haunts me in some ways. I posted my "score" (one which many of you would mock more than my layup) but I passed on one of the great risks in golf in my one time effort. I chalk it up to knowing my game, but I'm pretty sure I was scared. Probably unacceptable given I walked off 15 with a 2 and a very rare opportunity to join Club 22 my first and only time through.

The option is wonderful because it haunts one even more than the tee shot in the ocean.

[Jim Colton]

Mark,

 Does a hole have to be strategic to be great? Is there anything wrong with the architect dictating the exact, heroic shot you need to hit every now and then, especially on par 3?

 I'd call it great for all the reasons you mentioned. It is hard to discount the visual as it is so stunningly beautiful that it doesn't look real. It's hard to discount the ocean when it would've been an epic failure had they not built that golf hole there. I also really like where it comes in the round and the fact that it is in your head over the course of the round. For many, it is a once in a lifetime experience and the last thing you want to do is be haunted til the end of your days by blowing it into the Pacific. Unfortunately, I speak from personal experience.

[PCCraig]

Yeah...it's THAT good.

[Adam Clayman]

Mark, The hole is not hard, the people playing it get freak out, which makes it interesting.
The day I played it, it was a 215 yard shot.

It's setting and placement in the round is unparalleled.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark,

Your criticism of the back bunker lacks a basic understanding of the length of the approach and the penalty for going long if the bunker wasn't there.

The same concept is employed at # 17 at PBGC.

It's a great, long par three that follows a great short par three, and an excellent use of the land in terms of the routing.

If you want to criticize something that needs criticism, direct your focus to Ran's hairstyle.

[PThomas]

Yeah...it's THAT good.

+1

[Carson Pilcher]

Mark,

 Does a hole have to be strategic to be great? Is there anything wrong with the architect dictating the exact, heroic shot you need to hit every now and then, especially on par 3?

 I'd call it great for all the reasons you mentioned. It is hard to discount the visual as it is so stunningly beautiful that it doesn't look real. It's hard to discount the ocean when it would've been an epic failure had they not built that golf hole there. I also really like where it comes in the round and the fact that it is in your head over the course of the round. For many, it is a once in a lifetime experience and the last thing you want to do is be haunted til the end of your days by blowing it into the Pacific. Unfortunately, I speak from personal experience.

I have to agree with you here.  If you have a good round going, nothing would make a par 3 more intimidating than making it a 220 yard forced carry over water.  However, you also have the option of laying up over to the left.  Several options exist...also several outcomes.

1 - your guts are churning, you go for it, blow it in the ocean and blow your round.  You risked it, and did not pull it off.  Forever, you tell your friends how you blew your round at Cypress on #16.
2 - your guts are churning, you decide to lay up, you par the hole, but then (like Tim) you lament that you did not go for it for the rest of your life.
3 - your guts are churning, you go for it anyway, pull it off and remember for the rest of your life how you made the shot by risking it all.

All three scenarios include causing you to be nervous, causing you to actually make a strategic decision, and lastly, you remember that decision for the rest of your life.  In my book, that is a great hole!

I, for one, can still see my approach to #16 in the air as if it were yesterday.  It has been 15 years since that day.

[Bill_McBride]

"I didn't come all the way here to lay up!"   

And go for it off the tee is what I've done each of the two times I've played the hole, twice each time, for a total of four Titleists in the drink.   I don't hit the driver high enough to carry that far, or the 3-wood far enough.

But it never occurred to me to lay up.   One thing that did irritate me is that both times my caddy started around the cove before I hit, so I couldn't grab a third ball and 4-iron to at least finish the hole.

I agree it's the best par 3 in the world, like the Road Hole is the best par 4 and Long with the Hell Bunker is the best par 5.   

[Mac Plumart]

It is probably sacrilege to ask the question, but is the 16th at Cypress Point really that great a hole?


Looks like Mr. Potts was correct.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,47572.msg1064534.html#msg1064534


 

[Mike Nuzzo]

Howdy Mark
This may be a good example of a similar strategic hole:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.654689,-116.253572&spn=0.002573,0.002374&t=h&z=19

I'm with Jim, a hole in the context of the golf course is very important.

I am fortunate to have played Cypress Point and will always remember everything (hyper real) about the 30 min surrounding the 16.
It was over 9 years ago and I remember it as if it were happening in the present.

Cheers

[Anthony Gray]

  Was it built or found?

[Stewart Naugler]

I've hit and watched many tee shots on #16 and I've never seen anyone in the back bunkers. If you do happen to go in them the slope is so severe that you would end up at the bottom of the bunker.

It's one of the best finishing holes in all of golf.

You HAVE TO play it at the end of a good round to understand it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

  Was it built or found?

What's the functional difference ?

[Mike Benham]

From what I can tell never having played it …

We should really stop right here, I have never heard anyone who has played the hole question its authenticity.

I've hit and watched many tee shots on #16 and I've never seen anyone in the back bunkers.

That would be me …

You HAVE TO play it at the end of a good round to understand it.

Do you really understand it?  Or is the experience of playing the hole over-whelming?




Part of the mystic, the greatness of the hole and of CPC is the nature in which we non-members get the opportunity to play the course.  In most cases, you show up at 7:30 AM, the caddie switches out your bag, you whack your opening tee shot over the hedge and you are off.  4 hours later, you cross the 17 mile drive and step in awe onto the 15th tee.  A few minutes later, you ramble through the twisted cypress trees and are presented the 16th tee with the green off in the distance.  Your heart is pounding, you take your first swing at the ball and you now have a story to tell your friends.  In about 30 minutes, your round is over, you pay the caddie, you buy some souvenirs, you leave the property.  Later that day you realize how fast the playing of the 16th went by.  

Unlike a trip to Bandon, Sand Hills, Ballyneal or Dismal, where you play multiple rounds in a day, you always have a chance to play that hole again during your stay, likely in the same day.    

Not so at CPC, your tee shot at 16, your chance for a greenie, birdie or par, is a one shot deal.  No second round that afternoon for another try at it … this the experience of playing the 16th at CPC.

[Bill_McBride]

I like the shiny pennies in the box in the pro shop, take one for a ball marker.   I still use one in memoriam. 

[Kalen Braley]

Mike Benham,

Very well put, that's a nice summation of how it goes.

In our case, we had a group right on our tail, so I didn't feel comfortable dilly-dallying around, even as much as I would have loved to.  We had 1 of the 4 in our group put it on the green as Mr. Mayhugh hit a beautiful high shot that went about 30 feet past the hole.

P.S.  My heart was actually pumping more on the 15th as we were now on the ocean and in the fully glory of Cypress.  By the time we got to 16, I had a chance to settle down just a little bit.

[DMoriarty]

The functional component to the rugged oceanside setting is the variability of the wind and the ocean air.  Many days going for the green makes perfect sense for most, some days it makes senses only for a few.  The conditions change and the hole changes with it.  The hole is a strong reminder of why golf is best played were conditions vary, preferably near the sea.

No offense meant to Mr. McBride, but if anything might take away from the hole it is the I didn't come here to lay up mentality.  In a way deciding despite the conditions and circumstances nullifies the strategic beauty and balance, although there is something tragically beautiful about they way the hole preys on those who wouldn't consider a layup no matter the conditions and circumstance.  Having done both, I can attest that laying up is by far the more difficult choice even when the conditions so dictate.

[Mike Hendren]

What strikes me about this world-class hole is the relevance today of its distance.  Any shorter, and laying up would be inexcusable.  Any longer and laying up would be the default choice.  As is, the strategic merit is equally balanced, as David Moriarty suggests.  However, as Mike Benham suggests the guest's once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will likely skew the choice toward playing for the green.  It's simply irresistable for us visitors.

Bogey

[Bob_Huntley]

Bogey,

My memory fades from time to time but were you not walking the course with some GCA'ers and invited to have a go at the green, wearing your street shoes no less? Didn't you hit onto the green?

Of course I could be wrong.

Bob

[Adam Clayman]

What strikes me about this world-class hole is the relevance today of its distance.  Any shorter, and laying up would be inexcusable.  Any longer and laying up would be the default choice.  As is, the strategic merit is equally balanced, as David Moriarty suggests.  However, as Mike Benham suggests the guest's once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will likely skew the choice toward playing for the green.  It's simply irresistable for us visitors.

Bogey

While I've only had the pleasure once, I would think the distance is the most irrelevant aspect to the hole. With the wind being the greatest.

[Mark Saltzman]

What strikes me about this world-class hole is the relevance today of its distance.  Any shorter, and laying up would be inexcusable.  Any longer and laying up would be the default choice.  As is, the strategic merit is equally balanced, as David Moriarty suggests.  However, as Mike Benham suggests the guest's once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will likely skew the choice toward playing for the green.  It's simply irresistable for us visitors.

Bogey

Does that mean technology has made the hole better?

[Mike Hendren]

What strikes me about this world-class hole is the relevance today of its distance.  Any shorter, and laying up would be inexcusable.  Any longer and laying up would be the default choice.  As is, the strategic merit is equally balanced, as David Moriarty suggests.  However, as Mike Benham suggests the guest's once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will likely skew the choice toward playing for the green.  It's simply irresistable for us visitors.

Bogey

Does that mean technology has made the hole better?

No it means the architecture is so brilliant that it readily stands the test of time.

[Mike Hendren]

What strikes me about this world-class hole is the relevance today of its distance.  Any shorter, and laying up would be inexcusable.  Any longer and laying up would be the default choice.  As is, the strategic merit is equally balanced, as David Moriarty suggests.  However, as Mike Benham suggests the guest's once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will likely skew the choice toward playing for the green.  It's simply irresistable for us visitors.

Bogey

While I've only had the pleasure once, I would think the distance is the most irrelevant aspect to the hole. With the wind being the greatest.

Adam, would we even be talking about the hole if it played 150 from the tips?  Distance makes the hole.