As for the restoration of the year, I may still have to give the nod to Paramount. The green restoration at CCB may have been more dramatic, but in other areas, I felt like the CCB restoration was still torn between a culture of "punishment" (trees / unplayable native close to corridors) as opposed to enhancing the fun / playability (and letting the greens provide the challenge). I was surprised to see some newly planted trees at CCB, which tells me the "tree culture" contingent of the club is still very strong.
I hate doing this to a friend, especially one I'll be traveling with in a week, but I must.
1) Have you seen Paramount since the restoration was completed? If not...
2) I counted one new tree, nowhere near a playing corridor, meant to protect the 2nd tee from wayward balls off #9. If there were more, I missed them.
3) There was one truly unplayable area of native grass (right of #14) that I recall. At The Club, certain greens abut the drive zone of adjacent fairways and decisions have to be made as to what works. I find the whole notion of "Restoration Of The Year" a ludicrous thing, as any super will tell you that subsequent moves are made to enhance the restoration. I do not doubt that the 14th hole will see a thinning of that wee jungle in the coming months.
I can handle it....
1) Between the mid-resto visit we had to Paramount and Joe Bausch's detailed photo tour, I has a sense of Paramount's overall "theme" for the project. I still sensed a disconnect in the CCB project. They definitely brought back the original green sizes and cool corners, but didn't embrace the "fun" off the tee.
Case in point. The 4th is now a 501 yard par 4. I'm fine with that as it's downwind and we have ridiculous new club/ball technology. But, why is there a need for a 29 yard fairway pinched by bunkers and trees on the left, and more trees on the right? It's even more absurd when you consider the excellent front right slope of the green. We couldn't get close to that pin from 10 yards short (or the fringe, for that matter) yet alone from 200+. The excessive drive zone protection was slightly understandable when it was a "short 5", but seems like a disconnect now.
The only explanation seems to be an excessive level of enamor with trees or punishment. Where is the allowance for a strategic angle to get relatively close to that pin position?
I'm not criticizing Ron Forse, as I imagine the tree / rough culture is very powerful and hard to sway. If the ice storm in 2006 hadn't occurred, do you think CCB would look anything like it does today? To some extent, Urbina & Chapin were likely fighting the same thing at Paramount, as there are still plenty more trees that could go without being missed (IMO).
2) There was much more than 1 new staked tree I spotted off #2, but even without the new plantings, there were still redundant hazards on the left side. I managed to hook my drive around the surviving trees, but a minefield of bunkers and nasty native rough awaited beyond them. Again, it seems like the trees were left there out of aesthetic habit, rather than any golf-related purpose.
I saw new staked plantings on the right of #7 (in between the multiple specimen maples already there). There were new plantings on the right side of #10 as well, as if the slope of that green and fairway bunkers weren't enough of a defense. It just seems like there's a Fownes-like obsession with planting a tree anywhere it's remotely possible a wayward shot may not be summarily punished. I suspect this "punishment mentality" is also the reason those out-of-place Christmas trees remained on the left of #13.
In general, I sensed there wasn't a full appreciation that the severe green contours are meant to reduce the need for "absolute" punishments in the drive zones.
3) I agree that the subsequent moves are integral to the restoration, which is why the recent plantings and unplayable gunge on #14 are not a good indicator (IMO). It reflects a "punishment" mentality, which was not what I expected. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but I'm not sure it's what Ross had in mind.
I hope this doesn't come off as overly negative. I thought the green restorations were phenomenal, with the new 7th, 10th & 11th as the "poster children." And the course is definitely much more open relative to its prior claustrophobic iteration. But if that "openness" is more the result of Mother Nature's hand in 2006 rather than an embrace of "playability" by the club, the long term prognosis is concerning. If the recent tree plantings and unplayable rough is meant to put the teeth back into the drive zones, that seems a bit much considering the more severely contoured greens.