The new Cypress Point

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh c'mon...if we can't be honest (even about sacred cows), what's the point of discussing it?

Like Geoffrey, I am HONORED to have been asked to play CP, and I owe my gracious host a debt of gratitude.  

The photos are a very accurate representation of what is on the ground out there now.  One doesn't have to like everything being done, even at Heaven's Gate, and can certainly discuss those viewpoints here among similarly interested brethren.  

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

Good point.  There ought to be no reticence to discuss even the most sacred of cows.

The issue I have is that I think you guys do need to give this some time before you condemn it... The bunker work on 8 remains telling to me.  OK, I don't have the eye for this that you guys do, but I did see that as it was being done and it looked scary... now here we are two years later and well, by my recollection those bunkers look just fine and fit in perfectly.

Now if we are gonna talk about making all the bunkers like the dunes, in terms of composition of sand, well... that's one hell of a thought and a different issue.  I still remain curious over how that would be done, or if they'd even want to do it, but that does sound intriguing - for the addition of strategic choices as JB postulated re #9.

TH

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Tom, the bunker on 9 before was a bogie nine time out of ten if not a double if you buried or worse. lol The driver really is the play now. I do believe as the sod firms and the grasses migrate it will start working with the rest of the course better than Joel felt in the opening post.

[THuckaby2]

Good stuff, JB.  So ok, we need to bring that bunker on 9 back to what it once was... so how does one go about doing that?  Will that naturally occur over time, as you seem to state?

I profess complete ingorance on how this all works.  

TH

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think that day is over for mucho bucks are being spent of these state of the art traps. I do remember the thought of a shot from the old number 9 front bunker was not optimistic if par was your desire.

[THuckaby2]

OK, gotcha.  So no more work is to be done....

Then can we at least be optomistic that over time the bunker on 9 will "evolve" into a more punishing place?  Or has that come and gone also?

TH

[Dennis_Harwood]

"Bunker: A "bunker" is a hazard consisting of a prepared area of ground, often a hollow, from which turf or soil has been removed and replaced with sand or the like".

Hence, under the Rules of Golf an area that blends with the dune sand and is not "prepared" is not a bunker.  It may be difficult to play from, but its through the green whether its sand or whatever if its the natural terrain--

If its going to be a bunker it must be prepared and "different" than the natural state. Therefore if you want a bunker in a sand area it must be "different and prepared".

[Patrick_Mucci]

Does anyone know what affect the weather and especially the salt spray will have on these bunkers over the years ?

Form versus Substance ?

Has the strategy changed ?

Has the playability changed ?

[George Pazin]

Astute readers will note that several people already commented on how changing the bunker has affected strategy.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Pat as to 2 and 3, you might gather the new bunkers are easier to play from therefore not as penal as before. This does impact strategy. I am not sure about the spray and weather nor I guess is the club to some degree since this project is under 2 years old.

[THuckaby2]

Dennis:

Of course you are correct regarding the terminology under the rules of golf.  So this brings up an interesting question...

IF they just let the area on the front left of #9 return to a "natural" state (ie like the dunes which border the course, e.g. right of #8), then that wouldn't be a "bunker", and thus under the rules, one would be able to ground one's club, correct?

I'm wondering then what the proper fine line would be to make the area short left of 9 serve its proper strategic purpose - that is, to be an area more feared.

Bunker or not bunker?

I'm thinking a bunker less perfectly maintained might be the best way to go... but damn, how do you achieve that?

OK, I'm weird.  This stuff does intrigue me.  I also have no answers, only questions.  I am turning into Mr. Mucci.  Am I gonna start waking up the echoes soon?  

TH

[Mike Benham]

Bunker or not bunker?

In other areas of the country, mainly the desert, they use the term "waste area".  I suspect that that term is not an endearing one among the crowd within the 17 Mile Drive ...

OK, I'm weird.  

No comment ...

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Pazin,

Astute readers will note that several people already commented on how changing the bunker has affected strategy.

I must have missed it.

What astute individuals who have actually played the golf course since this work was done commented on how it has changed the strategy.

Tiger Bernhardt,

Which individuals who have actually played the golf course indicated that the bunkers are easier to play out of ?

What makes them easier to play out of ?

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Pat, ME! the sand is much more consistent, therefore easier to predict the behavier of the ball. I did still get one buried lie so they are not without their moments. lol the sand also has a courser quality which to me is much easier to play from than the sand they had before.

[George Pazin]

I enjoyed talking to the construction guys about the bunker construction and their goals. I spent an hour one afternoon last week with them as they shaped and poured the granite fiberglass compound used in the foundation of the bunker. One might find it interesting that Geoff's book was in the shapers cab with other old photos as he was working on 10 and 6. With all the technology and cad programs at work here, at the end of the day the photos were used to confirm the look and shape. I do find the new bunkers to be more playable. Now, I can hit a driver at 9 and feel that the bunker shot is almost as easy as the play from further back. ie some of the risk reward is gone. I went back to my traditional way of balancing shot values after 3 rounds for the purely personal reasons that we talk about on here from time to time. I have often wondered if the dune sand was originally used there and with its tecture how difficult it must have been to play from them. The new bunkers at 13 make those shots much easier than before too. The old sand was tough enough but, I can on the of how tight you would be into a strong wind with the risk of dune sand if you missed that green.

Guess you missed this one, Patrick.  

[Dan Kelly]

... I can on the of how tight you would be into a strong wind with the risk of dune sand if you missed that green.

Not to defend Patrick  , but can you blame a guy for forgetting a post that ends that way?  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tiger Bernhardt,

Of course the sand is more consistent, it's brand new.
How do you suppose the sand was when it opened ?
When clubs buy sand, they buy sand that is consistent.
Why is this a surprise ?

But, given time, with the winds blowing sand from their surroundings into those bunkers, the effect of weathering, salt spray and contaminatioin and you'll get less consistent sand.

But, why is this an issue.
Almost every golfer I know objects to inconsistent sand, despite the fact that one can test the sand when taking their stance.

[THuckaby2]

Mr. Benham:

I resemble those remarks!  

But seriously, we can call it a waste area, yes.  That's what the area right of 8 would be, I suppose.  My question though isn't what to call it - although you're right, perhaps the CPC members might not like that term - my question is that if they allow it become a "non-bunker" (whatever term they use), will the ability to ground one's club - and thus indirectly, if not directly, improve one's lie, defeat the purpose here of making it a more punishing place?

TH

[Mike Benham]

Th -

Good question.  

Does CPC have a local rule that says the dunes areas should be played as a hazard (i.e. bunker)?

Mike

[Patrick_Mucci]

George Pazin,

I didn't miss it.  I would hardly hang my hat and stake an evaluation on that post.

Perhaps you should reread the quote you posted.

How many times had Tiger Bernhardt played Cypress Point prior to his recent trek, and what were the dates ?
What was the weather like, and the relative humidity ?

What bunkers was he in on each of those treks ?

How many bunkers was he in on his recent trip ?

Had the crew compacted the sand to prevent blow away during construction ?

Are the bunkers being maintained any differently today ?

There are so many variables and facts that need to be known before drawing the conclusions that you WANT TO HEAR.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Tom-- Its crucial from the golfers standpoint to know whether you are in a bunker or not(calling it waste area, transition area, etc is not crucial so long as its clear that it is different than a bunker)--

 Lots and lots of significant differences under the Rules (touch and move loose impediments, sticks, stones, etc in a "waste area", not in a bunker; ground club in waste area, not in bunker; perhaps embedded ball relief through the green(depending on your wording of local rule), not in bunker; can move sand to search in bunker, not in waste area; relief is totally different from immovable obstructions, ground under repair, unplayable ball in bunker vs through the green--much more liberal relief rules through the green)--

If it returns to its "natural state" its not a bunker--

I'm not saying which it needs to be, but its got to be one or the other and whatever it is it does need to be clearly defined.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Pat you have lost me now. Settle down the rantings. I played 6 times this most recent trip and spend many hours studying the course. Last week and over the years I have played it in all seasons to extent they have seasons and almost weather that one has there.

[George Pazin]

More qualifiers, more questions, more ignoring the thoughtful comments of someone who's played the course before & after the work.... Heck, his major beef on the Cypress threads has been the dastardly effects of the ever increasing long ball - I thought you were in support of that. I guess I should thank you for not speculating about John's agenda & how it correlates to the member mandate.

I'm not hanging my hat on anything (in fact, I rarely if ever wear one unless it's bitter cold outside), I'm simply pointing out to good 'ole Ham BH that you're not infallible!

I look forward to hearing Mr. Huntley's report.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Mike-- Playing the entire dunes areas as bunkers would not only be definitionally incorrect, it would be a Rules disaster(defining the entire dunes as one large bunker means picking up a loose impediment anywhere in the area, improving your lie, touching during search with a club, taking relief from ground under repair, etc would cause a two stroke penalty)--

The difference in the Rules between play out of hazards(bunkers and WHs) is so markedly different than play through the green such areas must, of necessity be limited.

 Bunkers must be localized, realitivly small, clearly defined areas--

[THuckaby2]

Dennis - thanks for the clarification.  Oh yes, I fully agree that it needs to be clearly defined one way or the other... At CPC, I believe the areas that are and are not bunkers are clearly defined as such - it's not on the scorecard, but I do remember reading it somewhere... maybe Mr. Huntley can clear this up also.  In any case, you're darn right that they can't just declare the entire course non-bunkers, nor would they want to... Thus my question about the best way to handle the area short left of 9.  To me, JB is dead right on that it needs to be more punishing to bring out the proper strategy the hole intends... How best to do it remains my question.

TH