[THuckaby2]

I had the great fortune to play SFGC yesterday, and the even greater fortune to do so in the company of a very astute member, a former club champion very into the status of the golf course, the work done on it, the future for it. It was an extremely fun and extremely educational 3.5 hours, to say the least.

So of course when we walked off 12 green, the conversation turned to the re-done holes from that point forward.

My host was passionate about the subject, for sure.  They have the Tillinghast original map for the course right on the wall in the clubhouse (which is very cool, btw and would make you restoration and history addicts absolutely jizz), so it's just a matter of effort and choice as to restoring these holes.  All the land is there.  I have no clue about the politics or anything or the will of the club, but if they wanted to restore, they could based on the land being available.

So for my host - a passionate Tillie-phile, for sure - the issue is very difficult.

And he came down on the side of leaving it as it is, for a very logical reason:  the holes that are there now are better than what's on Tillie's map.

Blasphemy?  Remember, this came out of the mouth of a self-described Tillie-phile who waxed poetic about Winged Foot and other places.

The logic went like this:

a) "Little Tille"  - the old 13th - looks to be a fantastic golf hole for sure and restoring it would be VERY, VERY cool.

b) However, the current #15 - a par three running in the same direction as little Tillie, but now a hundred or so yards away - has a FANTASTIC, mind-boggling, extremely cool new green designed by Tom Doak, such that if anything, 15 is so great now it's hard to see the old 13 being better.

c) the current par 4s 13, 14, 16, 17 are if anything pretty similar to what Tillie had in mind... oh, 13 is tighter and my host acknowledged the change in flow that hole makes in the round... but my personal take was that's a good thing... prior to that hole, the tee shots are generally wide open and to me it's cool to have a butt-tightener at 13 to keep you on your toes...One can debate the strategic merits on the current par 4s v. what Tillie had in mind, but in the end that is too close to call... the Tillie holes are not clearly better, anyway.  My host bought all this more or less, but in the end the final straw came down to....

d) In the Tillie holes, two different par fours would have you looking RIGHT AT THE FREEWAY overpass, a jarring visual without a doubt.

So in the end, it's a very tight assessment... but d) above is just the final straw to get him to say it's better as it is today.

Now obviously this is no knock on Tillie - he sure as hell could not be expected to plan for freeway overpasses - but seeing it in person yesterday, my host does make a great point.  The holes as they are never give you a few of the freeway at all... You see it to the right of 15, but only if you TRY to.

Very interesting stuff.

Any thoughts from the restoration buffs, or others familiar with this golf course?

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I think the 3 holes that currently exist feel incongruous, and even look to be amateurishly designed and shaped.  They detract from the flow of the golf course and none of them approaches anything like what comes before in terms of quality.  

I wish the club would have permitted Tom Doak to restore the originals.  I believe they'd have a better golf course today.  

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

That thought was considered by my host... and has been considered by ME also.  I just don't agree that the holes look amateurish at all, nor disrupt the flow.

But let's say for the sake of argument they do.

Put back the Tillie holes and you look right at the freeway overpass.

That is a powerful reason not to do restore them... it becomes really powerful as you stand next to said overpass.

OK, so say you can use Goodalian focus and ignore the overpass.

The next question is this.... hold on to your seat for blasphemy.... but looking at that map in the clubhouse, well....

The Tillie holes are all very straight, seemingly very boring.  Oh, the bunkering looks to be cool.  And obviously it would depend on how they come out in the ground.  BUT.. I'm here to tell you the current holes are damn tough, damn fun to play, and.... here's the trump...

Doak re-did all the greens, and they've restored some bunkers that seem to match those on the Tillie map.  

The greensites are freakin' fantastic now.

Methinks you need to see it again.  It was enlightening, to say the least.

In the end, the bottom line is this:  I truly do think they are better off with what's there now than even if they would have let Doak do a full-blown, 100% faithful restoration.  I really do.

Here's another rub though:  I do think the club would have been better off if they would have let Doak RE-DESIGN the final 6 holes completely, not tying him to Tillie's plan.  The mind boggles at what might have been done there.

But what's there now is indeed better than Tillie's plan.  I do believe this.  My host, Tillie-phile that he is, believes it also.

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Have the greens on those holes been changed since you and I were out there with Geoffrey and crew?  I'm fairly certain that no original bunkering had been restored at that time.  

If memory serves, that was around this time 2 (3?) years ago.

[THuckaby2]

Mike;

The greens have been completely re-done since we were there - the Doak work was just getting ready to start at that point.  According to my host, several old Tillie bunkers were put back in as well.  Now that might be right, might be wrong, I have no idea.

But I will say with firm conviction that the greens are COMPLETELY different from when we were there. Totally new surfaces, and some new sizes.  New contour completely on 15.  I'm not 100% sure of the details as to what's new on the others, but some looked to be enlargened to me also.

And they are all abso-freakin-lutely fantastic.

Maybe Tom Doak will see this and say one way or the other.... if he is able to comment... I'm just reporting what I was told yesterday, and what I saw.

TH

[Adam_Messix]

Tom--

Enquiring minds want to know.....

What does your host think about the pine tree on the right hand side of 13?  It certainly drew some spirited conversation among the members that were in my group a couple of years ago and I asked about it in December and it generated extensive discussion again.  My own opinion is that the hole may be a bit too tight with the tree there but yet would be a pushover without it.  

I agree with your assessment of 15 green, it's really good and fits that hole perfectly.  

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

We had a spirited conversation about said tree as well.  My host really didn't like it too much and wouldn't mind seeing it die, as apparently it or trees near it are on their way toward....

BUT... I like it myself (as I say above, I actually like the tight tee shot there), and I did persuade him.  A little.  Some.  Oh hell, he was just being polite.  

Funny though - he did concede just what you said - that is, it's too tight with it, would be too open without it.

I have a feeling nature is gonna take it's course there, sooner or later.

TH

[Tom_Doak]

Tom H:  I was there on Wednesday making a consulting visit, so I just missed you.

I think the three Tillinghast holes should be restored, and my understanding is that it might happen in another ten years' time.  Support is slowly building for the logic of it.

I think 13 and 14 are totally incongruous there ... tee shots out of chutes where you can easily hit a tree?  And though the new 15th green has been popular, I told the green chairman on Wednesday that I would blow it up without a second thought to put back the original 15th hole and all its great fairway bunkers.

Time is on my side, too.  In ten more years most of the Monterey pines between 13 and 14 will be dead, and then people will want to play straight back up 13 to get to 14 green ... it will be a big safety issue.  Tillinghast's routing had no such dependency on the trees.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Doak;

Interesting question that came up on another thread...

If you were to get the green light to restore "Little Tillie", as well as the original two par fours, is there enough photographic evidence to actually emulate internal green contours, or would you be pretty much left to interpret what Tillinghast may have wanted there?

It seems to me that things like bunkering can be effectively restored from pictures, but because of the flattening effect of photography (and especially with older, grainier photos), internal green contours that are destroyed are pretty much gone forever as far as being able to effectively reproduce them.  

Is my interpretation correct?

[Nick Pozaric]

How do you feel about 18 as a finishing hole when compared to other holes on the course?  

[THuckaby2]

TD:

Well it's obvious that club isn't big enough for the two of us.  But damn, it would have been fun to see you at work.

 

Thank you very much for the thoughts and confirmations of truly what's what.

A couple things though...

Don't kid yourself, the current 15 green is rapidly becoming BELOVED.  My host was literally waxing poetic... I'd have to guess that if full restoration is considered, you've created a monster there that might work against the process - there are gonna be plenty of members who won't want to let it go, as great as Little Tillie looks on paper!

And GREAT point re the dying trees - we discussed that as well.  But we didn't discuss the safety issues... damn right, if all those trees go, they're gonna have to make some changes to those two holes... and if they are gonna change, it's a powerful lure to just due a full restoration.

One thing nags at me though:  what can be done to improve the visuals on the two par 4s?  As I look at the map - and as my host described it - one if not two of the restored par fours would have that hideous freeway overpass as the backdrop.  Man you'd have to work some miracles to make those holes LOOK as good as the others at SFGC.. and that is important, no?

This was important enough that my member host said that was indeed the final straw that makes him against restoration.  But of course he may or may not have been factoring in the safety issues after the trees die.

Whaddya think?

TH

[THuckaby2]

OK, one more thing:

redanman:  13-16 is "pitiful"?  Come on, that has to be exaggeration.  Worse than the rest of the course?  I'd argue, but can live with.  Not great, again, arguable but acceptable. Interreupt the flow?  Again, arguable but acceptable.  But jesus man, put any of those three holes on Santa Teresa and they immediately become the BEST holes on that course, and my home gets worshipped as the greatest public course value in all of NorCal.

Pitiful?  Please.  So they're not Tillie's holes.  Great.  And sure the old holes look great in ancient sepia photographs.  But the backdrops now are a little different, and the trees are a little bigger.  It's interest to contemplate the maybes re what happens if all the trees die... but man they need the ones on the perimeter.  The housing and freeway ain't going away.

In any case re what's there nopw..man playing them the other day, they each provide choices to make, challenges to face, they're pretty and each has a great green and great fun to play.  If those are pitiful golf holes than I'm Tiger Woods.

TH

[Ben Cowan-Dewar]

I like Tom Doak's comment on the 15th green, because regardless of whether you like it, to have to endure 13 and 14, it is not a worthy pay of. I also agree with the incongruous statement, as the absence of fairway bunkering, combined with the trees are a striking difference from the first 12 holes. I cannot believe a restoration would not better the golf course as a whole.

[THuckaby2]

Ben:

There's now a great fairway bunker in the crook of the corner of 14.  

Does that change your opinion?

As for the striking difference on 13tee, what's wrong with a change of pace?  It's really the first truly difficult drive since #3, and thus the course needs it... all other drives are bang away wide open.. oh, you do want to aim for a side on most, but there are no great penalties if you miss such...

You also REALLY need to see the new 15th.  My host is not crazy, it is a great, great green.  Sure Little Tillie would be very cool... but this green is so great losing it now would be a crime.  Heck Doak can say rip it up because he did it, and he's likely salivating over the thought of recreating Little Tillie.  Who wouldn't in his shoes?  But think of it as a golfer... a member of the club....

Think also about playing right into that freeway overpass....at least once, maybe twice...

I know you all seem to hate 13 and 14.  I guess I can sort of understand it, outside of the fact that on any other golf course they would be damn great golf holes... "pitiful".. "endure playing them".. jeez, do you guys play every round of your lives at Cypress Point?  I refuse to believe these are bad golf holes.  Ok, 13 is a tight drive.  But dammit I like that as a change of pace, and then the green opens up big time with nothing but vastness on the approach.  Then 14 requires great thought and placement, and has another fantastic green.   OK,  I'm a masochist - I'll volunteer to endure playing them every day, thank you very much.  I aim to serve.

Think of the course in total.

I just continue to find it hard to believe that a full restoration would be better.  14 and 15 on Tillie's plan do not look like that big of a deal... and remember 15 for sure and 17 probably would look right at the freeway overpass.

Can no one try to think of it this way?  Get past your distaste for the current 13 and 14... think in total....

TH

[Tom_Doak]

Tom H:  The club had not approved recontouring the 15th green when we did the project; but once we had gotten everything else rebuilt I asked if we could do it, and they had enough confidence in us to give the go-ahead.  It took us about four hours to reshape.  That's untouchable now?  I think your host is just stuck in the mud and looking for excuses not to have to worry about the finished product.

The only green which would have the freeway as a backdrop is 15 coming up from below.

The original 14th green is now the 13th; the contours have never changed.  The original 13th green is now the 14th, although they cut into the back of it so you could see into the new entrance before it started falling away [toward the old 13th tee].  So we would only have two greens to rebuild [old 13 and 15], and on old 15 it wouldn't be too hard to guess at the contours.

But the answer to Mike C.'s question is no, there's really no way to replicate green contours based on photographs.  You have to have a good sketch and/or a member whose memory is bulletproof [and no one's memory is that bulletproof].  You really just have to make your best educated guess.

[THuckaby2]

Tom Doak:

Oh, I'm not saying your new 15th is "bulletproof", nor does it matter to me how long it took you to create - heck in a certain way the fact you did it so quickly just adds to the legend!  What I am reporting is that it is beloved already, and not only by the member I played with (according to him anyway).  Now maybe it's because the 15th that was there before patently sucked, I don't know.  But it is honest and truthful that at least by this member and some others (he didn't quantify or specify), it is being seen as a great green they won't want to give up.

And OK, only one green will face the freeway overpass.  That does make sense to me - as I looked at the map it was close.  But isn't that enough also to be a very powerful negative?

Hey, I know you want to recreate Little Tillie - I can imagine how cool that would be, how fun, and what a feather in the cap it might be depending on how you look at it.  So I sincerely appreciate your words in here so far, clarifying what's what.

Only I will take them with an ocean of salt, thank you very much, given that anything you say in here could be used against you in the seemingly inevitable "should we do full restoration" conversation that might REALLY heat up there once the trees die.

 
 

But in case you do care to speculate some more - can you answer one more thing:  describe for me how the restored 14th and 15th would be superior golf holes to the current 13th and 14th. (And I don't mean this belligerently at all - I am a confessed yokel, rankest amateur about these things, just seeking knowledge).  As I look at Tillie's map, man those holes don't look like "all that."  I guess we can take this in the context of all the trees dying if you wish - as I've said already, that surely does change the equation.

Because I can accept that as cool as the new 15th is - and you're too modest - it is very cool - Little Tillie would be a net gain there.  So the "pro-restoration" is already ahead on balance, just based on that (though by not as great a margin as some here would think).

SO... if the new 14th and 15th are superior golf holes than the current 13th and 14th, well it becomes an easy decision in the abstract - the restoration would be a positive at least, so then the issues become is it worth the money, do they want to suffer through short-term closed golf holes, etc. and that ain't my bag.

I just continue to have a hard time seeing the clear superiority of the Tillie 14th and 15th, ESPECIALLY since 15 green would back up right to the freeway overpass.

And that's what this question all comes down to... as I do the pluses and minuses, it is really seeming to me that the minus of new 15 backing up to the overpass at the very least equals out the plus of recreating Little Tillie.  And given that the 14 I see on the map doesn't seem like all that great of a golf hole, well....

I conclude that on balance what's there now might be better than the end result of a full restoration.

OK, I've said this too many different ways already, my apologies.  It just remains very interesting to me, and it's just not the slam dunk so many people think it is.

*************


redanan - ok, pitiful RELATIVE to the rest, fine.  But go see them NOW... the bunker in the corner of 14 makes that a quite different hole... both greens are now perfect....

I'm gonna continue to disagree with you all about these holes, I still like them.

But you all in this thread - except Doak, obviously - are working off of invalid data.  You guys need to see how it is NOW.  I swear to you 15 is so damn good, and 13 an 14 are so improved, that your opinions might change.  If you're open to change, that is.  

TH

[Tom_Doak]

The restored 14th would be pretty much the same hole as the current 13th, without the dogleg or the silly trees-in-the-way.  Call that a draw.

The restored 15th, even facing the highway overpass, would be WAY better than the current 14th, which is the worst hole on the course in my opinion.  There was a bunch of great fairway bunkering that we could put back in.  With that, the restoration is 1-up.

The real question is whether the members would see restoring "little Tillie" as an improvement to the present 15th hole.  The green we rebuilt sucked, but now the hole has some real teeth to it ... and my guess is that the membership would be less than enthusiastic just because the restored hole would be much SHORTER.  Making courses shorter is almost always frowned upon by the membership.

But that's when I pull out the ace up my sleeve ... I can tell them if they don't restore the course because they want to preserve the new 15th, then they have to give me a co-design credit alongside Tillinghast!

[THuckaby2]

TD:

FANTASTIC!!!!!

That is a great summation.  Much obliged.  You've convinced me.  I gotta believe you'd have the talent to make the new 15th overcome that horrid backdrop.  The fairway bunkering does look pretty cool on the map, and in one's imagination.

But damn good point about the shorter distance... that was the FIRST thing my member host mentioned when I asked about Little Tillie....

But what a self-deprecating take re the current 15... and machiavellian manner about this... well done!  

TH

ps - I can see 14 being called the worst hole on this wonderful golf course... but man in the overall scheme of things it is FAR from a bad golf hole, cuz that's kinda like picking the worst photo of Eva Langoria.  Come play my home Santa Teresa some time.  Plunk SFGC #14 on ST and it immediately becomes the 2nd most interesting and challenging par 4.  I know that's not the point, but it just kills me when people call this a bad golf hole.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()