Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Drew Maliniak on June 12, 2021, 10:10:10 PM
-
If folks could re-design Torrey Pines, how would they do it?
Friend pointed out that 14 at Torrey should be a road hole style, hugging the cliff with a pot bunker right.
For the benefit of the doubt, perhaps that wasn't an option (environmental concerns)--but food for thought.
-
I'd really like to understand the specific constraints governing the routing of Torrey Pines. My knowledge currently only amounts to "I believe it was pretty restrictive."
Dreaming of California Kidnappers sounds fun but I'm like 90% sure it wasn't an option.
-
I'd kinda like to see a composite course.
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
Jaeger.
-
I'd kinda like to see a composite course.
In the early 1979s, the Andy Williams San Diego Open did play a composite course. They started with what was 1-3 of the North Course (now 10-12j, then played 1-10 and 14-18 of the South.
This made #6 the 9th which finished by the clubhouse meaning it was easier to do split tees. Also, it left out 11 and 12 which are among the hardest holes. They said it was because 11-13 were too far away for spectators.
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
While I understand the sentiment, I like to see what a wide range of architects can do.
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
-
get rid of the cart paths
-
The knock on TP was that it wasn't designed in a "seaside" look. It was standard Bell features on a spectacular site. Yes, I know that in football, running teams shouldn't get pass happy once they reach the playoffs, but in this case, I think Bell should have thought outside the box. And, in the redo, Rees was either trying to keep the basic character of the course (as a restorationist probably should) as opposed to creating a new look, and/or (more likely) designed it for USGA sensibilities for the US Open.
While the "new look" of shaggy bunkers, etc. would probably be a better option for TP visually, I think it would take getting out of the US Open rota and a different (probably new) management view as to what the course should look like as a destination resort. I know it still serves as a local course as well, but how far could they push the image towards a Bandon look?
-
Brian Schneider is now the high priest of Rees Jones exorcism, so he should be the man for the job. ;)
I think it’s right the the original design had to avoid the edges of the canyons, but I believe it was a question of safety and liability, not for any environmental reason. Undoubtedly, they would find one now, plus any major change would be opposed by the California Coastal Commission, on principle.*
* Their principle being, we are your overlords, and we are going to make you grovel at our feet for a while, before ultimately rejecting your permit.
-
I’m in agreement with Brad Lawrence on this one except that I don’t even think it’s great property. Just dull with no subtle movement land and a bunch of cliffs that erode so constantly that you can’t build too close to them. Playing Torrey in real life is more boring than playing it on my phone app. The only problem with the mall idea is that given the current state of malls our friends at Shopping Mall Atlas will be having this same debate in five years.
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
Has Gil found a way to build with smaller budgets?
-
I’m in agreement with Brad Lawrence on this one except that I don’t even think it’s great property. Just dull with no subtle movement land and a bunch of cliffs that erode so constantly that you can’t build too close to them. Playing Torrey in real life is more boring than playing it on my phone app. The only problem with the mall idea is that given the current state of malls our friends at Shopping Mall Atlas will be having this same debate in five years.
I've played the South course three times pre and post Rees Jones renovations. It is definitely a very challenging course and probably too tight in spots for the distance requirements when the wind is blowing. It can be a long, slow slog, but I've enjoyed myself immensely each time I've been there. But for the pace of play and the hefty green fee, I could play there regularly. My game would definitely improve and having the Pacific as a backdrop never gets old.
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
Has Gil found a way to build with smaller budgets?
Exhibit no. 1 why this site needs to adopt a thumbs up button.......or at least a like button.
-
Find 10-20 mil$ and Call Gil ;D
Has Gil found a way to build with smaller budgets?
Lake Merced GC will be first test case, at least based on past history re budgets.
-
San Diego just spent $15 mil at Torrey in 2020. They host an annual tour event as well as USGA events... I was just trying to be realistic.
I'm sure Phil and Mike Davis would know the key players too.
-
I’m in agreement with Brad Lawrence on this one except that I don’t even think it’s great property. Just dull with no subtle movement land and a bunch of cliffs that erode so constantly that you can’t build too close to them. Playing Torrey in real life is more boring than playing it on my phone app. The only problem with the mall idea is that given the current state of malls our friends at Shopping Mall Atlas will be having this same debate in five years.
I've played the South course three times pre and post Rees Jones renovations. It is definitely a very challenging course and probably too tight in spots for the distance requirements when the wind is blowing. It can be a long, slow slog, but I've enjoyed myself immensely each time I've been there. But for the pace of play and the hefty green fee, I could play there regularly. My game would definitely improve and having the Pacific as a backdrop never gets old.
Remove the view and setting and you’ve got a blah blah golf course. Wouldn’t break the top 10 in most states. About as uninteresting as they come.
-
Evidently I'm the only one that wants to play TP south.
Been there several times driving thru-always intrigued, always enjoy the annual PGA Tour event, enjoyed the '08 US Open.
Of course I'd like to see the Schneider exorcism there as well(and a couple of other places while he's at it)
-
get rid of the cart paths
Agree on this #1 point, and I think this is #10 tee:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3wGYijXEAgQ0hM?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
I could make the fairway cut lines more interesting:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3wGYijXwAE0Svo?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
While the pond on #18 is its own topic, the greens are the real problem at Torrey Pines South:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3wGYimXEAAS3sv?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
Sure the putting surfaces are flat, but there is very little buildup/movement off the greens. That said, it is a fantastic experience and I look forward to finally playing TP North next '22 season:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3zQrGMWQAALUrM?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3zQrGNXEAE9b0j?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
TP North looks more interesting???
-
Did no one else catch the hilarity of #ShoppingMallAtlas a few posts above? That's my kind of humor. Kudos to SMA.Com
-
Is TP hole 18 the most one dimensional finisher in the entire rota?
-
Is TP hole 18 the most one dimensional finisher in the entire rota?
Don't most U.S. Opens finish with a long par 4? How can a risk/reward par 5 be more one dimensional than that?
-
Perhaps Carl’s reference to one dimension was an acknowledgement that the hole is a “1” on a 10-point scale for its architectural merit. That’s my overall problem with Torrey. I don’t think there’s a single hole I’d score higher than a 3 on such a scale. It’s a dull course on a dull piece of property with a backdrop that could be green screened in any TV studio.
-
Played TPS weekly for two years prior to the last renovation and it's better now. Loved the course and all its subtleties and the only thing dull about the course is the imaginations of those that don't understand it. If your too cheap to drop the 2 bills on the non-resident rate, then move along so there are more tee times for the residents. 8)
-
I noticed in the second photo from Mike Sweeny that the left side intermediate cut is one mower pass wide, while the right side is 5 mower passes wide. It looks like the USGA decided the fairways need to be even narrower, but weren't going to pay to re-grass the fairways out to the fw bunker, instead, opting to have a wider intermediate cut to bring the bunker into play. Not sure it works, even if it was the lowest cost solution, unless someone can tell me the reasoning other than cost that it was done.
-
I noticed in the second photo from Mike Sweeny that the left side intermediate cut is one mower pass wide, while the right side is 5 mower passes wide.
Jeff,
Just as a reference date, that was from July 2019. They had something like 16 holes open, and two holes left to go in the renovation...
-
Played TPS weekly for two years prior to the last renovation and it's better now. Loved the course and all its subtleties and the only thing dull about the course is the imaginations of those that don't understand it. If your too cheap to drop the 2 bills on the non-resident rate, then move along so there are more tee times for the residents. 8)
What in the world does the price of the tee time have to do with the architectural significance of the golf course? I can take you to a $18 dollar public course here in Richmond with more imagination than that track. No offense, I will save the $182 bucks and play something with a little soul.
-
Is TP hole 18 the most one dimensional finisher in the entire rota?
Don't most U.S. Opens finish with a long par 4? How can a risk/reward par 5 be more one dimensional than that?
The options of play are quite limited.
Second shot options for the tour pro are:
1. Lay up: turning the hole into a lob wedge par 3.
2. Avoid the pond by hitting over the green or into the stands taking a drop.
If the landing area fairway bunkers and rough were eliminated, the pond pushed to the side, a pot bunker placed 20 yards in front of the green and even some trees that would require some amount of under or over imagination the hole might possess some drama.
-
For a hole that possesses no drama, it sure has been the center of a lot of drama.
-
Played TPS weekly for two years prior to the last renovation and it's better now. Loved the course and all its subtleties and the only thing dull about the course is the imaginations of those that don't understand it. If your too cheap to drop the 2 bills on the non-resident rate, then move along so there are more tee times for the residents. 8)
What in the world does the price of the tee time have to do with the architectural significance of the golf course? I can take you to a $18 dollar public course here in Richmond with more imagination than that track. No offense, I will save the $182 bucks and play something with a little soul.
The price matters because most that don't like it have never played it or played it once because of the cost and don't see the subtle greatness of the course. 8)
-
Never understood the dislike. I played pre and post renovation and I thought it was great.
-
Played TPS weekly for two years prior to the last renovation and it's better now. Loved the course and all its subtleties and the only thing dull about the course is the imaginations of those that don't understand it. If your too cheap to drop the 2 bills on the non-resident rate, then move along so there are more tee times for the residents. 8)
What in the world does the price of the tee time have to do with the architectural significance of the golf course? I can take you to a $18 dollar public course here in Richmond with more imagination than that track. No offense, I will save the $182 bucks and play something with a little soul.
The price matters because most that don't like it have never played it or played it once because of the cost and don't see the subtle greatness of the course. 8)
I have never played Cypress Point, and I can assure you I can look and tell you it's miles better than Torrey. Incredibly bland golf course at best. If it was anywhere else on earth you'd have never ever heard of it. Price is zero part of this equation.
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
What would you do differently?
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
+1 :D
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
Trying to determine if you are saying I need to have played the course to have an opinion on it or if I need to be a good player to have an opinion on it?
If either are the case, I would assume we would need to disband the website in it's entirety.
Never played it, have zero desire to.
Again, as bland as it gets.
My opinion here isn't anything that's all that far out there.
I play to a 6 if that's important to you, and far better players than me share my opinion regarding the course.
It's in my opinion the worst course to host an open in the last 50 years followed closely by Chambers Bay and Erin Hills. At least those two had a bit of flair.
Maybe everyone should post their course resume and handicap in their bios?
-
Have you walked the entire course or just seen it on TV?
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
What would you do differently?
Anything other than your all too typical, modern day, sterile and forgettable golf course. It’s certainly not a bad course per se, but I can’t see that it’s anything better than average and certainly not close to on par with a typical U.S. Open rotation golf course.
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
Trying to determine if you are saying I need to have played the course to have an opinion on it or if I need to be a good player to have an opinion on it?
If either are the case, I would assume we would need to disband the website in it's entirety.
I think you can have an opinion on just about any course. But I generally agree with the many who give a lot more credit to firsthand opinions than TV-based ones, and it can only help to know where a person's opinion came from.
It's sort of a catch 22 though, admittedly. I also haven't played Torrey. I'm also not especially interested in playing it. From what I know about it - which is quite a bit for a course I've never played, given its level of exposure - it's not a place where I feel confident that I would walk away happy to have spent $300 or whatever to play.
The downside of choosing not to play it is that some will not give much credence to my opinions on it. The upside is that I still have $300. But it certainly doesn't look awful. I'd pay $150, happily.
-
Have you walked the entire course or just seen it on TV?
Rob
I destroyed it on Tiger Woods golf. It was boring then too.
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
Trying to determine if you are saying I need to have played the course to have an opinion on it or if I need to be a good player to have an opinion on it?
If either are the case, I would assume we would need to disband the website in it's entirety.
I think you can have an opinion on just about any course. But I generally agree with the many who give a lot more credit to firsthand opinions than TV-based ones, and it can only help to know where a person's opinion came from.
It's sort of a catch 22 though, admittedly. I also haven't played Torrey. I'm also not especially interested in playing it. From what I know about it - which is quite a bit for a course I've never played, given its level of exposure - it's not a place where I feel confident that I would walk away happy to have spent $300 or whatever to play.
The downside of choosing not to play it is that some will not give much credence to my opinions on it. The upside is that I still have $300. But it certainly doesn't look awful. I'd pay $150, happily.
Back to my original statement, the cost to play the course has zero to do with the quality of the course itself.
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
What would you do differently?
Anything other than your all too typical, modern day, sterile and forgettable golf course. It’s certainly not a bad course per se, but I can’t see that it’s anything better than average and certainly not close to on par with a typical U.S. Open rotation golf course.
OK, so you’ve backed off the shopping mall idea? I mean, with the state of the brick and mortar retail industry, it just doesn’t make a whole lot of business sense, does it? If you had said solar farm or even high end residential property, perhaps you’d have gotten some backers, but shopping malls just don’t make much sense these days, do they?
Beyond that silliness, this my issue with so much criticism I see and hear of golf courses. It sucks. It should be so much better. It’s below average. So, what would you actually change? Routing? Bunkers? Greens? Grassing lines? And how?
I understand the vast majority of us here are not experts, many not even really well-informed. But, i do think we should be able to make some proposals or brainstorm an idea or two if we are going to say the course should be so much better.
FWIW, I am a TP fan. The South Course may not reach its potential, but it is a well above average course, in my experience. I’ve got somewhere between 50 and 100 rounds on it, so i feel i know the course pretty well.
Even so, i can think of a number of things that would make it better, at least for everyday play. For a US Open or annual tour event, it’s pretty perfect. However, for the other 50 weeks of the year, I’d love to see more interesting greens and surrounds, as well as an entirely different approach to bunkering (more strategic and varied). I’d also strongly consider looking into returning many acres to a non-irrigated, more natural state, similar to what you might see while hiking along the cliffs, just outside the golf courses. This has been a win for many other courses, aesthetically, environmentally, and financially. Those are just a few things I’ve thought about over the years, each time TP South gets its annual flogging.
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
I would assume the implication here is that you need to play a course before you can opine on it. I’ve been playing golf for 35 years, I’ve competed at almost every level, and I was a club pro for a decade. But I’ve only been fortunate enough to play three of the top 100. Should I denounce my GCA membership?
Being on the property can certainly help to shape your feelings about the scope and soul of a facility, but rarely would the experience take your ranking from an A to C or C to A. Trying to delegitimize someone’s opinion because they haven’t played it seems like a cheap shot.
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
What would you do differently?
Anything other than your all too typical, modern day, sterile and forgettable golf course. It’s certainly not a bad course per se, but I can’t see that it’s anything better than average and certainly not close to on par with a typical U.S. Open rotation golf course.
OK, so you’ve backed off the shopping mall idea? I mean, with the state of the brick and mortar retail industry, it just doesn’t make a whole lot of business sense, does it? If you had said solar farm or even high end residential property, perhaps you’d have gotten some backers, but shopping malls just don’t make much sense these days, do they?
Beyond that silliness, this my issue with so much criticism I see and hear of golf courses. It sucks. It should be so much better. It’s below average. So, what would you actually change? Routing? Bunkers? Greens? Grassing lines? And how?
I understand the vast majority of us here are not experts, many not even really well-informed. But, i do think we should be able to make some proposals or brainstorm an idea or two if we are going to say the course should be so much better.
FWIW, I am a TP fan. The South Course may not reach its potential, but it is a well above average course, in my experience. I’ve got somewhere between 50 and 100 rounds on it, so i feel i know the course pretty well.
Even so, i can think of a number of things that would make it better, at least for everyday play. For a US Open or annual tour event, it’s pretty perfect. However, for the other 50 weeks of the year, I’d love to see more interesting greens and surrounds, as well as an entirely different approach to bunkering (more strategic and varied). I’d also strongly consider looking into returning many acres to a non-irrigated, more natural state, similar to what you might see while hiking along the cliffs, just outside the golf courses. This has been a win for many other courses, aesthetically, environmentally, and financially. Those are just a few things I’ve thought about over the years, each time TP South gets its annual flogging.
I respect your opinion. These conversations would be boring if we always agreed. I’m not sure any of us can be “experts”. I’ve spent countless hours thinking about architecture. In school, my margins were always full of doodled golf holes, but is my opinion worth more than someone who just started playing? I’d say no.
It can be hard for me to explain why I love or loathe a course. I just do. It’s like a face or a painting. It speaks to you. Why is Charlize Theron beautiful? I can’t explain it.
-
When discussing courses that are suited to their purpose I would say that TP seems to easily fit the bill:
Able to host a tour event and major championships from both an infrastructure and challenge standpoint - check
Able to get revenue high enough to make it a viable business venture for the owners (municipality) - check
Able to keep a full tee sheet at the pricing structure they have - check
Good course for the paying clientele for rest of year - based on the tee sheet and anecdotal stuff read here - check
This would easily seem to be a facility that is well suited to the needs of those writing the checks. The course's long views over the pacific clearly help out on all of these and is the main selling point of the location. However, the views add little to the playing values of the course itself, other than the views themselves of course. the course's rightful peer group for comparison should other "championship" courses built on a somewhat flattish site without a lot of natural features to work off of. I have not played the course but am wondering if there are any natural features that were unused or poorly utilized that Bell and/or Reese could have used to better affect, subject to any restrictions that any architect would be constrained by.
Is this a course that I would go out of my way to play? No, but I also don't want to go out of my way to play many similar parkland tour courses (Congressional (pre-latest reno), Hazeltine, Bellerive, Atlanta Athletic, Medinah, etc.). Would I turn down a round at any of them? Certainly not, I am sure they are all very good courses suited to the needs their owners defined for them.
If someone wants to prove me wrong here are some questions I'd have:
Other than the views and the weather is there anything that I would see there that I would not see at many other similar courses?
What are the individual shots that stick in your mind well after playing that you look forward to playing again and again?
If I was getting on a plane to go play golf somewhere special why there instead of the many other choices?
-
"Other than the views and the weather is there anything that I would see there that I would not see at many other similar courses?What are the individual shots that stick in your mind well after playing that you look forward to playing again and again?If I was getting on a plane to go play golf somewhere special why there instead of the many other choices?"
I would ask the same questions about The Ocean Course. Probably the most overrated course I've ever played IMO.
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
What would you do differently?
Anything other than your all too typical, modern day, sterile and forgettable golf course. It’s certainly not a bad course per se, but I can’t see that it’s anything better than average and certainly not close to on par with a typical U.S. Open rotation golf course.
OK, so you’ve backed off the shopping mall idea? I mean, with the state of the brick and mortar retail industry, it just doesn’t make a whole lot of business sense, does it? If you had said solar farm or even high end residential property, perhaps you’d have gotten some backers, but shopping malls just don’t make much sense these days, do they?
Beyond that silliness, this my issue with so much criticism I see and hear of golf courses. It sucks. It should be so much better. It’s below average. So, what would you actually change? Routing? Bunkers? Greens? Grassing lines? And how?
I understand the vast majority of us here are not experts, many not even really well-informed. But, i do think we should be able to make some proposals or brainstorm an idea or two if we are going to say the course should be so much better.
FWIW, I am a TP fan. The South Course may not reach its potential, but it is a well above average course, in my experience. I’ve got somewhere between 50 and 100 rounds on it, so i feel i know the course pretty well.
Even so, i can think of a number of things that would make it better, at least for everyday play. For a US Open or annual tour event, it’s pretty perfect. However, for the other 50 weeks of the year, I’d love to see more interesting greens and surrounds, as well as an entirely different approach to bunkering (more strategic and varied). I’d also strongly consider looking into returning many acres to a non-irrigated, more natural state, similar to what you might see while hiking along the cliffs, just outside the golf courses. This has been a win for many other courses, aesthetically, environmentally, and financially. Those are just a few things I’ve thought about over the years, each time TP South gets its annual flogging.
I respect your opinion. These conversations would be boring if we always agreed. I’m not sure any of us can be “experts”. I’ve spent countless hours thinking about architecture. In school, my margins were always full of doodled golf holes, but is my opinion worth more than someone who just started playing? I’d say no.
It can be hard for me to explain why I love or loathe a course. I just do. It’s like a face or a painting. It speaks to you. Why is Charlize Theron beautiful? I can’t explain it.
I understand, but isn’t the point of this discussion group to at least try to explain our likes and dislikes? If every comment on this board were “i like it” or “i hate it” without any additional context or attempt at explanation, it would be absolutely pointless. To say you can’t explain why you like or don’t like something may be true, but then why comment, especially so strongly?
-
I agree, Brian. If your point were followed, it might also have the added benefit of shortening some of the threads by eliminating comments that add little to the discussion.
-
Googling synonyms for bland and uninspired.
-
“I understand, but isn’t the point of this discussion group to at least try to explain our likes and dislikes? If every comment on this board were “i like it” or “i hate it” without any additional context or attempt at explanation, it would be absolutely pointless. To say you can’t explain why you like or don’t like something may be true, but then why comment, especially so strongly?”
My apologies. I didn’t know this was a hyperbole free zone. I don’t think my language here has been strong but I can appreciate that you want opinions backed up with something with substance.
I think one reason this course gets beat up on is because it has been selected a couple times now to host a major championship. If it were just another fair golf course in California that 80% of us had never heard of, we would never be talking about it.
When judging golf holes, I think we all use the word “pedestrian” a little differently. To me, it’s a hole that’s just another hole. There’s nothing especially good or bad about it. It’s not quirky nor is it interesting or interesting looking. It doesn’t ask you to hit any kind of shot. It doesn’t present any interesting strategy. It’s the kind of hole that says, we might as well settle this thing on the driving range with a Trackman. At TP, as I see it, holes 1,2,4,5,9,10,11,12,15,16 are pedestrian holes. What holes there look fun or exciting or memorable? 3,13,17 I guess.
-
I just finished reading Derek Duncan's piece on the end of the Rees Jones era, and have to say I was surprised he failed to mention that it was mostly Phil Mickelson's comments about Atlanta Athletic Club and Cog Hill that drove the stake through Rees' heart as far as future Open Doctor commissions.
[/size]
[/size]Maybe it's just a politeness thing? Rees is good friends with the editors of GOLF DIGEST, among many others.
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
I would assume the implication here is that you need to play a course before you can opine on it...
Trying to delegitimize someone’s opinion because they haven’t played it seems like a cheap shot.
I think it is far from a cheap shot. I've never set foot on Seminole GC although I've looked at the routing map many times, read about it a lot and saw a few tour pros play it last year on TV. Still I would consider my opinion of it's architectural merits pretty worthless. Especially next to someone who has played it and especially someone who has played it multiple times.
On the other hand I've played courses like Prairie Dunes and Rustic Canyon hundreds of times so I consider my opinion rather informed. I remember a laughable thread on this site about 15+ years ago where a bunch of people who had played Prairie Dunes were trying to convince someone who had never been there that his deeply held convictions on the course were wrong. In retrospect, why were we bothering?
Would you buy a book like The Confidential Guide if it was written by someone who had never played the golf courses?
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
I would assume the implication here is that you need to play a course before you can opine on it...
Trying to delegitimize someone’s opinion because they haven’t played it seems like a cheap shot.
I think it is far from a cheap shot. I've never set foot on Seminole GC although I've looked at the routing map many times, read about it a lot and saw a few tour pros play it last year on TV. Still I would consider my opinion of it's architectural merits pretty worthless. Especially next to someone who has played it and especially someone who has played it multiple times.
On the other hand I've played courses like Prairie Dunes and Rustic Canyon hundreds of times so I consider my opinion rather informed. I remember a laughable thread on this site about 15+ years ago where a bunch of people who had played Prairie Dunes were trying to convince someone who had never been there that his deeply held convictions on the course were wrong. In retrospect, why were we bothering?
Would you buy a book like The Confidential Guide if it was written by someone who had never played the golf courses?
[size=78%]My guess is on any given day that all of the top shelf golf courses are played by some individuals who know little about golf and know little about or care about golf course architecture. I don’t think those individuals suddenly become qualified to talk about the merits or lack thereof of said course. I also don’t think that the course architecture connoisseur has a meaningless opinion until he or she has played a course. I’m all about neatly ranking courses but I have no interest in ranking the importance or validity of people’s opinions on subjective material. You’re not going to convince me that I need to play Augusta National to understand that it is a very good course. [/size]
[/size]
[/size]
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
I would assume the implication here is that you need to play a course before you can opine on it...
Trying to delegitimize someone’s opinion because they haven’t played it seems like a cheap shot.
I think it is far from a cheap shot. I've never set foot on Seminole GC although I've looked at the routing map many times, read about it a lot and saw a few tour pros play it last year on TV. Still I would consider my opinion of it's architectural merits pretty worthless. Especially next to someone who has played it and especially someone who has played it multiple times.
On the other hand I've played courses like Prairie Dunes and Rustic Canyon hundreds of times so I consider my opinion rather informed. I remember a laughable thread on this site about 15+ years ago where a bunch of people who had played Prairie Dunes were trying to convince someone who had never been there that his deeply held convictions on the course were wrong. In retrospect, why were we bothering?
Would you buy a book like The Confidential Guide if it was written by someone who had never played the golf courses?
[size=78%]My guess is on any given day that all of the top shelf golf courses are played by some individuals who know little about golf and know little about or care about golf course architecture. I don’t think those individuals suddenly become qualified to talk about the merits or lack thereof of said course. I also don’t think that the course architecture connoisseur has a meaningless opinion until he or she has played a course. I’m all about neatly ranking courses but I have no interest in ranking the importance or validity of people’s opinions on subjective material. You’re not going to convince me that I need to play Augusta National to understand that it is a very good course. [/size]
Unless I am misremembering, there were courses within the book Tom Doak didn't even play. Specifically at the time of publishing, The Cascades, which is my favorite track within the state of Virginia. With flyovers, tons of pictures, seen it on TV 100 times, and a pretty accurate recreation using lasers to capture contours and elevation in a golf simulation, I am fairly certain I have a good feel for it being bland as can be. To quote the book you champion regarding Torrey, "a fairly dull layout with a view". It's amazing to me how worked up people get because you don't think the course is the best thing since sliced bread.
-
I don’t believe you can ever really know a golf course until you have at least walked it. Ideally backwards. ;D
Seriously, though. Can you “know” ANGC is great without visiting? Sure. The overwhelming amount of information available and annual coverage (showing more each year) allow us to “know” almost everything about the place. To a lesser extent, the same goes for virtually any well-known or highly documented golf course, and it seems like that’s nearly all of them these days.
However, I don’t think anyone, expert or weekend hacker, is really going to understand what a golf course is all about if they’ve never been there. Anyone who has ever been to the Masters probably knew a ton about each hole before visiting, but seemingly every single person that visits is amazed by the scale of the property, the amount of elevation change, the brilliance of the greens, etc. That’s likely the best known course in the world, but there is still so much to learn by actually going.
As you go down the list from there, to less and less documented, broadcast, and exposed courses, in my view, the amount to be learned by actually going to the course increases (at least for courses “worth studying,” which in my opinion, includes TP South).
Of course, many people disagree with me, and of course that’s fine. One thing I will say, though, is anybody posting on this site that doesn’t want to dig into the nuance and minutiae of what makes a course great, good, indifferent, or bad, is probably in the wrong place.
-
I have a local friend who is a member of two of Dallas's best courses, an annual traveler to Carmel and, pre-Covid, to Bandon, as well as a visitor to many of the high-end resorts most of us like (Whistling Straits, Sand Valley). A little over a month ago, he took a key employee for a three day trip to Torrey Pines and came back gushing over the place. As to his architectural chops, he just finished reading "The Evangelist" and has started on "Anatomy" with "A Feel For The Game" and the Tillie articles collections on deck. He may not be the gca aficionado that some here feather themselves to be, but I have yet to hear him refer to a golf course as a "track".
And yes, one should at least have played a course once before getting into heavy analysis. Guys like Matt Ward (of "carrying the water" fame) deserve our attention a lot more than those who regularly intellectualize about courses they have only read about or seen on television. On the other hand, posting here is mostly free and nothing is required reading.
I do suspect that there is a positive correlation here between the ability to play and the affection for TP-S. How anyone can make a case that the course is one-dimensional and without options is incredible. I suppose that chopping out of the rough, getting on the greens a shot or two more than in regulation followed by three-whacking would make for a dull day. For that player, the North is available, but I'm not sure that it would be that much more fun.
-
Quote from Jason Thurman:
"I'd really like to understand the specific constraints governing the routing of Torrey Pines. My knowledge currently only amounts to "I believe it was pretty restrictive."Dreaming of California Kidnappers sounds fun but I'm like 90% sure it wasn't an option."
One thing to remember is that Torrey Pines was originally built as a public municipal course and for a number or reasons became a site of an annual tournament on the PGA Tour. The city operates two 18 hole courses and is a steward in some sense of public funds for operation of the facility and any profit made on the operation.
I have played Cape Kidnappers and Kauri Cliffs in New Zealand, two times each on different trips in 2007 and 2008. The developer was Julian Robertson, hedge fund billionaire and philanthropist, who had large remote sites to work with and hired David Harman to built Kauri Cliffs and Tom Doak to build Cape Kidnappers. David Harman had 4500 acres to work with. The Cape Kidnappers site has a lot of finger style ridges around the top of a large cliffs and the site overall has a large footprint.
The two courses were so stunning as cliffside courses I lost interest in trying to find anything superior and have played lots of links courses and links like courses in ocean and seaside settings.
Discussing Torrey Pines South in the context of two of the most stunning cliffside courses in the world is not really a fair comparison. Aesthetically, Hawkes Bay and the Bay of Islands have stunning beauty with or without a golf course. I like the Pacific Ocean but there are close 1200 miles of coast line on the west side of the U.S. La Jolla Cove and the view west of Torrey Pines is nice but not that special IMHO.
Similarly, comparing a budget for a municipal golf facility at the core of Torrey Pines with Julian Robertson's financial options is not all the realistic as a basis for a comparison. Even if the South and North course footprints were merged, my guess is there might be a routing that would make one course somewhat better and another slightly worse.
Torrey Pines South gets a Doak rating of 5 and the old North has a rating of 5 as a carryover. The courses listed in the Doak Guide from San Diego most are 5s or less, worth playing in the area but not calling for a special trip. I've had a condo in San Diego since 2001. I have good but not great options for playing golf and weather is rarely an adversity to tolerate. I like playing the North and South at the resident rate. Now in my 70s, I play the South from the whites and the North from the Greens on the senior resident rate and occasionally get a tee time outside the 7 day window for a surcharge.
Charles Lund
-
I don’t believe you can ever really know a golf course until you have at least walked it. Ideally backwards. ;D
Seriously, though. Can you “know” ANGC is great without visiting? Sure. The overwhelming amount of information available and annual coverage (showing more each year) allow us to “know” almost everything about the place. To a lesser extent, the same goes for virtually any well-known or highly documented golf course, and it seems like that’s nearly all of them these days.
However, I don’t think anyone, expert or weekend hacker, is really going to understand what a golf course is all about if they’ve never been there. Anyone who has ever been to the Masters probably knew a ton about each hole before visiting, but seemingly every single person that visits is amazed by the scale of the property, the amount of elevation change, the brilliance of the greens, etc. That’s likely the best known course in the world, but there is still so much to learn by actually going.
As you go down the list from there, to less and less documented, broadcast, and exposed courses, in my view, the amount to be learned by actually going to the course increases (at least for courses “worth studying,” which in my opinion, includes TP South).
Of course, many people disagree with me, and of course that’s fine. One thing I will say, though, is anybody posting on this site that doesn’t want to dig into the nuance and minutiae of what makes a course great, good, indifferent, or bad, is probably in the wrong place.
As I have stated along with others, I find the course bland and uninspired. Perhaps this might be better to have the people that think this is so amazing explain their position. This course is on TV every year. Not once have I said WOW. A bunch of 400 plus yard straight away par 4s with bunkers on either side of the landing area don't really scream amazing to me. I am open to having my mind changed.
-
I don’t believe you can ever really know a golf course until you have at least walked it. Ideally backwards. ;D
Seriously, though. Can you “know” ANGC is great without visiting? Sure. The overwhelming amount of information available and annual coverage (showing more each year) allow us to “know” almost everything about the place. To a lesser extent, the same goes for virtually any well-known or highly documented golf course, and it seems like that’s nearly all of them these days.
However, I don’t think anyone, expert or weekend hacker, is really going to understand what a golf course is all about if they’ve never been there. Anyone who has ever been to the Masters probably knew a ton about each hole before visiting, but seemingly every single person that visits is amazed by the scale of the property, the amount of elevation change, the brilliance of the greens, etc. That’s likely the best known course in the world, but there is still so much to learn by actually going.
As you go down the list from there, to less and less documented, broadcast, and exposed courses, in my view, the amount to be learned by actually going to the course increases (at least for courses “worth studying,” which in my opinion, includes TP South).
Of course, many people disagree with me, and of course that’s fine. One thing I will say, though, is anybody posting on this site that doesn’t want to dig into the nuance and minutiae of what makes a course great, good, indifferent, or bad, is probably in the wrong place.
As I have stated along with others, I find the course bland and uninspired. Perhaps this might be better to have the people that think this is so amazing explain their position. This course is on TV every year. Not once have I said WOW. A bunch of 400 plus yard straight away par 4s with bunkers on either side of the landing area don't really scream amazing to me. I am open to having my mind changed.
You’ve made your position clear. Thanks!
-
8) Jon,
So what'd you shoot at TP, N or S?
I would assume the implication here is that you need to play a course before you can opine on it...
Trying to delegitimize someone’s opinion because they haven’t played it seems like a cheap shot.
I think it is far from a cheap shot. I've never set foot on Seminole GC although I've looked at the routing map many times, read about it a lot and saw a few tour pros play it last year on TV. Still I would consider my opinion of it's architectural merits pretty worthless. Especially next to someone who has played it and especially someone who has played it multiple times.
On the other hand I've played courses like Prairie Dunes and Rustic Canyon hundreds of times so I consider my opinion rather informed. I remember a laughable thread on this site about 15+ years ago where a bunch of people who had played Prairie Dunes were trying to convince someone who had never been there that his deeply held convictions on the course were wrong. In retrospect, why were we bothering?
Would you buy a book like The Confidential Guide if it was written by someone who had never played the golf courses?
[size=78%]My guess is on any given day that all of the top shelf golf courses are played by some individuals who know little about golf and know little about or care about golf course architecture. I don’t think those individuals suddenly become qualified to talk about the merits or lack thereof of said course. I also don’t think that the course architecture connoisseur has a meaningless opinion until he or she has played a course. I’m all about neatly ranking courses but I have no interest in ranking the importance or validity of people’s opinions on subjective material. You’re not going to convince me that I need to play Augusta National to understand that it is a very good course. [/size]
Unless I am misremembering, there were courses within the book Tom Doak didn't even play. Specifically at the time of publishing, The Cascades, which is my favorite track within the state of Virginia. With flyovers, tons of pictures, seen it on TV 100 times, and a pretty accurate recreation using lasers to capture contours and elevation in a golf simulation, I am fairly certain I have a good feel for it being bland as can be. To quote the book you champion regarding Torrey, "a fairly dull layout with a view". It's amazing to me how worked up people get because you don't think the course is the best thing since sliced bread.
I never mentioned Torrey Pines South. I agree it was a dull before the Jones work and I think he made it worse. I played it twice before the renovation and twice after and I doubt I will ever bother with it again.
-
David,
Another quoted the book I believe or referenced it when saying you wouldn't buy a book from someone who hasn't played the course. Hence my response talking about a specific course he rated that he didn't play. That could have been the only one in the book or not. It is simply the only one that stuck out to me. This thread has gone so far down the rabbit hole. I have tried to back up my views per the request but have yet to have anyone explain to me what makes the course so remarkable. Never seen another course anywhere illicit such emotional responses from people.
I have heard the word "track" used to describe a golf course at a minimum at least 100 to 200 times. Don't really think I am too off base there but if there is a rule sheet for acceptable lingo on the board, by all means please post it.
-
David,
Another quoted the book I believe or referenced it when saying you wouldn't buy a book from someone who hasn't played the course. Hence my response talking about a specific course he rated that he didn't play. That could have been the only one in the book or not. It is simply the only one that stuck out to me. This thread has gone so far down the rabbit hole. I have tried to back up my views per the request but have yet to have anyone explain to me what makes the course so remarkable. Never seen another course anywhere illicit such emotional responses from people.
I have heard the word "track" used to describe a golf course at a minimum at least 100 to 200 times. Don't really think I am too off base there but if there is a rule sheet for acceptable lingo on the board, by all means please post it.
I would be willing to bet if he didn’t play it he walked it. I doubt he rated it from a simulator.
-
Googling synonyms for bland and uninspired.
Ignorance is bliss. :D
-
I don’t believe you can ever really know a golf course until you have at least walked it. Ideally backwards. ;D
Seriously, though. Can you “know” ANGC is great without visiting? Sure. The overwhelming amount of information available and annual coverage (showing more each year) allow us to “know” almost everything about the place. To a lesser extent, the same goes for virtually any well-known or highly documented golf course, and it seems like that’s nearly all of them these days.
However, I don’t think anyone, expert or weekend hacker, is really going to understand what a golf course is all about if they’ve never been there. Anyone who has ever been to the Masters probably knew a ton about each hole before visiting, but seemingly every single person that visits is amazed by the scale of the property, the amount of elevation change, the brilliance of the greens, etc. That’s likely the best known course in the world, but there is still so much to learn by actually going.
As you go down the list from there, to less and less documented, broadcast, and exposed courses, in my view, the amount to be learned by actually going to the course increases (at least for courses “worth studying,” which in my opinion, includes TP South).
Of course, many people disagree with me, and of course that’s fine. One thing I will say, though, is anybody posting on this site that doesn’t want to dig into the nuance and minutiae of what makes a course great, good, indifferent, or bad, is probably in the wrong place.
+1
-
I see that this thread has gone a bit off the rails, but I'll try to answer the question posed in the original post. I've played Torrey South at least 100 times, mostly between 2001 and 2005 (it was $10.50/month for junior golfers in San Diego). Needless to say, I've thought a lot about the course, what I liked, and what could be better.
The setting is beautiful, and at a macro level (i.e., if you zoom out and just think about the general hole corridors), the routing is really good, making good use of the cliffs and canyons. As others have noted, a lot of the holes and greens don't get as close to the cliff and canyon edges as you might like, and some of this is surely attributable to environmental regulations. It would be great if they could push the greens and fairways a little closer to those edges so that the natural setting is a bigger part of the strategy and the golfing experience.
The greens, bunkering, shaping, etc. are very unnatural. The course could be a lot better with more natural/minimalist greens and green surroundings.
The course doesn't have enough subtlety or charm. For example, in contrast with other U.S. Open venues, there are no exciting, interesting short par 4s. The 2nd hole could be a good candidate for this if it were a little shorter and had some more interesting features (perhaps with a smaller, more exciting green). 10 is a pretty uninteresting hole where you have to backtrack a ways to get to the back tee, so that would be another good opportunity to try to build a more interesting, shorter par 4.
As far as individual holes go, I think 3, 4, 7, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are very good and could be even better with some tweaking along the lines mentioned above. Other holes are either forgettable (1, 5, and 10) or downright bad (18). The artificial pond and the artificial green on 18 are a terrible way to end the day on a seaside golf course.
Despite my sentimental attachment to the place, I suspect you'd have to go back pretty far in time to find a U.S. Open being played on a worse golf course. The sad part is that it could be great, and you wouldn't have to meaningfully change the routing. You'd just have to build some interesting greens and bunkers that fit the terrain, and you'd have to be willing to use the edges of the cliffs and the canyons a little bit more.
-
“I understand, but isn’t the point of this discussion group to at least try to explain our likes and dislikes? If every comment on this board were “i like it” or “i hate it” without any additional context or attempt at explanation, it would be absolutely pointless. To say you can’t explain why you like or don’t like something may be true, but then why comment, especially so strongly?”
My apologies. I didn’t know this was a hyperbole free zone. I don’t think my language here has been strong but I can appreciate that you want opinions backed up with something with substance.
I think one reason this course gets beat up on is because it has been selected a couple times now to host a major championship. If it were just another fair golf course in California that 80% of us had never heard of, we would never be talking about it.
When judging golf holes, I think we all use the word “pedestrian” a little differently. To me, it’s a hole that’s just another hole. There’s nothing especially good or bad about it. It’s not quirky nor is it interesting or interesting looking. It doesn’t ask you to hit any kind of shot. It doesn’t present any interesting strategy. It’s the kind of hole that says, we might as well settle this thing on the driving range with a Trackman. At TP, as I see it, holes 1,2,4,5,9,10,11,12,15,16 are pedestrian holes. What holes there look fun or exciting or memorable? 3,13,17 I guess.
First of all on all the holes at TPS you have to deal with the Kikuyu rough which you don't find anywhere but Riviera or Australia. Then there are the ocean breezes to deal with that don't often allow you to just throw up a high shot without accounting for the winds.
Hole 4 has the cliffs and Pacific Ocean all the way to the green on the left side. Hardly pedestrian. Hole 11 is a great long tough par 3 into the wind to a narrow green guarded by traps on both sides and if you are putting from above the it is very difficult. Hole 12 is one of the toughest par 4's in America uphill into the wind, rough and traps with a long iron or highbrid/wood to a green that is very tough to putt. Hole 16 is another tough par 3 into the ocean wind with hazard left and trapped on both sides of another green very tough to putt. Nothing bland at this course, just subtle. It is not Pebble or Cypress but what is? 8)
-
If the merit of a course has basis in memorability, TPS for me is highly meritorious. I had the course to myself after waiting out a long rainstorm in about 2007. Greens fees were $50.00 at the time. I remember many of the holes and the routing on the fingers of the property has a lot to do with this. It has a bit of a corporate feel due to the development on the east side and the land is flat other than 3 and 13, but the routing is interesting and of course it's fame enhances any round. I've played better courses that left much less of an impression.
-
I found this Andy Johnson analysis persuasive. It comes with some nice photoshopped alternatives to 14, 7 and 13:
https://thefriedegg.com/torrey-pines-south-course-changes/ (https://thefriedegg.com/torrey-pines-south-course-changes/)
-
On Golf Channel yesterday Chamblee brought up how the outside of the fairway bunkers were tougher to play out of than the sides along the fairway edges. This is based on raised sides and fingers coming down into the edges creating effectively higher lips and tilted lies. He used these examples as a defense of Rees' Open Doctoring genius as it punished a shot 10-15 further off line more than a ball slightly off line. I guess it's subtleties like this that many of us just don't see.
-
Jeff -- Really like the Andy Johnson article! Thanks!
-
A nice shopping mall with plenty of parking would be an improvement. What a waste of a great piece of property that course is.
This is the most useless comment I've seen on here in a while.
-
As I have stated along with others, I find the course bland and uninspired. Perhaps this might be better to have the people that think this is so amazing explain their position. This course is on TV every year. Not once have I said WOW. A bunch of 400 plus yard straight away par 4s with bunkers on either side of the landing area don't really scream amazing to me. I am open to having my mind changed.
Jon,
From my experience watching the last US Open and the yearly stop ON TV, Torrey Pines has never stood out to me as having great architectural interest. I also think the pond on 18 is atrocious. However, having just breezed through San Diego at the start of a Nat'l Parks tour of California with my family, I had a chance to stop by the resort and have a quick peek around.
I was clear that I had underestimated the land movement and that I was probably ignorant to the reality that the course is better than I had judged from only seeing it on television. Your "strong" opinions haven't been backed up by any specific details other than telling us you've played it virtually. I think that is the reason for others' (fair) critiques of your posts.
Offer specifics when you jump full bore into such discussions.
Cheers
-
Come on gents. Isn’t it possible to like a course that is not great architecturally, but great for other reasons?
Torrey is a great site with an average design, but it’s got tons of history, it’s a true muni, and it’s a nice walk. I’ve only played it once 10 years ago, but it made a definite positive impression.
That the US Open was ever played there and may become a regular site is just really cool.
I will be watching all weekend.
-
Come on gents. Isn’t it possible to like a course that is not great architecturally, but great for other reasons?
Torrey is a great site with an average design, but it’s got tons of history, it’s a true muni, and it’s a nice walk. I’ve only played it once 10 years ago, but it made a definite positive impression.
That the US Open was ever played there and may become a regular site is just really cool.
I will be watching all weekend.
Yes. Exactly. Same.
-
Come on gents. Isn’t it possible to like a course that is not great architecturally, but great for other reasons?
Torrey is a great site with an average design, but it’s got tons of history, it’s a true muni, and it’s a nice walk. I’ve only played it once 10 years ago, but it made a definite positive impression.
That the US Open was ever played there and may become a regular site is just really cool.
I will be watching all weekend.
Yes. Exactly. Same.
ditto
seems worthy of a new thread
Pros for Torrey as an Open site
June weather good
a USGA like test is possible there, without killing the grass.
Let's face it, architecture means little when a course is soft(see Congressional/Valhalla/Erin Hills-etc. in the rain) and becomes silly when the USGA has to kill the grass/plinko putt to get somewhere near their preordained acceptable score.
Modern long, tough for pros in firm/fast June conditions
Keeps the powers that be away from bastardizing historic classic courses
an accessible muni-one of the few an average Joe can play-not cheap but not $500 plus a caddie fee
prime time TV viewing
great views-both when playing and viewing on TV
pros seem to accept it as a good course for an Open
I'll take it
-
could it be known as the Sandpines of southern California? Like most US Open courses the tall rough will negate much of the architecture
-
I’ve been marshaling there the past two days and here are my observations:
Fairway rough has a 6’ wide collar of 1”, then a 12’ wide strip of 2”, followed by 4-5” stuff. There is probably only 10% Kikuyu in the fairway rough; it’s mostly Poa Annua with seed heads and Rye that has been cut. The constant over seeding of the rough for the Farmers inhibits the growth of the Kikuyu here. We’ve had a very dry spring and the rough is probably not as penal as the USGA would like.
Fairways are perfect with at least 95% Kikuyu. Most average about 25 yards wide. One knock about the design is the ribbon straight fairway mowing lines; a little serpentine action would definitely add some variety.
Green side rough is very deep with closer to 20% Kikuyu, most likely a byproduct of the new irrigation system where each head can be individually controlled.
All fairway bunkers are surrounded by rough so don’t look for Bryson or Phil to try bombing one over them.
Putting greens are probably the best they’ve been since the redesign with 100% Poa Annua.
There are probably 1000 less trees than seen in 2008. The bark beetle has decimated the Torrey Pines and many Eucalyptus have also been removed. The views across the property have been greatly improved.
The recent bunker project has completely changed the nature of them. Previously they had a near vertical turf wall of about 3-4’, with a flat sand base. Now the sand is flashed up to the lips which are only 1-2’ high. Definitely easier to get out of and maintain. This was one of Phil’s biggest criticism of the redesign. Perhaps he will be able to showcase his sand skills to better effect now.
Although it has been very warm in SD this week Torrey is a pleasant mid 70’s with some marine layer keeping things cool. The sea breeze has picked up past noon and the players in the afternoon will have to contend with that.
The only significant architectural changes are the par 4 10th now plays 450 yards, no longer a long iron wedge hole. A new fairway bunker on the left will need to be carried to gain the optimum angle into the green. The par 5 9th now has a cross bunker on the right about 80 from the green. There is also a new chipping area back left that will lead to difficult up and downs to a back left pin if the player goes long. The 4th hole has had the fairway line shifted to the left and it now hugs the cliff as close as possible. However the slope to the left is very severe and no one will consciously play to there for a better angle; indeed a shot landing a few paces in the left will bounce into complete perdition. The fronting green side bunker was shifted from the left to the center of the green.
-
Jon,
From my experience watching the last US Open and the yearly stop ON TV, Torrey Pines has never stood out to me as having great architectural interest. I also think the pond on 18 is atrocious. However, having just breezed through San Diego at the start of a Nat'l Parks tour of California with my family, I had a chance to stop by the resort and have a quick peek around.
I was clear that I had underestimated the land movement and that I was probably ignorant to the reality that the course is better than I had judged from only seeing it on television. Your "strong" opinions haven't been backed up by any specific details other than telling us you've played it virtually. I think that is the reason for others' (fair) critiques of your posts.
Offer specifics when you jump full bore into such discussions.
Cheers
Let's do it.
Holes 1,2,5,6,7 dog legs to the right, almost all bunkers left and right in the landing area.
Bunker right bunker left surrounding the green.
4 and 9 dead straight, ones roughly 500 yards as a 4 and the other is a 600 yard par 5.
Nothing really special there.
One uphill 3 one down hill 3, so at least a little change there.
One does have a pretty view?
That's just the front.
The par 5 that goes down the hill and back up it is pretty cool and has a little soul.
We at least get to a dog leg to the left by the 14th.
Followed up by a bland straight away 15th.
Perhaps playing it might get me to give it a slight bump, but I doubt it.
This is far more in defense of my opinion than anyone has given in support of theirs sans one person.
Really not setting out to hurt anyone's feelings, simply find the course to be average at best.
I genuinely feel removed from where it is, you'd have never heard of it.
To be fair, I find myself to be a slightly above average looking guy.
Cheers!
-
Jon,
From my experience watching the last US Open and the yearly stop ON TV, Torrey Pines has never stood out to me as having great architectural interest. I also think the pond on 18 is atrocious. However, having just breezed through San Diego at the start of a Nat'l Parks tour of California with my family, I had a chance to stop by the resort and have a quick peek around.
I was clear that I had underestimated the land movement and that I was probably ignorant to the reality that the course is better than I had judged from only seeing it on television. Your "strong" opinions haven't been backed up by any specific details other than telling us you've played it virtually. I think that is the reason for others' (fair) critiques of your posts.
Offer specifics when you jump full bore into such discussions.
Cheers
Let's do it.
Holes 1,2,5,6,7 dog legs to the right, almost all bunkers left and right in the landing area.
Bunker right bunker left surrounding the green.
4 and 9 dead straight, ones roughly 500 yards as a 4 and the other is a 600 yard par 5.
Nothing really special there.
One uphill 3 one down hill 3, so at least a little change there.
One does have a pretty view?
That's just the front.
The par 5 that goes down the hill and back up it is pretty cool and has a little soul.
We at least get to a dog leg to the left by the 14th.
Followed up by a bland straight away 15th.
Perhaps playing it might get me to give it a slight bump, but I doubt it.
This is far more in defense of my opinion than anyone has given in support of theirs sans one person.
Really not setting out to hurt anyone's feelings, simply find the course to be average at best.
I genuinely feel removed from where it is, you'd have never heard of it.
To be fair, I find myself to be a slightly above average looking guy.
Cheers!
I've never seen you or met you but based on your posts I am sure your a less than average looking guy with a bland personality. ;D
-
To put it simply (if not correctly): Torrey Pines is the very epitome of a DECADE's golf course: perfectly suited to the modern game and its data-driven ethos, and thus ideally aligned with the USGA's over-arching goal of hosting the sternest-and-yet-fairest-championship-test in all of professional golf, and preternaturally blessed by having been the venue for a thrilling US Open playoff win by the greatest of all time, in one of his greatest and gutsiest performances ever -- all the while serving for decades as an extremely popular, always busy and very public municipal course in one of the most golf-loving and sun-drenched regions of the country, with the magnificent Pacific as a backdrop. All in all, this so-called 'missed opportunity' has done pretty well for itself. Heck, if I missed my opportunities half as well as Torrey Pines did, I'd be a billionaire by now!
-
Come on gents. Isn’t it possible to like a course that is not great architecturally, but great for other reasons?
Torrey is a great site with an average design, but it’s got tons of history, it’s a true muni, and it’s a nice walk. I’ve only played it once 10 years ago, but it made a definite positive impression.
That the US Open was ever played there and may become a regular site is just really cool.
I will be watching all weekend.
Yes. Exactly. Same.
ditto
seems worthy of a new thread
Pros for Torrey as an Open site
June weather good
a USGA like test is possible there, without killing the grass.
Let's face it, architecture means little when a course is soft(see Congressional/Valhalla/Erin Hills-etc. in the rain) and becomes silly when the USGA has to kill the grass/plinko putt to get somewhere near their preordained acceptable score.
Modern long, tough for pros in firm/fast June conditions
Keeps the powers that be away from bastardizing historic classic courses
an accessible muni-one of the few an average Joe can play-not cheap but not $500 plus a caddie fee
prime time TV viewing
great views-both when playing and viewing on TV
pros seem to accept it as a good course for an Open
I'll take it
Watching golf in the UK is a true test of interest. I don't have SKY, so golf costs extra to stream. I think I have to pay for an entire month to access the US Open on NOWTV. Honestly, being so-so on the event, Torrey Pines hasn't convinced me to spend the money. I kinda wish all tv was a straight decision of pay per view. I would probably watch less TV.
Ciao
-
Been watching events at TP for many years on TV and the only thing I immediately recall about the place is the pond on the 18th and the para-gliders. At other (allegedly) high echelon courses I've seen on TV I can usually recall a lot.
atb
-
These boring-ass greens sure do produce a lot of big breakers. Interested in hearing what works and doesn't about them from people who have putted on them.
-
;D ;D
really liked Jeff Warnes' answer +1
-
They really took a lot of trees out. Really noticeable on 16 from the last time I was there.
-
How much of the want surrounding the golf course is related to its proximity to the cliff edge and coastline?
Is it difficult to evaluate the course as it is because there is land between the course and the cliffs, thus there is a desire to route the course closer to the cliffs and a viewed missed opportunity?
If the golf course existed 1,000 yards inland, where the ocean was still visible in the distance but there were no cliffs nearby, would opinions on the course be different?
What did the land look like before the Army built an airbase on it? how much of the "blandness" of the course property is due to the Army's earth work?
-
How much of the want surrounding the golf course is related to its proximity to the cliff edge and coastline?
Is it difficult to evaluate the course as it is because there is land between the course and the cliffs, thus there is a desire to route the course closer to the cliffs and a viewed missed opportunity?
If the golf course existed 1,000 yards inland, where the ocean was still visible in the distance but there were no cliffs nearby, would opinions on the course be different?
What did the land look like before the Army built an airbase on it? how much of the "blandness" of the course property is due to the Army's earth work?
Cliff holes don't have the best record in Cali. Trump's course in PV lost two holes to the ocean, Olympic Club Ocean lost a hole, Half Moon Bay lost two 18th hole greens, and Pebble lost a tee box. My guess is the city of SD told Bell to play it safe and not risk losing any cliff holes. Jones has moved some holes closer to the cliffs but I bet he still has restraints. 8)
-
So Baltusrol (Lower) or Torrey for a US Open venue. Been to both, played both, lots of knocks on both on GCA.
I enjoyed both and really liked TP North for strike 3.
-
While it may or may not be relevant, Torrey Pines has produced an impressive list of winners in the Farmers tournament.
In the last 29 years (since 1993), that event has been won just 7 times by players who have not won a major (P. Jacobsen, N. Watney, J. Rahm, M. Leishman, S. Stallings and twice by B. Snedeker).
Major winners who have won at Torrey 22 times are T. Woods (6x), P. Mickelson (3x), J. Day (2x), C. Stadler, J. Daly, J.M. Olazabal, D. Love, M. O'Meara, S. Simpson, J. Daly, B. Crane, B. Watson, J. Rose and P. Reed.
It can be debated whether or not good golf courses identify good golfers. There is no denying Torrey Pines has done so.
-
good point David T.
Also thanks to Pete L. for his on the ground insights.
TW, PM among the Cali boys killing it at Torrey.
Fortunate to have played there, and it really is nice for a muni on the ocean with views forever but..............
From TV all I remember is the pond on 18 and the paragliders, for sure, LOL
How unatural is it to have all that healthy turf in the desert on the ocean, It is faux golf at best.
The course sucks TBH, nice cart paths that serpentine throughout though, LOL.
Would be better if they went with something more like Wilshire CC.
-
By coincidence, I had looked up winners going back to the 50s, in precursors to the Farmers. You will also see Littler, Casper, Bolt, Palmer, Nicklaus, Player, Tom Watson, Fuzzy Zoeller, Johnny Miller, besides the winners Dave Tepper mentions.
You can also look up past winners of World Junior Championship winners at the tournament hosted there over the years, an impressive list.
The surprise breaks, hard to read greens, juicy greenside rough, and sloping fairways that reduce the effective width of fairways and favor players who work it into slopes are what public players encounter when they play the course.
We'll see what kind of drama unfolds over the weekend. I'm glad I can play it at the Senior Resident rate and like the fact that a muni course I like and play is hosting the U.S. Open again.
I had the good fortune of making a hole in one on #3 in 2010. The experience adds to my viewing enjoyment.
Charles Lund
-
good point David T.
Also thanks to Pete L. for his on the ground insights.
TW, PM among the Cali boys killing it at Torrey.
Fortunate to have played there, and it really is nice for a muni on the ocean with views forever but..............
From TV all I remember is the pond on 18 and the paragliders, for sure, LOL
How unatural is it to have all that healthy turf in the desert on the ocean, It is faux golf at best.
The course sucks TBH, nice cart paths that serpentine throughout though, LOL.
Would be better if they went with something more like Wilshire CC.
Im surprised they didn’t shut down the paragliders this week.
-
good point David T.
Also thanks to Pete L. for his on the ground insights.
TW, PM among the Cali boys killing it at Torrey.
Fortunate to have played there, and it really is nice for a muni on the ocean with views forever but..............
From TV all I remember is the pond on 18 and the paragliders, for sure, LOL
How unatural is it to have all that healthy turf in the desert on the ocean, It is faux golf at best.
The course sucks TBH, nice cart paths that serpentine throughout though, LOL.
Would be better if they went with something more like Wilshire CC.
You can't remember holes 3, 4,7? Sorry I've not watched much of the back yet, but 14 is certainly an amazing greensite and 17 has a daunting canyon left. Yep the lake on 18 is unattractive, much like 15 at ANGC(I wish it was another arid canyon, but it's not)
Seems like every green I look at has a canyon lurking in the background
Many/most of the holes provide a test with both terrain, slope in fairways, firmness etc.
Balls not properly shaped or striped don't hit the fairway, yet we are seeing all kinds of players succeed-unlike Winged Foot where we found out who was longest and strongest-5 inch rye-be damned.
which is what you get when the fad police (no trees) take over.
The three par 3s I've seen have great variety in length, green design. Gap wedge, 9 iron and long iron(edit 16 is also a long par 3-6 ironish today,with another canyon left)
Goodness, at Medinah they play the same par 3 twice.
It's not perfect-it's a muni-Let me repeat that. It's a muni, that anyone can play-and if you live in the area, it's affordable.
it's in an area with perfect June weather, producing perfect firm fast, true conditions. not the usual plinko USGA greens that their agronomist spends two years "perfecting" only to watch balls bobble and fail to hold their line on mottled shitty surfaces-easy to protect par with shitty, bumpy greens.. and it's in prime time.
Lots to like.
Next year we get a course cobbled together from two uber waspy courses the public could never play and in two years we get to return to the Fadland of hand raked , restovation aesthetics open to the uber rich of the(mostly) right ethnicity and religion , so not to worry.Both are fantastic courses I'm excited to see on TV,I may add-but they are decidedly not munis open to the public.
i think way too many people are wrapped up in the aesthetic(which aren't our preferences) of the bunkers at Torrey.But I bet they're a good thing when they are machine raking them ahead of 6 am daily play-they play no easier or harder due to their amoeba shape than they would with frilly faddy edges.
Of course they could go with a different aesthetic,(less rye green) but they have many, many rounds annually and a Tour event in January.
As I've stated before, I've been there 3 times but not played it.
Each visit, plus each TV Open only wants to make me play it more.
I've played Kiawah three times, each time determined to see what I missed-given all the love it gets here.
Turns out I was right the first time-and watching it on TV again did nothing to change the opinion of not wanting to return.(though it was a fantastic event and well suited to today's elite player)
-
I think TP is looking great and this is setting up to be a fun Sunday night.
-
TP has proved, again, to be a good test for the best, but it’s gruesome television. Today has been especially dull.
I know that sounds bitter, but perhaps the USGA will ease the agony by finding some more accessible hole locations in the final round. The big name guys have taken a couple big steps to assert themselves, that’s for sure, but it’s been borderline unwatchable.
At the end of the proverbial day, it’s the US Open, which is almost always a grind of a championship. Grinding might identify the most fortunate player, but it doesn’t always provide interesting competition.
But there’s always tomorrow!
-
TP has proved, again, to be a good test for the best, but it’s gruesome television. Today has been especially dull.
I know that sounds bitter, but perhaps the USGA will ease the agony by finding some more accessible hole locations in the final round. The big name guys have taken a couple big steps to assert themselves, that’s for sure, but it’s been borderline unwatchable.
At the end of the proverbial day, it’s the US Open, which is almost always a grind of a championship. Grinding might identify the most fortunate player, but it doesn’t always provide interesting competition.
But there’s always tomorrow!
as you know, I'm no USGA defender...
but, it's the US Open-with a distinct identity
Masters=birdie fest/wide scoring dispersion
US Open=grind
Open=weather/survival or lights out
PGA-depends on which identity/schedule they're going with that year(which is why it's so forgettable)
-
JW:
I’m in agreement with your pithy analysis, but sometimes the grind ain’t all that watchable. The kite surfers were more appealing than most of the golf today. They better dial it back mañana.
-
JW:
I’m in agreement with your pithy analysis, but sometimes the grind ain’t all that watchable. The kite surfers were more appealing than most of the golf today. They better dial it back mañana.
Hope you hung on for Louis;)
-
Not one bitch, moan or complaint from any of the participants over the first 3 days of the event - it appears to me everyone has got it correct so far.
Lets hope tomorrow is a repeat.
I'm lovin' it.
-
Not one bitch, moan or complaint from any of the participants over the first 3 days of the event - it appears to me everyone has got it correct so far.
Lets hope tomorrow is a repeat.
I'm lovin' it.
I see no complaining as a sign that the golf course hasn't gotten into their heads. I would rather see a Pete Dye golf course that causes indecision and discomfort in these guys. I'll listen to the complaining. I really wish at some point the players were forced into a real go/no go decision that offered high risk reward trade.
-
You're a nice guy Tim...But too bad your opinion is the only one that matters.
-
IMO, the discourse (mostly on Twitter) around Torrey Pines has been, by and large, pretty pitiful. Pretty much no one has mounted an argument that it is architecturally as sophisticated as other U.S. Open venues (I personally can't wait to see LACC host in 2023) - especially the ones to come - but some of the bashing seems so over-the-top that I wonder what the underlying philosophy is.
Are the course's most vocal detractors so passionate because they believe the sort of linear type of golf it sets up is completely unacceptable in any case? Do they believe there should be zero courses defined primarily by their capacity to test a golfer's powers of shot execution? I'm not sure about this but it is clear that they believe once every 13 years is an unacceptable rate at which to have to watch a U.S. Open at this particular course.
If indeed this type of golf is unacceptable to play or watch, I can't help but conclude that that sort of hard-line philosophy is no less closed-minded than the one that the ardent advocates of classic architecture would argue produced the so-called "Dark Ages" of golf course architecture.
This week, I think there's been so much chatter about the course during, it's become easy to fall into the trap of thinking it represents all golf courses, when in reality it's one of many courses to host this particular event, on a long arc of history.
-
One of the things that seems to be lost in this convo is the concept of value.
While the course may not be awful, it seems a very poor deal at $200. Just like a burger from In N Out may be a good value at $7, but would you pay $25 for same? Huge difference between being cheap and not interested in the value proposition of a product.
P.S. Full disclosure, I've seen the course in person 3 times, walked it once, and its a $75 course at best. As a comparison in SD, Coronado looks far more interesting...
-
One of the things that seems to be lost in this convo is the concept of value.
While the course may not be awful, it seems a very poor deal at $200. Just like a burger from In N Out may be a good value at $7, but would you pay $25 for same? Huge difference between being cheap and not interested in the value proposition of a product.
P.S. Full disclosure, I've seen the course in person 3 times, walked it once, and its a $75 course at best. As a comparison in SD, Coronado looks far more interesting...
You nailed it-it's exactly the value for those who it was designed. $73-78 for San Diego residents.
BUT they allow non residents to play for more(way cheaper than paying CA taxes)
Locals who want to play a US Open venue acn do so at a "value" cost.
non residents can choose NOT to play there
I just don't see the problem.
20 years ago it was hip to bash TP and Rees.
Just seems like that ship sailed soooo long ago, especially after two ultra successful US Opens.
It looks well presented(puttable greens that are firm-rare for a US Open baked out normal plinko)
Incredible scenery and what looks like quite a few great holes 3,4,7,14,16 to name a few.
demanding with a WIDE range of different types of players contending.
News flash-the two biggest bomb and gougers finished 1 and 2 at venerable Winged Foot, despite 5 inch rough wall to wall
-
“Incredible scenery and what looks like quite a few great holes 3,4,7,14,16 to name a few.[/size]demanding with a WIDE range of different types of players contending.News flash-the two biggest bomb and gougers finished 1 and 2 at venerable Winged Foot, despite 5 inch rough wall to wall”
+1
This leader board has great finish written all over it.[/color]
-
Fair enough Kalen, but the flipside of that value equation is that it's probably the cheapest and most accessible of the courses that regularly host majors.
-
"Fair enough Kalen, but the flipside of that value equation is that it's probably the cheapest and most accessible of the courses that regularly host majors."
With the exception of TPC Deere Run (that hosts the Quad Cities), Torrey Pines is possibly/probably the cheapest and most accessible of the course that host a PGA Tour event each year.
-
Fair enough Kalen, but the flipside of that value equation is that it's probably the cheapest and most accessible of the courses that regularly host majors.
+1
-
Fair enough Kalen, but the flipside of that value equation is that it's probably the cheapest and most accessible of the courses that regularly host majors.
+1
Torrey is less expensive than Bethpage Black for residents but more expensive for non-residents.
-
It’s been 5 years but I played the Back for $48. What’s Torrey?
-
You're a nice guy Tim...But too bad your opinion is the only one that matters.
My opinion is not the only one that matters. I just dislike uneducated statements from ignorant people who think their opinion is the only one that matters.
-
Expect anything different?
-
"It’s been 5 years but I played the Back for $48. What’s Torrey?"
Senior resident rate for Torrey South Monday to Thursday is $44, if you can book a time. Friday to Sunday is $78.
Charles Lund
-
Seve weeps for the Torrey haters.
-
Well, now you can move Jon Rahm from the list of non-major winners who have won the Farmers at Torrey to the list of major winners who have won the Farmers at Torrey. :)
-
This win would put Torrey Pines in the golf course hall of fame.
-
Great tournament, great champion, interesting that the cliff and barraca that “doesn’t” come into play cost Louie. Torrey IMO looked and played great.
-
Tim Leahy...you're a funny guy!
I think the consensus is TP is not worthy of being in the Open rota, and that it is a boring layout that could have been better with a few tweeks.
Like I said, it takes a compelling story to keep people watching golf at this venue. (ever watch the Farmers...all four days? I didn't think so)
-
Looking at the breaks on putts, especially at US Open speeds and hole locations, this is a very good set of greens which more than compensate for the rest of what We think. The barrancas and cliffsides on maybe half the holes made opposite side roughs more appealing as a bail out, and there seemed to be green-side bunkering to counter that strategy. Fairway width seemed to be about right. And just enough wind to make things thoughtful.
-
Great tournament, great champion, interesting that the cliff and barraca that “doesn’t” come into play cost Louie. Torrey IMO looked and played great.
+1000
-
You're a nice guy Tim...But too bad your opinion is the only one that matters.
My opinion is not the only one that matters. I just dislike uneducated statements from ignorant people who think their opinion is the only one that matters.
Why do people have to get personal about architecture? At the end of the day, does any of this shit matter? People act as though they have been personally insulted if someone's opinion differs from their own. Its just a bloody golf course. Chill.
Ciao
-
From a leading player (but what do they know ;) ):
"I love this golf course. It's fun to play. I think it's perfect for a major championship. The way it sets up, you've got to be able to put the ball in the fairway, control your irons, and you've really got to putt well out here. That's kind of the basis of a major championship. You need to be able to do everything really well. I think this course is perfect for that."
-
From a leading player (but what do they know ;) ):
"I love this golf course. It's fun to play. I think it's perfect for a major championship. The way it sets up, you've got to be able to put the ball in the fairway, control your irons, and you've really got to putt well out here. That's kind of the basis of a major championship. You need to be able to do everything really well. I think this course is perfect for that."
"with no canyons in play.."
except the one that decided the championship,and about 12 others for the rest of us.
Far better green contours than Bethpage...zzz-
Obviously far more scenic.
While I find individual holes at Kiawah quite compelling, I have zero desire to return to the cumulative punitive design of it all, and thought it showed just average on TV
-
The kikuyu was fantastic.
-
The not-so-untold-story:
Jason Gore, the USGA's players relations director -- and apparently also a key part of the course set-up team.
Players as different as Paul Casey and Phil Mickelson went out of their ways to single out/thank JG for what they both said was an excellent-ideal set-up.
-
It's a lot easier to get the setup right on a course that's very well-suited for the task.
Torrey may not be architecturally enthralling, but it's clearly a fantastic test of elite-level golf.
The funny thing is that, even though it's not a "strategic" course in a lot of ways, it ends up really testing course management and presenting a lot of risk/reward at the elite level. These guys are really good, and they're also working with pretty solid analytics now. If you give them a "strategic" hole, they'll generally calculate the right way to play it pretty quickly. Holes like 10 at Riviera or 13/15 at Augusta aren't really all that compelling at the pro level anymore because these dudes know how to play them, which has reduced them to relatively simple tests of execution.
Somehow, a hole like 13 at Torrey that completely lacks nuance becomes genuinely compelling at the elite level because of the difficulty of execution it demands. Sure, the big boys all step to the tee hoping to hit a great drive and have a chance to reach in two... but then they hit the tee shot and all kinds of shit starts happening.
-
We've had many discussions about this in the past on GCA.com and I think these last few posts are interesting from the viewpoint of a long held GCA perspective which basically says:
"A course that is designed or setup to be great/interesting for the best .0001% of players in the world, may not be so hot for everyone else"
I can't argue it wasn't a compelling finish with plenty of twists and turns with a leaderboard chock full of big names, but the same thing happened at Chambers Bay and it was poo-poo'd by nearly everyone. If I had my proverbial 10 of 10 plays between those two, it would be an easy 10-0 for me. ;)
P.S. Full disclosure, I know the "play where the pros play" has allure to many, I get it. But I can only think of two courses on the planet where that might interest me...ANGC and TOC.
-
It's a lot easier to get the setup right on a course that's very well-suited for the task.
Torrey may not be architecturally enthralling, but it's clearly a fantastic test of elite-level golf.
The funny thing is that, even though it's not a "strategic" course in a lot of ways, it ends up really testing course management and presenting a lot of risk/reward at the elite level. These guys are really good, and they're also working with pretty solid analytics now. If you give them a "strategic" hole, they'll generally calculate the right way to play it pretty quickly. Holes like 10 at Riviera or 13/15 at Augusta aren't really all that compelling at the pro level anymore because these dudes know how to play them, which has reduced them to relatively simple tests of execution.
Somehow, a hole like 13 at Torrey that completely lacks nuance becomes genuinely compelling at the elite level because of the difficulty of execution it demands. Sure, the big boys all step to the tee hoping to hit a great drive and have a chance to reach in two... but then they hit the tee shot and all kinds of shit starts happening.
Amen. This absolutely nails it, Jason.
They may not fit the criteria of what we know/believe to be enjoyable GCA, but the talent and ego of the best players is very well matched by strenuous conditions like the USGA presents in its biggest event.
-
Holes like 10 at Riviera or 13/15 at Augusta aren't really all that compelling at the pro level anymore because these dudes know how to play them, which has reduced them to relatively simple tests of execution.
Somehow, a hole like 13 at Torrey that completely lacks nuance becomes genuinely compelling at the elite level because of the difficulty of execution it demands. Sure, the big boys all step to the tee hoping to hit a great drive and have a chance to reach in two... but then they hit the tee shot and all kinds of shit starts happening.
...yup, as others are saying...absolutely nails it... although my one visit to TP, even with more trees and a narrower corridor and a shorter tee...13 was a fun hole to play...comes in a perfect place in the back nine routing too, imo.
One stat I was REALLY surprised at... that #6 (played as card 4 of 519) played to a stroke average of 4.119...that's significantly lower than other USGA converted 5s... it's many years now, but I recall that hole being a scary 5 when I played.
-
One stat I was REALLY surprised at... that #6 (played as card 4 of 519) played to a stroke average of 4.119...that's significantly lower than other USGA converted 5s... it's many years now, but I recall that hole being a scary 5 when I played.
I believe this is because they were all able to cut the corner over that tree, making the hole play shorter than the stated length on the card.
-
One stat I was REALLY surprised at... that #6 (played as card 4 of 519) played to a stroke average of 4.119...that's significantly lower than other USGA converted 5s... it's many years now, but I recall that hole being a scary 5 when I played.
I believe this is because they were all able to cut the corner over that tree, making the hole play shorter than the stated length on the card.
That's got to be part of it...there's an example (I suppose) of where the pro's slightly diff teeing angle...further to the right and its carry proposition -- is actually an easier shot, than the further left, shorter Par 5 tee I played (I think) more than 25 years ago... the tee I played is remembered as a true slicer's fright, a test of accuracy/not blocking pushing or slicing rather than a test of carry. cutting any corner...
-
Good points.
100% agree that I would love to see the pros back at Chambers Bay.
Do think Torrey with more "road hole" style features would solve a lot of the criticism.
-
VK,
From what i saw on Saturday and Sunday, they were using the brown tee at 530, which was just close enough for many to go over the tree on the right instead of around it from from the 564 yard back tee and effectively made the hole even shorter than 530. BDC had a gap wedge approach on Sunday.
-
We've had many discussions about this in the past on GCA.com and I think these last few posts are interesting from the viewpoint of a long held GCA perspective which basically says:
"A course that is designed or setup to be great/interesting for the best .0001% of players in the world, may not be so hot for everyone else"
I can't argue it wasn't a compelling finish with plenty of twists and turns with a leaderboard chock full of big names, but the same thing happened at Chambers Bay and it was poo-poo'd by nearly everyone. If I had my proverbial 10 of 10 plays between those two, it would be an easy 10-0 for me. ;)
P.S. Full disclosure, I know the "play where the pros play" has allure to many, I get it. But I can only think of two courses on the planet where that might interest me...ANGC and TOC.
I played TPS almost every weekend for 2 years with a 10 hdcp from both the blue and white tees and never tired of the challenge or got bored in the slightest. Prior to the club championship and the
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
-
Brad - that's the question I was thinking about when I posted about the near-unanimous praise from the players re: the course & set-up, and how some of them singled out JG's role. If memory serves, there were few complaints in this regard at either of the past two Opens, ie at Winged Foot and Pebble in 2019, which coincided with JG's arrival. In short, I'm wondering if this slightly kinder gentler US Open (ie no 'losing the course' eg Shinnecock) might be the new normal.
-
Brad - that's the question I was thinking about when I posted about the near-unanimous praise from the players re: the course & set-up, and how some of them singled out JG's role. If memory serves, there were few complaints in this regard at either of the past two Opens, ie at Winged Foot and Pebble in 2019, which coincided with JG's arrival. In short, I'm wondering if this slightly kinder gentler US Open (ie no 'losing the course' eg Shinnecock) might be the new normal.
I really hope that’s not the new normal.
Top shelf players are often the worst source of what is and isn’t good design and set up. Their praise doesn’t influence my opinion at all. Many of them feel it is their birthright that the ball stops where it lands. That all “good shots” are rewarded. That a course “right out in front of you” is definitely a good thing.
-
Brad - that's the question I was thinking about when I posted about the near-unanimous praise from the players re: the course & set-up, and how some of them singled out JG's role. If memory serves, there were few complaints in this regard at either of the past two Opens, ie at Winged Foot and Pebble in 2019, which coincided with JG's arrival. In short, I'm wondering if this slightly kinder gentler US Open (ie no 'losing the course' eg Shinnecock) might be the new normal.
The aesthetics of the bunkers certainly have colored many opinions of TP here.
One thing is certain, we don't get the dramatic finish we got this year at TP on the plinko, mottled greens we've seen in so many US Opens other than the last 3 years.
Say what you want about Torrey, their greens were firm , sloped and demanding, yet puttable, while previous events have produced random , odd, uneven rolls as they were so stressed.
Just saying mottled and plinkolike is an undesirable, yet highly effective way to protect par.
I'd love to see the US Open at Pebble more often,or Bandon, or somewhere else of public access on the west coast.
So we have TP which ticks so many boxes except a few here on GCA.
On the muni side, t's hard for me to call Bethpage a better site with its(now perma) narrowed fairways and penal thick rough that renders many of its bunkers wide and irrelevant.To say nothing of its boring greens save 15.
And TP at least has the canyons now more than ever in play on 6-7 holes(one decided the event) as well as spectacular views,
with a prime time slot
Unless it's opposite swimming...
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
-
Brad - that's the question I was thinking about when I posted about the near-unanimous praise from the players re: the course & set-up, and how some of them singled out JG's role. If memory serves, there were few complaints in this regard at either of the past two Opens, ie at Winged Foot and Pebble in 2019, which coincided with JG's arrival. In short, I'm wondering if this slightly kinder gentler US Open (ie no 'losing the course' eg Shinnecock) might be the new normal.
Say what you want about Torrey, their greens were firm , sloped and demanding, yet puttable, while previous events have produced random , odd, uneven rolls as they were so stressed.
It was a demanding but fair test. Mickelson who hasn’t been a big booster of the post Reese Jones Torrey Pines praised the setup and added “In the thirty years I have played the U.S. Open, this is the best I’ve seen. I thought the USGA did a remarkable job, and I’m really proud and happy that it’s here at Torrey.”
-
I’ve been playing golf for 35 years, I’ve competed at almost every level, and I was a club pro for a decade.
Top shelf players are often the worst source of what is and isn’t good design and set up.
;D
It's funny. One of my takeaways as I watched this tournament was "Damn. The pros might actually have a lot of pretty good points when it comes to what makes for the best elite-level tests of golf."
Count me in agreement with the guys who liked seeing real grass on the greens and un-stupidly-narrowed fairways while still delivering a stout test.
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week. Also part of my statement was, the championship should be played on the nation’s best golf courses. Torrey Pines even isn’t among the very best courses in the state. Torrey Pines is such a snoozer that for me, the U.S. Open hardly felt like a major.
-
"I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week. Also part of my statement was, the championship should be played on the nation’s best golf courses. Torrey Pines even isn’t among the very best courses in the state. Torrey Pines is such a snoozer that for me, the U.S. Open hardly felt like a major."
The important thing was it felt like a major to Rahm, Louie and the other top players fighting like hell to win it. What anyone else felt is meaningless.
-
"I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week. Also part of my statement was, the championship should be played on the nation’s best golf courses. Torrey Pines even isn’t among the very best courses in the state. Torrey Pines is such a snoozer that for me, the U.S. Open hardly felt like a major."
The important thing was it felt like a major to Rahm, Louie and the other top players fighting like hell to win it. What anyone else felt is meaningless.
Obviously. I’m just one fan and I’m only speaking for myself. (though everyone I’ve spoken to agrees with me fully) But my opinion is the only opinion that matters to me. There’s nothing that could possibly happen during the tournament that could sway my opinion of that golf course and what the U.S. Open should look like.
-
"But my opinion is the only opinion that matters to me."
Glad you are so open minded.
https://www.golfchannel.com/news/despite-moaning-and-complaining-torrey-pines-should-host-more-us-opens (https://www.golfchannel.com/news/despite-moaning-and-complaining-torrey-pines-should-host-more-us-opens)
-
"But my opinion is the only opinion that matters to me."
Glad you are so open minded.
https://www.golfchannel.com/news/despite-moaning-and-complaining-torrey-pines-should-host-more-us-opens (https://www.golfchannel.com/news/despite-moaning-and-complaining-torrey-pines-should-host-more-us-opens)
I think you are reading that statement the wrong way. I don’t feel like my opinion is more important or more valuable than anyone else’s. I’m saying that my opinion is my opinion and it’s not going to change based on what anybody else says or believes.
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week.
I find those sentences at odds with each other.
Shinny's had 2 recent Opens and the greens were plinko-both times. (I pin that squarely on the USGA as Shinny has wonderful greens)
Just not sure how you can say "nobody wants to see bumpy greens" than say you'll take what you saw at Shinny over what we saw at Torrey. Evidently, you want to see bumpy greens if you chose "what you saw at Shinny".
At TP, I saw the best leaderboard by far I've seen in a major until the two leaders separated themselves late.
I saw one of the best finishes I've ever seen in a major.
I saw great shots rewarded and those who continually bailed, eventually punished(see Bryson)
I saw many kids of players have success. Bubba, Bryson, Rahm, Koepka, Henley,Shauffele ,Morikawa
I saw firm, yet healthy turf.
Stunning views on TV.
I love Shinecock. It's one of my favorite courses in the world.
I detest what the USGA has done to it the last two visits, and frankly feel TP as presented was a far better test.(I hate the word test, but I hate plinko greens worse)
If those are my choices, i'll take TP.
I'd prefer to see the Shinny that's presented every summer, and an improved TP, but it seems those aren't real choices.
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week.
I find those sentences at odds with each other.
Shinny's had 2 recent Opens and the greens were plinko-both times. (I pin that squarely on the USGA as Shinny has wonderful greens)
Just not sure how you can say "nobody wants to see bumpy greens" than say you'll take what you saw at Shinny over what we saw at Torrey. Evidently, you want to see bumpy greens if you chose "what you saw at Shinny".
At TP, I saw the best leaderboard by far I've seen in a major until the two leaders separated themselves late.
I saw one of the best finishes I've ever seen in a major.
I saw great shots rewarded and those who continually bailed, eventually punished(see Bryson)
I saw many kids of players have success. Bubba, Bryson, Rahm, Koepka, Henley,Shauffele ,Morikawa
I saw firm, yet healthy turf.
Stunning views on TV.
I love Shinecock. It's one of my favorite courses in the world.
I detest what the USGA has done to it the last two visits, and frankly feel TP as presented was a far better test.(I hate the word test, but I hate plinko greens worse)
If those are my choices, i'll take TP.
I'd prefer to see the Shinny that's presented every summer, and an improved TP, but it seems those aren't real choices.
What I saw at Torrey was a PGA Championship - a major on a second tier course playing fairly ordinary conditions. If that’s the future of the US Open, it’s open to be considered the third best major..... IMO.
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week.
I find those sentences at odds with each other.
Shinny's had 2 recent Opens and the greens were plinko-both times. (I pin that squarely on the USGA as Shinny has wonderful greens)
Just not sure how you can say "nobody wants to see bumpy greens" than say you'll take what you saw at Shinny over what we saw at Torrey. Evidently, you want to see bumpy greens if you chose "what you saw at Shinny".
At TP, I saw the best leaderboard by far I've seen in a major until the two leaders separated themselves late.
I saw one of the best finishes I've ever seen in a major.
I saw great shots rewarded and those who continually bailed, eventually punished(see Bryson)
I saw many kids of players have success. Bubba, Bryson, Rahm, Koepka, Henley,Shauffele ,Morikawa
I saw firm, yet healthy turf.
Stunning views on TV.
I love Shinecock. It's one of my favorite courses in the world.
I detest what the USGA has done to it the last two visits, and frankly feel TP as presented was a far better test.(I hate the word test, but I hate plinko greens worse)
If those are my choices, i'll take TP.
I'd prefer to see the Shinny that's presented every summer, and an improved TP, but it seems those aren't real choices.
What I saw at Torrey was a PGA Championship - a major on a second tier course playing fairly ordinary conditions. If that’s the future of the US Open, it’s open to be considered the third best major..... IMO.
Fair enough.
I'd like to see the PGA there as well.
And I certainly accept it is not a Shinnecock, Oakmont or PB.
Not so sure about "ordinary" conditions. June is just a good time in coastal San Diego for turf. They didn't have to lose the grass to firm it up-and it was plenty firm. Ironically, the last Open at Shinny the weather was ideal(coolish) and it rained two of the days-yet they still lost the greens.
-6 at TP on a par 71(278 vs 281 at Shinny) isn't exactly low, and players were able to make putts at TP so that plinko defense wasn't there(easily good for 5-6 shots over 72 holes.
-
Just about everything about golf is counter-intuitive.
A regular tour stop on a Doak 5 muni has produced two compelling U.S. Open Championships with Tiger Woods winning on a course he has dominated on since playing as a Junior. On Sunday, Jon Rahm, #2 ranked player wins over more than several of the top ranked players in the world, with a stellar finish.
Seems it worked well twice, if the point was not to embarrass the best players, but to identify the best player.
Charles Lund
-
Let the PGA be played on private courses with no public access. Keep the US Open on truly open public golf courses. TPS is a national treasure as much as St. Andrews is to Scotland. 8)
-
https://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2021/6/22/what-needs-to-happen-for-torrey-pines-to-host-another-us-open
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week.
I find those sentences at odds with each other.
Shinny's had 2 recent Opens and the greens were plinko-both times. (I pin that squarely on the USGA as Shinny has wonderful greens)
Just not sure how you can say "nobody wants to see bumpy greens" than say you'll take what you saw at Shinny over what we saw at Torrey. Evidently, you want to see bumpy greens if you chose "what you saw at Shinny".
At TP, I saw the best leaderboard by far I've seen in a major until the two leaders separated themselves late.
I saw one of the best finishes I've ever seen in a major.
I saw great shots rewarded and those who continually bailed, eventually punished(see Bryson)
I saw many kids of players have success. Bubba, Bryson, Rahm, Koepka, Henley,Shauffele ,Morikawa
I saw firm, yet healthy turf.
Stunning views on TV.
I love Shinecock. It's one of my favorite courses in the world.
I detest what the USGA has done to it the last two visits, and frankly feel TP as presented was a far better test.(I hate the word test, but I hate plinko greens worse)
If those are my choices, i'll take TP.
I'd prefer to see the Shinny that's presented every summer, and an improved TP, but it seems those aren't real choices.
What I saw at Torrey was a PGA Championship - a major on a second tier course playing fairly ordinary conditions. If that’s the future of the US Open, it’s open to be considered the third best major..... IMO.
Fair enough.
I'd like to see the PGA there as well.
And I certainly accept it is not a Shinnecock, Oakmont or PB.
Not so sure about "ordinary" conditions. June is just a good time in coastal San Diego for turf. They didn't have to lose the grass to firm it up-and it was plenty firm. Ironically, the last Open at Shinny the weather was ideal(coolish) and it rained two of the days-yet they still lost the greens.
-6 at TP on a par 71(278 vs 281 at Shinny) isn't exactly low, and players were able to make putts at TP so that plinko defense wasn't there(easily good for 5-6 shots over 72 holes.
Rahm shot 278. Only one person shot that low on this course earlier this year at the farmers insurance, and they play the much easier course one day.
I didn’t see anything that was unfair about Saturday at SH. I saw one of the best courses in the world playing about as hard as it can possibly play for the world’s best players for our national championship, and I loved it.
-
The thread is getting to be like Hey Jude.....
Charles Lund
-
And maybe most importantly, set-up wise, they made sure the greens were still alive and the grass wasn't dead at tournament's end. They understood precisely what TP is -- and isn't -- as a golf course and a championship/US Open test, and how it best 'functions'. That understanding hasn't always been evident at some past US Opens. I think that might be Jason Gore's influence.
If what we saw this week is the future of the U.S. Open, call me disappointed. I don’t want the U.S. Open to look like a PGA championship. I want to see our national championship played on the nation’s best courses set up to the extreme. Grass will grow back.
I am not sure I understand the relationship between playing on the best courses and stressing out the greens to ensure that they are difficult to putt because of mottled and burnt out surfaces. If the courses are top of the top, they should not need over the top preparations on the greens. TPS produced a final round of great players making runs and then fading (or worse) on greens that were not tricked up.
Ira
I don’t think there’s anyone among the players, fans, or governing body that wants to see bumpy greens. What I want to see is an extremely firm course. I’ll take what I saw at Shinnecock Hills over what we saw this week.
I find those sentences at odds with each other.
Shinny's had 2 recent Opens and the greens were plinko-both times. (I pin that squarely on the USGA as Shinny has wonderful greens)
Just not sure how you can say "nobody wants to see bumpy greens" than say you'll take what you saw at Shinny over what we saw at Torrey. Evidently, you want to see bumpy greens if you chose "what you saw at Shinny".
At TP, I saw the best leaderboard by far I've seen in a major until the two leaders separated themselves late.
I saw one of the best finishes I've ever seen in a major.
I saw great shots rewarded and those who continually bailed, eventually punished(see Bryson)
I saw many kids of players have success. Bubba, Bryson, Rahm, Koepka, Henley,Shauffele ,Morikawa
I saw firm, yet healthy turf.
Stunning views on TV.
I love Shinecock. It's one of my favorite courses in the world.
I detest what the USGA has done to it the last two visits, and frankly feel TP as presented was a far better test.(I hate the word test, but I hate plinko greens worse)
If those are my choices, i'll take TP.
I'd prefer to see the Shinny that's presented every summer, and an improved TP, but it seems those aren't real choices.
What I saw at Torrey was a PGA Championship - a major on a second tier course playing fairly ordinary conditions. If that’s the future of the US Open, it’s open to be considered the third best major..... IMO.
Fair enough.
I'd like to see the PGA there as well.
And I certainly accept it is not a Shinnecock, Oakmont or PB.
Not so sure about "ordinary" conditions. June is just a good time in coastal San Diego for turf. They didn't have to lose the grass to firm it up-and it was plenty firm. Ironically, the last Open at Shinny the weather was ideal(coolish) and it rained two of the days-yet they still lost the greens.
-6 at TP on a par 71(278 vs 281 at Shinny) isn't exactly low, and players were able to make putts at TP so that plinko defense wasn't there(easily good for 5-6 shots over 72 holes.
I didn’t see anything that was unfair about Saturday at SH. I saw one of the best courses in the world playing about as hard as it can possibly play for the world’s best players for our national championship, and I loved it.
So why then did the USGA saturate the course for Sunday, nearly giving up a 62?
You forgot about Thurday where the greens were a bumpy mess as well.
When you go an hour and see no one make an 8 footer, there might be a problem.
rain on Friday saved that day.
It is one of the best courses in the world-every summer, except June 2004 and 2018 on a couple of select days
-
“So why then did the USGA saturate the course for Sunday?”
[/size]I didn’t get invited to that meeting but my first guess would be it’s because so many fans and players cry about a very difficult golf course. Who wants to see the world’s best players have to try to grind out and manufacture a four? I would say the fact that someone almost shot 62 on Sunday is evidence it was a poor decision to saturate the course. By all means, let’s make sure our national championship looks like the Ollie’s Invitational.
[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
-
The thread is getting to be like Hey Jude.....
Charles Lund
I'm stealing this line it's fantastic.
-
The thread is getting to be like Hey Jude.....
Charles Lund
I'm stealing this line it's fantastic.
I don’t get it. Lol.
-
Brad -
I can't really speak for Jeff, but I think his point is that Shinnecock's greatness wasn't enhanced by the USGA in 2004 & 2018, but instead diminished; and that the architecture & design intent of one the very finest golf courses in the entire world wasn't highlighted by the set-up/conditions during those US Opens, but instead almost completely neutered. In other words: Shinnecock in 2018 was indeed a 'test' -- it just wasn't 'Shinnecock'. [If you'd like to see it playing as both a true championship 'test' and as 'Shinnecock', check out the 1986 US Open that Ray Floyd won there with a score of -1, as the only player to finish under par.] And since Jeff absolutely loves the golf course, I think he may be asking/saying to the USGA: 'If you don't want great classic courses like Shinnecock to actually *play* like the great classic courses that they are, why go there to host your championship in the first place?'
-
The thread is getting to be like Hey Jude.....
Charles Lund
I'm stealing this line it's fantastic.
I was thinking Tom Petty...
yep, I think you captured the spirit of my posts Peter
-
The thread is getting to be like Hey Jude.....
Charles Lund
I'm stealing this line it's fantastic.
I don’t get it. Lol.
Agreed,
Who or what is supposed to be Julian Lennon and who is getting divorced? I'm guessing many would like to see the USGA get divorced from TPS.. ;)
-
Seen numerous well thought out criticisms of the course itself. Just overall an average track. Nothing special. About middle of the road other than the location.
Defenses posted:
1. It’s tough! Ok? Tough doesn’t = good. I really don’t care about the score relative to par. The number doesn’t matter anyways.
2. Anyone can play it! Ok? I don’t need to be able to play a course to know it’s a good course. Accessibility plays no part in it for me. I’d imagine at some point based off what I do and where I caddie eventually I’ll find a way on to Augusta. I’ve walked it inside the ropes north of 70 times and putted and chipped all the greens from everywhere you can putt from. Just because it’s exclusive doesn’t change my like of it one way or the other.
3. The last hole produced drama/Tiger made a putt! Ok? It’s an easily reachable par 5 for almost the entire field and the 72nd hole of a major. Fairly certain any reachable par 5 would produce similar results at a major… for example that other snoozefest course in KY think Rory and Tiger.
4. The holes play into an ocean breeze? Ok?
5. KaKooYah. Never been a big grass guy so I’m missing all the excitement, maybe Carl Spackler can dig a little deeper with his NOCAL sintzomina sp?
6. The best player won! Tiger in his prime hard to beat, Rahm on quite a run as well, well all know cut short and I won’t reference the vax thread.
7. It’s a value for residents/it’s priced amazing… In a forum regarding architecture the price you pay to play has zero to do with the course. I suppose someone could start an OT thread for best value in golf.
All in all I stand by the point I’ve made and others have made as well, fairly average course that’s hosted two opens.
Nothing personal.
Just my opinion.
We can refrain from name calling, cheap shots, whatever else over a course someone most likely long dead designed that unless Rees is in here as a ghost writer, nobody has a professional interest in. That’s it.
-
It’s better than Pasatiempo. Just my opinion based on playing both courses. I’d choose Torrey 7-3.
-
Jon, we get it.
Even after all these pages though, you haven't mustered a single specific and solid criticism yourself. Your last post takes people's defenses of the course and attempts to negate them with generalities, but it's really just you yelling "it sucks because I think it sucks" some more. It's an awesomely hot take, but you and Brad have both sung your refrains 64 times already. Write a verse or go back to Twitter where discussion that shallow belongs.
Also, Valhalla's a blast and it literally never fails to deliver awesomely memorable tournaments, so I definitely see the comparison. But let me guess... you've never played that one either, have you?
-
Seen numerous well thought out criticisms of the course itself. Just overall an average track. Nothing special. About middle of the road other than the location.
Defenses posted:
1. It’s tough! Ok? Tough doesn’t = good. I really don’t care about the score relative to par. The number doesn’t matter anyways.
2. Anyone can play it! Ok? I don’t need to be able to play a course to know it’s a good course. Accessibility plays no part in it for me. I’d imagine at some point based off what I do and where I caddie eventually I’ll find a way on to Augusta. I’ve walked it inside the ropes north of 70 times and putted and chipped all the greens from everywhere you can putt from. Just because it’s exclusive doesn’t change my like of it one way or the other.
3. The last hole produced drama/Tiger made a putt! Ok? It’s an easily reachable par 5 for almost the entire field and the 72nd hole of a major. Fairly certain any reachable par 5 would produce similar results at a major… for example that other snoozefest course in KY think Rory and Tiger.
4. The holes play into an ocean breeze? Ok?
5. KaKooYah. Never been a big grass guy so I’m missing all the excitement, maybe Carl Spackler can dig a little deeper with his NOCAL sintzomina sp?
6. The best player won! Tiger in his prime hard to beat, Rahm on quite a run as well, well all know cut short and I won’t reference the vax thread.
7. It’s a value for residents/it’s priced amazing… In a forum regarding architecture the price you pay to play has zero to do with the course. I suppose someone could start an OT thread for best value in golf.
All in all I stand by the point I’ve made and others have made as well, fairly average course that’s hosted two opens.
Nothing personal.
Just my opinion.
We can refrain from name calling, cheap shots, whatever else over a course someone most likely long dead designed that unless Rees is in here as a ghost writer, nobody has a professional interest in. That’s it.
You caddied at Augusta but haven’t played it?
-
Jon, we get it.
Even after all these pages though, you haven't mustered a single specific and solid criticism yourself. Your last post takes people's defenses of the course and attempts to negate them with generalities, but it's really just you yelling "it sucks because I think it sucks" some more. It's an awesomely hot take, but you and Brad have both sung your refrains 64 times already. Write a verse or go back to Twitter where discussion that shallow belongs.
Also, Valhalla's a blast and it literally never fails to deliver awesomely memorable tournaments, so I definitely see the comparison. But let me guess... you've never played that one either, have you?
The worst golf course in this country has a good chance that top players will win and the finish will be exciting. I don’t see how that’s an argument for or against a golf course. But if that’s a deciding factor for you, I’m fine with that as I respect your opinion, unlike vice versa.
And why make personal attacks because someone has a different opinion of a golf course? I wouldn’t call you shallow because you dislike one of my favorite courses. Why don’t you just PM me when I am welcome to opine in your presence?
-
It’s better than Pasatiempo. Just my opinion based on playing both courses. I’d choose Torrey 7-3.
Bold take.
-
Jon, we get it.
Even after all these pages though, you haven't mustered a single specific and solid criticism yourself. Your last post takes people's defenses of the course and attempts to negate them with generalities, but it's really just you yelling "it sucks because I think it sucks" some more. It's an awesomely hot take, but you and Brad have both sung your refrains 64 times already. Write a verse or go back to Twitter where discussion that shallow belongs.
Also, Valhalla's a blast and it literally never fails to deliver awesomely memorable tournaments, so I definitely see the comparison. But let me guess... you've never played that one either, have you?
I posted much earlier in this thread point by point my criticism. I got tired after the front 9 alone.
-
Seen numerous well thought out criticisms of the course itself. Just overall an average track. Nothing special. About middle of the road other than the location.
Defenses posted:
1. It’s tough! Ok? Tough doesn’t = good. I really don’t care about the score relative to par. The number doesn’t matter anyways.
2. Anyone can play it! Ok? I don’t need to be able to play a course to know it’s a good course. Accessibility plays no part in it for me. I’d imagine at some point based off what I do and where I caddie eventually I’ll find a way on to Augusta. I’ve walked it inside the ropes north of 70 times and putted and chipped all the greens from everywhere you can putt from. Just because it’s exclusive doesn’t change my like of it one way or the other.
3. The last hole produced drama/Tiger made a putt! Ok? It’s an easily reachable par 5 for almost the entire field and the 72nd hole of a major. Fairly certain any reachable par 5 would produce similar results at a major… for example that other snoozefest course in KY think Rory and Tiger.
4. The holes play into an ocean breeze? Ok?
5. KaKooYah. Never been a big grass guy so I’m missing all the excitement, maybe Carl Spackler can dig a little deeper with his NOCAL sintzomina sp?
6. The best player won! Tiger in his prime hard to beat, Rahm on quite a run as well, well all know cut short and I won’t reference the vax thread.
7. It’s a value for residents/it’s priced amazing… In a forum regarding architecture the price you pay to play has zero to do with the course. I suppose someone could start an OT thread for best value in golf.
All in all I stand by the point I’ve made and others have made as well, fairly average course that’s hosted two opens.
Nothing personal.
Just my opinion.
We can refrain from name calling, cheap shots, whatever else over a course someone most likely long dead designed that unless Rees is in here as a ghost writer, nobody has a professional interest in. That’s it.
You caddied at Augusta but haven’t played it?
Had a medical issue where I needed to return to VA. Money at Augusta wasn’t really that good so decided to stay. May go back at some point once retired but I doubt it.
-
Seen numerous well thought out criticisms of the course itself. Just overall an average track. Nothing special. About middle of the road other than the location.
Defenses posted:
1. It’s tough! Ok? Tough doesn’t = good. I really don’t care about the score relative to par. The number doesn’t matter anyways.
2. Anyone can play it! Ok? I don’t need to be able to play a course to know it’s a good course. Accessibility plays no part in it for me. I’d imagine at some point based off what I do and where I caddie eventually I’ll find a way on to Augusta. I’ve walked it inside the ropes north of 70 times and putted and chipped all the greens from everywhere you can putt from. Just because it’s exclusive doesn’t change my like of it one way or the other.
3. The last hole produced drama/Tiger made a putt! Ok? It’s an easily reachable par 5 for almost the entire field and the 72nd hole of a major. Fairly certain any reachable par 5 would produce similar results at a major… for example that other snoozefest course in KY think Rory and Tiger.
4. The holes play into an ocean breeze? Ok?
5. KaKooYah. Never been a big grass guy so I’m missing all the excitement, maybe Carl Spackler can dig a little deeper with his NOCAL sintzomina sp?
6. The best player won! Tiger in his prime hard to beat, Rahm on quite a run as well, well all know cut short and I won’t reference the vax thread.
7. It’s a value for residents/it’s priced amazing… In a forum regarding architecture the price you pay to play has zero to do with the course. I suppose someone could start an OT thread for best value in golf.
All in all I stand by the point I’ve made and others have made as well, fairly average course that’s hosted two opens.
Nothing personal.
Just my opinion.
We can refrain from name calling, cheap shots, whatever else over a course someone most likely long dead designed that unless Rees is in here as a ghost writer, nobody has a professional interest in. That’s it.
Jon,
Several people posted specific architectural points about TPS, including about specific holes, yet you ignore those points in your rebuttal. I urge you in particular to read the posts in this thread and the other TPS thread from Jeff Warne who probably has played more courses around the world than most of us combined.
Ira
-
Jon,
Several people posted specific architectural points about TPS, including about specific holes, yet you ignore those points in your rebuttal. I urge you in particular to read the posts in this thread and the other TPS thread from Jeff Warne who probably has played more courses around the world than most of us combined.
Ira
Tim L is the only one I recalled that went hole by hole top of my head. While I don’t agree with him, he at least took a stab at it. He mentioned into the breeze and so forth. Jeff called the holes great, alluded to it being public and not a right wing rich guy club, I believe talked a bit about the green complexes as I recall after going through it. Not once have I attacked anyone personally, just simply think the course is average at best. That’s not bad, not great. Just average. Ho hum. I’m no Tiger sheep, I’m not from the area, my mom doesn’t work there, I didn’t grow up playing it, I most likely never will and have no desire to. So I don’t really get the vitriol associated with simply stating an opinion. As my good friend says, it be like that. No hard feelings.
I’ll attempt to find the other thread you’re speaking of, but I don’t think it will change my mind. I do enjoy the back and forth. Wish people would stop with the personal insults although it does make me laugh to see people get so worked up over a golf course.
-
Jon,
Several people posted specific architectural points about TPS, including about specific holes, yet you ignore those points in your rebuttal. I urge you in particular to read the posts in this thread and the other TPS thread from Jeff Warne who probably has played more courses around the world than most of us combined.
Ira
Tim L is the only one I recalled that went hole by hole top of my head. While I don’t agree with him, he at least took a stab at it. He mentioned into the breeze and so forth. Jeff called the holes great, alluded to it being public and not a right wing rich guy club, I believe talked a bit about the green complexes as I recall after going through it. Not once have I attacked anyone personally, just simply think the course is average at best. That’s not bad, not great. Just average. Ho hum. I’m no Tiger sheep, I’m not from the area, my mom doesn’t work there, I didn’t grow up playing it, I most likely never will and have no desire to. So I don’t really get the vitriol associated with simply stating an opinion. As my good friend says, it be like that. No hard feelings.
I’ll attempt to find the other thread you’re speaking of, but I don’t think it will change my mind. I do enjoy the back and forth. Wish people would stop with the personal insults although it does make me laugh to see people get so worked up over a golf course.
I find it hard to believe that Jeff would ever say that a course was " [/size]not a right wing rich guy club".[/color]
-
Jon,
Several people posted specific architectural points about TPS, including about specific holes, yet you ignore those points in your rebuttal. I urge you in particular to read the posts in this thread and the other TPS thread from Jeff Warne who probably has played more courses around the world than most of us combined.
Ira
Tim L is the only one I recalled that went hole by hole top of my head. While I don’t agree with him, he at least took a stab at it. He mentioned into the breeze and so forth. Jeff called the holes great, alluded to it being public and not a right wing rich guy club, I believe talked a bit about the green complexes as I recall after going through it. Not once have I attacked anyone personally, just simply think the course is average at best. That’s not bad, not great. Just average. Ho hum. I’m no Tiger sheep, I’m not from the area, my mom doesn’t work there, I didn’t grow up playing it, I most likely never will and have no desire to. So I don’t really get the vitriol associated with simply stating an opinion. As my good friend says, it be like that. No hard feelings.
I’ll attempt to find the other thread you’re speaking of, but I don’t think it will change my mind. I do enjoy the back and forth. Wish people would stop with the personal insults although it does make me laugh to see people get so worked up over a golf course.
I find it hard to believe that Jeff would ever say that a course was "not a right wing rich guy club".
LOL
Not sure I know what that is.
Seems like it would make the hang gliders pull a certain direction ;) if they got off the ground at all...
-
Next year we get a course cobbled together from two uber waspy courses the public could never play and in two years we get to return to the Fadland of hand raked , restovation aesthetics open to the uber rich of the(mostly) right ethnicity and religion , so not to worry.Both are fantastic courses I'm excited to see on TV,I may add-but they are decidedly not munis open to the public.
May have paraphrased a bit but “waspy uber rich right ethnicity” I took to mean rich white guys.
Also, I appreciate Jeff’s takes as they stick to golf and are well thought out.
We can leave it at agree to disagree.
*edited to fix rice with white*