News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2007, 10:38:32 AM »
Terry,
   Perhaps easily pleased, but more likely from getting to know you I would say it is a discerning palette.
   Of course you did see US golf in a pretty good light, given that your only exposure to golf here is LACC, Cypress, and SFGC. :)
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #26 on: May 22, 2007, 06:02:57 PM »
How tight, front to back, is the green on #9?
Is it a more heavily contoured version of #12 at Augusta?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2007, 06:03:16 PM by Jordan Wall »

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #27 on: May 22, 2007, 06:19:02 PM »
Terry,
   Perhaps easily pleased, but more likely from getting to know you I would say it is a discerning palette.
   Of course you did see US golf in a pretty good light, given that your only exposure to golf here is LACC, Cypress, and SFGC. :)

That is not fair....send him to orange county next time and we'll darken his outlook on short order.
You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #28 on: May 22, 2007, 07:26:54 PM »
Terry,
   Perhaps easily pleased, but more likely from getting to know you I would say it is a discerning palette.
   Of course you did see US golf in a pretty good light, given that your only exposure to golf here is LACC, Cypress, and SFGC. :)

That is not fair....send him to orange county next time and we'll darken his outlook on short order.


I'll second that! ;)
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

Terry Thornton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #29 on: May 23, 2007, 02:13:19 AM »
Terry,
   Perhaps easily pleased, but more likely from getting to know you I would say it is a discerning palette.
   Of course you did see US golf in a pretty good light, given that your only exposure to golf here is LACC, Cypress, and SFGC. :)

That is not fair....send him to orange county next time and we'll darken his outlook on short order.
So you're suggesting that these 3 courses aren't indicative of US or Californian golf. :o I had assumed they were 3 of the least popular given the scarcity of golfers on offer. ;D

Chris Perry

Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2007, 03:44:06 AM »
I'd think their location alone is what would make them great holes, they add variety to the course's landscape which is one of it's outstanding features.

And as Bob said, your boss must be a blaster because for most people a 5 iron off that tee would mean hitting a fairway that's 15 yards wide (not to mention likely a blind approach) as opposed to the 80 yards it widens to farther out in 3 wood range (for most people).

Jon Spaulding

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:#8 and #9, Cypress Point
« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2007, 10:07:01 AM »
Terry,
   Perhaps easily pleased, but more likely from getting to know you I would say it is a discerning palette.
   Of course you did see US golf in a pretty good light, given that your only exposure to golf here is LACC, Cypress, and SFGC. :)

That is not fair....send him to orange county next time and we'll darken his outlook on short order.
So you're suggesting that these 3 courses aren't indicative of US or Californian golf. :o I had assumed they were 3 of the least popular given the scarcity of golfers on offer. ;D

Spot on; this is bizarro world in which the least popular places are the best designs, offering play at a reasonable pace with decent conditions.

"Indicative" would be a 5-6 hour round, plus $100 green fee, cigar smoke, carts, GPS, unrepaired ball marks......
You'd make a fine little helper. What's your name?