Pebble loses tree on 18th fairway

[Joe_Tucholski]

  While there is water left and OB right the length of the hole needs something to prevent everyone from ripping it and going at it in two. 

Why? Why should two long, straight shots not be rewarded?

Steve it wouldn't be bad.  The amazing Monterey coastline would still be on your left.  I figure the trees add something to the decision when calculating risk.  With the trees the location you have to hit your long straight shots is smaller and therefore the risk is increased.  If you decrease the risk by removing the trees I believe you would see many more attempts at going for it in two.

The following link is an excerpt from GD.  Since the "dreaded" changes in format to the magazine they started adding these articles on strategy.  I really like them.
http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-instruction/2014-08/jack-nicklaus-par-5-strategy

[Joe_Tucholski]

The Pacific Ocean is all the hole needs.Put a few centerline bunkers way out there if you must. I don't see the best players consistently getting on this green in two.

Mike I agree the pacific ocean is magical and the hole would be good without the trees, but I feel the trees add something and a bunker wouldn't suffice.  It is weird to me that I like the trees.  I've played other courses where there are trees in the middle of a fairway and it irks me.  Maybe it's because a lone (or small grouping) cypress is in fact the symbol of the peninsula.  It's not abnormal for a group of trees to be in an unexpected place on the Monterey Peninsula.  

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe:  how old are you?  There are many here who for decades have hit the ball plenty far and just about as long as anyone, and who have played Pebble many times, but could not reach the 18th at Pebble until the ProV1 and the fancy driver shafts.   Indeed, the 18th was long considered almost unreachable until very recently.  So my question is whether you've ever played balata or persimmon, or know what they are?

David, I'm 31.  If we go way back most were hitting the green in two on the 18th at Pebble.  When the course opened the 18th was a par 4 for a short time.  I understand after Fowler changed the 18th to the current par 5 there was a long period of time when going for the green in two wasn't feasible for most people.  At that time maybe the trees weren't the same hazard they are today.  In 2000, before the ProV1 Nicklaus at age 60 hit the green in two.  The times I played pebble were as a high school/college kid with tour professionals and a 975D driver.(I did start with a persimmon driver and still have a bag of dead balatas but didn't grow to love the game in that era).  I was always short of the trees, but they really impacted my second shot in a way a bunker would not have.  If we talk today, the reality is skilled players bomb it.  At a recent tournament a high school kid hit driver 4 iron for albatross.  Playing from the white tees it appears he was 50 yards past the trees and probably could have hit straight at the trees and carried them.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/golf-devil-ball-golf/17-year-old-wins-pro-junior-at-pebble-beach-with-walk-off-albatross-021519030.html

[Bob_Huntley]

Joe,

The young man's ball was water bound, hit a rock and he gained a bunch of yards with a forward hop. I think he may have been hitting off of shorter tees than the pros.

Bob 

[Steve Okula]

So what if somebody abnormally long could reach a par 5 in two?  It's maybe one player out of a thousand with that sort of length (and Nicklaus even at 60 years old is still probably longer and definitely straighter than 99% of golfers). We lament the lack of growth in the game then argue that a hole should be set up to thwart all but the scratch golfer at the top of his game striking the purest shots.

You can't design courses to prevent anybody from ever reaching the green just like you can't practically design a golf course to immediately drain a 100 year storm.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe,

The young man's ball was water bound, hit a rock and he gained a bunch of yards with a forward hop. I think he may have been hitting off of shorter tees than the pros.

Bob 

Bob thanks for the additional info about the tee shot.  I do believe you are correct that the first tee participants were playing up.  That being said the premise of the hole still works.  Standing on the tee you have a decision, take on a very risky line or not.  The young man needed to take on the risk.  He got lucky, which happens in life.  The bounding forward portion does void my statement about flying the tree though.

[Joe_Tucholski]

So what if somebody abnormally long could reach a par 5 in two?  It's maybe one player out of a thousand with that sort of length (and Nicklaus even at 60 years old is still probably longer and definitely straighter than 99% of golfers). We lament the lack of growth in the game then argue that a hole should be set up to thwart all but the scratch golfer at the top of his game striking the purest shots.

You can't design courses to prevent anybody from ever reaching the green just like you can't practically design a golf course to immediately drain a 100 year storm.

Steve I'm not saying every course should do this and with or without the tree abnormally long people hit the green in two.  It's just more people would hit it without the tree and the decision process on the tee would be different.  

I look at Pebble as what it is.  It is a resort course that holds an annual PGA event and repeatedly holds the US Open.  This course isn't a municipally owned course providing affordable and enjoyable recreation, it isn't a private course trying to cater to the desires of it's membership, it isn't even a CCFAD trying to do whatever CCFADs try to do.  

What I lament is courses wanting/trying to be like Pebble when they are not (probably due to golfers unrealistic expectations).