News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Andrew Cunningham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« on: May 23, 2007, 10:01:49 PM »
After reading Ran's recent profile on the Cypress Point Club and the accompanying pictures I was struck by the relatively "new" rock wall on the face of the 16th green - see below.  The last time I was fortunate enough to play this course I recall the front of the green sloping in the ocean – i.e. no wall.  My question is does this man made wall reduce the relative esthetics of this hole?  In Golf Digest’s latest ranking CPC received a category leading 9.48 out of 10.  Would this number be less because of the wall?  And if the wall was reconstructed to look more rugged (even though being completely fake – like the 18th at Pebble) would or should this make a difference?


Jordan Wall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2007, 11:34:56 PM »
I say dont mess with CPC 16, though I've never even seen the course.

Phil_the_Author

Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2007, 11:44:15 PM »
Jordan, if man didn't intervene and "mess with CPC 16" then nature would sooner or later.

Storm driven water will erode that entire area unless it is protected. Having never been there myself and only based upon the above photograph, how can anyone argue against placing a wall there to protect it?

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2007, 01:29:17 AM »
Does anyone have a "before" picture?

Eric Franzen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2007, 03:47:01 AM »
I belive that the 15th also was reinforced in the same way, but with a look that blended the artificial work with the natural rocks.


Andrew Cunningham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2007, 07:49:58 AM »
Eric,

That's kind of my point.  The 16th wall looks a little fabricated in my mind.  The bigger question in my mind is whether it takes away from the esthetics of one of the world's greatest golf holes?  I'll try and find a before picture.

Andrew

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2007, 12:12:41 PM »
Having recently been to the 16th (and 1st through 15th, plus 17 and 18) I can attest that it is a bit disturbing. However, like many things on golf courses, it will weather and soon will blend to the cliffs, complete with bird droppings, algae stains and an oxidized finish.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Jim Bearden

Re:Esthetics vs. Cypress Point Club
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2007, 10:26:21 AM »
The issue at hand is that there was erosion at 15 16 and 17 is terrible. They fixed 15 about 12 years ago after the path from the tee to the green along the ocean fell in. Given this problem they looked at 16 and 17 and found that if they didn't do something soon the holes would fall into the ocean.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back