[Gary_Nelson]

The threads related to Cypress Point got me thinking...

It is obvious that duplicating the oceanfront holes (15 - 18) is impossible.  However, reading comments from those who played the course leads me to believe there is something special about holes #1 thru #14.  

What is it that makes them great?
Can such greatness be replicated elsewhere?
Or... does the "exclusiveness" of the club and the ambience of the site somehow make these holes better?

Assuming these holes are as terrific as some people say, are there examples of similar routings/holes elsewhere?

Thanks,

Gary

[THuckaby2]

Gary:

Wow are those loaded questions.    Again I must point to the work of others... Geoff Shackelford did a recent book on Cypress that covers all of this in great detail - check it out.  I can't possibly improve on his words and pictures there...

But for my short answers:

What is it that makes them great?
They are filled with strategic options and choices, the greens are in general fantastic, they have a beauty hard to match anywhere else...

Can such greatness be replicated elsewhere?
Not perfectly.  But the architectural principles are used on many other of MacKenzie's courses.  Hard to duplicate the incredible sand dunes, though.

Or... does the "exclusiveness" of the club and the ambience of the site somehow make these holes better?
That is the final piece that sets them apart from other courses, without a doubt - there is a definite mystique to Cypress.  Discount that, as at least one unnamed expatriate regular poster in here tends to do, and who will certainly give me crap upon seeing this for being overawed, and they are still GREAT in my mind, each one of them... but they are surpassed elsewhere... although each of 9, 11, 12, 14 have very few peers... Of course why one should discount this remains silly to me, the mystique is palpable to all but the hardest of cynics.

Assuming these holes are as terrific as some people say, are there examples of similar routings/holes elsewhere?
Sure - throughout MacKenzie's body of work, and those who try to emulate him.

Read Geoff's book.

 

[Scott_Burroughs]

Gary,

The routing, the bunkering, the inland sand dunes....all are
part of what makes the rest of the course great.

If you want to see more pics of the rest of the course, there
have numerous pics posted in past threads on inland holes, in
addition to a view of the holes above here, also previously posted:

[James Edwards]

All,

Why did they change 6 from a par 3 to a par 5?

[A_Clay_Man]

Gary- It is amazing to look at that aerial and know that each one of those white dots (bunkers) is elegantly placed. To see how narrow the entrance to #8 is astounding. Let alone all those holes apparently crammed into such a small area, yet you'd hardly know it while golfing. CPC passes all the micro tests, regarding golf and it's features, but what is indescribable  and a big part of the genius, are the macro elements of everything ties-in and in the case of the land, tells you where to golf.

[Gary_Nelson]

Adam,

I like where you are leading with your reply on how the micro and macro elements are tied in.  Is this "intangible" monopolized by those architects fortunate enough to get a fantastic site (ie. Sand Hills, Pacific Dunes)?  Or...  is this intangible something that can be "designed-in" to just about any site?

Green contours, bunker placement and bunker shapes can all be manufactured in nearly any configuration.  Are modern-day architects avoiding things like the narrow entrance on CP #8 because modern-day golfers won't like it?

Thanks,

Gary

[THuckaby2]

And my friend, as we've discussed many times, you are:

too focused on bordering houses re 2, ok re 3, lacking imagination re 5 and 6, ok re 10, too focused on score re 15, right on re 16-17-18.

But we need not argue again.  Hell, we agree on 14 out of the 18 holes, by my count, so that ain't bad.

 

[A_Clay_Man]

Gary- I doubt "any site". But certainly the principles or some of the specific "little things" could be had, if the designer was so inclined.

Most of these macro elements are only appreciable when there's no fog. I hope to someday find out what it looks like cloaked.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I would think there are several places with holes as good as 1 to 14. However, let look at them. 1,2,4,5,7,9,11,12,13 are as good as any holes anywhere on earth. 3 is pretty average, just a good par 3. 6 is good but not as good as 5 and maybe needs another 50 yards now, but like 11 what a greensite. 10 has the great tee shot but is like 3 to me, just another really good hole. 1 is a great great opening hole that gets very little play. 2 wow, 4 one of the best holes for me on earth. 5 what a gem, 7 takes all our breath away. And then lets jump to one of the best strong par 4's on earth again in 11. Have I not mentioned 11 to 14, what a run of par 4's. I cold play 12 and 3 over and over and just get more excited each time. I love the place.

[Gary_Nelson]

Adam,

I also liked your point about the course "tells you where to golf".  I always enjoy courses where the trip around them is like a little "journey"... instead of 18 disjointed holes.  The best ones will tally up the whole experience as an adventure.  The worst ones are just mind numbing and forgettable.

I've played Pebble Beach just once but every stroke is still etched in my mind about 10 years later.  Could it be that the "memorable" factor is as important to course ranking as "resistance to scoring" and all the other typical criteria?

[THuckaby2]

Could it be that the "memorable" factor is as important to course ranking as "resistance to scoring" and all the other typical criteria?

Damn right it is, and I've been trying to get that through to
people here for years.  But don't expect much support
for this, Gary.

[A_Clay_Man]

I'm not sure about that Tom. I've been under the impression that a long lasting impression, especially from limited exposure, is how many here, rate. Or at least consider something to be in the realm of great.

Gary- Have you ever golfed SFGC? The most obvious of "flowus interuptus" occurs after holing out on 12.

[Gary_Nelson]

Adam,
No, I haven't golfed SFGC.  However, my definition of "golfus interruptus" is in Japan where you MUST wait 1:30 between the nines... in order to rest, relax, and eat lunch.  It's not my idea of a memorable experience.

Gary

[THuckaby2]

I'm not sure about that Tom. I've been under the impression that a long lasting impression, especially from limited exposure, is how many here, rate. Or at least consider something to be in the realm of great.

Maybe you're right.  In any case I'm trying to say it
SHOULD matter.  Golf is so much more than pure architecture... But no need to rehash this.

SFGC flow interruptus on 13?  I didn't feel that at all.
I know some complain about that golf hole, but it
didn't look out of place nor feel out of place nor interrupt
the flow in any way for me... but I've just played there twice.

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom- I was fortunate to get around once, on a Monday, with none other than D. King. I swear to you, I knew each direction to go next and I even knew how the hole set-up to my eye, without asking the caddie Boo, ever. Not until we holed out on 12. I whipped around and said "where to?" Then, the trees, creating this suffocation, not felt before or after. I know variety and while this technically fits, it ain't. Just my O

[THuckaby2]

Adam:

Fair enough.  And I remember tales of that round with
the too often missing Mr. King!

I don't get the flow interruptus though.

But, to each his own and this is supposed to be
about Cypress, so never mind!

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()