[Jeff Goldman]

Let's talk architecture, not ratings.  Is Spyglass better than those listed below it?  The first 5 holes amid the dunes and iceplant are terrific, and 4 is unique, but after that it seems like just a very difficult tree course on some rolling ground.  One good thing I noticed compared to Chicago courses in general is a lot of uneven lies, but the narrowness of the course takes away a lot of strategy and options.  The later par-3s  seem like pretty average water holes.  Is it a superior design to the Ocean course or the River Course, or .....  I think the River course is a far superior "penal" course.  What makes it great??

Jeff Goldman

[THuckaby2]

Jeff:

Spyglass is a tough nut to assess.  The first 5 holes are just so all-world great, well... it's tough NOT to rate it pretty damn high just for those.  Then one heads into the forest and there does remain a lot of good there, but nothing earth-shakingly great... On the whole it is a very difficult golf course, so if that's what one is into, it rates highly just for that.  It's also very pretty, both in and out of the forest.  But if one is to measure just on "design", well... it's all going to depend on the weight given to the first 5 holes.  

What makes Spyglass great?  The setting.  If that doesn't matter to you, then it's gonna be mundane.  I personally tend to play golf with my eyes open and heart willing, so setting does matter to me.  And while Spyglass is always going to be about my least favorite of the great courses on the peninsula, I'd never call it anything less than great.

TH

TH

[THuckaby2]

Call it #75 modern, and that's still great.  Works for me.  The differences are pretty darn hair-splitting close.

TH

[Forrest Richardson]

I am a fan of Spyglass. It's like the chap you enjoy talking to every few years, but one would hardly stand him if thyey were forced to work alongside him. Spyglass has great holes — and then some average ones.

My absolute favorite description of a golf course was in reference to Spyglass...

"If it were human, Spyglass would have a knife in its teeth, a patch on its eye, a ring in its ear, tobacco in its beard, and a blunderbuss in its hands. It’s a privateer plundering the golfing main, an amphibious creature, half ocean, half forest."

— Penned by Jim Murray, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times

[Jeff Goldman]

The dunes holes are great, but when I ask myself which course I would rather play (of the puny number I have played), it loses huge to the River Course, less to La Quinta Mountain, maybe PGA West, and I'm not even sure about the meadowvalley course at BWR.  Leaving the setting aside, I'd certainly rather play classic courses in my neighborhood like Beverly, Shoreacres and Olympia Fields and Lawsonia.  I think its the penal nature of the design, and the fact that the trees mean not too many fun recovery shots.  Many of the greens are terrific though.

Jeff Goldman

[THuckaby2]

Well then there's your answer, Jeff.  If you "leave the setting aside", then it's very logical to prefer to play at any of the courses you listed.  I just find that impossible to do.

And I love Jim Murray's description - thanks, Forrest!

TH

[Joel_Stewart]

I assume that this post was started because of the Golfweek ratings.  The fact that it is rated above Olympic can only be attributed to the editor who bias against Olympic is evident.  

Spyglass is a very good golf course but not as good as it use to be.  The 16th hole is so severly damaged by Fazio it ruins the entire course for me.  The interior holes are often overlooked (because of the first 5) but are generally very good by themselves.

When you study Spyglass the interior of the course is not built on a sand dune unlike the rest of the 17 mile drive.  Tom Doak has some interesting thoughts in his book asking if Jones should have routed the course differently to take better advantage of the sand area.   If Spyglass was built today they could have built sand dunes and it would totally different. Jones only spent $600k constructing the course, which has now lead to the Pebble Beach Company spending millions in the last few years trying to fix the drainage issues

I barely rate Spyglass a top 100 course and probably 8th, 9th or 10th in the state.

[THuckaby2]

Great thoughts, Joel.

But even in your downgrading, it's still a great course.

Good call re ruining #16, also... Black Dog is a mere shadow of the beast it once was... they should change the name to Black Poodle now.

TH

[ForkaB]

I haven't played Spyglass since the recent revisions, but when I did play it fairly regularly (in the 70s and 80s) I considered it to be as good (if not as spectacularly beuatiful) as Pebble Beach.

I think that people tend to over-rate the ocean holes and under-rate the inland ones--much as they do with Cypress.  ! is neat, hitting out of the trrees into the fog and then finding that incredible vista in front of you for your 2nd/3rd shots.  I know that Adma likes 2, but I think it is just a good but not great short uphill 4.  3 is an average drop-shot par 3.  $ is world class, and 5 is OK.  However, in the forest, there is hardly an average hole.  I personally think that the 2 back nine short holes are better than 2.  Much better green contours and thinking required.  16 is (or was..... ) one of the world's greatest golf holes and 8 and 17 are great short 4's and, and 9 and 18 very solid med-long 4's.

To me Spyglass always made you think, from the tee to the green, backwards and forwards, on just about all of the holes.  I can't give much higher praise, unless you wnat to get into eye candy, designer heritage or ambience or tradition or exclusivity or any of those other distractions from the essence of GCA.

[HamiltonBHearst]

Were the Olympic ballots fixed?  If you have any proof they should be verbalized.  

[THuckaby2]

Interesting how reasonable minds can differ.  Spyglass never has made me think at all, about anything but how horrid my score was.  Seriously Rich, once one leaves the 5th green, what thought is required other than keep it between the trees and below the hole?

6 - stay left off tee, stay below the hole on green
7 - two slugs, avoid water, stay below the hole on green
8 - stay right - left isn't worth the risk, stay below the hole on green.
9 - straightway, slug away, stay below the hole
10 - interesting dogleg, but not much thought involved other than stay between the trees - another green to just stay below the hole
11 - water now gone, slug away, cut off as much as you can chew off tee, go for green if in range, if not lay up short of bunkers.. not exactly rocket science...
12 - obviously too easy given aces made here  .  No thought other than try to miss water, another green where below the hole is all that matters
13 - stay right, needs a draw, 2nd plays longer than it looks, stay below the hole
14 - thought involved here - good risk/reward par 5 - great green
15 - drop shot, wedge, not much to it other than miss water and don't go long
16 - used to be great, now sadly emasculated
17 - decent thought involved here - sharp dogleg - but again a green where stay below the hole is all that's involved
18 - stay between the trees, stay below the hole

Contrast that to other nearby courses where thought really is required... hell Laguna Seca requires more thought than Spyglass.

All this being said, I do still call Spyglass great, because of the setting, the beauty, and other intangibles that damn well are part of the essence of GOLF, for anyone with vision and a soul anyway.

Bracing to get ripped,

TH

[GeoffreyC]

I have not played Spyglass since the changes were made. It is a HARD two dimentional course.

Among the first five, I like #1, thought #2 used to be teriffic (until I saw the original at PV), #3 overrated (although I've birdied it > 1/2 the time I've played it), #4 is fantastic (in spite of 4 putting the last time I was there) and 5 a wonderful 3 par.

The 2nd dimention comes in the forrest and it is much less interesting from a routing and variety standpoint. The greens are quite good and pitched steeply so as to require being below the hole on most. Short dropshot par 3's get repetitive.  In the forrest it just lacks the fun factor as well as the strategic thought provoking temtations of risk and reward.

No way IMHO is it as good as its rating makes it appear.

[ForkaB]

Tom

1-5 Spyglass, by your standards:

1--Hit it straight down the chute.  Lay up on the 2nd.  Keep the 3rd below the hole
2.  Hit it down the middle.  Get the club right on the 2nd to keep it belwo the hole.
3.  Stay out of the iceplant, STUPID!
4.  Favor the right side of the fiarway.  Hope you get the line and length right on the 2nd shot.
5.  See how good your med-long irons are.

Some other Huckabyean descriptions:

1 @ NGLA--hit the drive straight and then try to find the proper plateau on the green.
9 @ CPC--hit the ball in the fairway, hit the green and then 2 putt.
14 at RDGC--drive safe to the right, cut a 3-wood short left, try to pitch and putt for a "par."
11 @ Shinnecock--go long, go back over the front, go in the bunker, go back over the green, go back in another bunker, go back over the green again.........

Have I missed something?

[THuckaby2]

Rich:

Well, that hugely oversimplifies my way of thinking about golf holes, but I'll grant you your seemingly daily yuk at my expense.    Of course what you missed is re #11 Shinnecock:  blast out of footprint in sand left by unthinking, careless playing partner.  

 


So you tell me, oh great strategic thinker: what is involved at Spyglass that both I and Dr. Childs seem to be missing?

TH

ps - in 4 playings of RDGC, I never once played 14 as you say - in fact not even close.  I've also never played #9 CPC as you say - it's been nothing but one putts or missing the green.  So neener neener.  

[Jeff Goldman]

Joel, you are correct, this thread was an attempt to get back to architecture.  Isn't it a lot better to read the analysis from you, Huck, Rich and the rest??

Rich, actually, we may overrate the dunes holes because of the setting, but they do give more room to hit the ball, which is the focus of my criticism of the tree holes.  Also, there are choices on these holes.  On 4, depending on where the hole is, you might want to stay safely right, or try to get a little left for a better angle.  You might want to try to bounce the ball in, fly it in, or, my choice the first time I played it, boink it off the right hillock onto the green.  Moreover, these holes give chances for recovery after a lousy tee shot.  At least off the tee, the inland holes are either fairway or pitchout.

Jeff Goldman

[A_Clay_Man]

I won't split hairs on 11th or 69th place. To me, Spy is great because I am regionally biased. It has nothing what-so-ever to do with the first five holes. It has even less to do with the greens. All those marvelous deceptions, I am hardly worthy of knowing them. The sloping fairways and the tenacious rough make scoring always secondary. Sure, the sounds of the spyglass symphony are often heard, and you can get the worst poison oak looking for your ball, but I still think it's great. One will never be able to predict, how their round will turn-out, at the glass.

The tenth hole is a study in subtlety. Negotiating the shot testing tree off the tee is key, but is a small part of how that hole has soul. Same with the course, lots of soul.  And, as Forrest reported, a soul that takes not to liking to, limp wristed wimps from the other side of the town.

[THuckaby2]

I can dig all that, AC, and find myself nodding in agreement.  It's weird because I really do love Spyglass, and I've never been able to get a handle on WHY.  I mean, I come off 18 every time I play there pissed off at my lousy score or match results.  It kicks my ass every single time.  But still I love it.  I do a hole by hole brief strategic analysis, finding nothing really to think about much after #5, and still I love it.  It has always been the toughest course I've played a lot to really get a handle on....

So thanks for these words, and if you wouldn't mind, add more...

For example, what is it on #10 that is give it this "soul" you mention?  I guess the more I think about it, the more it is the first really tight tee shot one faces... and it does require a draw... but the shot to the green has always been just a blah affair to me, that is, if I have had the rare success in finding the fairway...

See, I believe you overall that it has a "soul" that is very hard to define... to me this is exemplified by my love for a course I have never played well at, which is tough to make happen... and I do love it so... so in the macro, I see and feel the soul... but in the micro I can't find it.

Where is it?

I'd really like to hear Rich's descriptions of the thought involved also... all smart-ass jibes aside, I just plain can't see this and would love to hear how he does.... it would make me want to play the course again with fresh eyes...and I am gonna be down there again pretty soon.

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom, Bill, I believe most of the soul can be felt in the subtleties. That approach shot into ten is slightly downhill, likely with a downhill lie and the golfer needs to play front yardage, because the green slopes away. Sometimes, the proper play, is to play for the apron.(short yardage) You might not see a high caliber player elect that option or "miss spot", but I can gaurantee you, without perfect execution, the high caliber player will wish they had mssed it on the apron.   The variables that go into every shot are probably why spy is so great. If you aren't aware, on just one little variable, your score, as exemplified, will suffer.

Honestly, the greens are a major force in the unpredictability. Throw in the wind, heavy air (Javier) and whether or not you got laid last night and you have a golf course which stirs the juices and can move the soul. Maybe more so, for the less sophisticated, gcawise.

[THuckaby2]

Adam:  Thanks.  Of course that last part can apply to ANY golf course, but perhaps Spyglass does bring it out more than others.

So ok, I am getting this a bit more... Maybe by "thought involved", it's not strategic choices per se, but giving the proper thought and attention to every shot, lest your results suffer?  I can see that better now... and you're right, just like your example on 10, that does come out on many holes.  There's a light bulb going off here... See, I never could figure out just WHY Spyglass was so tough before either, other than it is long and does play long due to the Javier... damn there are more subtleties there than I ever considered.

I'm gonna have to give this a lot more thought but you have put me in the right direction for sure.  Thanks again.

TH

[Carlyle Rood]

http://www.golfarch.com/Spyglass/


Hole 2

[ForkaB]

Tom H

If you can tell me why 1-5 are great and 6-18 are not WITHOUT resorting to "eye candy" arguments, I'll make a proper riposte.

[A_Clay_Man]

Aye! The second hole. I'm shocked it's a copy. How come I never knew that? I am forced to consider it great until I get to see the original. Thanx for the pic.

In this pic, the left edge of the green is approx. just to the left of center of the fronting bunker. The pic also shows the slope deception on the left side of the fairway, before the rough-line narrows. See how it slopes towards the ocean? But, you can also see the uphill aspect of that section. When taking a stance over the ball in this position, all one feels is the ocean pull. The mind wants to aim left. The resultant left of left pull is attributed to the uphill lie. Now, The hill that is next to the leftside of the green, can assist your ball in accessing a back left pin. However, one needs to golf the hole directly after the mower, cause it's usually too soft and too hairy for too much bounce.

After numerous attempts I felt the proper play off the tee was to end up rightside near the hillock. Two reasons; If you went too far, the hill acted like brake, and the uphill rough lie on that hill assisted in hitting the high approach shot required. This also helps take long, out of the equation.

My personal attitude about this hole is just that personal. After having many many birdie chances, I never made any. I vowed to birdie that hole, and it became a goal. Not one that I was going to force, just a goal. It was fianally acheived, but only once. So, it has a special place in my psychosis, so stay out!

[Jonathan Cummings]

I have always said that SG would have better rhythm if it were to start at #7, with today's 1-6 being the finishing 6 holes.  "My Spyglass" would enter the woods for the fine inland holes.  Anticipation would increase until the magnificient "#13" - a sweeping downhill par 5, where you break out of the woods and introduce the climatic "ocean" holes.  #18" would be a fine denouement.  A Spyglass routed as such would mimic CPC's routing - but with a better finish!

JC

[THuckaby2]

Tom H

If you can tell me why 1-5 are great and 6-18 are not WITHOUT resorting to "eye candy" arguments, I'll make a proper riposte.

Already have, Rich, several times elsewhere.  And btw, I never said 6-18 are NOT great.. in fact I've said they are great several times here.  I just can't put a finger on exactly why... and I honestly don't see huge amounts of thought involved on any of those holes, so I look forward to your words on the subject.  I must be missing something, and as I say, it's always been a very tough course for me to figure.

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom- I'll post what you wrote earlier and try to point-out anything you may have overlooked. On cursory exam, you get most of the "Ideals", but the genius is what you do with reality once it has collided with your swing.

6 - stay left off tee, stay below the hole on green
7 - two slugs, avoid water, stay below the hole on green
8 - stay right - left isn't worth the risk, stay below the hole on green.
9 - straightway, slug away, stay below the hole
10 - interesting dogleg, but not much thought involved other than stay between the trees - another green to just stay below the hole
11 - water now gone, slug away, cut off as much as you can chew off tee, go for green if in range, if not lay up short of bunkers.. not exactly rocket science...
12 - obviously too easy given aces made here  .  No thought other than try to miss water, another green where below the hole is all that matters
13 - stay right, needs a draw, 2nd plays longer than it looks, stay below the hole
14 - thought involved here - good risk/reward par 5 - great green
15 - drop shot, wedge, not much to it other than miss water and don't go long
16 - used to be great, now sadly emasculated
17 - decent thought involved here - sharp dogleg - but again a green where stay below the hole is all that's involved
18 - stay between the trees, stay below the hole

One thing that jumps out is that "staying below the hole" is not always as straight forward as one might think. i.e. #10, since the green slopes away, below is long. #8 is another very delicate subtlety. Yes, right side is better than left side, but truth is left center will get you right center. Because the fairway has serious slope. The further right you go, the more the high lip bunker needs to be negotiated. Difficulty in Hitting a fade from this up hill lie, is why most end up left of the green. Also, below the hole is not that easy on this hole, where the front pin is world class.

#11- short of the bunkers isn't really the play. The play is to the 100 yd marker, which menas the 110 yd marker with anticipated roll down hill.

12 is an amazing green. People who trust the caddy will do well here. Seeing is not believing, especially a front pin. Also, the off shore breeze, over the tree tops, is mind boggleing. Especially downwind, during the Santa ana's.

14- Not sure what you mean risk/reward. Few go for this green in two, because there is no bail. Lay-ups are where this hole "gets ya". The downhill towards the pond creates a downhill lie and the golfer needs to go counter-intuitive and trust that his ball will fly farther than expected. One of the best chances to play a low runner up the leftside to take the huge slope to the right. the top left shelf has to be one of the smallest targets ever. A good shot is to the fringe.
 15 more than than the sum of the parts. Many get very frustrated, because of the green. One of those holes that if you show no respect, you will be grumbleing all the way up the hill to 16 tee.
16-Nevermind

17 is the most interesting green on the course and the right 1/3rd is not so staright forward. Neither is the left.

18, clearly the 4 sisters are the dominate feature to avoid off the tee, and knowing the wind and the tendancy to play uphill, is key to approaching.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()