[Kevin Pallier]

And as for the other side of the coin ?

# 1st P4 Royal Melbourne West (RMW) - a very mundane begining and the moguls near the green are out of character with the rest of the course.
# 15th P5 RMW - a relatively flat and fairly uninspriring P5...the front left trap being the best component of the hole.

[John Kavanaugh]

The first at Pasa is the worst hole on a great course I have ever played.  Of course the driving range, par 4 status and trees may not have been AMac's fault...

[Padraig Dooley]

I guess the standard reply is the 18th at Cypress, particularly after 15,16 and 17.

[Evan_Green]

The first at Pasa is the worst hole on a great course I have ever played.  Of course the driving range, par 4 status and trees may not have been AMac's fault...

John -

In it's present state - i agree with you, but what if it had not trees or just a couple of trees lining the fairway and no driving range? Do you still think it would be a bad hole?

Whether its a par 4 or 5 shouldn't affect how one would play the hole. Like many MacKenzie par 5's - it lack of distance makes it play as a par 4.5 today, but that surely doesnt mean the holes are bad for that reason.

[John Kavanaugh]

Evan,

I think I would like the hole if I could play it like it was when the course opened.  I would probably think it was the finest course I ever played.  Sadly, it seems that AMac didn't always have a clear vision of the future in both his bunker design and safety issues..

[Tom Huckaby]

JK - methinks you need to come back and play Pasa again.  Of course it's never going to be like MacKenzie had it - that range isn't going away nor are all the trees - but a LOT of the trees on the right have been cleared away and/or thinned, and it's not nearly as claustrophobic as when you played it.  Every year it gets a little more open...

I wouldn't put it on a list of MacKenzie's least impressive holes... hell the entire course at Green Hills is worse than #1 Pasa.

TH

[Mike Benham]

I wouldn't put it on a list of MacKenzie's least impressive holes... hell the entire course at Green Hills is worse than #1 Pasa.

That's an extreme statement, did you forget Sharp Park?

[Tom Huckaby]

No - today's Sharp Park has as much MacKenzie in it as does my back yard.

[Glenn Spencer]

I like #1 at Pasatiempo. The view is one of my favorite in golf. I love the putting green right there and the gate and all. I thought the trees make this hole. I liked the green and the second-shot is absolutely exhilirating and the back, back right pin location is a terrific challenge. I liked it as a par 5 and I think I would like it as a 4. I like this hole.

[Glenn Spencer]

No - today's Sharp Park has as much MacKenzie in it as does my back yard.

What is par for your back yard TH?

[Jack_Marr]

Do you think there's much anyone could do with these worst holes, given the land they're on?

[Tom Huckaby]

I like #1 at Pasatiempo. The view is one of my favorite in golf. I love the putting green right there and the gate and all. I thought the trees make this hole. I liked the green and the second-shot is absolutely exhilirating and the back, back right pin location is a terrific challenge. I liked it as a par 5 and I think I would like it as a 4. I like this hole.

How recently have you played it?

A tree that used to be front left of the green has been removed.  Much thinning has occurred to the right.  The back tee on top of the cart barn is seemingly forever closed... so max yardage is 470 or so.  It's a legit par four these days... and a very strong golf hole still.  It's funny though how so many people get caught up in the par change... I still think of it as a par five, even though with the tree removal and thinning it is much easier these days than before.  I just don't expect to make many fours on that hole, so if and when I do, it's a mental birdie even still.  I also tend to never intentionally hit to that back right pin... that has sucker written all over it and is the graveyard of triples.  

Like I say, given the range on the left, I sure wouldn't put it on the "greatest" list.  But I don't think it belongs on "least impressive" either - there is a lot going on on this golf hole.

TH

ps - my backyard is a strong par 2.  Consider Sharp Park in this light.  

[John Kavanaugh]

I never thought #12 at Pasa was any great shakes...it's pretty damn bland, acutally.

I loved it...it makes for a great hole to continue a birdie run..I thought it was a comfortable drive that reflects well on the tee shot at 11...11 and 12 is a beautiful place to hit 6 shots...

[Tom Huckaby]

I never thought #12 at Pasa was any great shakes...it's pretty damn bland, acutally.

OK, I too won't put it on the greatest list, but "bland"?

Only if one plays 100% of his golf at places like Cypress Point.

You have a downhill tee shot that requires a choice - layup short or try to bash it down close to the ravine.  Correct play most of the time is to stay short, but then you better go far enough right lest you get blocked by the trees on the left - which have a hazard underneath them, btw, which snares the overcooked draw quite often.   Big hitter like you could also conceivably drive the green with a huge hard draw... oh it's a silly play, but the possibility is there.  But sure, most of the time, bunt out a 3iron (3wood for us mortals) and if you do it correctly, you have around 100-130 in.

Which is over a barranca - no longer hazard but not a nice place to leave one - high rough - to a green with more subtle breaks than all of Medinah combined.

Not that I know Medinah - that was just a convenient example.  

Sure it CAN be played 3iron/PW for a guy like you.  But there's still quite a bit going on on the tee, the approach shot is never easy - miss the green and there's no easy up and down - and the green is one of the few subtle ones on a course filled with monsters.

Bland?

No freakin' way.

TH

ps - JK, I hate you.  You're gonna come back some day and take 12 shots over those two holes like all of the rest of us have at some time... you are not that good as you were that glorious day.  

[Glenn Spencer]

TH,

97 was when I played it. Those sound like some serious changes. It was 505 par 5 I think in 97. The tree by the green is gone? The right is thin. Maybe, I just liked something that no longer exists.

[Tom Huckaby]

Glenn - #1 is VERY VERY different today from 1997.

Most people like today's version a lot better.

But then again, you seem to love #18 green at fast speeds, so I am getting a handle on your masochistic tastes.

 

[Glenn Spencer]

TH,

Is your back yard a nice solid half par then, between 2 and 3? It may not be a sacred cow, but more Pasatiempo discussion could never be a bad thing.

[Tom Huckaby]

Glenn - heck yeah - one has to take a serious risk to get one's deuce.

And yes, the more discussion about Pasa the better.  It is FAR FAR FAR from being a sacred cow... I was mystified by that when that came up before.

TH

[Glenn Spencer]

Glenn - #1 is VERY VERY different today from 1997.

Most people like today's version a lot better.

But then again, you seem to love #18 green at fast speeds, so I am getting a handle on your masochistic tastes.

 

TH,

You got me. I love masochism that is not stupid. That way it was not my fault, just a hard hole. Much easier to forget that way. I have no doubts that I will see the new number #1. I kind of liked the par 3 third as well, now that I think of it. I really love the place, I didn't even hate #7 because the I have not faced anything like the tee shot on a real course.

[Mike Benham]

As is JakaB wish, if you take away the trees that have grown in the barranca between 11 and 12, you will have a different take on these holes.

#12 without the trees would be drastically different visually which might encourage  more golfers to bomb away, and the longer hitters might come close to driving that green.

The first 4 holes on the backside of Pasa are fine the way they are, 2 ballbusters in 10 and 11 where you will be more than satisfied playing those holes in 1 over, and then 2 birdie chances at 12 and 13.  

[Tom Huckaby]

shivas:

Absolutely no way.

Come on back and I'll bet you if you play it 3 times, you won't be under 13 total shots.

And that's IF you play smart, which I know you won't.

And this hole is "wide open"?  Are you blind to the hazard left, trees right, trees on left blocking shots from the left half of the fairway?

You're memory is very faulty.  You need to play it again.

As much as I love Santa Teresa, there is maybe one hole on the course that's better than #12 Pasa.

TH

ps - I've floated Mike's idea for years... good lord, take out the trees and BOTH 11 and 12 become all-world...

[Glenn Spencer]

TH,

Like I said, it has been 9 years, but I believe we had a following wind and I don't remember looking greenward at 12 with my tee-shot at all. That didn't look like an option and I was not called short a lot in 97.

Shivas,

Seriously, that is hard to imagine. I believe I hit a 4-iron on number #7. Is Wilmette a good golf course?

[Tom Huckaby]

TH,

Like I said, it has been 9 years, but I believe we had a following wind and I don't remember looking greenward with my tee-shot at all. That didn't look like an option and I was not called short a lot in 97.

You mean re 12?
Of course it's not a real option.  But I have seen big hitters give it a try.

TH

[Glenn Spencer]

TH,

Does that Haggin Oaks in Sacramento have any candidates for this discussion? I assume you have played it.

[Tom Huckaby]

Glenn - I haven't played Haggin Oaks since the "renovation".  And many have speculated that there's about as much MacKenzie there even post-renovation as my glorious back yard also.  I don't think we can really count that as a MacKenzie course, as much as the city of Sacramento wants us to.

I always enjoyed the course, btw.  But it has been a few years.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()