On another thread, Scott Seward asked about reversing the nines at Spyglass Hill and Mike Dugger observed that Spyglass is a classic case of “what if”.

I’m wondering whether there really are many examples like Spyglass, that is to say designs where you are immediately inclined to wonder why the architect didn’t do something totally different. I played three world famous golf courses recently (Yale, Garden City and Winged Foot) and none of them provoked such a feeling.

Let me be clear: I’m not talking about changing the design of a single hole or two. I have in mind the entire configuration of the course.

Can anyone think of other big “what ifs”? Does Spyglass have the dubious honor of leading the pack by this measure?

Tim,

I know of your reverence for spyglass, thus I hope you did not take my comment in jest.  I merely conveyed the opinion of Mr. Doak, and happen to agree with it.  I've always wondered why Spyglass was so segmented.  Five holes of a flavour completely different than the others.

Why Mr. Jones felt inclined to rout the course in this manner I don't understand, but it is certainly a great stretch of holes.

As far as other what ifs go......I'll nominate the following:

Sandpines
 

Huck

I'm slightly thrown off by you bringing up Cypress.  Do you really think that Raynor's routing, over that piece of land, would have resulted in a significantly different final product?

Cypress is already renowned as one of the best five courses in the world, doesn't "what if" consititute wasted potential, not "still great, but different"?

Mdugger:

It's more of a curiousity than anything else.  Given the VERY different styles between Raynor and the Good Doctor, it's just easy to ask my question... what would he have done differently... I'm not at all suggesting any shortcomings in what's there - hell I've said many times it's among the very shortest list of my favorite courses on the planet.  Nope, this is more intellectual curiousity....

TH

Mdug:

We need the Raynor experts like Mr. Bahto to really weigh in on this... I am such a neophyte re him, I really can't say much.  But yeah, picture a biarritz/short/prize dog leg, all somewhere on that landform... that's the kinda curiousity I'm talking about.  Who knows if it would be better, and I'm with you, I don't think I'd dig it either, but it is interesting to contemplate.  Maybe Raynor keeps 16 as a par 4?  Maybe Raynor takes the Paulian/Goodalian approach and routs it backward from what MacK did??? All good food for thought.

I think Geoff addresses this to some extent in his Cypress book.. damn, it's at home, I can't look it up.

TH

Tim:

Those are all great what ifs.  I understand about 14 and the road - that makes sense to me - but add to the what if re taking more land over the sand hill that if they did that, less would have been available for Spyglass app. 40 years later.... Intriguing, huh?

Add me to those who love the "inland" holes, btw.  But then again, there's nothing about that course I don't love, just as it is.  That being said it is still fun to contemplate these what ifs.

TH

Well sure, Matt.  Still, it is interesting to contemplate, and at least in some instances, like MPCC-Shore, the what-if comes to fruition....

TH

I'm confused--

There seems to be the belief that RTJ somehow had a large plot of coastal dune land to lay out Spyglass on-- Nothing could be further from the truth--

The area that he was permitted to intrude into the "sacred" coastal dunes is really tiny(very, very tiny)--(and given the experience of Spanish Bay, would have non-existence a few years later)--

The first hole is really a hole in the pine forest, excepting the green complex which is at the edge of the dunes--The tee on the second and most of the fairway is on the edge of dunes with only the right of the fairway and green complex in the dunes-- The third, 4th and 5th(two of which are par threes) are in the dunes, but only the green complexes and the fairway on the 4th(which runs adjoining a previously existing road) are any improvements or alterations made to the natural state--

I'm a little confused as to what you think RTJ could do given the servere restrictions in the area--I am amazed he fit 5 holes into the extremely limited area he had--

I personally(as I posted before) like the routing-- The start of the round from the chute on 1 around the dogleg, down the hill and into the green complex on 1 is one of the best in golf--

You need to put it at the beginning or the end--I like it at the start--

Dennis:

As I understand it two questions have been raised about the routing at Spyglass:

1) Why didn't the good stuff come at the end?

2) Why didn't the good stuff get mixed throughout the routing?

#1 seems just like a matter of personal preference. That's why I've always felt RTJ decided to do the opposite of what Mackenzie did next door.

#2 seems like it would really some careful analysis to determine how practical it would have been given the limited dunes area. FYI, Tom Doak raises some doubt as to whether this alternative was possible in his Cconfidential Guide review.

  i would agree with ian on ballybunions cashen course....world class links site with unlinks greens complexes....never would have guessed it was designed by RTJ....still can't believe it.

The National Golf Club (VIC, Australia), Ocean Course.

Peter Thomson gets first pick of the land for the two courses, correctly chooses the right parcel on which to route, and designs a very poor course that is eaten alive by the course built by Norman on the leftover real estate.

Paul Cowley:

If you are suggesting that the big problem with the Cashen is the green complexes, you might have to credit (or fault) my good friend who played near scratch at the time. RTJ had him hit shots to numerous locations when selecting green locations and if he could do it, that was apparently good enough for Mr. Jones. I've never heard of any 18 handicap player being asked his opinion on the difficulty of some of the shots.

An interesting insight into the Cashen comes during the winter when the rough is dormant and some key fairways play wider. You still have all the challenge of the fierce wind, but certain shots just play far more reasonably......and pleasurably.

Pat Mucci:

I agree with you on Spanish Bay and would love to know why the hotel was placed where it was.

Tom Doak:

Obviously, I'm not intimately familiar with the Bandon property, but I guess I'm glad the situation you describe didn't exist. Just like some folks here expressed something would have been lost at Cypress Point if Mackenzie had more of the sand hills going over towards Spyglass, I think the loss of Pacific Dunes - the variety, the inland holes - would have been a shame.

But, the tradoff is worth thinking about.

What if Tom Doak hadn't inherited the routing at Stonewall?  

Would he have handled the lower, wetlands area of the property in the same way?  Would the 5th hole be a dropshot par three totally over wetlands?  Would he have relegated the two par threes on the back nine to the edges of the routing?  Would he have created the short 17th in the same way to get to the site of the 18th tee?