[Tom_Doak]

Adam:

There isn't as much of that "overlapping" effect at Pasatiempo as at The Valley Club, because the slopes are so steep that you can't make bunkers overlap if they are very far apart.  The tilt of The Valley Club is perfect for it.

However, there is a good example in the picture of #13 here.  On the left, see how the last little cape in the first bunker (on the green end) continues the back line of the bunker behind it?  And how the top line of the three bunkers to the right of the green has a continuous form to it?  I'm not sure whether that was MacKenzie, or just one of his associates [not to mention Jim Urbina] messing around to pass the time while they were being built.

Bill M:  Fans of Bethpage, Pinehurst No. 2, and Pebble Beach would argue your point.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill M:  Fans of Bethpage, Pinehurst No. 2, and Pebble Beach would argue your point.

Good point, but from an affordability and accessibility perspective, Pasatiempo is a third the cost of Pinehurst #2 and Pebble, and you don't have to spend the night in your car to get on it!

And none of the three you cite has been restored to what I think of as Golden Age condition in the recent past either.

I figured I wouldn't get a free pass on that statement!  

[Adam Clayman]

Thanx, Tom. I can see how the site differences and routing makes the overlapping difficult in Santa Cruz.

Just from this photographic evidence (and my faulty memory) it appears the prunings have improved the intamcy by opening up some of the views? Yes?

[Mark Bourgeois]

I think I am with Sean Arble on that hole, not so much because they're over the top but because to my eye they don't ring true.  Those bunkers don't seem to sit right on the land, the sand is Augusta-unnatural white, and the deep green of the rough surrounding them looks odd.

I do like many of the other bunkers pictured, though, in particular those at 16 green.  The bunkers that seem to bleed off a hilltop for some reason feel more "natural" to me whereas those that appear to be rising out of the ground, even if they sit on a gentle slope, ring untrue.

I appreciate that future weathering may help them integrate better, and there's the whole issue of functionality / impact-on-play I have not considered, but help me out: from an aesthetic perspective what I am missing that MacKenzie understood / intended with those?

Mark

PS Bill, with the notable exceptions of added length and shaved green surrounds, #2 is very true to its Depression-Era design.  You couldn't say true to its Golden-Age (1920s) design because Ross kept making changes all the way up to around 1938.  And the added-length knock is probably a red herring as Ross was preparing to lengthen it further but then he went and died. As an aside, Richard Mandell in his Pinehurst history debunks this notion that crowned greens are post-Ross. His evidence is old photographs and interviews with witnesses and relatives of Tufts and Ross.  He could have saved himself the effort and asked Pat Mucci, who apparently played #2 in the "Sand Green" Era...

[John Kavanaugh]

I appreciate that future weathering may help them integrate better, and there's the whole issue of functionality / impact-on-play I have not considered, but help me out: from an aesthetic perspective what I am missing that MacKenzie understood / intended with those?

Mark

Mark,

You are viewing a bird sitting in a box as opposed to one flying in the sky.  The current bunkering does not hold its original visual appeal because of the lack of long views and bare barranca.  I now find the design as presented to be too busy because your focal point if forced to one narrow area.  In other words...it no longer works.

[BVince]

Looks like it works to me.

[Mark Bourgeois]

I appreciate that future weathering may help them integrate better, and there's the whole issue of functionality / impact-on-play I have not considered, but help me out: from an aesthetic perspective what I am missing that MacKenzie understood / intended with those?

Mark

Mark,

You are viewing a bird sitting in a box as opposed to one flying in the sky.  The current bunkering does not hold its original visual appeal because of the lack of long views and bare barranca.  I now find the design as presented to be too busy because your focal point if forced to one narrow area.  In other words...it no longer works.

John,

Interesting.  I say maybe yes and maybe no.

Maybe yes: I sure would like to see more of the 16th green and surrounds!  A clear-out on 18 too would help.  There'd be more drama if we could see raw barranca, dontcha think?

Still, I like the look of the bunkering at 16 and 18.  I like how the 18th green looks sort of "perched" (birdie country!) in the middle of a landslide.

Maybe no: Getting back to pic at issue, there is a neatly-arrayed, carefully spaced amphitheater of trees.  I don't see how chopping them down would make much of a difference.  Not sure if obliterating the trees and houses behind it would make much difference either, but I'm outside the parameters of my imagination there. (Maybe you could photoshop it for us?) No, I think what I'm missing there has more to do with the gentleness of the slope (bunkers seem to be sitting on top not "landsliding"), bunker sand looks like sugar, and rough appears not only emerald, but of such uniform color and apparent texture as to look "manufactured."

(Again, I'm assuming the photo is a faithful representation of reality...)

Mark

[Sean_Tully]

I think I am with Sean Arble on that hole, not so much because they're over the top but because to my eye they don't ring true.  Those bunkers don't seem to sit right on the land, the sand is Augusta-unnatural white, and the deep green of the rough surrounding them looks odd.

Mark, this is just after sodding was done and they got it from a sod farm. You could not get that sod any greener and that is why the contrast is so great. The bunkers were not raked and the grass on the soded areas hadn't even been mowed yet. Once it matures it will look a little better!  The bunkering is rather deceptive to the eye as it really does play with your depth perception.

Tully

[BVince]

Does anyone know when the course is expected to be completely finished and ready for play?  I see they have a collegiate tournament in March, will it be ready for action by then?

[John Mayhugh]

It's been over 10 years since I played there.  Way too long.  These changes look fantastic.  

I really appreciate sharing these pics with us.  Imagine how 16 would look w/o all those trees....

[Jeff Doerr]

We were planning to play there two weeks ago but played Spanish Bay instead - truly our loss!

From the historic pictures on their web site I'd say the place is truly back to the old glory and maybe even better. I'm guessing that it wil never go back to the days I saw in the early 90s when we could play twilights for about $30. The blue collar days may be gone, but the golden age has been restored.

[Andy Troeger]

Does anyone know when the course is expected to be completely finished and ready for play?  I see they have a collegiate tournament in March, will it be ready for action by then?

Bryon,
I was told that it is supposed to be done very soon, by the end of the month at least.

[Patrick Kiser]

As promised...

Self explanatory I think.  Should complement many of Sean's pics.  I tried to take from his vantage point + a few more.

One thing's for sure.  The old "can't walk and chew gum" saying applies to me when it comes to playing a round of golf and going gonzo with the camera.

The course was in good shape on a wonderful day.  Windy at times (on the back nine).

Still ... I say spring will be the better time to go.  Needs to grow in.

Really something though.  Night and day from when I played about a 1 1/2 ago.  Urbina and his crew did some great work.

Enjoy.

12th:









13th:









14th:











15th:





16th:







17th:



18th:

[Sean_A]

Pat

Thanks for posting.  I don't think I have ever seen such detailed photography of bunkers!  

Are these fronting bunkers as steep as they look?  Can a ball get plugged near the top of the bunkers?


Ciao

[wsmorrison]

I hope I do not come across as overly critical.  This is a style, just one that I am not fond of.  However, I can certainly see why an extreme style such as this attracts many fans and ardent ones at that.  No doubt the playability and interest is improved upon with these changes.  I'm sure the playing public will enjoy the improvements.

How is the course to be maintained?  How was it presented in the past?  Is playability paramount or lush/green turf?  Soft or firm?

This use of bunkering at Pasatiempo once again demonstrates MacKenzie's tendency to over-bunker and frame greens, especially the rear.  I take it this is a US style that he did not use in the UK.  Is that so?  If so, why did he design so differently?  Did he feel the American audience needed a helping hand or that this appealed to our sensibilities more?  

The problem with so many bunkers with complicated outlines is that they simply don't look like they were naturally made.  The original look was probably much more in harmony with the surrounds.  Perhaps because they are new this overt appearance will fade in time.  Is that the intent?  Will there be a measure of natural evolution or is this the look that will be held?

To me, the long narrow finger in the right front bunker below detracts from an otherwise attractive bunker and does not fit in very well with the other bunker looks.  The top left corner of that bunker somewhat mimics a larger feature in the bunker behind.  Is this coincidental and is it original/intentional?  



I don't know if this bunker is original or not, but it is unusual in how shallow it is and how it follows the exact contour of the slope rather than being cut in at all.



I also observe that there are many flowing curves and lines to these bunkers but that a great many also have portions with rather straight lines.  Is this typical of MacKenzie or a more modern interpretation?

[BVince]

How do you guys think these changes will effect the course ranking?

[David Stamm]

I placed this link some time ago on this site. It may be of benefit to those who want to get some idea of how close Urbina got to what AM's looked.

Just look under the Pasa tab and the Dr. AM tab.


http://www.julianpgraham.com/index.shtml

[Patrick Kiser]

Sean,

Yes, they are as deep (slope wise - not on the face of the bunkers - shallow there) as they look on the front facing bunkers to the 15th, 16th, and 18th as shown.  Just take a look at the fellow in the 15th.  Also the foot prints in the lower right face bunker that didn't get racked.

A ball can definitely get plugged.  I will say I had no problems getting out of these bunkers.  Perhaps because of the type of sand used.

Pat

Thanks for posting.  I don't think I have ever seen such detailed photography of bunkers!  

Are these fronting bunkers as steep as they look?  Can a ball get plugged near the top of the bunkers?


Ciao

[Patrick Kiser]

Wayne,

Some good points.  I'll let the experts answer most of these but did want to point out that the photos might be giving you some misinterpretation about the "straight" lines part.  They are not straight.  The angle for that photo is what is causing it to look straight.  If you look at the following pic after that one, I'm taking from the front more for the same bunker and you can clearly see it curving ... where in the other pic it looks more straight.  I simply couldn't get a better angle from the side without stepping all over the sod.  Big no no...

Hope this helps clarify.

... are many flowing curves and lines to these bunkers but that a great many also have portions with rather straight lines.  Is this typical of MacKenzie or a more modern interpretation?

[Patrick Kiser]

Most excellent!

I think these historical pics show the restoration being as faithful as possible.  Tough to tell on the 18th how much of the lower front bunkering is the same.  Similarly, difficult to clearly see the separation of the string bunkers on the 13th.  12th looks like an almost exact match to the historical photo with A.M. in the left bunker.

I placed this link some time ago on this site. It may be of benefit to those who want to get some idea of how close Urbina got to what AM's looked.

Just look under the Pasa tab and the Dr. AM tab.


http://www.julianpgraham.com/index.shtml

[Tom Huckaby]

Great pics - thanks for posting, Patrick.  So selfishly, it sure looks like on 11/8 we'll have a real golf course to play.  I'd agree from the looks of things that it will surely be better come spring... but playing 11/8 won't be worthless, for sure.

TH

[SB]

I think it looks fantastic, and the bunkering on 13 has to be taken in context with the rest of the course.  It's a long par five on the flattest piece of land on the course, and there's not a whole lot of bunkering on the way to the green.  That's the danger in looking at pictures and trying to draw conclusions.  

I'm also curious about the barranca on 18, and if it can be cleaned up.  It looks like there's a lot more vegetation there, I guess due to the irrigation system.

[Patrick Kiser]

I also thought of the 18th barranca clearing, but when I saw that retention wall on the lower right hand side of the 18th ... it made me think there might just be a reason why it hasn't been cleared.  In fact, I saw patterns down there.  Certain kinds of plants had a man made pattern to them.  Same goes for the 10th tee and 11th cross over to the split fairway.

All this to say I think they're keeping it that way for erosion purposes.

I agree if cleared, the chasm and contrast would create a greater impression on the player.  Right now it just blends in a little too much.  Just compare the old pics to these and it's obvious.

I think it looks fantastic, and the bunkering on 13 has to be taken in context with the rest of the course.  It's a long par five on the flattest piece of land on the course, and there's not a whole lot of bunkering on the way to the green.  That's the danger in looking at pictures and trying to draw conclusions.  

I'm also curious about the barranca on 18, and if it can be cleaned up.  It looks like there's a lot more vegetation there, I guess due to the irrigation system.

[Andy Troeger]

Great pics - thanks for posting, Patrick.  So selfishly, it sure looks like on 11/8 we'll have a real golf course to play.  I'd agree from the looks of things that it will surely be better come spring... but playing 11/8 won't be worthless, for sure.

TH

Just wanted to bring this back to the front. We have room for a fourth at Pasatiempo at 10 AM on Thursday 11/8 if anyone would be interested in joining. Send me an e-mail or PM tomorrow (Tues) or contact Tom after that if interested. Will try to update the thread if we get a taker.

[Tom Huckaby]

4th spot is now filled... should be very fun.

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()