Spyglass Hill

[Sean Leary]

MWP,

I was thinking the same exact thing. Holes like 16 at Pasa without any houses, (or trees for that matter) would be so much more impressive.

It is a flip of a coin for me which one I would pick.

[Ted Kramer]

*** EDIT*** #16 at Spyglass is one of the best examples of a tree "belonging in play" that I have ever seen.

-Ted

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Unless I am mistaken Ted, that tree you are talking about has gone......what a great loss..unless they have replaced it.

[Sean Leary]

Ted,

What about the tree on 10 fairway?

[A_Clay_Man]

Actually Michael, there were a total of three important trees on the hole. Two, used to gaurd the green front with just a sliver of an opening, where one needed to draw a ball into to hit the green. These trees had that Spanish moss hanging down from them, and was a site, when first seen, was as intimidating and unforgettable as any.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Adam,
You are correct, I was talking about the tree on the right that used to govern the shape of the tee shot, that was not there the last time I played.

[Bob_Huntley]

I notice that there are many questions posed about the the course, the routing and other minutia concerning Spyglass.

A good friend of mine, Bob Hanna, was the Executive Director of the NCGA for many years. It was his germ of an idea that saw the creation of the group that put the plan in front of Sam Morse.

Bob knows more about Spyglass than anyone extant. If you have a specific question, IM me, I'll submit it to Bob and answer here in GCA.

Bob

[Carlyle Rood]

Link to photos of the course during my trip to California in 2003:
http://www.golfarch.com/Spyglass/


Hole 2



Hole 3



Hole 4 is rarely photographed from the fairway because the view is much less spectacular than from the green looking back.  Much of this green is blind.




Hole 11

[Ted Kramer]

Adam,
You are correct, I was talking about the tree on the right that used to govern the shape of the tee shot, that was not there the last time I played.

That is the tree I was talking about too.
I thought it was an excellent feature on a very strong hole.
I played the course in '99, I had no idea that the tree is gone. That is too bad!

-Ted

[Ted Kramer]

Ted,

What about the tree on 10 fairway?

I don't remember it.
-Ted

[Sean Leary]

There is a tree in the left center of the fairway on 10.  In a Golf Digest pece in the last year, Johnny Miller mentioned that he thought that it was an example of unfair architecture....

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Sean,
Personally I love that hole, I think the tree site strategically perfectly for a hole of that length.
Once again what does Johnny Miller really know??

Carlyle, nice pictures mate.

[Joel_Stewart]

I started a thread on this site about 2 years ago called "What happened at Spyglass" which I can't seem to find on the search?   It might have been "What the hell happened at Spyglass".  

I played Spyglass for the first time maybe 25 years ago and then last year and was amazed at what Fazio did, virtually destroying the atmoshere on the back nine especially #16, what was one of the great par 4's in the country.

The story of Spyglass is very interesting with Bob Hanna and Jones and the very limited budget.  I've always wondered why the rest of the course didn't carry the sandy waste atmoshere that the first 5 holes have and its because that area doesn't sit on a sand dune which Cypress is blessed with.  Nowdays it could be imitated but not with the original $700k budget.

[Pete Lavallee]

Pete, there are merits to those holes 6-18. Just not in the same league, as the first five.

Then we are in agreement Adam.

MWP,

I did not say that 6-18 were without architectural merit, I asked a simple question: Which hole has the most and why? I would answer that the 17th is interesting because of the dogleg nature of the hole, golfers must decide on a club of the tee (not always driver) and pay careful attention to the line they take. The green has excellent movement from left to right and the green side bunkers are actually in the line of play not just off to the sides. The rest of the holes, to me, are much like Torrey South, no decisions to be made, just a test of execution; with the old 16th the ultimate pass/fail exam.

[Ian Dalzell]

Could someone please tell me the architectural merits of the tree that sits right in the middle of the 10th fairway, bacause I for one could not understand why anyone would think that is okay on what is supposedly a top class venue.

 

[A_Clay_Man]

I thought the 10th hole made better sense, when the turf above the bunker allowed for some bounce. The tree narrows the requirement, and puts a huge premium on placement v. length. Of course, both are optimal. But even if you drive it long and down the middle, then foozle it up onto the apron, it is the best way to play the hole, if not playing for regualtion. Chipping close and walking to the next.

There are a few other holes where even a 10 handicap would do well to remove the green side bunkers from play, by playing short and relying on ones short game to make par. Many testosterone driven males don't have the good sense g-d gave them and always want to be a hero.

I believe they replaced the tree on 16's landing zone. I'll check and get back if different.

[Mike Hendren]

I thought the 10th hole made better sense, when the turf above the bunker allowed for some bounce. The tree narrows the requirement, and puts a huge premium on placement v. length. Of course, both are optimal. But even if you drive it long and down the middle, then foozle it up onto the apron, it is the best way to play the hole, if not playing for regualtion. Chipping close and walking to the next.

Precisely the way I played it last year, yet no need for the putt

Joel,

I liked the way the 16th laid upon the land and did not realize it was not original.  Please elaborate on its predecessor.  Thanks.

[Mike Hendren]

Interesting that Cuscowilla and Spyglass are next door neighbor's on Golfweek's modern list.  I am an unabashed fan of Spyglass, perhaps rating it a little high.  I've only played it once and I've played Cuscowilla five times.  Given ten future plays, I'd go Spyglass 8, Cuscowilla 2.  Fodder for the butt-boys no doubt

Major knocks on Spyglass are the rather mundane 9th and 18th and the fact that three of the one-shotters are drop-shots.

What do I know, however.  I found Pebble Beach significantly harder than Spyglass.

I find some of Spyglass' pushed up greens somewhat classical.  Can well call it a mid-modern?

Mike

[johnk]

Quick vote for Pasa here.  I think Spyglass is easier to score well on, at least from the 6500 yd tees.  I've been playing quite a bit of both courses lately, and Pasa is more fun, and has more variety IMHO.  However, the more I play it, the more I like Spyglass - a real lot.   Spyglass may kick your ass, but Pasa kicks your ass and you come back and say: "Thank you, sir, may I have another."

Architecturally "interesting" holes after 5 at zee glass:

#8, #10, #11, #14, #16, #17.  Each one has approach issues, for sure.  And most of those have really great driving set-ups.  Note the often under-appreciated Par 5s.

[THuckaby2]

Interesting comparison in Spyglass from its whites v. Pasa from its tips.  I haven't looked it up, but I'd guess that they are similar course ratings at those similar yardages... But methinks JK is correct - Spyglass may be a bit easier to score on from those tees... with the primary reasons being a) the greens are subtly difficult at Spyglass yes, but no way to they compare to the 4-putt inducing monsters at Pasa; and b) Pasa just plays so much longer due to longer par threes and so many tough uphill shots.

So good call, JK!  At first glance one would think it's the opposite.

Now as to which one is "better", or which I'd play if given one chance and cost isn't an issue... well...

I'm still gonna say Spyglass, for the reasons I said already.  And this is after 30+ playings of Pasa, probably a dozen or so at Spyglass.

See JK, I've come to think of it in the opposite way you do... Spyglass kicks my ass every time and I really can't figure why.  Oh, if I play the tips, I know why - that's too much course for me.  But from the whites, I feel like I should score well but I never do.

Pasa, on the other hand, completely turns on putting for me... if the flat stick is on, the course can, and has, been had.  I've had several low rounds there... lots of AWFUL ones also, as you guys saw... but lots of good ones too.

Spyglass keeps me coming back, trying to slay the beast.  Pasa is great fun, for sure... and deserves all of its accolades and I do love it so....I sure as heck do keep coming back to play it, and always will... but it holds no grails.  Not like the Glass.

So redanman, methinks also you need to re-assess this in the cold sober light of day.  Pasa way way way better than Spyglass?  No way way way way.

 

[Bob_Huntley]

So redanman, methinks also you need to re-assess this in the cold sober light of day.  Pasa way way way better than Spyglass?  No way way way way.

 

Thomas of Huckaby,

Pasa is a delightful hors d'oeuvre, Spyglass is a meal.

Bob

[Carlyle Rood]

Thomas of Huckaby,

Pasa is a delightful hors d'oeuvre, Spyglass is a meal.

Bob

Bob deserves bonus points for spelling hors d'oeuvre without a dictionary!

[A_Clay_Man]

Couple of comments:

Spyglass still gets the rip as a tough tough course, even though it's run for the ease of resort play.

In 99' when the Am came to town, the fairways were narrowed, the rough was grown and the knife in the Pirate's teeth was surgically sharp.

It's always been my opinion that Spy would've been another CPC had they stayed in dunesland. Since that wasn't possible, when the pitch cancre issue became high alert, it posed an opportunity to emulate the openness of dunesland, by turning all the forested areas into pine barrens.
 I feel strongly that the ability to have expansive views, on that site, could open up the golfer's mind, and allow recovery from most areas, sans chainsaw.

[THuckaby2]

VERY well put, Mr. Huntley, as always.  Why is it that you can always say in 10 words or less that which takes me over 100?

 

TH

[THuckaby2]

Interesting.

I find Spyglass every bit as interesting as Pasa.  I also find it to be prettier.  Add that to the greater challenge (not the thing I typically care too much about, but it does matter a little) and well...

I'd say Spyglass 6, Pasa 4.

TH

ps - remove the infininte putting issue at Pasa by slowing the greens, just allowing for so many more pin placements, and then I'd perhaps get it to 5-5, maybe 6-4 in favor of Pasa.  But playing the same boring pins because so many places are unpinnable, well... Pasa loses a lot of its interest.