News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #50 on: April 23, 2005, 10:06:51 AM »
I'd agree with the 8/2 split favoring Pebble Beach.  That, however, is no reflection on Spyglass, but rather the lofty opinion I have of Pebble.  IMLT (in my limited travels) I have not played a golf course superior to Pebble.  Spyglass is one of my favorite moderns and IMAO (in my amateurish opinion) easily belongs in the top 20 moderms as rated by GW.  

Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #51 on: April 23, 2005, 10:20:32 AM »
I find myself in an odd situation of saying yes Pebble has more glamour and is more enjoyable to play. However Spyglass is a harder golf course but I think Pebble is a better overall test of golf. I think Pebble makes you play and have more shots than Spyglass. Spyglass just beats you down, well all of us except Phil one day earlier this year. I find Spyglass to be one of the harder highly visable courses in the world.

Brent Hutto

Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #52 on: April 23, 2005, 10:47:25 AM »
My round at Spyglass was from the up tees, the guy in the pro shop warned me they had the whites set at nearly 6,400 yards that day but frankly it played much closer to its card value of 6,123. Anyway, from my point of view it wasn't clear just where the difficulty of the course primarily lies.

My poor score was due to a whole bunch of chunked and bladed wedge shots. Frankly, I would have scored 95-100 that day on a wide-open 6,000-yard muni course. Tee to green I found that Spyglass rewarded my usual conservative bogey-golfer's game and there were really less than a dozen shots that absolutely required hitting a decent shot or it would surely cost a full stroke (tee shots on 3, 5 and 12; second shots on 2, 4 and 17; third shots on 11 and 14) but I could play the game of keeping the ball between me and the hole and leave a lot of fairly easy up-and-downs without hitting many greens.

So from the back tees does the trouble come from driving it sideways? Or do the green complexes punish bad execution of iron shots toward the flag more than my weak-ass rollers up to the front fringe? I suspect that Spyglass Hill more than some courses leads to compounded errors and big numbers. For instance when Lou hit it right on the approch to #11 he had to drop in a crappy lie then try and get it on a firm, elevated green carrying huge bunkers. If you don't have your A-game even a good golfer can post worse than a double on a lot of holes at Spyglass from the back tees just by not having an easy route back into position once you've hit it in trouble (3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 at least).

So what is the hardest element of Spyglass Hill to decent players.

A_Clay_Man

Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #53 on: April 23, 2005, 11:01:24 AM »
Brent- Generally speaking it's the greens at Spyglass that are the cause for many a round going south. (or is it north?)

Their deceptive undulations and elevation changes are a huge part of the courses mystic, and character.

Other factors included the fairway lies, weather, trees, long rough and iceplant.

Honestly, with proper course management (and a good caddy) many of the visitors shoot surprisingly well, for their ability. Perhaps relatively better than the better player, because there are several instances where going for it, is just not prudent. And the higher handicap player is more likely to listen to sensible advice, than a player who's ego won't allow them to lay-up on a par four. Or as I suppose in Lou's instance, play ultra safe on #11 by playing well short of the dip and away from the rightside. ;)

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #54 on: April 23, 2005, 10:36:43 PM »
Back to the topic...I played the original with the pond, and recently, the new sans-pond + bunker(s) design. I prefered the pond version.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2005, 10:37:03 PM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

ian

Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #55 on: April 23, 2005, 11:13:04 PM »
I think this image was requested recently.

The photo is from 1991.


Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #56 on: April 24, 2005, 12:02:21 AM »
After meeting Ian for the first time in person this past week, it is interesting to note that the dark grey/black area on Ian's portrait is not facial hair, but rather a muzzle.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Peter Galea

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #57 on: April 24, 2005, 12:08:25 AM »
I agree with Forrest, I liked the pond too.
i like to play chess on a golf course. Create the shot, execute the shot, deal with the result.
"chief sherpa"

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #58 on: April 24, 2005, 01:04:53 AM »
It was a 3-shot hole with remarkable sternness. Now it acts like the majority. No bite and not much bark.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2005, 01:05:19 AM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

johnk

Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #59 on: April 24, 2005, 02:16:01 AM »
Spyglass is like a very nice pure golf club experience.  I've played there 10 times during the last year, and each time it's wonderful.  I'd say the same about Pasatiempo, and I've also played there about 10 times over the last year.  Both Spy and Ptemp are in my personal top 10 in the US.

Pebble, however, is what golf is like in heaven, I think.  I've played there once in the last year, and walking the fairways is somehow like slipping the surly bonds of earth...




ian

Re:Spyglass #11
« Reply #60 on: April 24, 2005, 03:41:19 PM »
Forrest (Yoda?),

I'm photoshopping another image of you as I type.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back