Spyglass

« **Reply #50 on:** December 28, 2005, 03:54:56 PM »

Quote from: Jordan Wall on December 28, 2005, 03:53:02 PM

would pine valley have to make any changes IF it were to hold a major???

WHOA! There's the $256K question, adjusted for inflation.

I am FAR from familiar enough with PV to even guess beyond thinking that it could hold up just fine as is. Of course it too has a membership that needs to hold a major like they all need holes in their heads... But again, dare to dream.

« **Reply #51 on:** December 28, 2005, 03:57:52 PM »

Well think about it...before thursday at baltusrol mickelson played PV and shot 72 without the course being tricked up...kind of reminds me of how tough SPYGLASS would be

...i dunno much, but i do know it would be fun to see the pros struggle on a golf course for once

« **Reply #52 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:01:35 PM »

That is a good point too. I forgot about Kohler. But if anything, the business relationships between heavyweight friends is also a dynamic at work.

« **Reply #53 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:03:15 PM »

Kohler, huh??? Anyone thought about maybe Blackwolf run as a site??

By the way do you find it ironic how much TEPaul and Pat Mucci talk with each other...lol...arts and crafts is on page 20

« **Reply #54 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:07:14 PM »

I dunno if you can go by a casual round so much. But that is just me. I am sure phil has put up some worse number on eaiser courses then that. Just because he shot 72 does not mean he wont shoot 67s four rounds there. I am sure it is not easy but who knows.

Like tom said though why does Pine valley need to host a major? How would it benefit them? it is already #1 in the country without hosting any.

« **Reply #55 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:07:18 PM »

Jordan, well... again, there are a lot of courses that could hold up as a major, but we'll just have to dream about. And I'm with you in that it is fun to see the pros struggle, and even more fun when it's not due to tricked up courses. There are so few that this can occur at... so you really are on the right track here.

As for the Arts and Crafts boys, well... there are a few other major players in that thread also. But yes, Mucci and Paul do love to debate. Let me tell you it's even more fun in person.

« **Reply #56 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:11:58 PM »

i just think pros should face the same stuff us amatuers do...ex:how do you think they would deal with crappy course conditions like some of our muni's

« **Reply #57 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:14:16 PM »

ANOTHER great question, one I've thought of from time to time. Hell yes - it's one thing to conquer Pebble all tricked up... quite another to shoot under par when greens are so slow it's better to chip than putt, with fairways so muddy you're lucky your ball retains any white at all after the teeshot. I'd love to see the pros at a few of my local courses....

« **Reply #58 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:17:13 PM »

Forget Kohler, I agree that the majors are/need be pretty closely tied to major markets, but there are enough major markets to get around the country pretty well. My point was that using Spyglass dilutes the Bay area market a bit and neither the USGA or PGA want to try to make that work.

Come to think of it, does the PGA have a NoCal site? Is it just the US Open at Pebble and Olympic? What am I missing?

« **Reply #59 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:18:41 PM »

The pros have earned their way out of those shitty conditions.

It's like wondering what Bill Gates would do with Microsoft if he couldn't make his rent check each month.

« **Reply #60 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:21:46 PM »

Quote from: JES II on December 28, 2005, 04:18:41 PM

The pros have earned their way out of those shitty conditions.

It's like wondering what Bill Gates would do with Microsoft if he couldn't make his rent check each month.

Party pooper.

And the PGA once had a NorCal site - Pebble - 1977 I believe. But none since then. They are overdue. But our sites that can hold majors tend to have US Opens on them.

« **Reply #61 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:26:04 PM »

I have an idea, how about a PGA at Spyglass. I hear its very difficult.

« **Reply #62 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:28:07 PM »

Hell of an idea. Why didn't anyone think of that?

« **Reply #63 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:29:41 PM »

I really really* like you Jes

*really, really, really, really, really

« **Reply #64 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:37:24 PM »

« **Reply #65 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:57:13 PM »

DOES THIS MEAN SPYGLASS WOULD BE A GOOD SITE FOR A MAJOR

...

« **Reply #66 on:** December 28, 2005, 05:03:28 PM »

Jordan:

Good site in terms of fan interest, yes.

Likely to happen in our lifetimes, no. For many reasons already listed.

But let's just say it's a LOT more likely to hold a PGA than a US Open.

Now I'm the party-pooper.

« **Reply #67 on:** December 28, 2005, 05:11:19 PM »

Your still OK in my book Tom

« **Reply #68 on:** December 28, 2005, 09:54:20 PM »

I think Spyglass would be a great Open course and an even better PGA course. The Open will not ever be there for obvious reasons stated above. That does not take away from the ligitamacy of the merits for holding it there.

« **Reply #69 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:01:29 PM »

Thanks, Tiger

It makes no sense that the USGA or the PGA of America would be so stubborn. If the USGA is so intent on defending par, then why choose Pebble over Spyglass. It doesnt make sense. And Spyglass would be an AWESOME site for a PGA. It would be a great venue, and no one should argue that. It might not provide the 'best' finishing holes but remember anything is possible on the last two holes. Imagine Tiger and Phil coming down the stretch tied after 16. The drama would be awesome because 17 could put forth a birdie but 18 is a brute. I would sure watch the tourney...

« **Reply #70 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:24:25 PM »

Yep Mr. Huckaby....the PGA at Pebble in '77, when Lanny Wadkins stuck a knife through my heart, chipping in from an impossible spot above the hole on #1 to defeat Gene Littler.

Another really good, if not great, major championship at Pebble. It never fails to deliver, does it?

Still in recovery,

Tom

« **Reply #71 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:26:17 PM »

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on December 28, 2005, 03:05:40 PM

Adam - re adding rather than replacing, it's just VERY difficult to believe the USGA would give that many Opens to Northern California. If Torrey bombs and they're committed to a third California site, I just can't see that being Spyglass. But then again there aren't any other obvious candidates - but don't you think they'd try anything to get Riviera or another SoCal site before they'd go north again?

And if they do go north, wouldn't it be for a muni to replace Torrey?

I believe they use Harding way before they use Spyglass....

TH

Tom--you are 100% correct--

Forget another NoCal site-- Geography is as importent (more important) than the issue of whether Spyglass (or Harding or any other NoCal course) is better than Torrey--

The USGA is NOT going to use three USGA sites in Calif and have all of them in NorCal-- They will have one is SoCal and that is a sure, absolute, slam dunk--

The USGA has announced for years that it is seeking a SoCal course to fit somewhere in its rotation of Open sites--

If Torrey bombs (and I doubt very much that it will-- course is important, but only one factor among several, and Torrey has all the other factors covered better than any other SoCal course I can think of), they will simply go to another SoCal site (maybe LA North will reconsider, but I doubt it.

« **Reply #72 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:29:10 PM »

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on December 28, 2005, 03:11:00 PM

Brian - LACC was immediately one that I thought of. But I am assuming that such course is off limits until we hear otherwise. Oh man, if the members there would allow such a thing, a major there would be fantastic.

TH

Tom-- I thought you knew-- The USGA has approached LACC several times over the last 20 years, hat in hand, attempting to convince the LACC membership to host the Open-- The door has been slammed in their face every time, with a "do not darken our door again" message--

I can assure you there is no change in the philosophy of the membership in the foreseeable future.

« **Reply #73 on:** December 28, 2005, 11:31:49 PM »

Would LACC provide as much drama as PBGL or Spyglass. I've never seen it

« **Reply #74 on:** December 29, 2005, 10:13:05 AM »

Dennis - gotcha. I don't recall where I heard that the stance at LACC was softening, but it was obviously not a reliable source.

Tom J - oh yes, that was one hell of a great PGA. I was rooting hard for Littler also, being the good SoCal man that he was, living there at the time as I did. That did hurt at least a little. But not anything close to how my heart was torn out and stomped on in 1982.

Jordan - I have to believe LACC would be a VERY dramatic site for any major - perhaps not the equal of Pebble (because what is?) - but certainly equal to or better than Spyglass. it is one brute of a course, building to a conclusion through tough hole after tough hole. BUT - it's nowhere near an ocean - LACC North is a fantastic parkland course.

TH

News:

Tom Huckaby

Jordan Wall

A_Clay_Man

Jordan Wall

Brian Noser

Tom Huckaby

Jordan Wall

Tom Huckaby

JESII

JESII

Tom Huckaby

JESII

Tom Huckaby

Jordan Wall

JESII

Jordan Wall

Tom Huckaby

Jordan Wall

Tiger_Bernhardt

Jordan Wall

Tom Jefferson

Dennis_Harwood

Dennis_Harwood

Jordan Wall

Tom Huckaby

An Error Has Occurred!