Crystal Springs, Burlingame

[David Stamm]

I watched a tour of this course on Hooked On Golf's website and it looked pretty good. Great views. The course's website says that Herbert Fowler designed the course. It says it has been redone in spots, I presume because of 280. I'm sure the No Cal boys can shed some light. What do you guys think of the course? There's also a tour of Callipe Preserve and Saddleback Resort and they look like they would be worth a lookover.

[Tom Huckaby]

Crystal Springs is a pretty darned good course - it has some quirkiness, some wildly sloping greens, a lot of fun elevation change, and some drop-dead gorgeous views.  It is said to be a Fowler design originally and I believe we can trust that... as for what's changed and why, that I don't know - we need Sean Tully.

The negatives about the course have always been conditions and price.  It's in a VERY wet area and it's on clay, so it plays very damp and muddy damn near year-round.  Not much can be done about it, but there it is.  Price has always seemed to me to be too much for what you get, though I think such has come down....

It's worth a look for sure.  Just don't go in expecting too much and you'll enjoy the day.

As for Callippe, there's a thread on that now on page 2 or three...

And I assume you mean Saddle Creek?  That is a great course - it's just pretty damn remote - 3 hours or so to the east from San Jose.

[Kevin_Reilly]

There are a handful of purely ordinary holes at CS but as Tom said there is some quirk and good use of the terrain on some of the holes that at the end of the day leave you feeling glad that you played it (assuming it wasn't a muddy mess and pace of play wasn't bad).  The 6th tee shot in particular is a lot of fun...severely downhill bender to the left.

[Patrick Schultheis]

I lived about 10 mins from Crystal Springs for a number of years in the mid-1990s.

I liked the course, particularly in comparison to the other public courses on the Peninsula at the time.  A number of interesting (if occasionally quirky) holes.

Back then the condition of the course was not great.  Also, the pace of play was brutal --- I don't think I ever finished 18 on a weekend in less than 5.5 hours.  Any comments on current course condition and pace of play?

[Steve_Lovett]

I used to have family in San Mateo - and, as a teenager and young adult I played there many times.  I always thought it was an impressive site, and is a good golf course.  As has already been mentioned - it has a few very ordinary holes, several spectacular views, and generally average/wet conditions.  To me, it is a "diamond in the rough" - and could be fantastic.  I always enjoyed it and found it worth playing.

[David Stamm]

Crystal Springs is a pretty darned good course - it has some quirkiness, some wildly sloping greens, a lot of fun elevation change, and some drop-dead gorgeous views.  It is said to be a Fowler design originally and I believe we can trust that... as for what's changed and why, that I don't know - we need Sean Tully.

The negatives about the course have always been conditions and price.  It's in a VERY wet area and it's on clay, so it plays very damp and muddy damn near year-round.  Not much can be done about it, but there it is.  Price has always seemed to me to be too much for what you get, though I think such has come down....

It's worth a look for sure.  Just don't go in expecting too much and you'll enjoy the day.

As for Callippe, there's a thread on that now on page 2 or three...

And I assume you mean Saddle Creek?  That is a great course - it's just pretty damn remote - 3 hours or so to the east from San Jose.

Sorry, Tom. Yeah, I meant Saddle Creek.

[Kalen Braley]

Great views yes, but as was stated it always plays wet and soggy which most of the fast and firm boys seem to despise on this site.

Something else that wasn't mentioned is that the entire length of the course runs next to hwy 280 and that adds quite a bit of noise as you are playing the course.  

Combine that with the steep green fees and slow pace of play, just not a great day on the links.

[Jon Spaulding]

I enjoyed Crystal; a few very goofy holes (like #9 if memory serves), but certainly worth playing....unless you have the option of playing some of those downright miserable tracks slightly North of Crystal.....

[Kalen Braley]

Good point Jon,

The penisula in general is mediocre at best for good public courses with a reasonable price.  

And excellent at worst for top notch private courses!!

For a real treat,  try delta view in Pittsburgh.  The good doctor himself designed the original 9 and they added 9 more I think in the early 90s.  Mackenizes 9 even in thier tamed down state over the years are a real joy to play.  A bit of a drive from the south bay, but worth it IMO!!

[Matt_Cohn]

I think a key point about Crystal Springs is that it has been redone - "in spots" - and you can tell. It's quite pleasant; it just doesn't all blend together. The greens there, when I played, were in great shape.

[Tom Huckaby]

Interesting thoughts.  I've played Crystal a lot over the years, and freeway noise never bothered me... perhaps I'm just used to it.  Also, I sure can't tell what's been re-done and what's original...it all seems to blend together well enough for me... Please do fill me in, Matt.  I am curious what you see.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

This is an interesting topic going.

Along this same vein, we all know of the awesome private courses, but which public courses do you like that are on the pensiula.  The courses at half moon bay are certainly nice, but they have a pretty high price point.

The best bang for your buck in my mind is the course at Shoreline by RTJ2.  A few of the holes can be brutal with all of the geese droppings, but it has an interesting layout.  And given that there aren't many other options on the penisula this is worth a play.

Any thoughts from the NorCal boys?

[Tom Huckaby]

I guess it depends on what you call "peninsula".  Mountain View is pretty far south and while the chamber of commerce would love to think they are part of the peninsula, well it screams out more South Bay/Silicon Valley to me.

But let's say that's the southern boundary and SF city limits are the north.

In that area, the public courses to consider are:

Shoreline GL - yes, great fun, some darn fine holes - conditions are never all that great though and methane gas fumes might put some off.  John Krystynak - semi-regular here - is the expert, he plays there a lot.  I used to when I lived nearby but haven't played it much in last 5 years.

Poplar Creek - former San Mateo muni, re-done by a group that included our very own Gib Papazian.  Darn fun, quirky, vastly improved conditions, pretty darn good bang for the buck.  

Palo Alto Muni - I see nothing really good there, but others do like it... It is a very fair test of golf... to me it's just kinda boring.

Crystal Springs - already discussed.

Sharp Park - oft-discussed in here, they call themselves MacKenzie but the course isn't in Wexler's Missing Links by accident.  Could be so much, sadly isn't now.

That's it for 18-hole courses full-sized courses.

Add in the executive Emerald Hills - somewhat fun, very quirky, very cheap, but pasture golf conditions... and

Mariner's Point - 9 hole par 3 - very cool, linksy, night-lighted.. a recent fave of Chicago visitor shivas....

As you can see, it's slim pickings.  It's not a stretch to say Shoreline is the best of the lot... though I might go for Poplar Creek as it is now.

TH

ps - I deliberately left out the HMB courses, as they are at a price range so greater than the others, the comparison is silly.  Each of those would be clearly superior to the rest mentioned here... although maybe "clearly" isn't the proper word re the Old course there..... that's no great shakes.

[Kalen Braley]

Great list Tom,

I agree with your southern boundary, but I would include San Fran as apart of the penisula as well.  Being such this would include Harding Park which is a nice course but with triple digit green fees (for non-SF residents) its not exactly what most six pack joes would call affordable.

Presidio would have to be added in the mix as well, but with the trees over runnings, the constant spongy conditions, and bumpy green, I'm not sure its worth the green fees they are asking.

In addition to Sharp Park, another course that really could be so much more is Lincoln Park.  Its built in a great location and sure while it will never be a "full" size course with some improved course conditions, a few well placed bunkers, and new greens, it could be a great little course.  And the view from, I think its 17, is nothing short of jaw-dropping.

[Tom Huckaby]

If you include SF city limits, you'd also have to add Gleneagles 9-hole, which is also cool.  All SF courses have been discussed many times in here.  I just wouldn't call SF "peninsula"... I don't think SF residents think of themselves that way.  

Note I also forgot the 9-holer at Colma - Cypress Hills - which is pretty fun but has been reconfigured so many times I have no clue what's there now.

[Kalen Braley]

I was just going to ask about gleneagles.  While I have never played it I've heard its a fun little course with some great par 3s.

Only downside is I've heard you have to drive thru a pretty sketchy neighboorhood to get there and want to make sure the doors and windows are locked tight.

Myself being born and raised on the east bay, I guess I always thought of anywhere on that side of the bay as being apart of the "penisula". After all SF is on the tip of it!!  

[ed_getka]

David,
   Callippe is certainly not worth your time unless your goal is to see every course in Calif. There are a few good holes, and a demanding finishing couple of holes. I would recommend seeing Metropolitan Golf Links before Callippe or Crystal Springs.
   If you do decide to play Callippe, let me know, as it is just down the street from my house.

[Kalen Braley]

I would 2nd the statement by Ed.

Metro is a better course than the other 2. Sure it has a few blands holes, but this is pretty much limited to the front 9.  The back nine is where the real fun starts IMO.  Having played a few other johnny miller courses this one is a little more tame, but has some quality holes for sure.

[AndrewB]

Back then the condition of the course was not great.  Also, the pace of play was brutal --- I don't think I ever finished 18 on a weekend in less than 5.5 hours.  Any comments on current course condition and pace of play?

I've played Crystal Springs a handful of times and the pace of play has always been pretty bad.  In fact, that's the real reason I haven't played it more that just a handful of times.  Perhaps during a weekday the pace would be fine, but on the weekends it's always been slow going for me.

That said, I enjoy the course quite a bit and always thought the conditions were fine given the weather around the time I played (it was wet last "winter" when just about all courses were very wet too, but otherwise it's been fine).

[Tom Huckaby]

Kalen - geographically SF is obviously the end of that peninsula.  Emotionally and in terms of identity, I really believe "the Peninsula" means Mountain View north to SF city limits.  But no matter really.  Hell I live in San Jose - they can call themselves whatever they wish and their houses are still going to be worth way more than mine.  

David - Ed seems to be quite down on the course nearest to his home... methinks he might be suffering from Rustic geography envy.    Callippe is certainly not the 6th best public course in our state, but it's also not THAT bad... one certainly wouldn't make it the last course in our state you check out.    I think it's worth a play; I sure don't regret the two rounds I've played there, and I have no goal to see every course in the state.  That being said, I'd agree Metropolitan is a better course.  But don't go there seeking scenic views, that is unless you really like airports.  It's adjacent to OAK.

Andrew - yeah, Crystal Springs conditions are never that bad; and in the wet times they are no worse than most others.  The problem is they seem to have winter conditions year round; that is, it will be muddy and soggy in the middle of July.  Thus the issues...

TH

[ed_getka]

Tom,
   I'm not saying Callippe is the worst course in Calif, not even close. However, when there are better alternatives why waste time at a mediocre course.
   On the other hand I would go to most any course if a couple of GCA'ers are going to be there.

[ed_getka]

Tom,
  No geography envy on my part. I am more than happy to live in the better half of the state and drive the 350 miles to Rustic which is my "home" course.

[Tom Huckaby]

Ed - I just meant you likely wished Rustic were less than 350 miles away.

As for the rest, well... this is our great disconnect.  I'll play anywhere - the playing of the game trumps the venue for me. My golf world doesn't include a choice to just limit myself to great courses, given how much I do want to play.  To me golf on a mediocre course is still a very worthwhile way to spend a day.  All this being said, I did enjoy both rounds at Callippe and will certainly go back.  

Say a visitor has no access to private clubs and doesn't want to hastle Oakland... Callippe is a decent choice of a course, no?

TH

[Kalen Braley]

You make a good point here Tom. The worst day on the course is always better than the best day doing anything else right?  

So a course I haven't played since the redo is the 18 holer at tony lema.  I learned the game on the little 9 holer out there, and played the 18 holer many a time, but moved away during the remake of the course.

How you would rate this against metro links or gulp dare I say it Skywest in Hayward??

[ed_getka]

Tom,
   I assume you're talking local to me. I would play Poppy Ridge or Wente before Callippe. Yesterday I was out at Roddy Ranch with Matt Cohn. $30 with a coupon. I would do that before Callippe, but that is a bit of a drive, so probably doesn't qualify.
   I suppose I come across as a golf snob, since you keep bringing it up , but I don't often point out privates as an alternative, since I have no control over that.