Seminole & Cypress Point: Overrated?

[Andy Troeger]

"TEPaul,
Didn't mean to critique your statements so much as just counter the prevailing sentiment here that "well the guy just played it once and obviously didn't get it."


Andy:

That's precisely what I'm trying to do too.

I love Seminole but one cannot just rationalize away the fact that so many players, particularly good ones, have wondered what the big deal is about Seminole after playing it the first time.

I love Seminole, always have, but I'm not about to tell all those players who have had that first impression that they just don't get it.

On the other hand, like TOC, I have seen how Seminole tends to grow on those players who pan it at first---maybe not all but a lot of them, so I just think this is an interesting subject and it's why I like to hear Michael Whitaker's tour pro friend's specific take on it.

Well said. I certainly agree that both courses sound like fabulous places. I have to admit that degree of difficulty is not a huge deal for me. As a low-handicap amateur I tend to enjoy courses that make it possible to score on with good play but carry penalties for poor mental and physical execution. For example, in my round at Crystal Downs I made poor choices on the front and shot 47. On the back I was much better and shot 38 (with a double on #10).

It sounds like Seminole and Cypress Point both would be more than difficult enough for me

[Joel_Stewart]

The other thing I really liked about Seminole was they have not over conditioned the golf course like 96% of the top 100 courses in the US.  I'll place Maidstone, Newport and Fishers Island on the list with Seminole.

Below is a picture from Rans review of the 17th.  I'll bet Mr. pro didn't like the fact every shot was perfectly set up like the tour.



Tom:  Pete was in such a foul mood I wasn't going to take him on regarding how long he's been a member.  You and I both know there are some really old members but even if he joined in the 1960's, thats pretty damn old.   He was serious though about knowing Donald Ross?   I did try and debate him on the membership/green committee/board agreeing to Silvas green and bunker plan and he wouldn't budge on discussing it, just kind of shruged his shoulders?

[Tom_Doak]

Joel / Tom:

Pete Dye spent some time with Mr. Ross when he was stationed at Fort Bragg and he went over to Pinehurst a lot.

He had offered to oversee the "restoration" of Seminole to what he remembered of the Ross course but the board would not hear of it, Pete's reputation at the club being what it is.  So naturally he was not a big fan of whatever transpired afterwards ... in fact I think it was the thing which made Pete such a critic of restoration, since he was all for restoring Camargo and Shoreacres when I worked for him.

[TEPaul]

"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEPaul,
The issue isn't about Seminole's reputation or hype, it's about Seminole's rating/ranking.
The ratings/rankings follow a precise categorized format and the evaluative process addresses each of those specific categories, arriving at a numeric indicator, the results of which are based on the cummulative tally of the component analyses.
This isn't a subjective issue of someone randomly hyping Seminole, or Seminole's reputation, it's about Seminole's placement on the rating/ranking scale based on an evaluative process that's pretty detailed in its structure and precise in its calculation."

Patrick:

The foregoing just could be about the biggest verbal garbage that has ever been put on this site. It's even worse than the criteria and process rationalization of the magazines for rating courses.

[JESII]

How can you say that TEP? Clearly, if a magazine rating panel determines that Seminole receives a certain point total, every single one of their raters would have given Seminole exactly that total...right?

There is no chance that one, or perhaps even two, raters could give Seminole a lower score than what the final average score was, is there?

Just out of curiosity; if there were an individual rater, operating within all of his/her panel guidelines, that scored Seminole substantially lower than it's cummulative, posted final score, would that person be allowed to opine that the course is over-rated...to them?

[TEPaul]

"He had offered to oversee the "restoration" of Seminole to what he remembered of the Ross course but the board would not hear of it, Pete's reputation at the club being what it is.  So naturally he was not a big fan of whatever transpired afterwards ... in fact I think it was the thing which made Pete such a critic of restoration, since he was all for restoring Camargo and Shoreacres when I worked for him."

TomD:

I'm not sure I understand any of that. Would you mind expanding on it or clarifying it? If you don't want to---I do understand.

[TEPaul]

Sully:

Regarding your post above---I have no idea what the modus operandi of magazine rating or their individual raters is---nor do I care. To me both of them are total bullshit.

A really good writer/critic of any golf course would sit a lot better with me.

[JESII]

Tom P,

Just giving Pat Mucci a needle about his position and approach to this conversation...nothing worth re-hashing.


You never answered my question about your feelings for #'s 7 and 14 at Seminole. I ask based on your stated lack of enthusiasm for #9.

[John Kirk]

Pretty.  Assuming that shot is 175-200 yards long, that looks pretty difficult, too, for a regular guy.

I played golf yesterday with a nice guy yesterday who offered up Seminole as the most overrated course he had played.

[JESII]

Seminole is probably a bit underwhelming visually, but the golf is flat out great...IMO.

It is right on the ocean, but it does not even almost come into play, and you can really only see it from a couple of vantage points...could that be because your actually below sea level for much of the course?

[Bob_Huntley]

On the subject of Seminole and Cypress and over-rated, I would offer this observation.

I was up at the club today and met Brett Langley, the son of the legendry Jim Langley, pro emeritus of Cypress.

I asked if it was true that he hit the tenth green, a par five with a drive and nine iron. He replied no, it was with a sand wedge and the driver was a persimmon headed club and he used a wound ball. This was some twenty years ago. He did point out however that the wind assisted drive was of no help when he turned around and played he eleventh.

He also pointed out that with the greens at a decent speed there were some holes that if you were above the hole, i.e. the fourth for example, there was no way you could two putt them.

Over-rated, no way.

Bob

[Joel_Stewart]

I played golf yesterday with a nice guy yesterday who offered up Seminole as the most overrated course he had played.

I've heard it a few times as well and would offer that Seminole may be considered overrated by those who do not see the fine details in golf architecture or design strategy.

As for the magazine ratings, I believe both GolfWeek and Golf Digest will question panelists if their scores fall to far away from the standard deviation.  There are a few courses that will receive love it or hate it type scores and sadly Seminole is one which in my mind doesn't deserve such treatment.

[Michael Whitaker]

I think I see the problem.
There is no "problem," just a difference of opinion.

It's more than that.

It's the abilty to see versus being blind.

Your friend has myopic vision. He can only see the golf course in the context of his game, which is a common failing amongst many.

I don't know how you can say this when he clearly stated that he understood and appreciated the historical standing of Seminole. Yes, he was evaluating the course in the context of his game... he readily admits that. Are you now like Matt Ward in that you can evaluate a course in the context of someone else's game?

In addition, your friend appears to have no concept of the numerous criteria and methodology employed by the magazines that produce the ratings/rankings of golf courses. Be careful here... you have no idea what my friend does or does not know about magazine rankings criteria. As a matter of fact, for all you know, he may be a member of one of the national magazine panels!

Your friends sole criteria, as evidenced in your post, was that the course didn't provide a difficult test.

For whom ?  For one one millionth of one percent of the golfers on the planet ?   Or, for 99 + % of the thousands of people who play there every year ?  Your friends perspective and analysis is in the extremely limited context of his game.[/color]

Your friend, obviously a GREAT player, can't differentiate between "short" courses and "LONG" courses.
I think he can differentiate between long and short just fine... of course, your "long" would be more in line with his "short."

Playing courses at 7,200+ on a regular basis, as recently as last week, having been in the presence of the greatest golfers in the world during their rounds and playing with fellows who carry the ball 300+ qualifies me to understand what long and short are.

And, Medinah # 3 at 7, 561 yards, Pinehurst # 2 at 7,305+ yards and Congressional Blue at 7,250+ yards don't qualify as short in any prudent person's assessment of golf course length.  In fact, at 7,561 Medinah # 3 will be the longest golf course in Major History.

Your friends categorization of the golf course as an "old", "short" golf course speaks to his inability to differentiate between long and short golf courses.

I also don't know many people who categorize Medinah # 3 as an "old" golf course.  It's had more surgery, major and minor than the "cat lady".[/color]

Pat, I asked my friend to give me a list of his favorite old and modern courses so that you guys would have some frame of reference for his tastes and be able to put his comments about Seminole and Cypress in context. I didn't qualify them as "long" or "short," that was your idea.


...how on earth can he detect architectural features, let alone, determine their merit?

Maybe its because he is an intelligent student of the modern game that is not living entirely in the past.


Like all students, he has a lot to learn.  It also seems that he's in the midst of the learning process.  Astute architectural intellects can detect architectural features irrespective of their year of origin.  Obviously he's chosen to study the Nouveau school of architecture, skipping over all that came before it.[/color]

Pat, you are always chastising other people for not "reading" your posts... read mine. I think his list of favorite courses shows an appreciation for older designs. Also, his statement that some of the best courses he has ever played are the old masters in Australia shows he has an appreciation for classic design. You just come accross as wanting to belittle him because he doesn't appreciate one of your favorites to the extent you think he should.

As I mentioned earlier, you'd be giving him great advice by telling him not to give up his day job.

I take offense to these smartass "keep your day job" comments. This is a strictly first-class guy who's opinion differs from yours... leave it at that.

I have no doubt that he's a first class guy, and a world class golfer, but, just because one's pockets are lined with gold, doesn't mean that they sing well in the shower.

Architectural awareness points aren't awarded on personality or golfing prowess. You're looking to give him the very same brownie points that he objected to in his reference to CPC and Seminole, points awarded on pedigree rather than on merit.

Pat, I'm not trying to give him brownie points for anything, just trying to keep the conversation out of the personal attack mode. I don't think it is productive for guys like you to dismiss someone's opinion simply because you don't like what he has to say.

It's not that his opinion differs from mine, he's entitled to his opinion, no matter how outlandish it may be.

He's not familiar with the rating methodology, nor the criteria that make up the analysis. He couched his understanding of ratings solely in the context of providing a difficult test, which is flat out wrong. Since he's misinformed about the process, his conclusions are flawed and out of step with mainstream thinking on the subject of ranking/rating Cypress Point and Seminole.[/color]
As I said before, be careful here. You have no idea about my friend's background or "pedigree." Your belittling of him is based on assumptions that you are pucking out of the air based only on my sadly lacking reporting skills.

[Michael Whitaker]

I am disappointed by many of the comments and responses that have appeared in this thread. I really thought some of you would be interested in the opinions of a world class player who has ideas which differ from a good number of the regulars on this site. Instead of asking intelligent, thoughtful questions that would help us try to delve into his rationale, many of you simply wanted to hammer his credentials, lack of knowledge, "myopic vision," selfish focus, etc. I was too embarrassed to send him this thread when I saw the petty nature of several comments.

I asked his permission to share our conversation with you because I thought you would find it interesting and provacative... and, a great discussion point. I'm sorry if it upset or offended anyone.

You "Gods" often pine for the old days when this site was in its heyday. Do you think belittling individuals simply because their opinions differ from yours is productive for this site? I don't think my friend would be interested in participating in other conversations if every time he has an opinion that differs from this site's norm he is forced to defend his "pedigree." He doesn't need the hassle... and, neither do I.

To those of you who appreciated what I was trying to do here, thanks! I completely understood that my friend's ideas on Seminole or Cypress would raise a few eyebrows, that's what made them interesting to me... and, I hoped, to you. If I had been familar with these courses I could have discussed them with him and questioned his opinions without your help. But, how much fun would that be?

I'm truly sorry this little experiment didn't turn out better.

[Sean_A]

"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEPaul,
The issue isn't about Seminole's reputation or hype, it's about Seminole's rating/ranking.
The ratings/rankings follow a precise categorized format and the evaluative process addresses each of those specific categories, arriving at a numeric indicator, the results of which are based on the cummulative tally of the component analyses.
This isn't a subjective issue of someone randomly hyping Seminole, or Seminole's reputation, it's about Seminole's placement on the rating/ranking scale based on an evaluative process that's pretty detailed in its structure and precise in its calculation."

Patrick:

The foregoing just could be about the biggest verbal garbage that has ever been put on this site. It's even worse than the criteria and process rationalization of the magazines for rating courses.

Tom P

I agree with your comments completely.  If course rankings are anything, they are subjective and a catalyst for hyping courses.  All the number crunching in the world doesn't alter this.  

Mike W.  

I too was dismayed by the way this thread turned.  It was an excellent opportunity for me and I expect many others to learn something - more's the pity.

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

I agree wtih Mike and Sean

This could have been a great thread if those responding had seen it as an opportunity to discuiss the architecture of Seminole and Cypress rather than making ad hominem character assasinations of Mike's anonymous friend and others who didn't agree with them.

Rather we had 150 posts which mostly said:

"He's a pro so what does he know about archietcture!" and/or

"Why are Seminole and Cypress great?  Well, just because, and you are stupid if you don't agree with me!"

Not a high point in GCA.com history......

[wsmorrison]

I do not know Cypress Point or Seminole so had nothing at all to add to an architectural discussion.  I would like to second the thoughts of Mike, Sean and Richard that this discussion fell mighty short of its potential.  It could have been one of this site's highlight threads yet it accomplished so very little good.

I think we are all so far removed from the mindset of touring professionals that it was a welcome addition to hear how one of their rare segment of the golf population feels about two courses at the top of most lists by everyone on this site and courses that I only know in photographs.  I think it is unfair that opinions are shot down simply because these players are so good.  As in any population, there are bound to be different opinions and we should not disparage different opinions, certainly not out of hand because they are +5 or better.  That makes no sense at all.  We don't know who Michael's friend is, but if it were Geoff Ogilvey or like Geoff seems to have a similar understanding to most of us, he doesn't get slapped down.  It would seem that this site's bias for certain courses and architects is again showing as well.  We should respect other opinions, they are subjective and not taken personally.  

I don't admire some of the sacred cow architects and courses on here to the extent most do.  I don't mind being an outlier when it comes to Ross, Raynor, Bethpage Black, Pebble Beach, etc.  These are my opinions and that's it.  Why we take things personally when people disagree is rather startling.  The website doth protest too much, methinks.

From photographs alone, I think there should be a lot of interesting discussions about the two courses mentioned on this thread.  I cannot see why these two courses are bullet proof, especially Seminole.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if as many raters played Indian Creek as Seminole that the difference in ranking between the two would be almost nil.  In fact, I would expect many would consider Indian Creek to be superior.  Those I've spoken to that know both courses rather well, Indian Creek doesn't rely on the wind as much as Seminole (even though it was clearly designed with the wind in mind)  nor does its interest and difficulty drop so dramatically with the wind drop.  One of this site's biggest Seminole boosters may be going to IC pretty soon.  It will be interesting to see his comments.  I likewise have found a distant subjective examination of Cypress to reveal something less than perfection.  

I'm sure some of my issues would be cleared up by a site visit, but others I am pretty convinced would still hold true.  I've looked at thousands of golf course photographs before visiting the 50 or so Flynn courses that I have studied and have learned a thing or two about what I can learn from photographs and what I cannot, especially subjective issues.

I would hope that the tour pro has some pretty thick skin (he must by the nature of the sport he plays) so he will realize that the contents of this thread reveal our weaknesses as well and he will forgive us them and post more through you.  I'd like to hear more about his thoughts on other modern and classic courses to spark architectural discussions.  Having a broad perspective of opinion can only help, even if a majority may disagree.

[Sean_A]

I don't admire some of the sacred cow architects and courses on here to the extent most do.  I don't mind being an outlier when it comes to Ross...

Wayne

Hang on there a minute my Philly friend.  Dems fittin werdz!
Ciao

[Brent Hutto]

Attributes such as greatness are not inherent to a golf course. The worth or value of a golf course arises from its interaction with the golfers who play it.

If an unusual golfer comes to an unusual conclusion about a particular course that does not necessarily imply that his or her evaluation is flawed. It is equally plausible that the course exhibited a different mix of qualities when interacting with his or her game than it does when interacting with your game or mine.

Now admittedly the word "Overrated?" is somewhat loaded around here for various reasons. But given the normative level of esteem in which Seminole an Cypress Point are held, one could conclude they are "overrated" without exactly saying they are chopped liver.

I am personally comfortable with the idea that there might be golfer out there for whom Cypress Point is simply a very good course in an incomparable setting even though for my part I fully believe I'll never see a finer course and will be lucky to ever play one that is its equal.

[TEPaul]

Joel:

I bet Pete Dye really wasn't in a foul mood, but he can put on a great act that he is.  

Last time I actually saw him there were a bunch of guys standing around him and he said to one of them: "What course are you from?" and the guy said; "Seminole". Then Pete said: "That course has the worst greens in the world." The guy flinched a little but was pretty cool about it in my opinion.  

[TEPaul]

"You never answered my question about your feelings for #'s 7 and 14 at Seminole. I ask based on your stated lack of enthusiasm for #9."

Sully:

Sorry, I missed that.

Interesting you'd ask about those two. Why did you pick them by the way?

But anyway, when I answer that you should know I go back a long way there and the way I played those holes probably isn't anything like you do. First of all you probably drive it 60+ yards different.

I was never too impressed by #7 even if it's a pretty nice looking hole laying out below you from that tee. Believe it or not that cross bunker actually got into your head a little if you were into the wind and you missed it a bit. That thing is not even noticeable to you guys. The green is OK but isn't that much unless you really miss your approach shot.

#14 is an interesting one and perhaps something of a mini-theme of the flatland holes at Seminole that are pretty interesting in a Rossian way. By that I mean he didn't seem to attempt to do much with some areas of some holes on the flatland areas and pretty much just relied on a single feature or single area of a hole to carry it through. In my opinion, #14 is one of those in that there's nothing very interesting about the hole except the green which is wonderful. It's just another of Ross's theme of a real back to front slope meaning you really do have to strategically watch where you put your approach in relation to the pin (a good number of Seminole's greens carry that basic strategic theme and in a tournament like the Coleman you really have to pay attention to that or you're in trouble---ie a five foot downhill putt is way more dangerous that putting or chipping up from even just in the approach).

But again, with #14 and since I obviously used to play it very differently than you do, the thing I always thought was so interesting about that hole other than the green is I had to really pay attention where to lay up my second shot because of that open culvert on each side of the fairway. Isn't it interesting how something that simple can carry so much strategic importance to a golfer? I think that kind of thing is very cool on a course----sort of a perpindicular Oakmont drainage ditch effect. It's very simple but can really get in your head.

But again, you guys probably go at that green with a mid-iron so that feature I'm talking about is irrelevent to you.

[Eric Franzen]

I think we are all so far removed from the mindset of touring professionals that it was a welcome addition to hear how one of their rare segment of the golf population feels about two courses at the top of most lists by everyone on this site and courses that I only know in photographs.  I think it is unfair that opinions are shot down simply because these players are so good.  As in any population, there are bound to be different opinions and we should not disparage different opinions, certainly not out of hand because they are +5 or better.  That makes no sense at all.

Well spoken, Wayne.

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

Actually, in my opinion, most of the contributors to this thread have been open-minded and fair about Michael Whitaker's tour pro friend's opinion.

As usual the loose canon who went off on a tangent and will ever-lastingly refuse to be reeled back to reality and reasonableness is Patrick Q. Mucci. Some of the others merely followed his hysterical lead.

[Andy Troeger]

More generally, I agree that its great to have an alternative point of view, and I applaud posters on this thread who have tried to gain an understanding of why this guy thinks the way he does. Criticizing his view point from a second hand account doesn't do anybody any good in terms of understanding the rationale.

This type of thread to me makes it appear to be not worth criticizing the status quo courses here sometimes because some will label you as an idiot who does not know anything about architecture instead of using it as a learning opportunity to understanding others' viewpoints. There are many statements on this thread of posters immediately trying to explain how such a silly thought could have come into this fellow's head.

I've never set foot on either one of these courses, but its important to me if I ever do to understand not just why most think they are great, but why detractors may think they are flawed.

Wanted to bring my thoughts from yesterday back up since they match pretty well with the new prevailing sentiment. I think Rich and Wayne together especially hit the nail on the head that we tend to agree with Geoff O. when he says things that match the prevailing opinions on this site (and count me as one who respects his interest in GCA by all means), but then go back to our "touring pro mindset" when someone has a different viewpoint.

It is likely too late for this, but I would hope that maybe its not too late for someone with some knowledge of either/both of the two courses to ask an intelligent question or two to get this back on track?

[TEPaul]

"I don't admire some of the sacred cow architects and courses on here to the extent most do.  I don't mind being an outlier when it comes to Ross, Raynor, Bethpage Black, Pebble Beach, etc."

Wayne:

Well, now, you've finally done it, haven't you? You've finally gotten around to admitting that you think Ross is nothing more than a poor man's Flynn, and that Raynor was nothing more than an anal engineer who didn't like Nature's randomness and needed to make things look more precise---as anal engineers tend to do.

But even I'm not sure what your problem is with Bethpage Black and Pebble Beach.

Actually, Wayne, I have little doubt that if you were to see Seminole you might actually think this tour pro friend of Michael Whitaker had massive OVERrated it with his UNDERratng of it.