CPC's 18th - What Might Have Been Part II

[Mike Hendren]

Not wishing to hijack Matt Ward's thread, I've often wondered if Mackenzie could have routed the 18th as a lengthier, slight dogleg left, with the green hard by the water just off the 16th tee.  

Nice to have the surf on the left side for a change and what a spectacular three hole loop this would have created just below and in full view of the clubhouse.  Perhaps a little congested with the 16th tee, but wasn't the original 9th tee just up from the back left corner of the 8th green?  

Perhaps Benhan or another Google-earther could draw this scenario, please.

Also, if this is the dumbest idea of all time, please feel free to say so.  It would not be unprecedented.

MIke

[Rich Goodale]

Mike

I think that is a very intriguing idea.  Even though my memories of the terrain are sparse and dated, I think the land to the left of the current green and fairway is more suited to golf than the present 18th, and a great hole, with at least a view over the bay could have been be made (or could still be made).

Is it possible that your routing idea was thought of but rejected because of Mackenzie's original (pre-Hollins) tee placement for 16, which might have interefered with a left-oriented 18th?

[Mike Hendren]

The green site would be in the proximate are of the semi-circlular path between the back tee and two small forward tees, perhaps accessible by a nice ground hook:

[Jim Bearden]

I have always found that those not liking 18 don't understand it danger on the left danger on the right. My Dad was playing with Hogan and was in the right trees and punched out as he and Hogan were partners in the match Hogan was mad as hell for not trying to reach the green. I think it is a great hole because of the difficulty.

[Tyler Kearns]

Michael,

I believe this idea was thrown onto GCA a few years ago (Brent Hutto?), and if I remember correctly, those familiar with CPC felt the property was quite steep between the clubhouse and #17 fairway, yielding a less than ideal hole. I'll check the archives to see if I can link to the thread.

TK

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Bogie I have often though of a green site in the hill or at the base of it. I do not think it would be a long hole though. I have often thought of a double fairway taking out some of the trees on the right and giving one the option of angles to the present 18th green as well. I have not found an 18th option where tree removal is not part of the modifications to the hole.

[Bill_McBride]

I have not found an 18th option where tree removal is not part of the modifications to the hole.

Amen, brother - fire up those chainsaws!

 

[Tom Huckaby]

I did not post the following:



I can't see where you'd put a green where Mike says without requiring such to be walked through as one gets from 16 tee to 16 green.  Also I too recall that the area in question is steeply sloped, going down toward the walking path for 16.

But others with better imagination, have at it....

TH

[Mike Hendren]

Are you telling me it was beneath The Good Doctor to cut-n-fill?  How about benching the 18th into that hill with some spectacular Mackenzie bunkering on the bank with a very narrow footpath (not unlike the one left of the 16th green that provdes access to the 17th fairway from the 17th tee) at the foot thereof.  Heck, he could have bunkered the high side only like he did at 14.

Random thought no. 2:  That beautifully mowed lawn directly behind the clubhouse would be a nifty green site as well.  Just bring it forward and down the bank a little bit with some of what swell bunkering front and back and it would shame the 9th.

Mike

[Tom Huckaby]

I'm sure the Good Doctor would have nothing against cut and fill if it meant creating the best golf hole.

I just don't see any of your suggestions as improvements on what's there now.  The current greensite on top of the hill is pretty dramatic.  

I guess for me though it comes down to lack of imagination combined with trusting that a man pretty universally acknowledged as one of the all-time greats in his field knows a bit more about the problem to be solved at a point in time in which he's solving it than we do 80 years after the fact, as rank amateurs in said field.

But hey, that's just me.  And I leave that penultimate paragraph/sentence as a monument to all who love to diagram sentences.

 

[Bob_Huntley]

I have not found an 18th option where tree removal is not part of the modifications to the hole.

Amen, brother - fire up those chainsaws!

 

Tiger,

That is the only sensible option. The tree straight ahead of the tee is an abomination and should "be utterly cryit doon"

Bob

[Mike Hendren]

Tom,

Of course I have zero business making any suggestions.  But this site could benefit from more of a "what would you do" mentality than the prevalent "here's what's he did wrong" approach.  I've offered this for the sake of discussion only.

Mike

[Tom Huckaby]

Mike:

I sit suitably chastised.

Only this:  I definitely read this as a "here's what he did wrong" exercise... given the hole in question, so reviled on this site.  But I have been here a bit too long, and failed to consider the source.

My apologies.

All things considered, and desparately not wanting to screw with 16, I still think the green's fine where it is though.  

Now as for the trees blocking the direct route to the fairway on 18, well... I could certainly live without them.  I don't think they make this an awful golf hole, though.

TH

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I have not measured the hole bogie is describing but I think it will be in the 330 to 350 range meaning an incredible green complex would be needed to make it a good finishing hole. I like the current hole sans a few trees.

[James Bennett]

Michael,

I believe this idea was thrown onto GCA a few years ago (Brent Hutto?), and if I remember correctly, those familiar with CPC felt the property was quite steep between the clubhouse and #17 fairway, yielding a less than ideal hole. I'll check the archives to see if I can link to the thread.

TK

see the thread 'Anticlimax', recently bumped.

[Evan_Smith]

What's that "bonus" green on the right hand side of the 18th Fairway?

[Matt_Ward]

Michael H:

You raise a good point -- my only comment is that the closing hole at CP is indeed a major letdown. People can dress up the excuse book anyway they like but the existing hole simply fails to add the final point to an otherwise glorious time spent there.

Having the wherewithal to have created something more unique was clearly missed -- less anyone start barking at me -- I am a fan of what Mackenzie has provided to golf but even Babe Ruth struck out a number of times in his career. The 18th at CP is a strike out because Demaret's comment on the hole is still on target.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Well,

If we aren't above making suggestions to a masterpiece, then what about playing from 16 tee down to 17 green/18 tee area, reversing 17 as the par 3 (to avoid those pesky back to back par 3 holes) and finish on 18 as 16 in reverse, but lengthened to a driveable par 4?

[Tom Huckaby]

Jeff - well, few here have ever had any reservations about making suggestions to a masterpiece, obviously.  Hell Rich Goodale steadfastly maintains the course would be better with the routing completely reversed, a suggestion made by our own Tom Paul initially.  So no, screwing with masterpieces is absolutely accepted here.

My point to my friend Mike was more about the 18th... and that is, if a green would have been better farther to the left, by the bay, don't you think MacKenzie would have put it there?

And the same thing goes for these other, wilder suggestions.  I trust MacKenzie got it right.

But it is fun to speculate.

So to that end... your suggestions are interesting... but I can't see them as an overall net gain.  16 tee to 17green/18tee covers some broken ground... hard to imagine a fairway going through that area .. then 17 as a par 3 going in the reverse of the current 17 fairway, well... that's a definite decrease in quality from the current 16 - you wouldn't go over the ocean, just alongside it.  The 18th going in reverse of current 16 is interesting, but to make it a driveable par 4 you'd have to move the green away from the water, and that rather takes away a lot of that thrill.

So, let's just say I like what MacKenzie did better.  But that is an interesting thought... and it pretty much describes the first three or so holes on the Paul/Goodale Cypress.

 

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think the reverse CPC would be great except for a weak 18th. Playing accross the pesky road.

[Tom Huckaby]

I think the reverse CPC would be great except for a weak 18th. Playing accross the pesky road.

 
There sure are no easy answers in this life, my friend.

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

What you fail to consider is that the driveable par 4 to finish would allow CPC to qualify as a TPC.  Wouldn't that enhance their world ranking?

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,

What you fail to consider is that the driveable par 4 to finish would allow CPC to qualify as a TPC.  Wouldn't that enhance their world ranking?

Good point!  I just forgot that enhancing the world ranking was the objective.  

[Mike Benham]

I've often wondered if Mackenzie could have routed the 18th as a lengthier, slight dogleg left, with the green hard by the water just off the 16th tee.  

Someone asked me to post this, artist unknown ...

[Tom Huckaby]

That's what Mike H. seems to be suggesting....

And my thoughts stand.  I don't see it working - too many issues with that hill side, the comings and goings from 16 tee, the small barranca that would need to be carried for the approach shot, you still have trees in the way off the tee, etc.

But the trump remains (for me) that if this was available and would have been a better golf hole, it's unfathomable to me that Mackenzie wouldn't have thought of it.

TH