Spanish Bay... yea or nay?

[A_Clay_Man]

Who wants to tell Marvin Davis what a pig he was for utilizing the land for the hotel and not the golf course?

Everyone  knows the story about how Pete Dye wanted to move the road (17 mile dr.) So he wasn't hired.

What's so wrong with the golf course? There are visats where other holes are visable. There is strategy, spindrift and refraction of light. WHat more should it have been?

[ed getka]

I played it years ago with my brother along with Spyglass and Pebble. I thought it was a fun course with some interesting features, although the green fee is absurd at this point (over $200). I would rather play the back nine at Pacific Grove 10 times.

From what I've seen and learned in the last year about architecture, I'm pretty sure some of the guys whose works we enjoy could have gotten more out of the site, but I enjoyed the course when I played it.

[John Bernhardt]

Adam, you know the drill. It was designed as a links course and barely done so at that. It is not nor ever has been maintained as such. There is nothing wrong with it except it is not that good of course in an area with great courses. And it does not give the golf experience it mission statement expresses it would. Great 19th hole though and good neighborhood. lol

[Paul Richards]

NAY, I say.

NAY, Nay!!

[Paul Richards]

The reason I say Nay is that (and I have written this numerous times on gca!) Spanish Bay attempts to market itself as a "Scottish Links."

That's how they sell, that's how they describe it.

That is NOT what it is!

It IS an Americanized, lush-green, overwatered course instead.

I have golfed with one of the guys "behind" it from the beginning.  He is upset at how it has turned out as well.

[A_Clay_Man]

Thanx Guys but I was interested in your specific opinion of what is wrong.

I know that when I lived there, we appreciated the fact that people bad mouthed the course. I loved it and It allowed us easier access as opposed to it's neighbors.

So Pat, here's your chance to give some specific reasons.

[Paul Richards]

Oh, I forgot to mention the in-course out-of-bounds - aka
"environmental areas".

A total joke.

[A_Clay_Man]

I don't see how the marketing of a course should enter into your evaluation of it, from a strategic design perspective.

And don't you think that having so much danger (aka ESA) causes one to think thier way around, more than it's bomb and blast brotheren?

And if the person who was behind it is disappointed, that is just f$%#@'in unbelievable.

[THuckaby2]

Adam - JB covered the drill re Spanish Bay pretty well I'd say.  The complaints have been stated ad nauseam and I doubt Pat Mucci or anyone else will say anything that hasn't been said many times before...

You either accept this course for what it is and try to enjoy it, or think about what might have been.  Neither school of thought is gonna come to a middle ground re this course - the poster child for what might have been, really.  It's undeniable that if a genie somehow moved the hotel and the road you'd have a better golf course, more contiguous, utilizing the shoreline better.   I believe we can all accept that....

But that ain't how it went down and really never was gonna happen that way, was it?

So as for how the course is now.. well... as I say JB covered it, by my take.

But re the ESA's, they are frustrating in that they are hazards that shouldn't be hazards - it just really sucks to see your ball five feet away and not be able to even go get it, let alone play it.  I suppose the avoidance of these does add strategy, but it flies so much in the face of "play it as it lies" and everything fundamental to golf that it really takes a lot away from the course - by my take anyway.

Hey, I'd never turn down a round at Spanish Bay - I've always enjoyed it.  But it is indeed "problematic", more or less so depending on one's point of view.

TH

[Kevin_Reilly]

I recall about 3 or 4 years ago a group of guys I knew (friends of a friend, all decent players) came in to town and played Spanish Bay, Spyglass, Olympic, Cal Club and SFGC in a 5 day span.  At the end to a man they ranked the courses #1 SB, #2 SFGC, #3 OC, #4 SH and a close #5 Cal Club.  So this just goes to show that the old saying about opinions is true.

[Bob_Huntley]

With apologies to Tommy the Emperor. A disappointing effort on what could have been a golfing paradise on earth.  A disused sand pit with a gazillion cubic yards of earth and sand brought in to what effect? To have you avoid environmentally sensitive areas that had native plants where none previously existed.

At least they have removed the rushes at the 8th where at one time you had a blind par three.

The best thing about the place is that with a gin and tonic in your hand, standing on the stoep, the sun low in the sky on a summer evening, the shadows at play on the sward and with bagpipes playing a lament, there is probably no more romantic place on earth. How's that Tommy?

[THuckaby2]

Interesting, Kevin.  Normally good players go for the "fair test" in their rankings and these guys sure went for the opposite of that... I can only guess that they liked being near the ocean (thus SB #1), but didn't like getting their asses kicked (thus SH #4).  They're into rankings, but like to be able to achieve a good score more than they care about that (SFGC #2, OClub #3).  Names matter (Cal Club #5).

Close?

This is all in good fun.  I have a good friend who will battle you to the end that Pasatiempo is better than Pebble Beach.  To each his own....  I have another that maintains both courses at Pelican Hill are better than ANYTHING in Northern CA and I do mean ANYTHING.

Opinions like bunkers at Pine Valley, indeed.

TH

[THuckaby2]

"Tommy the Emperor" is indeed Mr. Naccarato, sometimes known as "Tony" and featured in national magazines.  You did mean to address that to him, didn't you Bob?  He has in the past professed a fondness for Spanish Bay, telling a great story of being comped there at the behest of Mr. Langley from Cypress and then being followed by a dear for his entire blissful round....

But in case this was somehow misdirected at me (given the True Emperor's lack of presence on this thread and mine all over it), in any case, I agree with you.  It is indeed frustrating what might have been, perhaps most so for you personally as you lived through the construction and saw what was there before!  Still, I don't wholly mind what's there now, it's a fun course.  And you are right on re the romantic part anyway - Mrs. Huckaby and I have spent many fine sunsets at the fire pits outside of Roy's by the 2nd green....

TH

[Doug Wright]

Adam,

I gotta say "yea" 'cause I played it on the morning of my wedding day with my best man/best golfing buddy! When I played it (1991), it seemed pretty linksy, with the fescue fairways and such. Maybe it's changed since. I thought there were some decent long and short par 4s on the front side (don't recall the hole #s), and I liked the downhill par 5 on the back. As I recall, the 10th was particularly bad ESA-wise, and I don't think the 18th was much of a finisher.


All The Best,

[Kevin_Reilly]

Probably, Tom.  

Their opinion of Cal Club was probably guided by its relatively low "Q rating".  Or maybe because of all the trees back then.  They did get their butts handed to them by OC and Spy, so your suspicion is correct.  And they said that when they played SFGC there were only a couple of other players on the course...adds to the "aura".

[THuckaby2]

Doug:  the course is indeed wholly different from 1991.  Back then they were still trying the fescue... that is long since all gone, it's bent now and lush and green like the resort guests want.  There are likely MORE ESA's also - but you're memory is good, 10 is the worst hole for those.  As for 18, I don't mind it, it requires some thought... though I sure as hell wish they'd cut the left sliver up by the green as fairway - that would make for a good choice on 2nd shot.  

Kevin:  I guess I wasn't far off!  We seem to have similar friends....

TH

[Paul Richards]

A Clay Man:

The marketing, especially in this case, DOES come into play.

When I spend a couple g to bring my wife and friends to golf in Monterey, and we pay bookoo $$'s to play a course advertised as "a true Scottish links" and it turns out to be anything but that, you are bound to be disappointed!!

I'm not sure if you've played a real Scottish links course, but if you have, you can appreciate why a course that is lush and green and WET (all the time) isn't like that real Scottish links course!!

[Paul Richards]

A Clay Man:

You said:
>if the person who was behind it is disappointed, that is just f$%#@'in unbelievable

While that may be true, my "friend" was with the group that helped build it.  He left because even he was disgusted at how things turned out - from all the environmental areas, etc,
but, especially, because it was designed to be a links course but isn't kept up as one!

[Doug Wright]

Tom IV,

Certainly a bummer that they've bastardized the course--it was a pretty decent facsimile of a links in 1991. Guess next time I'm there I'll stick to Spyglass and Pacific Grove (unless somebody wants to invite me to CPC... ).

All The Best,

[THuckaby2]

Doug - let's just say Paul Richards' sentiments are not unjustified.  It's as much of a links as Medinah is.

I still do find it a fun golf course.

But there sure is a lot to ignore....

TH

[Paul Richards]

Tom:

We exactly agree.  The Links at Spanish Bay is as much a links course as Medinah #3 is.

Thanks for clarifying it.

[Doug Wright]

Tom IV/Paul,

Yikes! If that be so, I'll let it remain a fond memory.

All The Best,

[A_Clay_Man]

Boys Boys Boys- I still don't hear anything but periphreals. And as my memory serves me #10 has no ESA. The dune, that a good drive must carry, to the right, is all in play. and on the left, all that is playable too, horrible, but not ESA.

I actually think the tenth is one of the holes that has the most number of strategic options  and is a great hole. Looking at each and every hole there is not a dog in the bunch. The closest is the 11th but with the in-fairway bunkers and the table top green makes for option filled shot-making and fun.

I will admit that certain features have changed over the years most notably the turf, used to be awesome, every lie was sitting up. Not now   The other is the front left bunker on the one shot 16th. At one time it was one of the most natural-looking dune sand bunkers, I loved being in it. But sadly no more.

I will also admit that the 18th is open to your criticisms but once again you are faced with multiple options and challenge and truely one of the most spiritual walks on the peninsula when the light is just so.

[ed_getka]

Adam,
 I would like to help, but I played it once 8 years ago. I really like the short par 4 (third or fourth hole). Fairway bunkering makes you think twice about going for the green and then the 3-tier green makes you tighten up even with a wedge in your hands to try to hit the right level.

The par 3 that is near the start of the back nine is an excellent par 3, that looks harder than it really is, unless the wind is up, and then it is harder than it looks. Following that is the par 5 that tumbles down towards the ocean that is interesting to play with the wind up, although I seem to remember most of the bunkers being on the flanks of the fairway.

Thats all I remember that stands out. I really didn't like the "Tophat" hole, that just seems like a goofy green to me when the course isn't firm and fast.

[A_Clay_Man]

Ed- Your talking about the second hole. 265 yds from the whites and certainly an option riddled short 4. The tumbling down the hill par 5 14th has a fairway large bunker within the fairway and is the bunker that should occupy most of your swing thought on your second and gives a reference for distance control.

As for the table top I beleive you and Arnie are on the same page. The last I heard they wanted to scalp it down. Loser idea! That green is perfect for protecting par and is unique enough to classify as special. Not to mention a bitch.