[JohnV]

Since the Shore Course at Monterey Peninsula is probably pretty close to being blacklisted, I thought I'd try to start discussion about the Dunes Course.

I was fortunate enough to get to play it a couple of weeks ago (thanks Bob).  I found it to be a very enjoyable course and was caught in thinking about some of the similarities in routing with Cypress Point, especially in the light of Raynor's designing it and doing a routing of CPCC at the same time.  I also read The Match over Christmas.  In the Appendix Frost talks about Mackenzie routing CPCC and deciding to use the all the different areas present (forest, dune and beach) and how unusual that was in those days.  It seems to be that he had an example of that right down the street at the Dunes course.

I know that the Dunes has been redone by Rees Jones and I really don't know how much is still Raynor, but here are a couple of things I noticed.

Both the Dunes and CPCC start off by taking the player away from the ocean and into the forest.  The Dunes doesn't give the player a taste of what is to come like CPCC does on the first and second holes, starting with three straight par 4s that take you to the back of the property.

After the Biarittz style 4th hole, the course turns back for a straight run to the ocean, which really doesn't come into view until the 9th tee.  #9 is the first of the par 5s.  While Cypress gets all 4 par 5s in the first 10 holes, the Dunes gets them all in the last 10 including 3 in the last 6 holes.  From a competitive point of view, this is more interesting as the opportunties to stage big comebacks are there (not that I was able to do so in the Wolf game that day.  )

The holes down by the sea are good solid holes, but they definitely don't have the beauty of the holes that Strantz did at the Shore or of Cypress.  Only the par 3 14th comes in contact with  the ocean, but the rest are good holes with 11 and 12 being a couple of the best par 4s on the course and 15 being a long par 5 that would be hell to play into the wind.  I particularly liked the par 5 18th with a green set at the bottom of the hill below the clubhouse.  The shot to the green for someone going for it in two is very demanding, although I would think a ball can be bounced down the hill on the right to the green so that the front bunker wouldn't have to be challanged so directly.

I enjoyed the Dunes a lot.  I know that some people like it more than the Shore course.  It has been a couple of years since I played the Shore so I'll hold my judgment for now.

All things considered, I think that MPCC should be considered in any discussion of the best 36-hole complexes around.  Certainly not the best as Winged Foot probably takes that, but I'd think it could be in the top 10.

[Kyle Henderson]

I walked the Dunes course during last year's Cal Amateur. I thought the par 3s were stellar. Also, the weakest holes are all near the start of the routing, leaving the world class ones most freshly in your mind upon the completion of a round. An amazing place.

The only other 36 hole complex I can compare it to is The Olympic Club (not counting the Cliff course), and even that venerable club can't compete with the peerless surroundings enjoyed by those on 17-mile drive.

[Tom Huckaby]

JV:

I've been tooting this horn for a few years now; that is, since the re-do of the Shore it seems to be only that course that gets much love and fame, but the more I play both the more I've come to believe that I personally prefer the Dunes.  Some have agreed, most think I'm crazy.  I look forward to your report on the Shore so we can discuss the comparison further.

What I've always liked about the Dunes are these things:

1. The par threes as a set are just plain fantastic; there's not close to a weak hole among them.  The 14th (from the back tee) is one of the more exciting holes in our state... and the 10th is as good as one is gonna get for a shortish hole... the others are damn good too.  As for beauty, I'll take 14 over any hole on the Shore, thank you very much.

2.  I enjoy how the routing starts somewhat slow, then builds and builds and builds in excitement and difficulty through 14-15-16... then allows for a comeback on 17 and 18 perhaps.  I've always just really had fun with this.

3. Re the par fives, #9 is a just plain great golf hole, with seemingly countless ways to play it, none of which are easy.  It's a hole the good player assumes a 4 (or less) on, then shakes his head when he walks away with a 6.  Contrast that to 15, which is just a stone bitch from any tee - a rare true three shotter for damn near anyone, a very rare par five where the good player ought to be damn happy with a par.  Love it.

I could go on and on, but we have a real expert here in the house and his word shall be law.  But anyway, if we want to do a Dunes v. Shore comparison, I will be happy to take the side of the Dunes.  I just hope for Bob's sake I due it justice!

As for 36 hole complexes, I'll take MPCC over Olympic (unless the latter gets to count Cliffs, in which case Olympic gets the nod)... and really the only one that might be called clearly better than MPCC in the US might be Winged Foot.  Are there really any others that are superior (keeping this to two courses at the same club)?

TH

[Kyle Henderson]

Huckster:

The 14th is a beauty, but I still have to vote for the 11th on the Shore in the eye candy category. Also, while the 14th is absolutely right on the ocean and thus (arguably) slightly more exhilerating off the tee, the recovery shots will nearly always be a penalty drop followed by a simple pitch. On the 11th at the Shore, scrambling shots will be much more varied and compelling... IMHO.

As you alluded to, the resident expert might chime in to settle this. I know he favors the Dunes course overall.

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

11 Shore is a fine hole, for sure.  And yes the recovery shots are interesting - it's a GREAT green also.

But there are only so many shots over the ocean with legions of tourists watching you in this life.

So my vote still goes for 14 Shore.

I'll take 10 Dunes over any par 3 on Shore also, btw....

TH

[George Pazin]

Judging solely from photos and writeups - haven't been to Cali in a long long time - it looks like a case of subtle great versus obvious great, which then comes down mostly to personal preference.

There's probably a pithy quotation in Geoff's latest book that summarizes this phenomenon more poetically.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

George:

There's not much subtlety on either of the par threes we're discussing, or the courses as a whole, for that matter.

Each of 11 Shore and 14 Dunes are pretty mind-blowing in visuals and how they play - they're each as subtle as a mallet.

And as for the courses, well... this was as subtle as Strantz gets for sure, but still the strength of the Shore would not be subtlety.  If anything the Dunes has more of that...

Methinks you do need to get out and see these.  I believe we can find a way to get you on.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

FYI - here's 11 Shore, more or less... disregard those yahoos in the foreground.  As you can see, not much subtlety.  Tee perched in huge rocks, boulders strewn about, ocean in distance. 14 Dunes was pictured on the Mucci/Huckaby thread.

[George Pazin]

To clarify, I wasn't speaking of the specific holes, more the overall courses. It kind of looks like the difference between classic and modern greats (realizing, of course, that the Dunes has had a well done makeover).

Maybe it's just that the Strantz work looks so bold in photographs that the Dunes looks subtle merely by comparison.

Unfortunately I'm almost as homebound as you these days.

[Tom Huckaby]

Cool - I thought you meant it the other way around!  That is that the Shore was more subtle than the Dunes... if one did just see 14 Dunes, one might think that.

So I can see your point better now - Shore does allow for more striking photos, many of which have been shown in here.  One of the goals was to maximize views, and Strantz succeeded there big-time.

But the course as a whole in terms of how it plays does have remarkable subtlety.  In fact, I'd have to say in terms of how they play, there's little difference between the courses in this criterion.

One thing that does come through - and you captured it well from afar, my friend - is that the feel is more old-school on Dunes and new-school on Shore.  That's tough to explain but you nailed it - call it classic great v. modern great.

TH

[Kyle Henderson]

But the course as a whole in terms of how it plays does have remarkable subtlety.  In fact, I'd have to say in terms of how they play, there's little difference between the courses in this criterion.

I definitely (and respectfully ) disagree with you on this point. The Shore course fairways all sweep back and forth. No hole every runs straight away from the tee to the as they do on the Dunes (1,2,3,5 and 9 to some degree,11,12,13,15,17,18). Also, while Strantz toned his style down a bit, the Shore course greens are still much more heavily sloped/tiered. Finally,  the sand capping employed at the Shore allowed for flatter fairways, while the Dunes fairways are rumpled to assist with drainage.

Furthermore, I think these disparities are an essential part of what makes the club so great. Two quality courses with very different feels and somewhat different requirements of the player.

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

My point was that neither is particularly subtle.  And I shall stick with that.

I do agree that they have very different feels, though... as George says more or less, to me Dunes feels classic great and Shore feels modern great.  

I have no personal preference for classic or modern though.

I just do every so slightly prefer playing the Dunes course.  One thing that can't be overlooked is Shore tends to take so much longer... I have never been there when there wasn't at least a two group pileup on #7 tee.  I'm not sure why this occurs, but it does.

Things like that matter to me... as much or more than design issues.

TH

[Matt_Cohn]

There are many straight lines on the Dunes. There are no straight lines on the Shore other than maybe #17 fairway.

[Kyle Henderson]

I just do every so slightly prefer playing the Dunes course.  One thing that can't be overlooked is Shore tends to take so much longer... I have never been there when there wasn't at least a two group pileup on #7 tee.  I'm not sure why this occurs, but it does.

Things like that matter to me... as much or more than design issues.

TH

It's probably because so many stop in for libations at the nifty little "half-way" house by the 6th/10th greens.

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle - that is one hell of a halfway house, among the best I have ever seen... but it's not the reason for the pileups on 7 tee.... or at least I don't think so.  From my experience people do get in and out of there pretty quickly.  Also if lingering there were the issue, the groups wouldn't all be there at the tee.

I think it's just a VERY difficult golf hole.. and for whatever reason it takes people forever to play.

TH

[David Stamm]

 and really the only one that might be called clearly better than MPCC in the US might be Winged Foot.  Are there really any others that are superior (keeping this to two courses at the same club)?

TH

Hucks, I was discussing this with Jon Spaulding a couple of weeks ago so this is timely. I haven't played either at MPCC but have driven by it many times. We were talking about the best 36 hole clubs in the country and I stated that while WF is an obvious one, I think MPCC can make a hell of a case. Perhaps it's my love affair with the Monterey Peninsula, but I would have an awful hard time choosing between those 2. LACC is an excellent 36 hole club and Merion looks like a very good 1-2 punch. I believe MPCC can hold it's own as a whole with these places, IMHO.

[Tom Huckaby]

There are many straight lines on the Dunes. There are no straight lines on the Shore other than maybe #17 fairway.

Ahh, so it would seem... but those seemingly straight holes on Dunes don't PLAY straight... different tees, different angles, all change the play.  

Also some of the doglegs on Shore aren't exactly positives.  I cite #18.  

[Tom Huckaby]

 and really the only one that might be called clearly better than MPCC in the US might be Winged Foot.  Are there really any others that are superior (keeping this to two courses at the same club)?

TH

Hucks, I was discussing this with Jon Spaulding a couple of weeks ago so this is timely. I haven't played either at MPCC but have driven by it many times. We were talking about the best 36 hole clubs in the country and I stated that while WF is an obvious one, I think MPCC can make a hell of a case. Perhaps it's my love affair with the Monterey Peninsula, but I would have an awful hard time choosing between those 2. LACC is an excellent 36 hole club and Merion looks like a very good 1-2 punch. I believe MPCC can hold it's own as a whole with these places, IMHO.

David:  I have a very strong love for Monterey also, so I am with you on this if we make it a crusade.  VERY strong arguments for MPCC's superiority can certainly be made.  I'll take it over LACC without question... Merion I don't know enough about (which of course is very odd given it's massive overkill on here, but I tend to ignore those countless threads given I've never been there and likely never will).  

I have been to Winged Foot though and have played both courses (well, 1-8 on East, anyway).  Those courses struck me as both so damn great - and so very different - that I can live with New Yorkers or others calling it the best.  Of course it doesn't exactly have our coastal scenic beauty... so who knows.  

Are there other competitors?  Baltusrol?  

[Matt_Cohn]

I don't know of any others which can be played year-round unless you're a big fan of Whisper Rock or Desert Mountain.

[David Stamm]

 and really the only one that might be called clearly better than MPCC in the US might be Winged Foot.  Are there really any others that are superior (keeping this to two courses at the same club)?

TH

Hucks, I was discussing this with Jon Spaulding a couple of weeks ago so this is timely. I haven't played either at MPCC but have driven by it many times. We were talking about the best 36 hole clubs in the country and I stated that while WF is an obvious one, I think MPCC can make a hell of a case. Perhaps it's my love affair with the Monterey Peninsula, but I would have an awful hard time choosing between those 2. LACC is an excellent 36 hole club and Merion looks like a very good 1-2 punch. I believe MPCC can hold it's own as a whole with these places, IMHO.

David:  I have a very strong love for Monterey also, so I am with you on this if we make it a crusade.  VERY strong arguments for MPCC's superiority can certainly be made.  I'll take it over LACC without question... Merion I don't know enough about (which of course is very odd given it's massive overkill on here, but I tend to ignore those countless threads given I've never been there and likely never will).  

I have been to Winged Foot though and have played both courses (well, 1-8 on East, anyway).  Those courses struck me as both so damn great - and so very different - that I can live with New Yorkers or others calling it the best.  Of course it doesn't exactly have our coastal scenic beauty... so who knows.  

Are there other competitors?  Baltusrol?  

  I had forgetten about that one. Obviously a good one as well. Olympia Fields and The Country Club are 2 others I just thought of. Even so, I still think MPCC presently can make a great case. I'll have to defer to you about comparing them to WF since I have no playing experience at either place.

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt - great point!  Let's limit this to year-round play... is there really any other such thing?  

David - good call re those others also.  I'm with you though, MPCC can compete with any of them.

TH

[George Pazin]

Year round play is available at World Woods - but no ocean.

[JohnV]

Somehow I knew that Huckaby would get carried away on this thread.

I loved #10, but #14 didn't do much for me beyond the setting.  The hole was so flat from that little back tee and the green didn't seem to have that much to it that I was a little disappointed.  The day we played, the hole was on the front and I came up short so I can't say I saw that much of the green.

From just the golf shot point of view, it was probably my least favorite par 3 on the course.  It is a wonderful setting and a spectacular view though.

[Tom Huckaby]

George:  World Woods is pretty cool.  But it's no MPCC.

JV:  well hell, from just where did I get the term America's Guest?  The place is rather special to me.

And I beg - no demand - to differ re 14 Dunes.  That is one darn good green - you need to see all of it.  There are slopes both bold and subtle once you get past the first part.  In terms of the golf shot being flat, what do you want by the ocean?  Heck, it's maybe 2 feet flatter than CPC 16 - do you short-shrift that one also due to flatness?  And what, does the setting and and spectacular view not count?  Have you really gone that Muccian?  If so, why the hell did you move out here?  Might as well live in Pittsburgh (that oughtta get George).

All in good fun.  But I do love 14 Dunes.  To say it's one's least favorite par three on the course, well... that just seems exceedingly odd to me, unless you REALLY liked all the others - I'd begrudgingly get that.

You did play the back tee, didn't you?  From the front tees it's no great shakes.  From the back tees it is magic.

TH

[JohnV]

Tom,

Yes we did play the back tee.

I did like the other 3 par 3s quite a bit.  

I agree totally that the setting adds a huge amount, I was trying to separate that part though and just comment on it as a golf hole / shot.  Hopefully I'll get to play it again to a different hole location and gain more respect.

Sometimes the setting for a golf hole makes it a spectacular hole, but does that take a good golf hole and make it a great one?  I don't think so.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()