Bayonet Blurb From Monterey Herald

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle - yeah, it's now like any other golf course.

Sorry man, this is a point I've hammered on too many times in here... but the trimming of the trees was to me the beginnings of the death knoll for the course that have just come to full fruition now.  Back prior to 1990 or so, the course was extremely unique; totally unfair, the ultimate test of golf - and the main reason was the underbrush meaning any ball into the trees was either lost or unplayable.  Trimming the trees meant all that was left was just a hard golf course.  There are lots of those.  The world needs at least one stupidly unique torture chamber.

Thus I cry for the days of yore at Bayonet.  These pictures tell me my tears are legit.

TH

Different strokes... Frankly, I think players may run their scores up higher from attempting to break out of jail and failing than they would if they just took a 2-stroke penalty and proceeded.

The point wasn't that it was the hardest course in the state - although I believe it may well could have been.  The point isn't whether it's tougher now or then - I think tougher then, as penalty strokes are immediate and remember, they weren't simple two shotters - it was back to the tee, or standard unplayable drop meaning usually the far side of the trees - no, the point is that the course was UNIQUE in its torture.

The remains nothing unique about it today...

TH

[Mike Benham]

In all honesty, why bother to have rough on this hole?

[Pete Lavallee]

I played there Monday, ignoring the warnings of many who played there Saturday. I was glad that the original back nine was still in play; it had a familar military feel, nothing too fancy but quality golf shots were needed to score well. The holes did fit the land beautifully and it certainly accomadated left handed generals who slice. Frankly I can see no need to compund an already difficult course with trees that allow no recovery from beneath them. The trimmed trees also look much better IMHO; there must be agronmical benefits as well.

The new front nine reminded me of Torrey South; hard for the sake of difficulty alone, completely without charm, hastilly constructed via CAD drawing from some far away workshop. There is no visible tie in to the surrounds and as many have stated the bunkering needlessly compounds the difficulty of the existing narrow tree lined corridors. The greens themselves made absolutely no sense, the various tiers had no relation to the terrain. Has Gene Bates built anything of note? But it did have enough effort expended to justify $200 green fees I suppose.

[Tom Huckaby]

Frankly I can see no need to compund an already difficult course with trees that allow no recovery from beneath them. The trimmed trees also look much better IMHO; there must be agronmical benefits as well.

Pete - most of the time you'd be correct.

But can't you see the reasoning for leaving a totally unique golf course alone?

Imagine that back nine with underbrush as I say.  Would you have ever played a golf course like that in your life?

What you saw on Monday - both nines - can really just be called difficult and not much more (old back nine) and everything you stated (new front nine).  Are either of those unique?  Are either truly any good?

I doubt anyone ever called Bayonet a "great" golf course, or particularly fun.  But back in the day with the underbrush, at least it was unique.  So hell yes it compounded the difficulty on a course that in a pure fairness sense needed no such compounding.

But it made for the most unique test in our state, and thus I miss it.

It continues to amaze me how people don't get this point, which seems so simple and logical to me.  I hate stupidly hard courses.  But I love unique courses.  And if a stupidly hard course has to exist, why not have it be totally unique?

TH

[Pete Lavallee]

No, arguments here Tom; I would rather play the version you liked than what exists on the
front nine now. But that version is probably just a little too plain Jane for 400 room Fairmont
resort. RIP Fort Ord.

[JohnV]

Imagine that back nine with underbrush as I say.  Would you have ever played a golf course like that in your life?

Yes, Salishan's front 9 was like that and it was not a lot of fun to play if you weren't a straight hitter.  I think it was wider than Bayonet so it was a little more pleasant.

Sorry, a course where any drive that misses the fairway is unplayable is not something I'm interested and I doubt many others would be either.  The opportunity to recover makes a course a lot more interesting.

[Tom Huckaby]

Imagine that back nine with underbrush as I say.  Would you have ever played a golf course like that in your life?

Yes, Salishan's front 9 was like that and it was not a lot of fun to play if you weren't a straight hitter.  I think it was wider than Bayonet so it was a little more pleasant.

Sorry, a course where any drive that misses the fairway is unplayable is not something I'm interested and I doubt many others would be either.  The opportunity to recover makes a course a lot more interesting.

Sigh.

I guess it's just me who likes unique brutality.  But then again if this existed at Salishan, perhaps it wasn't all that unique!

It's like this though John:  obviously I wouldn't want to play all my golf on courses like this.  But if every other golf course I play allows for recovery, and there's this ONE that does not, and thus is the ultimate test... why would not this one unique course have some value?

TH

[Kyle Henderson]

Kyle - yeah, it's now like any other golf course.

Sorry man, this is a point I've hammered on too many times in here... but the trimming of the trees was to me the beginnings of the death knoll for the course that have just come to full fruition now.  Back prior to 1990 or so, the course was extremely unique; totally unfair, the ultimate test of golf - and the main reason was the underbrush meaning any ball into the trees was either lost or unplayable.  Trimming the trees meant all that was left was just a hard golf course.  There are lots of those.  The world needs at least one stupidly unique torture chamber.

Thus I cry for the days of yore at Bayonet.  These pictures tell me my tears are legit.

TH

Different strokes... Frankly, I think players may run their scores up higher from attempting to break out of jail and failing than they would if they just took a 2-stroke penalty and proceeded.

The point wasn't that it was the hardest course in the state - although I believe it may well could have been.  The point isn't whether it's tougher now or then - I think tougher then, as penalty strokes are immediate and remember, they weren't simple two shotters - it was back to the tee, or standard unplayable drop meaning usually the far side of the trees - no, the point is that the course was UNIQUE in its torture.

The remains nothing unique about it today...

TH

I'm not saying it's tougher when trimmed. What I'm saying is that it now tempts the player to attempt recovers and dig his own grave, rather than pre-digging the grave down both sides of the hole from tee to green.

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

I get that.

And again, you just described every other tree-lined course.

I just did like this one unique one that had the pre-dug graves.

TH

[Kyle Henderson]

Kyle:

I get that.

And again, you just described every other tree-lined course.

I just did like this one unique one that had the pre-dug graves.

TH

If you're just going to drop automatically, why not just surround the fairways with lakes. That way you get to see the tell tale splash!

[Tom Huckaby]

That too would be unique.  Having never seen a course with water on all sides, I'm not sure what to make of it though. 

But you see Kyle, you didn't drop automatically.  There were times you'd pray and get lucky and still have some semblance of a shot.  But also, as opposed to water which would be a one-shot penalty and drop to the side (lateral) or behind (regular), again, the penalty was never very clear at the old Bayonet.  Oh it was bad however it played out...but you could have to reload, you could get a decent drop and be able to advance the ball forward, you could have no drop at all or have to go behind the trees.  You know the rules for unplayable lie, right?

It all made for a hellish nightmare of a test... and not so crystal clear as you are making it.

Again, not to overuse a word, but it was unique.  In this very weird way, it was special.

But I guess we've gone around on this enough.  I can't sell you.  Join the club; I've yet to sell a single person on this.

TH

[Kyle Henderson]

That too would be unique.  Having never seen a course with water on all sides, I'm not sure what to make of it though. 

But you see Kyle, you didn't drop automatically.  There were times you'd pray and get lucky and still have some semblance of a shot.  But also, as opposed to water which would be a one-shot penalty and drop to the side (lateral) or behind (regular), again, the penalty was never very clear at the old Bayonet.  Oh it was bad however it played out...but you could have to reload, you could get a decent drop and be able to advance the ball forward, you could have no drop at all or have to go behind the trees.  You know the rules for unplayable lie, right?

It all made for a hellish nightmare of a test... and not so crystal clear as you are making it.

Again, not to overuse a word, but it was unique.  In this very weird way, it was special.

But I guess we've gone around on this enough.  I can't sell you.  Join the club; I've yet to sell a single person on this.

TH

I'm just enjoying the discussion. Golf occasionally brings out the masochist in all of us. Having never played Bayonet before last Saturday, I can only imagine that 6 hour rounds filled with an eye-bulging overload of cognitive dissonance held a special appeal for you, Huckster.

My condolences. This loss must weigh heavily upon you.

[Kalen Braley]

Imagine that back nine with underbrush as I say.  Would you have ever played a golf course like that in your life?

Yes, Salishan's front 9 was like that and it was not a lot of fun to play if you weren't a straight hitter.  I think it was wider than Bayonet so it was a little more pleasant.

Sorry, a course where any drive that misses the fairway is unplayable is not something I'm interested and I doubt many others would be either.  The opportunity to recover makes a course a lot more interesting.

Sigh.

I guess it's just me who likes unique brutality.  But then again if this existed at Salishan, perhaps it wasn't all that unique!


TH

I'm quite surprised at the responses to Huck concerning the old Bayonet. 

Didn't you all know Tom is the founding member and President of Masochists Anonymous?  Recoveries after poor shots?  We don't need no stinking recoveries.  Finding wayward shots?  We don't need no stinking balls off the fairway being found...  

A proper course is supposed to be mean, nasty, make you lose a dozen golf balls, and kick you in the nads for good measure...come on people!!

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

I'm enjoying it as well.

And yes, rounds did take a long time there.  I'm not sure they were filled with cognitive dissonance, but maybe so.  

But whereas I tend to hate overly difficult courses - ask Benham how I beg to play up tees for fun where he plays back tees for challenge; and how I love short and weird courses like Delaveaga and Spring Hills and prefer them big time to long championship tests - this place was just so unique and special, that yeah I did love it, and it's loss does weigh heavily on me.  I am not kidding about that.  When I first saw the tree-trimming (early 90s) I was bummed... when I saw how they butchered was used to be one of the five most crazily unique par 4s on this planet (#12, later in 90s), I believe tears did well up.  When I am seeing these pictures of how it is now, I am just resigned to the fact that the course now sucks.  It's tough and fair and it sucks.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Imagine that back nine with underbrush as I say.  Would you have ever played a golf course like that in your life?

Yes, Salishan's front 9 was like that and it was not a lot of fun to play if you weren't a straight hitter.  I think it was wider than Bayonet so it was a little more pleasant.

Sorry, a course where any drive that misses the fairway is unplayable is not something I'm interested and I doubt many others would be either.  The opportunity to recover makes a course a lot more interesting.

Sigh.

I guess it's just me who likes unique brutality.  But then again if this existed at Salishan, perhaps it wasn't all that unique!


TH

I'm quite surprised at the responses to Huck concerning the old Bayonet. 

Didn't you all know Tom is the founding member and President of Masochists Anonymous?  Recoveries after poor shots?  We don't need no stinking recoveries.  Finding wayward shots?  We don't need no stinking balls off the fairway being found...  

A proper course is supposed to be mean, nasty, make you lose a dozen golf balls, and kick you in the nads for good measure...come on people!!

Sigh.

I've gotten that many times before. In fact each time this discussion occurs - and believe it, it's occurred many times in here - someone makes a similar comment.

THIS ONE UNIQUE COURSE, I am all for it.

But I guess all golf should be a fair test... and no courses should be unique.

Long live the new Bayonet, an improved test.... and not unique in any way shape or form.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

Has Gene Bates built anything of note? But it did have enough effort expended to justify $200 green fees I suppose.

Gene Bates has done Circling Raven in Idaho and San Juan Oaks which are both solid tracks.  He's also done 3 or 4 courses here in the Salt Lake City area which are decent tracks but not in Circling Ravens or San Juan Oaks league.

[JohnV]

Tom,

Don't get me wrong, I liked Salishan and even owned a house on the course (it kept me supplied with golf balls for years.)  I've never played Bayonet and I certainly never saw it in the old days. 

But, I still don't really like having the opportunity to lose a ball or have to declare it unplayable on every shot.  It isn't that unique these days with all the courses that have wetlands or knee deep fescue on both sides of almost every hole.  I'll play courses like that if they are good enough and perhaps it was, but at the end of the day, if my group spent time on most holes looking for balls or having to take drops because of where they ended up, it ain't much fun to me.

I like my golf to be a little more playable.  For example, Poppy Hills punishes the wayward tee shot, but you find it and can hit it as the area in the trees is generally very clean.  You probably just have a chip out, but it is a lot better to me.

[Nick Church]

Kyle - yeah, it's now like any other golf course.

Sorry man, this is a point I've hammered on too many times in here... but the trimming of the trees was to me the beginnings of the death knoll for the course that have just come to full fruition now.  Back prior to 1990 or so, the course was extremely unique; totally unfair, the ultimate test of golf - and the main reason was the underbrush meaning any ball into the trees was either lost or unplayable.  Trimming the trees meant all that was left was just a hard golf course.  There are lots of those.  The world needs at least one stupidly unique torture chamber.

Thus I cry for the days of yore at Bayonet.  These pictures tell me my tears are legit.

TH

Sorry, #12 may have been a little more "lost or unplayable" than the rest.  Prior to 1990, my best friend and I dug trenches amongst the trees along the left side of the fairway.  Any tee ball short and to the left, took a roller coaster ride to our pockets.  Allowance for an 8th grader didn't cover tees & balls back then.

The renovation wasn't complete on Bayonet's front nine when I was there several years ago.

I take most of the criticism as fair since I can't judge for myself with a large test sample of rounds.

Since Fort Ord is where I first learned the game, it holds the most special memories for me.  It's hard to see it change, but I take a lot of faith that at least someone is putting in money and time to the course.  They've obviously taken some measures that aren't popular, but I'm just glad that it's not as dilapidated as the nearby neighborhoods.  I was shocked by the disrepair (7 foot tall "weeds" growing through cracks in the asphalt and boarded housing that appeared to have no work done to it since 1987).

I enjoy these threads the most.  Thanks all for keeping me up to date.

(Side note --- whodathunk the DOD could do a better job of managing a golf course than business enterprise?!?!?  Score one for the Army!)

[Tom Huckaby]

Nick:  my dates are hazy for sure.

But man, then you of all people know how COMPLETELY UNIQUE the old #12 was... it was a tee shot that had to be hit into a box - too long, too short, too right, too left all meant either in the trees or blocked by them.  It was stupidly unfair, yet eminently fair.  It was brutally hard and the one hole I always most looked forward to playing.

Now, with all the tree trimming?  (and I say this prior to the latest renovations, which I haven't seen - god knows how they've further butchered it, or will):

nothing unique at all.  Dogleg left uphill par 4.  Yawn.

TH

[Jed Peters]

Kyle:

I'm enjoying it as well.

And yes, rounds did take a long time there.  I'm not sure they were filled with cognitive dissonance, but maybe so.  

But whereas I tend to hate overly difficult courses - ask Benham how I beg to play up tees for fun where he plays back tees for challenge; and how I love short and weird courses like Delaveaga and Spring Hills and prefer them big time to long championship tests - this place was just so unique and special, that yeah I did love it, and it's loss does weigh heavily on me.  I am not kidding about that.  When I first saw the tree-trimming (early 90s) I was bummed... when I saw how they butchered was used to be one of the five most crazily unique par 4s on this planet (#12, later in 90s), I believe tears did well up.  When I am seeing these pictures of how it is now, I am just resigned to the fact that the course now sucks.  It's tough and fair and it sucks.

TH

Every time I played old bayonet, we used to laugh at how silly drunk GIs in shorts, flip flops, and tees would be playing that track a 12 pack deep.....

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle:

I'm enjoying it as well.

And yes, rounds did take a long time there.  I'm not sure they were filled with cognitive dissonance, but maybe so.  

But whereas I tend to hate overly difficult courses - ask Benham how I beg to play up tees for fun where he plays back tees for challenge; and how I love short and weird courses like Delaveaga and Spring Hills and prefer them big time to long championship tests - this place was just so unique and special, that yeah I did love it, and it's loss does weigh heavily on me.  I am not kidding about that.  When I first saw the tree-trimming (early 90s) I was bummed... when I saw how they butchered was used to be one of the five most crazily unique par 4s on this planet (#12, later in 90s), I believe tears did well up.  When I am seeing these pictures of how it is now, I am just resigned to the fact that the course now sucks.  It's tough and fair and it sucks.

TH

Every time I played old bayonet, we used to laugh at how silly drunk GIs in shorts, flip flops, and tees would be playing that track a 12 pack deep.....

Memories....

 

[Lou_Duran]

Thomas H,

I find your and Pete Lavallee's comparisons of pre and post Bates Bayonet hard to understand.  The new front is much better from playability and visual standpoints.  I found the 2004/5 version to be way too punitive, and you noted earlier that in the "old" days it was much more so.  Get rid of the silly high, thick grass around and in front of the tees; move the tees up on #9 and mow the back mounds to the height of the fringe so as to act as a backboard; trim back or elimiate some trees on the opposite side of some fairway intruding bunkers (#3 comes to mind); keep the fees under $100; and the course will be great for the area.  Also, once the greens soften a bit and all the internal OB stakes are removed, play will move along better.

BTW, I also think that Torey Pines South is undeservingly panned here.  If I had one of those magic San Diego cards, I'd be happy to play there most every chance I got.  Like Bayonet's front nine, it has all the variety and challenge I need, with the added plus of some outstanding scenery to enjoy.   Not a bad view from the restaurant patio and practice green at BlackHorse, don't you think?   

[Kalen Braley]

Thomas H,

I find your and Pete Lavallee's comparisons of pre and post Bates Bayonet hard to understand.  The new front is much better from playability and visual standpoints.  I found the 2004/5 version to be way too punitive, and you noted earlier that in the "old" days it was much more so.  Get rid of the silly high, thick grass around and in front of the tees; move the tees up on #9 and mow the back mounds to the height of the fringe so as to act as a backboard; trim back or elimiate some trees on the opposite side of some fairway intruding bunkers (#3 comes to mind); keep the fees under $100; and the course will be great for the area.  Also, once the greens soften a bit and all the internal OB stakes are removed, play will move along better.

BTW, I also think that Torey Pines South is undeservingly panned here.  If I had one of those magic San Diego cards, I'd be happy to play there most every chance I got.  Like Bayonet's front nine, it has all the variety and challenge I need, with the added plus of some outstanding scenery to enjoy.   Not a bad view from the restaurant patio and practice green at BlackHorse, don't you think?   

Lou,

You opened up a big can of worms.  You'll have better luck getting a reasonable explanation of the nature of the holy trinity over why Huck liked the very wickedly penal bayonent in its 1.0 form. 

In a nutshell all I can figure is, it was sooooooo  damn penal, it made it unique, hence it was good grisly fun for its uniqueness.  I guess it was a maschocists dream of a course!!

[Tom Huckaby]

I can do no better than what Kalen just posted.

The course was very very unique, Lou.  It is no longer unique in any way shape or form, and gets less and less so with each renovation.

Just do understand I an not thinking of this at all in terms of business plan or how it will be received by the majority of golfers.  Oh good lord yes, most will like it more and more and more as it keeps getting butchered, er I mean renovated.

But they don't have the golfing soul I do, nor the taste for the unique.

The owners of Bayonet are likely doing the right thing for their bottom line.

But why should I care?  I am a selfish bastard and I miss the ultimate test that used to keep luring me back.

TH

[Pete Lavallee]

BTW, I also think that Torey Pines South is undeservingly panned here.  If I had one of those magic San Diego cards, I'd be happy to play there most every chance I got.  Like Bayonet's front nine, it has all the variety and challenge I need, with the added plus of some outstanding scenery to enjoy.   

Lou,

To me they are amazingly similar, both of the original courses were laid out on the existing topography and an effort was made to tie any constructed features into it. My impression of both the improved South and Bayonet courses is that the greens were designed in a far away office complex. The do provide an exacting test for the modern game; but loose points in my view my trying a little too hard to accomplish that goal.