[Stan Dodd]

Tom,
That is what makes this so great is that personal tastes are so varied.  What I want from my golf is different from others.
when I wnat to hve a fun round of golf I choose Shore.
When I want to have fun and test my game Pebble.
When I want a fun spiritual game I play North Berwick
When I want to have fun, testing, spiritual experience, Dornoch.
You say potato, I potatoe.

[Jed Peters]

I will concur with others here that the shore is a more "fun" golf course than the others I've played on the peninsula (basically everything but CPC and Dunes).

I played it from the back tees and had a good caddie (Drew Knottencamper, he plays at SJ State and his dad's a member) who took the time to watch me hit shots on the range ahead of time, knew my distances, etc.

Let's see--the course was great, but there were a couple issues I had:

5 (?) Par 3? From the back tees I was not even aiming at the green--I was aiming for the front (extreme) right. I think it was 212 or so? I personally think that aiming at sand and hoping to get a good kick isn't a very good hole/design. NOTE: This green from the forward tees is probably a lot easier to hold.

9 (?) Par 3. Again, from the tips, the green with the large undulation in the middle was pretty unfair/difficult to hold.

18: Just not a very good golf hole IMHO. But that's okay, there's a bunch just before it!!!!

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,
That is what makes this so great is that personal tastes are so varied.  What I want from my golf is different from others.
when I wnat to hve a fun round of golf I choose Shore.
When I want to have fun and test my game Pebble.
When I want a fun spiritual game I play North Berwick
When I want to have fun, testing, spiritual experience, Dornoch.
You say potato, I potatoe.

Well, you and I spell the same way - that's my point - as I concur with all of that.  I just wanted to make sure we were in the same bee, that's all.

 

[Bob_Huntley]

I will concur with others here that the shore is a more "fun" golf course than the others I've played on the peninsula (basically everything but CPC and Dunes).

I played it from the back tees and had a good caddie (Drew Knottencamper, he plays at SJ State and his dad's a member) who took the time to watch me hit shots on the range ahead of time, knew my distances, etc.

Let's see--the course was great, but there were a couple issues I had:

5 (?) Par 3? From the back tees I was not even aiming at the green--I was aiming for the front (extreme) right. I think it was 212 or so? I personally think that aiming at sand and hoping to get a good kick isn't a very good hole/design. NOTE: This green from the forward tees is probably a lot easier to hold.

9 (?) Par 3. Again, from the tips, the green with the large undulation in the middle was pretty unfair/difficult to hold.

18: Just not a very good golf hole IMHO. But that's okay, there's a bunch just before it!!!!

Jed,

Par 3 Hole....Your 5th? was the 7th.

Bob

[Bob Jenkins]

Bob,

I too appreciate the opportunity to play the Shore course and found it a real treat. Thank you.

Overall, I enjoyed the course very much. The words that come to me are that it is "gentle', "flowing", and blends into its environment very well. I would not even try to compare it to Pebble as some have done on this thread. As a golf course, the Shore is a totally different experience. Pebble is in an overwhelming setting, spectacular beyond words in many ways and feels a lot "bigger" and more powerful. The Shore course is much more subtle. I think it is the 14th green (dogleg left with the plaque on the rock behind) that is so typical of the Shore which as I understand, was designed to look like a wave, and it does.

Although I love the 11th, as has been said here before, it is just too "busy".  The waste area on the left has too much going on and I would likely cut back on the number of boulders around the lower tees. I assume Mr. Stranz was using those to emulate the rocky shoreline and outcroppings in view out in the ocean towards Cypress. Just cut back on it a bit.

10 is a great short par 5 with a super green complex and the ability to run the ball up the incline. I should have played it that way!

18 has been referred to a lot. I neither liked or disliked it but it did seem so out of place with the rest of the course. It was not "gentle" or "flowing". More of a muscle hole.

Unfortunately I do not have my scorecard at hand as a reference and should be working now but could not resist jumping in. I do agree that this is a course I could play everyday. Very easy walking and just plain pleasant.

Thanks again, Bob



What would I change?

[Jed Peters]

Jed,

Par 3 Hole....Your 5th? was the 7th.

Bob

Thanks Bob.

With just one play, unfortunately, I have forgotten the names of many of the holes.

However, the lasting memory is the "fun factor" I had at the course....ironically, even though it TOTALLY didn't fit my game--I play right to left shots.

As for "changes", i'd like to see a softening of those two greensites to be able to accept shots into the greens. I don't think there's much they can do with 18....it is what it is.

[Tim Bert]

But try to imagine playing PB a lot cheaper and without waiting on a shot... then compare it golf course for golf course... if you can do this and honestly prefer MPCC Shore, then you are seeing things I sure don't.  I do love the Shore - it's a great, great golf course - but even the late Strantz himself wouldn't call it better than Pebble Beach, I think.  I know Bob Huntley must be chuckling at this comparison.

Tom - I'm not trying to make the statement that I think MPPC Shore is architecturally superior.  Even if I thought it was, I'm vastly unqualified to make a reasonable determination and I've only played the courses once each anyway.

I am, however, qualified to state that if both courses cost the same and the length of the round were not an issue, I'd choose to play Shore again tomorrow over Pebble Beach.  I'll take the big, wild, flowing, smooth greens over the small bumpy greens any day.  I'm not good enough to hit most of the greens at Pebble with a wedge in my hand.  It makes for some interesting recovery shots, but I think you get those at MPCC Shore as well.

I've seen you post enough on fun and enjoyment to know that you don't make your entire determination based on the architecture, so I hope you can appreciate this perspective.  It's a personal opinion and I'm not trying to force it on anyone else. 

I enjoyed Pasa more than Pebble as well.

Let's face it, the major golf publications aren't lining up at my door step to solicit my services as a rater, and I'm fine with that.

ps to Tim Bert - playing the worst muni course with Huntley and his cronies is not a fair fight against Pine freakin' Valley - those rounds are that much fun.  And as for Spaulding, well he must have been still hungover from his Monday round if he made that statement with a straight face.

No dispute here!

[Stan Dodd]

Tim,
Now you opened the can o worms that I have been mulling I too prefer Pasa to Pebble.

[Kalen Braley]

May as well throw some gas on the fire. 

I preferred Pasa to the Shore course, but just by a whisker.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim:

OK, I get it better now.  You have more fun at PB, and Pasa too I guess.

But you can honestly say with a straight face that either is the better golf course?

I sure as hell don't assess "architecture" - I've stated that many times on here and you have me correct there.

But I do think we can and should look beyond our own games....

See, to me it's one thing to say "I prefer a round at MPCC Shore to a round at PB."  Heck, my perfect golf course is a 9 hole par three course called Studio City Golf and Tennis, and I prefer playing there to anywhere on earth, because it's where I grew up and I tend to play it every year or so with my Dad.  

But of course I'd never say it's a better golf course than anything else.....

So can you look beyond your own game, your own preferences, and say which is the better golf course?

And I'm not talking basing this on architecture, as all of us not in the business are unqualified to assess that.  I'm talking which course provides the most thrill, best test, insert your own definition of greatness, for the most number of golfers.

That to me is a definition of greatness that moves beyond one's own game and preferences, which ought to be necessary.

And under that, no way is MPCC Shore really even close to Pebble Beach.

As for Pasa v. Pebble... same discussion, same result.  But there are some here who do defend Pasa as superior.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

May as well throw some gas on the fire. 

I preferred Pasa to the Shore course, but just by a whisker.

No gas there.  I bet if you polled 100 golfers who've played both, at least 80 would prefer Pasa.

TH

[Ash Towe]

Bob,
First of all I was very grateful to have the opportunity to play this wonderful course.
The lasting memory I have was the quality of the par 5's.  For me they were all genuine 3 shotters and your position for the approach was critical.
The other holes are only just behind.
Regarding the 18th I think part of the issue is you have come from some of the most scenic holes you would find anywhere, to one which does not have a visual wow factor.  It is still a good hole but it is different to most of the rest of the course.
It was a great experience.

[Pete Lavallee]

Bob,

I would have to agree with Bob Jenkins that the area around the 11th green is just a little too busy. I wonder why Mike Stranz chose to put the waste bunkers around the two greenside bunkers? it would seem that those two greenside bunkers provide ample protection of that green complex. Is it possible that that was the only solution there; maybe it would be impossible to grow grass in that area. That would certainly be one of the questions I would ask Forrest if given the opportunity.

The other question I would like to ask is about the large hump on the back left of the 18th green. I played my shot into 18 off this hump, thinking it would feed my ball towards the pin which was located on the right side of the green that day. Unfortunately my ball came straight back to me and rolled a few feet off the green. Since that area isn't pnnable what exactly is its purpose; to confuse first time players?

I did find it amazing that Mike was able to replace a rather linear layout with one that is so serpentine. Every hole seems to meander through the rocks and trees and to me this gives the layout a wondeful complexity that must surely change the nature of many holes when conditions such as wind are encountered. Even 1-3 seem to bend and turn when in fact they play through the straight line corridors of the original first 3 holes. Maybe this is what is lacking in the 18th; it really doesn't have the curvacious qualities of the other 17 holes. Can that be fixed, I don't really know? But I would be interested in hearing the rational for the bank on the back left of 18. I certainly think that the 18th would be improved by massaging that bank to kick balls to the right portion of the green.

Thanks again for the opportunity to experience that wonderful layout.

[David Stamm]

Shore vs Pebble, Shore vs Pasa, Pasa vs PB, in the end they are all great and they are all very different. I'm very much into the arch, but I'm also very much into the way the course made me feel. Bob Jenkins is correct, Pebble feels "big" and the scale makes one feel very humble and small. The Shore, like Pasa, has a more intimate feel in spots and it also feels big as well, like   the 12th for example. I prefer Pasa over the other 2, but it's so close that it's hardly measurable. I think there is more "architecture" going on at Shore or Pasa than Pebble, IMO. I simply loved the Shore for a variety of reasons. I expected it to be a great course, but it was even better than I thought it would be.

[Tom Huckaby]

David:

Gotcha. 

I keep harping on this because I just still have a hard time getting how anyone can prefer either MPCC Shore or Pasa to Pebble, as to me it's not particularly close.  But yes, it is a big world with room for one and all.

And I very much into how golf courses make me feel.

Pasa makes me feel inadequate.  I don't have the game to do well at that course.  I enjoy the battle though.... both phyiscal and mental.  So I do love it so.

MPCC Shore makes me happy - I have never had anything but great fun there.  Love the views, love the firm turf, love the shot choices one faces.

Pebble leaves me with nothing but awe and makes me glad to be alive and playing this game.  Thus it's #1 for me.

[Dave_Miller]

 As I told John Mayhugh and others on the trip, I enjoyed it more than my round at Pebble Beach.  I don't expect that to be the popular opinion, but I thought the round was that much fun.
   

Jon Spaulding said exactly the same thing today (during our round at Harding Park). I haven't played Pebble, but I did walk it during a tournament and I'm inclined to agree with the both of you.

Bob:
Having had the opportunity to play the old Shore and now the new Shore I agree with Tim and John.  I like it much better than Pebble.  The Shore course is fantastic and there is, in my opinion, little or nothing to be done.  I know you and some others don't particularly care for #18 but I guess I'm in the minority.  I like that hole also.  It may not be as strong as some of the others but the rest of the course carries it.
Best
Dave

[Tom Huckaby]

Wow... another one comes out preferring MPCC Shore to Pebble freakin' Beach.

OK, I guess I must be the crazy one.

Nahhhh... you guys are all just in Huntley Honeymoon phase.

We're gonna have to do a comped outing at Pebble Beach, first group off, so you all can see how crazy you really are.

How about you set that up, Dave?

 

[Bob Jenkins]

David:

Gotcha. 

I keep harping on this because I just still have a hard time getting how anyone can prefer either MPCC Shore or Pasa to Pebble, as to me it's not particularly close.  But yes, it is a big world with room for one and all.

And I very much into how golf courses make me feel.

Pasa makes me feel inadequate.  I don't have the game to do well at that course.  I enjoy the battle though.... both phyiscal and mental.  So I do love it so.

MPCC Shore makes me happy - I have never had anything but great fun there.  Love the views, love the firm turf, love the shot choices one faces.

Pebble leaves me with nothing but awe and makes me glad to be alive and playing this game.  Thus it's #1 for me.



Tom,

You have hit it on the head!

And, just think, all of us discussing this point have been so lucky to play Pebble, the Shore and Pasa! Love 'em all and for different reasons.

Bob J

PS - Good to have met you, even if it was briefly at the bar. See you again!

[David Stamm]

OK, I guess I must be the crazy one.

 

This is the case whether you prefer PB or not!

[Tom Huckaby]

Bob - the pleasure was all mine - and that was way too short... darn my life!

I guess in the end it is a silly question, as they are all indeed great and the preference for one or another shouldn't be too crazy.  I just do have these quite apart in the way I look at things, thus my quandaries here to those who see it differently.  My assumption is typically that I am missing something.... but I don't think so re these three.

TH

ps to David - that does go without saying. 

[Tim Bert]

Tom - I thought about it a little more, and I've got one more thing to add.  And probably just a little more to make you think I'm drinking the crazy juice.

One of the things that distinguishes Pasa and MPCC Shore for me is I can't quite compare them to anything else I've played.  I find them both unique.

For me, I've played a course several times that I think compares well and surpasses Pebble Beach.  That course is Pacific Dunes.

I know this one has been discussed ad nauseum as well, but let me put it like this.  I've played Pacific Dunes 8 or 9 times on three separate trips.  I think Pacific Dunes played a very large role in the underwhelming feeling I felt when I walked off of Pebble.  I think it is a better course.  I think 4, 11, and 13 are as spectacular as anything Pebble throws out there.  I think the inland holes are superior.

I'd prefer to play Pacific another 10 times before I play Pebble again.  Unless, of course, Dave secures the comped round first tee time.  

For Pasa and MPCC Shore, I have no point of reference or benchmark.  As I said, I found them to be completely different than anything I've played, which was really cool.

As to an earlier question you asked, I think MPCC would appeal more to a wider range of player than Pebble if most were able separate themselves from the history and famous factor.  I think it is more playable, and provides a lot more options around the green.

[Kalen Braley]

Switching gears back to the course..

This is the first course I've played that has extensive waste bunkering on pretty much every hole.  Its taken me awhile to digest what I thought of it and it seems it was helpful in both tying the course into the land as well as really give the course that meandering feeling.

Holes where I thought it was really neat was 7 with all the intermittent waste areas down the right hand side, 9 all along the right side, 15 which I felt like gave the suggestion to the golfer to play out to the right when the hole actually doglegs left, and last but not least 16.  This waste area fronting the 16th fairway was nothing short of spectacular in my book.

For those of you who have played course with extensive waste areas like the Shore, what were your impressions?

There are a couple of Gene Bates courses here in the SLC area that have these, but I must admit they look a bit contrived as opposed to what I saw at the Shore where it helped to blend things in.

[Jed Peters]

You guys are NUTS for not liking pebble more.

I've played all of them, and pebble is just "grander" than both of 'em combined.

Pebble is the older grandfather, imposing, intimidating, yet loveable.

Pasatiempo is like the stern father, harsh and demanding, yet rewards you lovingly if you do good.

Shore is like your playful older brother that can wheel off and sock you one if they're in a bad mood, but you can have more fun with them than either Grandpa or Dad.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom - I thought about it a little more, and I've got one more thing to add.  And probably just a little more to make you think I'm drinking the crazy juice.

One of the things that distinguishes Pasa and MPCC Shore for me is I can't quite compare them to anything else I've played.  I find them both unique.

For me, I've played a course several times that I think compares well and surpasses Pebble Beach.  That course is Pacific Dunes.

I know this one has been discussed ad nauseum as well, but let me put it like this.  I've played Pacific Dunes 8 or 9 times on three separate trips.  I think Pacific Dunes played a very large role in the underwhelming feeling I felt when I walked off of Pebble.  I think it is a better course.  I think 4, 11, and 13 are as spectacular as anything Pebble throws out there.  I think the inland holes are superior.

I'd prefer to play Pacific another 10 times before I play Pebble again.  Unless, of course, Dave secures the comped round first tee time.  

For Pasa and MPCC Shore, I have no point of reference or benchmark.  As I said, I found them to be completely different than anything I've played, which was really cool.

As to an earlier question you asked, I think MPCC would appeal more to a wider range of player than Pebble if most were able separate themselves from the history and famous factor.  I think it is more playable, and provides a lot more options around the green.

Wow.

OK, we can end this, because you and I are on such totally different pages here that we shall never come to consensus, or get the other to really understand his way of thinking.  I too have played Pacific Dunes several times and well... split 10 rounds between PD and PB and it's about 7-3 in favor of Pebble for me.  And this is not DISLIKE for PD - god I love that course as well - it's more the very high regard in which I hold PB.  I've also played quite a few courses to which I can compare MPCC Shore, and Pasa.  I've played precious few that are really anything like Pebble, and I include PD in that.  In fact the two courses are really apples and oranges to me, as they should be.... I doubt Doak set out to create PB #2.  Surpass it, yes.  Duplicate it, no. 

I guess we can cover one more question though... you state:

As to an earlier question you asked, I think MPCC would appeal more to a wider range of player than Pebble if most were able separate themselves from the history and famous factor.  I think it is more playable, and provides a lot more options around the green.

To which I have to ask:  why SHOULD people separate themselves from the history and famous factor?  One can't emulate Watson's chip in or Nicklaus' yellow-cardigan 1iron nor Kite's chip-in nor so many other things at MPCC Shore, no matter how much more playable it is nor more options it offers around the greens.

TH

ps - methinks Jed Peters just nailed this.  Glad to read some sanity in here.   

pss - don't make me mention a certain Isthmus.   

[Kalen Braley]

You guys are NUTS for not liking pebble more.

I've played all of them, and pebble is just "grander" than both of 'em combined.

Pebble is the older grandfather, imposing, intimidating, yet loveable.

Pasatiempo is like the stern father, harsh and demanding, yet rewards you lovingly if you do good.

Shore is like your playful older brother that can wheel off and sock you one if they're in a bad mood, but you can have more fun with them than either Grandpa or Dad.

Don't stop there Jed,

Which courses best represent:

The cruel older sister, the loving mother, the coddling grandmother, vindictave first ex-girlfiend, etc.     

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()