My question is, why do clubs keep making these decisions to ruin their best holes for the sake of 0.1 % of the golfers who will play the course? I thought this would stop after the Hinkle Tree fiasco, but it was only the beginning. Something needs to be done before all of our great courses are destroyed, either from poor renovations or wasteful spending or both.
In this case it's to hold the US Open for 1 week in 2012.
There is no question that the greens needed to be rebuilt. The club was almost in 100% agreement on this issue mainly because of the nemitode issue.
Changing #7 and #8 did not have the same consensus and was driven by a bad superintendent and an even worse architect. The main reason that 7 was rebuilt is these two did not know how to rebuild this 3 teir green to USGA spec. So as a result these two non members opted to change it to a 2 tier green and move the green back a whopping 14 yards. Since this now moves the 7th green into the 8th fairway, they decided to swing the new tee for #8 over which meant they needed to change the 8th green.
So as a result you could lengthen #8 which was a short up hill par 3 so now 3 of the par 3's play uphill, blind and around the same length.
This course is a case study of bad decisions, multiple bad green committee chairmen, an architect who is inexperienced and in way over his head and a superintendent who has no respect for classic architecture and chooses modern renovation over restoration.
I can sort of understand why they might like to lengthen 7, but changing 8 seems like a stupid idea. IMHO that hole was one of the great short par 3s in golf along with 15th at Kingston Heath, 16th at CPC, 12th(?) on the Composite Course at RM. If you want to make this an 8iron to restore the 'shot' values, I'm fairly sure you could have taken the tee another 10-15 yds down the hill.
I can't see why you need to go to 7200 yds for the Open. OC will always play longer in the US Open due to air conditions in SF during the summer months. It's hard to cut the doglegs too, due to the height of the trees and the reverse cant of the fairways. e.g. A draw on 12 and 17 will simply kill the ball and perhaps prevent it running into the right hand rough. But it won't gain you any significant distance.
The other thing that sounds like it needs a little more thought is putting MORE slope on a USGA spec bent green. It's going to be faster and firmer than the current set-up, so less slope would be needed on 18, not more. Correct?
Since when is 16 at CPC one of the great short par 3s in golf? It is great hole no doubt, but it is not short. I assume you mean 15 at CPC?