It was really a pleasure to see my home course play host to KP this year -- in particular it's nice to hear comments from a group of architecturally-astute players. Those of us who call Rustic home are certainly proud of the place -- it's truly a joy to play on a regular basis.
Thanks to Tom Huckaby (nice meeting you, by the way, Tom -- sorry you had to play and run) for the very heartfelt words that opened this post. I thought I'd spend a few minutes babbling in response, since I can always find something to say about Rustic Canyon. This might just go on for awhile, so pardon me in advance for the long-winded post.
First, I agree wholeheartedly with Tom. It's great that a player with as much varied experience on different golf courses was so strongly moved by Rustic Canyon. It's always affected me that way, but while I've played enough great courses to know what they're like, my experience is somewhat limited compared to many of you. I've always felt that Rustic can hold its head high up against any of the truly great courses I've played. For example, the best course I've seen in the LA area is Riviera, but I think when comparing the two it's much closer than many might expect.
For those of you who have only gotten to experience the course in the kind of conditions we saw last Sunday, let me say that the KP round might have been about the most difficult combination of wind and firmness I've seen at Rustic over the years -- the place really bared its teeth for the King's Putter. Which was probably on balance a good thing, since a tournament is the perfect place for a golf course to play hard, and to make the players stay focused if they want to put up a good number. But a representative sample of rounds throughout the year will reveal a golf course that allows for plenty of birdies, and for perhaps a bit more pure fun that what we saw on Sunday.
Tom's point about the spiritual nature of the course is something that I hold close to my heart, having played many a round on a beautiful afternoon where you get to the 16th tee late in the day and can just take in the view of the canyon in dramatic, early evening light. Have a look around in those conditions and it's pretty stunning to think that a 45 minute drive gets you into the heart of Los Angeles (depending on our fabulous traffic, of course!). The back nine is a lovely place for a stroll, and if I'm not mistaken, most of the surrounding land belongs to Ventura County, so we won't be seeing the place turn into a housing development course any time soon. Even those "unsightly houses" that bug Brad Klein at the bottom of the front nine are a positive for me, in that they remind the player (who may have only plunked down about $30 if the round is a mid-week one) that he's not at some exclusive club in a tony part of town, but rather just knocking it around on a municipal golf course just like the ones I grew up on. Nice.
Some specific responses to a few things people have said in this post:
I've never really understood the complaint about the par fives playing up canyon being similar -- for me they all play rather differently, although I do get the point about so many going in the same direction. I think the point (maybe it was Lou's?) about yardage being more meaningless at Rustic than at any other course I know is probably the reason I personally don't place much stock in that criticism. But if it bugs a player, it bugs him. I think Gil, Jim and Geoff made specific choices about the routing in which the positives far outweigh the negatives.
For example -- I love the way the course basically goes up and down the canyon with no real action that goes side to side. I love it because it harkens back to the old Scottish out and back routings, which lends a sense of history to the place -- a sense that this course continues a tradition that goes back to golf's beginnings. There's something romantic about that, and it also makes the walk very much of a journey, because you wander far away from the clubhouse in both directions. I also think that the out and back, with-the-canyon nature of the routing really maximizes the "canyon effect" -- because it affects approach distances very strongly since you're basically always going either up- or downhill. And the canyon effect is for me the thing at Rustic that becomes its most mystical feature -- after playing the place many, many times I still get totally befuddled by approach distances sometimes and especially putts. It gets into your head in a fantastic way to the point where you're sometimes trying to remember how much to take the canyon into consideration when you read a putt. I always try to stay on the 16th green with newcomers after everybody holes out, and hit a putt all the way across it from left to right. People see that green and think it's got a strong tilt from back to front, and then they watch open-mouthed as a putt goes the full width of the green on a virtually dead-straight line. Love that.
Another issue that’s come up here is the point about the tightly mown approaches tending to push the player into one type of shot – namely putting. Just as a quick note, I can think of quite a few places not far off of greens that have areas iof longer grass: long on 2, long on 9, all around 8, long and left on 10 all come to mind. But having said that, I think one of the great things about Rustic Canyon is that it’s a particular type of course, and that it does not try to be all things to all people. The approaches are a big, big part of how the course was designed, and they tend to create a certain style of play – a style that we don’t see all that often here in the US. I think the simple elegance of that kind of design is just fine as is – there is a purity of intention in the architecture that simply is what it is. I like that the course doesn’t try to be everything all at once.
I think that’s probably why holes 9 and 12 are two of my favorites on the course. The philosophy of design here tends generally toward less is more. In the case of 9 that means that the tee shot and to some extent the 2nd are rather low key, because everything on that hole revolves around what might be the most interesting green on the golf course. And I admire what Gil, Jim and Geoff were up to when they decided that creating a particularly testing tee shot wasn’t what the hole was about – rather the hole is about the simplicity of choosing a way to get to the green, and how to approach that green. The more times you play 9, the more respect you’ll have for the amazing green there.
12 is kind of similar. I absolutely love that there are literally no visual cues in the fairway to help you. The more you stare out at that tee shot, the more non-descript it becomes. That can create uncertainty – which is part of the “mental” game Tom Huckaby talks about. I have seen countless people (me, especially!) plan to hit a simple shot out to the right on 12 and then somehow manage an over the top pull into the left bunker, or just down the left side. Your mind kind of looks at that green hiding there behind the tree and steers your swing in that direction, because -- why would you want to go right? I mean the green is only 295 yards away downhill! And suddenly you have to hit that approach shot to a firm green tilted away from you with a big falloff beyond. Bogeys and worse are common from the left. But the fact that you could make a 2 with two great shots only increases the beauty of the hole for me. Not every hole should be tough. Try playing 12 with a back or middle pin with a Santa Ana wind like we saw last week, though, and it definitely won't feel like such a pushover.
Anyway – I’ve babbled on way too long. Thanks to everyone for making me feel so welcome at the KP. And if you’ve made it through this ridiculously long essay on the joys of Rustic Canyon, thanks much for your attention. Just felt like singing its praises to a crowd who’d understand what I was talking about, even if we don’t necessarily see eye to eye on everything.
Cheers,
R