[Ian Andrew]

Is it a CONSISTENTLY great course? 

Ron,

Here's the problem with trying to assess the course from that viewpoint. Your argument attempts to remove the impact of the holes that are on the coast. You can’t pull out sections when you are talking about an overall impression.

A few thoughts for consideration…

1. All players come away from the 10th green tremendously disappointed to have finished the run up the coast. That feeling, particularly after the initial playing, is going to be projected onto those holes because they can’t possibly measure up to the coastal holes.

2. Does the interior run set up the final pair of holes? The course winds down beginning at the 11th (a great hole by the way) and the player is given the opportunity to bring their excitement level back down before the pace slowly rises until the crescendo at the 18th. Is there not an element of presentation to how this course builds and backs off and builds and climaxes? 

3. Are the holes in the interior any worse than other lesser holes on great courses, or are they in an impossible position of competing with an exceptional set of great holes and simply get overwhelmed because of the circumstance.
 

[Matt_Ward]

Ron:

Why does a course have to be consistent?

It's the sum total that counts -- not about having a model where each hole is equal to that of another. Few, very few course I might add -- are bulletproof for the entire 18. And those that do have such a "consistency" may not be really great but merely above average for the duration of one's play. PB is a great opera -- there are moments of riveting majesty and other times when less so.

Under your logic you would need to demote plenty of other courses because of the argument I presented earlier -- when did one play the course and what were the turf conditions like?

PB is one of the most remarkable courses because it can be so varied in how it presents itself. Watch the soon to be played winter version at PB and it's far from what it can be when drier and faster.

The same can be said for other places like Pinehurst #2 and my famed BB. Multiple plays on certain courses will reveal much more than simply a one time visit. TOC is another such course where my preceding statement can apply.

I don't doubt what people have said about the starting hole at PB. If ever a hole needed a makeover that's a good place to start.

Yet, the 2nd is a nicely done par-5 (wrong to be changed to a par-4 lately) to allow the player to possibly grab a birdie / eagle before getting deeper into the round.

What's wrong with the 3rd hole ?

From #4 through #10 you play alongside the water.

The 11th is a good transition hole away from the water.

The 12th is not my favorite hole there but rarely does it give up any cheap scores. Just a tough hole to hit and hold.

The 13th appears easy under soft conditions -- try the green on for size when firm and fast -- don't finish to the high and right side and think you can walk away with a quick simple two-putt.

The 14th is as solid a par-5 as can be. The whiners who complain about the green were likely out of position to start with when approaching the target and failed to execute a first rate approach shot with stopping power and precise distance.

The 15th and 16th are good mid-length par-4's -- again depending upon the firmness of the turf -- the green contours will either be easier or harder.

The 17th is never an e-z hole to judge -- the wind and the way the green sits at a tough angle makes for a tough call to be precise.

The 18th, no doubt gets plenty of visibility and many might say it's overrated - but it still provides a solid conclusion to one's play at PB.

Ian says it best -- the inland holes are simply "overwhelmed" by the circumstance of the ocean setting ones.

Andrew:

Then why blog at all.

The nature of conversations via the Internet is the probing and back and forth comments. I hope to learn from Kevin's comments and hopefully I can provide him a counterpoint to really dwell upon.

I find it hard to imagine anyone would have Pebble Beach outside of any world top 25. I also think it's fair to ask anyone what the turf conditions were like during a singular visit when I know from the numerous times I have played the course how firm and fast condtions, plus any breath of air, can change matters immensely. The green there, when presented correctly, are far from ordinary and quite e-z to dismiss when played under slow and plodding conditions.

Let me put it this way -- PB outside of a world top 25 -- would be akin to me coming to Australia and proclaiming Royal Melbourne is overrated and would be more towards the rear of a world top 50 than the more forward top 25 position many proclaim. Kevin says he would place PB in a second 25 of world courses -- and then went further to say it would be likely lower in that grouping than others might have. I think it's fair game to probe his rationale. Nothing more ... nothing less.

[Bart Bradley]

The biggest and perhaps only real problem with Pebble Beach is the cost....The cost keeps many of us from playing multiple times and thus limiting our ability to discover all of the subtleties that exist.  On my one visit, I LOVED the place and found the rhythym and pacing of the routing to be utterly fantastic...but I knew that I had only scratched the surface of the place....

Here is a question:  How many of you have played the course 10 or more times and feel it is overrated?

My hunch is that there are few, if any, that have seen the course repeatedly that don't treasure it.

Bart

[Scott Warren]

Bart,

Isn't the major failing of that method of measuring a course that almost anyone who isn't majorly enarmoured with a course after 2-3 plays is highly unlikely to put their hand in their pocket another 7-8 times just to test their feelings?

[Bart Bradley]

Bart,

Isn't the major failing of that method of measuring a course that almost anyone who isn't majorly enarmoured with a course after 2-3 plays is highly unlikely to put their hand in their pocket another 7-8 times just to test their feelings?

Scott:

I see your point that especially at today's prices that if you don't see greatness immediately then you wouldn't pay to play again..but that was my point above..the cost prohibits you from continuing to try it out. I will also say I have played many, many courses more than 10 times that I don't rank in the US TOP 10.

But, Scott, do you know ANYONE who has played Pebble often who says that the course is less than great?

Bart

[Matt_Ward]

Scott:

For the casual visitor to PB the element of costs can be a real consideration.

For the purposes of ratings it cannot be.

Multiple visits serve a purpose -- I certainly feel for those who can only have the opportunity to play PB only one time. I can only hope that that one time visit does provide the kind of turf conditions I previously outlined.

[Kevin Pallier]

Kevin:

I don't know how you can definitively place PB in a standing of USA courses given your own limitations in having played a limited range of courses here in the States.

Matt

With respect - my experience in the US may not be as broad as yours though with the help of my recent trip I think I have seen enough high calibre courses that I feel I can comment. FYI - I have seen 10 of Golf Digests current Top15 (approx. 30 in their Top100). I have also seen around 60 of Golf Magazines current World Top100 so enough I think to at least give an opinion.

Kevin, the second 25 of world courses you have played !!! Are you saying the course would be somewhere from the 40th or higher to the 50th position?

Are you kidding or what ?

No - I'd bracket PB with some of the courses just outside the Top25. Remember - GM currently has it at #7 ahead of at least six courses that I've previously listed which I would argue are better than it.

When I mentioned Nicklaus and Watson I also forgot to include the likes of Johnny Miller. I guess all of those superstars failed to see what you have seen. ..<snip> One other thing -- check out the pedigree of players who have won there. Rarely, do you find any name that is less than stellar.

I fail to see the nexus between the quality of Tour players and judging the merits of a golf course ?

[Scott Warren]

Bart: You're probably right, but I'd say you would also have a hard time finding someone who has watched The Shawshank Redemption 10 times who doesn't think it's brilliant, or someone who has been to see a band/play/musical/motivational speaker/impressionism exhibition 10 times and isn't right into whatever it is.

Of how many other artforms do we tell fans/critics that they need to take the work in 10 separate times before their opinion is valid, or at least as valid as another's? I just don't think that carries weight. Two or three times, sure, but 10?

It seems to me that line is largely the catchcry of the man who knows he has played a certain course more times than the guy he is debating.

[Adam Clayman]

The saddest part of the cost analysis is that PB is not off the charts expensive compared to US great private courses.. If one is to pencil out what they spend per round at the high end privates, they would see similarities.  So, spending 500 + per round, ten times a year, should impact the wallet closely to the same as belonging to most high end private. Yes, there are exceptions for those who can play their course more frequently. Lucky bastards.

I honestly can't believe I just wrote that, but I believe it is accurate.

Like Riviera, the recent changes have an impact on the courses quality. But, a golf course is a big thing and there's still plenty of parts that still make the whole a quality experience. Just not as great as before any ill conceived alterations. And it is amazing how the little things can matter. Just because the sleeping masses are oblivious to the impact, any courses architecture should be treated like a fiduciary responsibility. Same as one would with any piece of important work of art.

GW's ranking slide for Pebble Beach is commensurate with these recent changes. IMO.

For those interested in trying to design in the best quality turf experience, for their once in a lifetime chance to play there, June is the best month to try. August should be avoided at all costs. I qualify it with "try" because I have no idea if they still maintain it the way Mark Michaud did when he was in charge.

[Andrew Summerell]

Andrew:

Then why blog at all.

The nature of conversations via the Internet is the probing and back and forth comments. I hope to learn from Kevin's comments and hopefully I can provide him a counterpoint to really dwell upon.

I find it hard to imagine anyone would have Pebble Beach outside of any world top 25. I also think it's fair to ask anyone what the turf conditions were like during a singular visit when I know from the numerous times I have played the course how firm and fast condtions, plus any breath of air, can change matters immensely. The green there, when presented correctly, are far from ordinary and quite e-z to dismiss when played under slow and plodding conditions.

Let me put it this way -- PB outside of a world top 25 -- would be akin to me coming to Australia and proclaiming Royal Melbourne is overrated and would be more towards the rear of a world top 50 than the more forward top 25 position many proclaim. Kevin says he would place PB in a second 25 of world courses -- and then went further to say it would be likely lower in that grouping than others might have. I think it's fair game to probe his rationale. Nothing more ... nothing less.

No problem, Matt.

I have played the course in firm & fast conditions (only once though), as well as softer conditions & I agree with you that it plays better, as do most courses, in firm & fast conditions.

Of course, most ranking panels consider architecture, condition, aesthetics, etc. Architecturally the course doesn’t ask the golfer to approach from the edge of the fairway enough & doesn’t ask enough questions on the green to be in the top 20 in the world. Regarding the condition, the course is not up to the standards of the other top 20 courses & aesthetically the internals are poor in comparison & although the ocean views are great for the external aesthetics, the houses are blight on the course.

In saying that, I believe it to be a great course as are most of the worlds Top 50.

[Bart Bradley]

Bart: You're probably right, but I'd say you would also have a hard time finding someone who has watched The Shawshank Redemption 10 times who doesn't think it's brilliant, or someone who has been to see a band/play/musical/motivational speaker/impressionism exhibition 10 times and isn't right into whatever it is.

Of how many other artforms do we tell fans/critics that they need to take the work in 10 separate times before their opinion is valid, or at least as valid as another's? I just don't think that carries weight. Two or three times, sure, but 10?

It seems to me that line is largely the catchcry of the man who knows he has played a certain course more times than the guy he is debating.

Well certainly, I cannot be accused of that...I have only been to Pebble once and I chose the 10 rounds out of the air....how about changing what I wrote to 5 times...Who has played Pebble 5 times and thinks it is overrated?  or even 4 times?

I do suspect that the cost of Pebble causes all of us to try to absorb it with less rounds than we might, if visiting elsewhere.

For example, I went to Kingsley last Spring and we played 4 rounds... I think that gave me a very decent taste of the course and I appreciated the course more after the 4th round than the 1st by a wide margin...now the 4 rounds at Kingsley cost me $400 plus very reasonable lodging.  To get the same amount of on-the-ground experience at Pebble, I would have to spend >$2000 plus expensive accomodations...Accordingly, I only played one round at Pebble on my Monterey visit.

I agree that 10 was too many...let's change it to >3.  

EDIT:  While typing Andrew Summerell seemed to indicate he may be just such a person!

Scott, as far as I can tell, the big majority of Pebble detractors have played only one or two rounds ....I could be wrong, but I am waiting for the fellow with a decent number of rounds (>2 or 3) at Pebble, who thinks it is overrated, to step up and identify himself and educate us.

Thanks for the discussion,

Bart

[Matt_Ward]

Kevin:

You certainly can give an opinion -- anyone can and that's fine. Your USA total of 30 top 100 is quite nice.

The issue, which you don't answer or frankly admit, is that you played PB a grand total of one time. Kevin, if I played an Aussie course one time and had an opinion -- I'd be more elastic if you and/or others opined back that such a course can be more forthcoming with subsequent plays.

People who have played it more times and seen it in different circumstances -- like me and others -- are more fully aware of what PB is about and how it can play so that the architectural elements that I mentioned can come to the surface and shine rather brightly.

PB is like Pinehurst #2 -- if seen through slow and plodding turf conditions the very essence of the architecture is buried and most people -- you are not the first -- then dismiss the totality of the course while acknowledging the some elements of it are noteworthy. Get PB in a more consistent presentation and the nature of what is there is more easily seen and likely better appreciated.

In regards to your specific ratings of PB -- I'd have to see your entire listing of courses that you say would come ahead of PB.

Here's the nexus you missed Kevin -- Nicklaus, Watson and Miller have likely played more of the top courses under some of the most demanding of circumstances and for them to agree on one course being the most supreme of them all says a good deal in my mind. It may not register squat with you. To totally dismiss the eye that each of these gentlemen possesses is a bit presumptive on your part don't you think?

[Matt_Ward]

Andrew:

Thanks ... my point was that PB's greens have always been a concern when people play the place. Years back PB was in horrible shape and often times the greens required a good shoulder turn to get a putt to the hole. With the poe there you get instances of inconsistency and no less than Tiger has balked at returning to PB because of what I just mentioned. If memory serves, if Tiger does play the 2010 US Open this will be his first return to PB in quite some time.

During the month of June and with some return to warm sunshine the nature of the poe can be abated and with any firmness and even a hint of wind the very nature of the architecture and what Jack Neville originally envisioned then comes to the surface.

Just look at the final rounds played in '72 and '92 US Opens and you can see exactly what I mentioned.  One other thing -- if you watch Watson's approach to the 71st hole with his 2-iron approach and you can see how burnt the green was and how utterly demanding it is to stop a shot to a rear left hole location. I can't imagine a more daunting shot with a big time event on the line when the hole plays nearly 220 yards and there is any type of wind blowing.

Andrew, have to disagree with you -- PB DOES ask players plenty from the "edge of the fairway" and enough "questions on the green" to be rated quite highly. Let me point out that PB has been tested thoroughly against the top players and emerged very well. There are other so-called "world" class courses that have either never had or never sought a big time event so the architecture elements that many casual players rave about may not be as solid when tested against the likes of the big time players. See what Doak wrote about Shinnecock Hills in his last sentence about that famed LI course in "Confidential Guide."

Help me out when you say -- not up to the "standards" -- if one looks at any course the shot values are the dominant ingredient in weighing the subtance of any course and PB does very well in that regard. My God -- just try to venture through the ocean holes alone and avoid a major blow-up is no e-z feat. Even the inland holes -- minus the 1st -- have their qualities to them and I have already ventured an opinion that the 14th is one of the world's best par-5's from all of the holes I have ever played.

You also cite "internals" as being poor -- are you of the opinion that a course must then be "consistent" as suggested by one or two other posters? Can you put some meat on the bone when you say "internals," because minus the 1st hole, which I readily admit, is a dog I take the same stance that Ian mentioned that when held against the ocean holes the interior holes would seem to be "overwhelmed because of the circumstance."

Bottom line -- you say PB is top 50 -- where in the top 50 -- more towards the rear or just outside your world top 25?

When you speak about "the houses are blight on the course" then you would have to say the same about the following other USA courses where houses intrude -- do the names of Merion, Winged Foot / West, Riviera, to name just three, also get demoted because of the "blight" you referenced?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick Mucci,

Is it a CONSISTENTLY great course? 


Yes,

If so, how do the inland holes complement the ocean-side ones? 

Where did you get the notion that non-sequential holes need to compliment each other ?  

Especially in the context of inland and ocean side.

Do the 5th and 6th hole at Seminole need to complment the 17th and 18th ?

Does the 2nd and 3rd at Maidstone need to compliment the 8th and 9th ?

Does the 10th, 11th and 12th at NGLA need to compliment the 18th ?

Does the 16th, 17th and 18th at Bandon Dunes need to complment the 4th ?

Who created the notion that non-sequential inland holes have to compliment ocean holes, especially on an out and back routing ?

It's an abusrd notion and/or demand.

Each hole stands on it's own architectural merits in addition to its sequencing.


What is there that is subtle and architecturally great about the inland holes or about any of the undervalued (as indicated in this thread) elements of the course?

I haven't read this entire thread, but, have you played PB ?

Do you not find # 2 and # 3 to be very good holes ?

# 11 ?, # 14 ?, # 16 ?

Is # 13 not unlike # 3 at GCGC, other than the cant of the green ?

To many people, when discussing PBGC get caught up in the cost to play the course, rather than the architectural features, routing and holes.

If you played PBGC 40 times what would it cost you ?  $ 20,000 ?  What's it cost for initiation and dues at WFW, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc. etc.  ?  A lot more than 20K.

Too many focus on trifling details, like the mole on Cindy Crawford's face, completely ignoring the quality of all of the other features.

Me, ? I'll take PBGC and Cindy Crawford any time.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick Mucci,

Is it a CONSISTENTLY great course? 


Ron,

Would you list for us, your top 10 "consistently great golf courses ?

Thanks

[Andrew Summerell]

Bottom line -- you say PB is top 50 -- where in the top 50 -- more towards the rear or just outside your world top 25?

I see it around the high 20’s compared to the other courses I have played around that mark. It is only overrated because of where some of the ranking panels place it on their lists. I still consider it a great course.

When you speak about "the houses are blight on the course" then you would have to say the same about the following other USA courses where houses intrude -- do the names of Merion, Winged Foot / West, Riviera, to name just three, also get demoted because of the "blight" you referenced?

With regards to the housing, I don’t like single fairway corridors. On a few holes you have houses (or houses & road) both sides of the fairway. I just think it’s a shame. Merion & Riviera don’t have any single fairway corridors.

[Tom_Doak]

....how about changing what I wrote to 5 times...Who has played Pebble 5 times and thinks it is overrated?  or even 4 times?


Thanks for the discussion,

Bart

Bart:

I've played Pebble Beach ten times, I think, although only once in the past ten years.

But the answer to your question still hinges on the definition of the term, "overrated".

It is a great golf course.  I don't think it is an absolute lock for the top ten in America; I think it's been up there in part because it's open to the public, in part because of the history going back to the Crosby and the Opens.  But if somebody does put it in the top ten, I don't dismiss them as a lunatic, either.  It just means they value playing a few all-world holes more than they care about playing a handful of letdown holes.

I agree with the many posters who have opined that the cost of the golf course has not helped its public appeal.

I also agree with Paul Cowley's post from the other day, that the course has lost a bit of its luster in the last ten years.  And I think Bandon Dunes has a lot to do with that.  It has reduced Pebble's reputation as THE go-to golf resort.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

The courses at Bandon, and the Bandon Resort definitely eroded the allure of the courses in the Monterey Penisula. (PBGC, SHGC & SB)

If Bandon was easier to get to, if the airport at North Bend was more accessible from distant locations, I think the erosive process would have been much more accelerated.

IMHO, the price to value ratio at Bandon is far greater, and will get even better in the not too distant future.

I believe that another element has come into play that favors Bandon over MP...... The economy.
Many golfers will drop out of private clubs, but, will continue to thirst for great playing experiences, given the price to value one gets at Bandon, versus MP, Bandon would seem to be the destination of choice for those golfers inclined to play a number of great courses in one trip.

Connecting flights that arrive early in the morning and mid to late afternoon, that depart mid to late afternoon at North Bend, would seem to be ideal in terms of making Bandon more attractive and accessable. 

[Chip Gaskins]

Re-reading the Sprint of St Andrews today...Mackenzie called the #3 one of the best holes on the course???  Hmm, who knew?

[Cristian]

....how about changing what I wrote to 5 times...Who has played Pebble 5 times and thinks it is overrated?  or even 4 times?


Thanks for the discussion,

Bart

Bart:

I've played Pebble Beach ten times, I think, although only once in the past ten years.

But the answer to your question still hinges on the definition of the term, "overrated".

It is a great golf course.  I don't think it is an absolute lock for the top ten in America; I think it's been up there in part because it's open to the public, in part because of the history going back to the Crosby and the Opens.  But if somebody does put it in the top ten, I don't dismiss them as a lunatic, either.  It just means they value playing a few all-world holes more than they care about playing a handful of letdown holes.

I agree with the many posters who have opined that the cost of the golf course has not helped its public appeal.

I also agree with Paul Cowley's post from the other day, that the course has lost a bit of its luster in the last ten years.  And I think Bandon Dunes has a lot to do with that.  It has reduced Pebble's reputation as THE go-to golf resort.

Tom,
a lot of the debate has been about rating PB after just one or two rounds. You having played 10,  did you appreciate it progressively more after multiple plays and more so than other courses?

What's the use of a rating of PB which can only be appreciated after multiple plays if 99% of people go there only once or twice?

[Sean Leary]

Re-reading the Sprint of St Andrews today...Mackenzie called the #3 one of the best holes on the course???  Hmm, who knew?

I am not surprised. That hole has been compromised by technology....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

a lot of the debate has been about rating PB after just one or two rounds. You having played 10,  did you appreciate it progressively more after multiple plays and more so than other courses?

What's the use of a rating of PB which can only be appreciated after multiple plays if 99% of people go there only once or twice?

Cristian,

Isn't that true of almost every private course ?

[Mac Plumart]

Chip...

Hole #3 at Pebble was discussed on this thread not too long ago...posts #24-34...in case you have an interest.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,42540.0/

[Chip Gaskins]

Also, how much of Dr. Mac's work is still in the #8 green?

[Matt_Ward]

Cristian:

Golf pubs worth their salt should try to weigh their ratings formula based on how many rounds someone has played. Multiple rounds help give you a wider appreciation of any course. I don't think anyone will dispute what I just wrote.

The mags can then weigh such previous votes accordingly so that those that are more distant have less of an overall impact when compared to those that are more recent.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()