Cal Amateur at La Costa

[Jeff_Brauer]

As it happened, the Cal Am was happening the same time there were 100 guys conferencing from NFL Security, and another 200 from TD Ameritrade were having a sales meeting.  Not to mention all of the families on summer vacation.  Dissapointing to contestants, but I wonder how many courses in this economy willingly give up so much revenues for an AM event?  Breakfast and Lunch provided, but contestants even ate dinner off site for cost reasons, etc.  Just saying it is no picnic to host, from what I hear.

There is no doubt that LC could have made it a bit more special for the players, but as I mentioned, they have new owners, new GM, and just announced a new DOG but he's not on site yet.  They might have been overloaded.

About green speeds - I know So Cal is not famous for fast greens in general, and at least they were smooth.  9.5-10 sounds like normal resort play.  Maybe they didn't want to make it too hard for guests.  Or competitors....... If the greens were rolling 9.5-10 and the field had trouble scoring, is the implication that faster greens would have really skyrocketed scores?  Or, in other words, does the entire Cal Am field universally want the faster greens, just out of curiosity?  Is it common everywhere else?

 

[David_Tepper]

"the field had trouble scoring"

Jeff B. -

I don't think that was the case. Eleven guys were under par for 2 rounds and 8 more were even par. The cut to make matchplay was +3. That sounds like pretty low scoring to me.

DT

[David Bartman]

As it happened, the Cal Am was happening the same time there were 100 guys conferencing from NFL Security, and another 200 from TD Ameritrade were having a sales meeting.  Not to mention all of the families on summer vacation.  Dissapointing to contestants, but I wonder how many courses in this economy willingly give up so much revenues for an AM event?  Breakfast and Lunch provided, but contestants even ate dinner off site for cost reasons, etc.  Just saying it is no picnic to host, from what I hear.

There is no doubt that LC could have made it a bit more special for the players, but as I mentioned, they have new owners, new GM, and just announced a new DOG but he's not on site yet.  They might have been overloaded.

About green speeds - I know So Cal is not famous for fast greens in general, and at least they were smooth.  9.5-10 sounds like normal resort play.  Maybe they didn't want to make it too hard for guests.  Or competitors....... If the greens were rolling 9.5-10 and the field had trouble scoring, is the implication that faster greens would have really skyrocketed scores?  Or, in other words, does the entire Cal Am field universally want the faster greens, just out of curiosity?  Is it common everywhere else?

 

I for one would have scored better with faster greens, mostly because I play a vast majority of my rounds in tournaments, where the greens are usually at least 11.  I know that Wilshire for the Macbeth and Winged Foot for the Anderson were much faster than that.  It was difficult to adjust to greens that were at least 1 foot and most likely a foot and half or two feet slower than what most of us are used to in " Tournament Conditions ".

 For the record, I don't blame La Costa at all.  I blame the governing bodies that are in charge of the event.  La costa is a great resort and is for profit.  I have no idea if they plan to advertise that they hosted the Cal Am in order to try to elevate their golf clientele?

 If I am running the State Am there are certain things that would be required of the host club/resort.  Free practice rounds, Driving range limited to Players on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, Greens and course set up to the tournament committee specifications, ample available parking ( this was not an issue at La Costa with the free Valet, but was an issue at MPCC having to park 1000 yards away when there was a parking lot that was mostly empty that we were not allowed to park in)   Anything that isn't related to the actual tournament golf experience is secondary.  Meals are easy to provide either for a fee or for free.  Lodging is the same thing. 

The biggest problem that I see is that the CGA thinks it needs 2 courses when 1 is plenty, but that one is going to have to give up its course for a significant period of time (3-5 days). 

The bottom line is that allowing the Pebble Beach Company to force the CGA out of Pebble Beach without a major negative PR campaign across the country was crazy.  Pebble Beach was built to host the CGA , did so from 1920-1999 and 2001-2005, 85 years! and now it doesn't seem like it ever will again.   

[JMEvensky]

 If I am running the State Am there are certain things that would be required of the host club/resort.  Free practice rounds, Driving range limited to Players on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, Greens and course set up to the tournament committee specifications, ample available parking ( this was not an issue at La Costa with the free Valet, but was an issue at MPCC having to park 1000 yards away when there was a parking lot that was mostly empty that we were not allowed to park in)   Anything that isn't related to the actual tournament golf experience is secondary.  Meals are easy to provide either for a fee or for free.  Lodging is the same thing. 

   

I have zero knowledge of how the CGA runs their championships,but I do have intimate knowledge of how they're run in my state and have intimate knowledge of how club/state GA discussions work.

If California is different,I'll apologize in advance.

First,a state GA doesn't get to dictate any terms--they're just happy when a private club makes their golf course available.The "site fee"  they pay is a token. The club takes a financial hit in multiple ways.

You're assuming people give a damn about your state am--99% don't. The club members consider you a nuisance. Your entry fee is probably half of what they pay per round in dues. You tie up their golf course for a week and now you want to bitch about not getting free practice rounds?

You're a guest--what you need to concentrate on is thanking every guy out there who volunteers his time and golf course so you can have a tournament.

And condolences on your back and the slow greens causing scoring problems. I'm the same way--every time I play poorly the greens seem to suck and my back hurts like hell.

[David Bartman]

 If I am running the State Am there are certain things that would be required of the host club/resort.  Free practice rounds, Driving range limited to Players on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, Greens and course set up to the tournament committee specifications, ample available parking ( this was not an issue at La Costa with the free Valet, but was an issue at MPCC having to park 1000 yards away when there was a parking lot that was mostly empty that we were not allowed to park in)   Anything that isn't related to the actual tournament golf experience is secondary.  Meals are easy to provide either for a fee or for free.  Lodging is the same thing. 

   

I have zero knowledge of how the CGA runs their championships,but I do have intimate knowledge of how they're run in my state and have intimate knowledge of how club/state GA discussions work.

If California is different,I'll apologize in advance.

First,a state GA doesn't get to dictate any terms--they're just happy when a private club makes their golf course available.The "site fee"  they pay is a token. The club takes a financial hit in multiple ways.

You're assuming people give a damn about your state am--99% don't. The club members consider you a nuisance. Your entry fee is probably half of what they pay per round in dues. You tie up their golf course for a week and now you want to bitch about not getting free practice rounds?

You're a guest--what you need to concentrate on is thanking every guy out there who volunteers his time and golf course so you can have a tournament.

And condolences on your back and the slow greens causing scoring problems. I'm the same way--every time I play poorly the greens seem to suck and my back hurts like hell.

I think it is sad that any state am isn't a privilege for a course to host.  I realize times have changed and people are really selfish with their time and their courses. 

I also realize that State Associations don't get to dictate terms , but they should in order to provide the best tournament that they can.  After all, don't the host clubs pay to belong to that state association?  Where is the payback to the association for all it provides? 

Once again, I wasn't assuming that people care about the state am, I think its sad that the golfing community doesn't, it should.  And I am sure some still due, I play in Tournaments at Winged Foot, Oak Hill, Champions Golf Club and Carlton Woods  each year and believe me they care about amateur golf, that tournament and the club is supportive of giving up its course(s) for more than a couple days. 

I certainly, thank all the volunteers when I am at the tournament, in fact, they know me personally and usually come up to me and we shake hands and have a short interaction about each others lives. 

As to your last comment, the greens were great, just slow for a tournament and my poor scoring has nothing to do with my back hurting, it usually hurts, I just had a bad round and woke up and could barely get out of bed.  This happens about 4-5 times a year after playing a few rounds in a week. 

It seems you have me pegged as an entitled guy, but I am not, I am very appreciative but at the same time feel that if a course is going to host a major event, they ought to do it right.  I would rather have a lesser course, venue , do it right , like La Cumbre did, than playing a better venue that doesn't allow for a great tournament experience.  For some in the field, this is the pinnacle of their golfing careers and they should feel special.  I do think that in CA , we were extremely spoiled having Pebble Beach built to host the CA am for 85 years, and its a shame that experience is no longer the norm. 

[Pat Burke]

I was on the Buy.com players council my last full year I played.
As is my normal style, I pissed off a few players in that role.
At one meeting, there was a constant barrage of what we deserved as players.
Who gets in what tournament, how to categorize the players, purses, etc.

Many asking for things that make it better for themselves. 
I raised my hand and said that every player in the meeting, really had one thing in common.
As Buy.com players, we did NOT succeed the year before, or we wouldn't be there.  Nobody deserves
anything. 
If the value in giving up the course was there, there would be plenty of great courses lining up.
Instead, we hope for a great course to invite us, and as guests there, we should be grateful for that.

But, if free range balls, access only to players for practice and tournament days, and free food is to be included,
what is the cost to host that event?  Add in members not having access to the facility.  I'm pretty amazed at the courses that do host now to be honest.

Lakeside, Winged foot, LACC and many other clubs host events, and provide amazing things.  The difference is that those
clubs are running those events, and design and desire to host it in the manner they choose and for the cost they choose.

[Matt_Cohn]

Pat, I totally get where you're coming from. I mentioned in my first post too that we're really talking about fine shades of a high level of privilege here. But I do think we have a legitimate justification in saying that the Cal Am should be special. It's not the most important golf tournament in the world, but it's our state championship, and that means something. I think as players we just want a tournament that feels special — especially for us mid-ams who aren't jet-setting between the Western Am and the Northeastern Am and the Porter Cup and so on.

At Pebble Beach, I'd imagine, the tournament felt special just because of the location. Most clubs can't manage that, of course, so what makes it feel special is the extent to which the club/course and its people treat the event like it's special. CGA always does a great job. Basically....everybody wants to be treated like they're a big deal. Those of us at the Cal Am each year are certainly no exception.

Probably my favorite tournament each year is the Santa Clara County at San Jose Country Club. I like the course a lot, but what really makes it so great is really just that it matters to the people there. They prepare the course especially for us, they provide us with great meals, and the members come out to watch. The club and its people unmistakably care about the event, and that makes all the difference. That's tough to find, but it sure makes a difference when it happens; I think that's the elusive factor that everyone wants to find at the Cal Am.

[Matt_Cohn]

About green speeds - I know So Cal is not famous for fast greens in general, and at least they were smooth.  9.5-10 sounds like normal resort play.  Maybe they didn't want to make it too hard for guests.  Or competitors....... If the greens were rolling 9.5-10 and the field had trouble scoring, is the implication that faster greens would have really skyrocketed scores?  Or, in other words, does the entire Cal Am field universally want the faster greens, just out of curiosity?  Is it common everywhere else?

I've don't want to be the guy who complains about slow greens because I know what the green-speed-chase does to our game. Just as a matter of fact, they were slower than most of the greens I play in tournaments, but there really wasn't anything to complain about — I think it was more just a sense of the course not being prepared "especially for us" (see my previous post).

I don't think the field had trouble scoring, as +3 is a relatively low Cal Am cut, but my theory is that California players — North, South, wherever — are just really not familiar with grainy grains, and there is some grain in the greens at La Costa because they are still quite new. I don't think it had anything to do with speed, personally, although in reality 9.5-10 might be about right for those greens. I think that's why nobody had a very low round in stroke play.

[Pat Burke]

Re-read my posts, and I stand by them, but I do sound a little bit
"get off my lawn!"

I grew up in New Jersey, and was blessed to have courses that were amazing host
all of our tournaments. 
California is a different world.  Anybody who played in the Cal Am in the Pebble/CPC glory days
was certainly fortunate.  I loved it, but it also was a bit ridiculous, as a kid working on the maint crew
at my course, and barely making rent, had to stay in Salinas, and not play a practice round because CPC said no, and Pebble, while
discounted was still too expensive.  The good 'ol days weren't IMO.
it sounds as though La Cumbre did a great job, and maybe some haven't.  But it is still a huge inconvenience to many
to give their facility for an event of this magnitude. 

[Ryan McLaughlin]

I don't know the full extent of the conversation the course has with the CGA.  I will say that the advertising the course gets leading up to this event or the SCGA majors for that matter is quite extensive.  Big Canyon is hosting the Senior AM later this summer and I am sure the members there will take pride in that as well as good publicity, while giving up their course.  Are there clubs that want to be isolated and super exclusive..yep.  Even LACC is opening up to bigger events.  I can imagine a new resort owner putting out some cash to get publicity with the big golf associations.  The SCGA is constantly in your face, in a good way, in So Cal.