14th Green/ Poppy Hills

[Evan_Green]

Last weekend I had the chance to play Poppy Hills for the first time in many years. I was struck by how good the 14th green complex was with the wonderful bunkers fronting the green. I think it is one of the very best green complexes that RTJ Jr. has designed.

Overall I think the course has some great holes (like 13 and 14) and some bad holes (10,12)- but I really liked it- If I had to rate the best deal in the Bay Area,  I'd much rather pay $45 to play there than $35 to play Harding (a major dissapointment to me)- alas it's 2hrs further away from my house...

[Texas_Three_Putt]

My favorite is the 12th green because it is so deceptive. It's a shot that requires letting it roll onto the green (a complete contrast to the rest of PH). I like the 14th hole layout (how much do you want to chew off?) but not impressed with what's behind the green (not much chance of recovery).

I also like #10 overall. What is it you don't like about #10?

To me, the worst holes are 2, 4, 9, 15, and 18.

NOTE: It's been about 5 years since I played Poppy. Has there been any significant changes since then?

[THuckaby2]

I'm not sure of the time-line of the changes on our association's first home course, Tex.  Over the years the green contours have been softened a lot... and many other minor changes have occurred... I just don't remember what happened when.  It might have all been more than 10 years ago.

I'm thinking hard about 14 green, and I don't see the big whup there.  Raised green with deep bunkers in front, some good back to front contour but not much else... tough shot because it generally plays so firm... Yes, very good golf hole, tee shot is interesting... But while I'd call it a "good" green, I wouldn't single it out as any marvel or anything... I'm with Tex - the green I might single out is 12.... And yeah, I've always liked 10 also... looks like a lamb, plays like a lion... so many choices on the 2nd shot...

TH

[Texas_Three_Putt]

Tom,
I knew they had removed some of the goofyness when the pros started playing there. When I played there 5 years ago, I was impressed with the improvements. I actually enjoyed the course! Why they fabricated some of the things in the initial design was always a bone of contention with me (ie the bumps in the middle of the fairway on #12).

IMHO, the worse hole on the course is #4.

[THuckaby2]

Gotcha, Tex.  I too had no problem with the improvements... I did sorta like the "goofiness" that exasperated the pros, but I think I might have gotten tired of it over time.  In the end, I like what's there now a lot.

You no likey el numero quatro, eh?

I actually kinda dig the hole myself.  Zig-zag par 5's are so rare, that I just enjoy it in that respect, how neat it is... and the fact you really have to think about where to put the 2nd shot.  The hole does have it's many detractors though.. most don't like how little room there is to put fit that same 2nd shot into.... To me, a tough 2nd shot on a basically unreachable par 5 remains just so damn unique, I like the hole.

I butcher it nearly every time I play it, but I still like it!

TH

[Mike Benham]

I actually kinda dig the hole myself.  Zig-zag par 5's are so rare, that I just enjoy it in that respect, how neat it is... and the fact you really have to think about where to put the 2nd shot.  The hole does have it's many detractors though.. most don't like how little room there is to put fit that same 2nd shot into.... To me, a tough 2nd shot on a basically unreachable par 5 remains just so damn unique, I like the hole.

I butcher it nearly every time I play it, but I still like it!

Tom - I echo your thoughts ... the drive is strategic, the second shot is strategic and requires execution.  My complaint is that it is a huge green, that when the contours were more undulating, might have been appropriate, is not now.  Cut down the size of the green and put some more challenge in the green ...

Mike

[THuckaby2]

Good point, Mike.  That green is enormous and relatively flat... Make that smaller and/or give it more contour and then you really have something....

I'm curious what Tex doesn't like about that hole.  He's not alone, lot's of people hate it, usually because they can't so easily go for it in two, and the 2nd shot is so tough regardless of where you try to put it.  That's reason to hate it if you just hate tough golf holes, but I am giving Tex the benefit of the doubt.  

TH

[Texas_Three_Putt]

Tom,
The thing I don't like about #4 is, there's no risk/reward. You need to hit a decent drive (nothing fabulous). The second shot, (once you know the course) is not really that demanding, just good execution. I do like the approach into the green. The pen placements can make it quite an adventure. But overall, I just don't like the hole. To me, it's a par three that requires you to hit two shots to get to the tee box.

I sat on #4 and watched the pros one day. Every one of them hit their drive to the same spot (you could draw a 10 yard wide circle and every ball was in that circle). They then all hit the same second shot to the same spot. Even Daly played the hole the same way as Pavin did.

[THuckaby2]

Tex:

Very interesting, I hadn't thought of it that way at all... But that is a very valid criticism.

I just have played it SO many different ways myself, if the pros have figured out the one best high-percentage way to play it, than more power to them... For a relatively average-length player like myself, it has stategy galore, which I like.  It depends on which tee I play, but normally I play white - most appropriate for me, that course is a bitch from the blue.

From white, it goes like this:

drive:  do I want to try and tempt the left and go over or around the left fairway bunker, thereby shortening the hole and giving me a chance to get over the 2nd bunker and have a short pitch in?  Or do I stay right, much safer, but making the hole so much longer that I can't possibly clear the 2nd bunker, so the 3rd will be way longer?

2nd - depends on what drive did... if I have gotten past the fairway bunker, then I have options galore... to me it is worth it to try and get past that 2nd bunker, because I can get it close and I'm pretty damn good at short pitches... but that's a tough shot, the slightest pull means trees and jail, the slighest mis-hit means bunker... so ok, if I don't feel like trying that, or if I have gone right, then there are several places I can try and put the 2nd, in various degrees from the right of the bunker, meaning farther and farther from the hole... which is disconcerting, as I'm not used to having 150+ for my 3rd shot to any par five....

3rd - can come in MANY different forms, depending on how shots 1 and 2 went.

So you see all these choices and possible outcomes?  That's for me, a relatively average-lenght, fairly decent player.  If it's that way for me, it has to be that way for the majority of golfers...

Maybe the issue for the pros is they play too far back (never ever thought I'd say that!).  Put them at a tee where going for it in two becomes a very viable option - and they wouldn't have to go too far up to make this so - and then you have a great golf hole even for them....

TH

[Mike Benham]

The thing I don't like about #4 is, there's no risk/reward.

That is a fair statement but what's wrong with making execution of the shot the reward.  If you fail to execute the second shot properly, then having a decent third shot and chance at birdie are shot ...

All the other par-5s at Poppy offer risk/reward so I think it is OK that one of them doesn't.

Mike

[Texas_Three_Putt]

Mike,
I don't disagree with you at all about the execution being the reward. But IMHO, that's all the hole is from the back tees. I've walked away numerous times with an 8 on that hole because I failed to execute (maybe that's why I don't care for the hole, too damn penal if you don't execute). Don't mistake what I'm saying, I don't hate the hole, I just think it's the worst hole on the course. On another course, it might be the best hole.

I like Tom's idea of moving the box up for the pros and let's see what kind of risk they might take. I've played that hole from the whites and tried to go for it in two. It was actually kind of fun trying (of course, I failed, just clipped the trees on the left). I think moving the tees up would add some interest (imagine that! we're talking about shortening a hole for the pros  )

Now, if you want to play a course that requires execution on every shot, play Tom Kite's Riverplace in Austin. It's actually kind of fun first few times, after that it's boring because there is no variety, just pure execution.

[THuckaby2]

Good stuff, Tex.  I don't think Mike or I want execution to be the only thing going on every hole... but in this case, it is an ok thing because the other par 5s are very risk/reward, as Mike says.

And yeah, I find it as strange as you do to talk about moving a tee UP for the pros, but it does make good sense for that hole, doesn't it?

TH

[Mike Benham]

I think that the 9th is the worst hole on the course as is evident by the fact that they (management) have altered it countless times, so they aren't even sure what they want from the hole ... eliminate the alternate tee boxes, eliminate the cross bunkers, change the valley from rough to fairway ... maybe they should add a lake and a waterfalls ..

[THuckaby2]

Concur.  9 sucks now, has sucked, shall have sucked if we talk about this again in a few years.  If I have to pick a worst hole that's it also.

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

I like the 13th green. It's bigger than 14's(I think) and has a high butt puckering quotient, no matter where the pin is. (middle far right is especially sadistic). I also like these two holes back to back. In competition, they are demanding and can really set the tone for the final leg. Both are fun when just goofing around.

I have heard the course described as one that penalizes agressive play from a very accomplished amateur, Bud Bradley, out of WCC. He once won the British senior AM and has a swing that closely resembles butter.

[Texas_Three_Putt]

What does the 9th look like now? Used to be kind of fun from the right going for it in two. Hit too far off the tee and you had no shot at going for two and forced to lay it on the plateau to the left. Far enough back you could attempt a big cut into the green. From the left side, just not a lot to the hole. I didn't dislike #9 but I sure wouldn't rank it as one of the top holes on the course. I think the biggest design mistake on the course are 15 and 17 (too similiar).

I have heard the course described as one that penalizes agressive play from a very accomplished amateur

IMHO, only penal if you don't pull of the shot. I think there's a lot of chances for the aggressive player.

[Mike Benham]

What does the 9th look like now?

http://www.poppyhillsgolf.com/pebblebeach/images/hole09view.jpg

The fairway is now open as shown in the drawing so that you could drive it straight and it would roll down to the lower tier which, for the pros, is low-risk drive and iron to the green.

Before the risk/reward was to carry the bunkers and get to the lower level ...

I recommend moving the green down and to the left of where it is now and make it a par-4 ... a slightly elevated green complex with no bunkers and shaved down rough ...

[Texas_Three_Putt]

Thanks Mike! They did really revamp the hole.

I like your idea of turning it into a par 4. Put the green down in the valley with a steep hill behind with the green sloping back to front. Would make any shot over the green a treacherous recovery. Plus the down hill approach shot would be fun knowing that if you took too long of club, being over is deadly. I like it!

[A_Clay_Man]

TTP- They did away with the alternate tee too. The center bunker(right) use to be a series of 2-3 bunkers almost church pew like. I know the changes have not effected the way I play the hole, in the least. It just seems a little easier to get to "the go" spot. Probably equiptment.

Also, The ninth has an example of a maintenance meld (maybe not ideal) but an example nontheless. The long left fairway abuts a steep hill on the right. The grass that stretches between the green and fairway is of a narley variety length that makes it quite penal. If one's lay-up to this leftside fairway is not negotiate perfectly the downhill lie in this grass is sure to cause an other if not fortunate.

[Mike Benham]

The grass that stretches between the green and fairway is of a narley variety length that makes it quite penal. If one's lay-up to this leftside fairway is not negotiate perfectly the downhill lie in this grass is sure to cause an other if not fortunate.

Not any more, the have mown the grass to fairway length at the bottom of the valley.  You can now hit your second shot to the bottom, have a semi-flat lie, and a wedge to the elevated green ... there still is rough on the hillside and left of and left-short of the green

[A_Clay_Man]

Wow! That is surprising. Oh wait, it was probably done for pace of play justification. Not surprising, just TUPID. I always liked the fairgreen cut out below the entrance to the green but it was only 10-20 yards.

Mike- I liked the idea of a seperate green down in that valley but wondered if the similarity to the tenth hole's downhill approach, would be perceived as repetetive.

[Texas_Three_Putt]

I don't think it would be perceived as repetitive. 10 has a variety of how it can be played. It's just a matter of how one wants their appoach into the green. On 9, there wouldn't be any choice, you're going straight down the hill. Besides, I think most would perceive 10 as "a carry over water" and 9 as "downhill approach".

15 and 17 are what I would call repetitive.

[Scott Seward]

What an incredible thing to read good debate on Poppy instead of virulent, over-the-top, its not Cypress-Pebble-Spy criticism.

I know the thread started talking about 14 (which I like), but I want to highlight #1, a strong par 4 with a glimpse of ocean in the background that, where topography is a major issue. I love the approach - the good player can go right at it, the not so good can try to bang it off the hill on the left.

I think #3 would be fantastic if not for the too severe green.

I agree on #9. From the drive landing zone it looks like a fun shot to play but there is no penalty for slapping it down to the lower level. There was talk at one point about extending the barranca to the right of 1 all the way through the lower level of 9, but I don;t think this will happen.

I must disclose bias, my desk is right outside this course, and as a perk, I love playing here.

[Texas_Three_Putt]

If we're going to talk favorites, 16 is mine. I'm just a glutton for punishment.

Scott,
I agree with you about #1. Just wish it wasn't the starting hole. That's a tough way to begin a round. And for #3, I love the green. I think it makes you really think about your approach.

I must disclose bias, my desk is right outside this course, and as a perk, I love playing here.

As my grandmother use to say: "F**k off!"    

[Scott Seward]

I didn't mean to rub it in, but working for the association is awesome.

I agree on 16, for useless comparison's sake, I find it more difficult than 16 at Spy (at least now - from what I have heard 16 at Spy use to really flog golfers). Poppy is not as long, but the elevated green makes it a sink or swim shot. I have saved par at Spy more times than not because the bunkering isn;t quite as severe and the green in't elevated.