Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Mike Hendren on April 07, 2010, 03:39:31 PM
-
Augusta National Golf Club's:
1. Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2. Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3. Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4. Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5. Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6. Greater visual intimidation
7. Blind shot requirements
8. Uneven fairway lies
9. Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.
My next thread: Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock. ;)
Bogey
-
My next thread: Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock. ;)
Hmm, I've lost count. Are there ten holes at CPC with ocean views?
-
Bogie - I don't know either course well enough to comment, but I will defer to you and your opinion (with trust and respect) if you'd be so kind to answer these two questions:
If one course, call it Course X (or, say, Augusta National) has greater elasticity, more interesting and challenging green surrounds, a really good -- and superior -- set of par 5s (a great feat in and of itself, IMO), contoured/fun greens that, in a consistently more meaningful way, 'work backwards' to the fairway in terms of ideal/required approach angles, and demands more frequently that shots be shaped both left and right, and this from canted/uneven lies, how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?
Thank you
Peter
-
...how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?
I believe Mark Twain said it first...
scratch that...either Robinson Jeffers of Francis McComas did...and I'm being liberal with Big Sur and the Monterrey Penninsula.
scratch again...Robert Louis Stevenson.
-
Bogie - I don't know either course well enough to comment, but I will defer to you and your opinion (with trust and respect) if you'd be so kind to answer these two questions:
If one course, call it Course X (or, say, Augusta National) has greater elasticity, more interesting and challenging green surrounds, a really good -- and superior -- set of par 5s (a great feat in and of itself, IMO), contoured/fun greens that, in a consistently more meaningful way, 'work backwards' to the fairway in terms of ideal/required approach angles, and demands more frequently that shots be shaped both left and right, and this from canted/uneven lies, how in heck can another course, call it Course Y (or, say, Cypress) possibly be any better? What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?
Thank you
Peter
I think it's a trick question.
-
Show off...
Always saying more in 5 words than I say in 150, aren't you Jim?
Why don't you just mention that you're also a two-time Mid Amateur champion, add that into the mix if it makes you feel better...
I liked you better as JES, when your none-too-subtle put-downs were at least 'anonymous', since I didn't know anyone named JES.
Peter
For my next thread: Why My 150 Words are Better than Your 5
A trick question, JM? Ah, no my friend, an 'artful' one!
-
What more could Course Y possibly provide in terms of being a classic field of play, or in manifesting the fundamental principles of great golf course architecture?
Thank you
Peter
I also don't know either course. But here are some possibilities:
1. Better par 4s. They make up over half the course.
2. Better par 3s. Add them to the par 4s, and now you usually have around 80% of the course.
3. More strategy.
4. On top of better par 4s in general, better short par 4s.
5. A more spectacular site.
6. Easier to play for the average golfer (less sidehill, uphill, downhill lies).
But Bogey's last line in his post suggests he will answer your question himself.
-
I was strung up for operating under a psuedonym or else I'd be the same old anonymous dick...
Must have been trying to persuade Tom Doak into a 10 year contract...I'm sure I'll be able to pay him by then...
As to CPC holding ANGC's jock...the truth is, there is an entire world of golf architecture junkies that say the ocean at Cypress, or Pebble for that matter shouldn't impact their architectural ranking...and amazingly they all log in here under one name PAT MUCCI[/color]...
-
Mike,
Have you played both?
-
Rick, I have played Cypress Point Club once and walked it as an observer with an esteemed foursome (Huckaby, Cirba, Duran & Childs) on another occasion. I have not played Augusta National Golf Club but watched practice or tournament rounds on 6 occasions.
Peter, Cypress Point is visually stunning and either unaltered or faithfully restored. I'm gonna let the cognoscenti populate the imminent thread on its superiority. A smart-arse could opine that without the ocean it and Mackenzie's Palmetto Golf Club are closer in the ratings than you might think. By smart-arse I mean me, not Mucci.
Frankly, I love playing devil's advocate (btw, I only recently learned that term's origin as the party responsible for presenting a counter-argument to proposed sainthood of a faithful Catholic) when it comes to Augusta National Golf Club. After returning there last spring for the first time in 20 years (and frankly having been educated by many friends and thoughtful students of golf course architecture such as yourself since my last visit) I left convinced of its greatness notwithstanding a few warts imposed upon it over the past few years. I am absolutely in awe of some of the shots required by that golf course:
The approach to one - check out Tiger's scoring history there
The drive at the second.
The pitch to either wing at the second - watch the better players use every inch of an extremely wide fairway to enhance the angle
The approach to the third - watch how long players practice pitching from behind that green during practice rounds
The tee shot at the fourth - absolute jail above the hole.
The tee shot at the fifth.
The approach at the fifth - perhaps the most underrated hole and green in the game of golf due to its isolation from tv cameras and the balance of the course
The tee shot to a back right pin at the 6th.
The approach to apparently nothing at the 7th.
The mountainous skyline second at the 8th
The tee shot into oblivion at the 9th and 10th.
Uphill approaches off hanging downhill lies at the 9th and 10th.
The frightening approach to the 11th - if it's too tough for Hogan.....
The frightening shot at the 12th - watch how long it takes the players to pull a club. I thought these guys were money from 155.
The requirement to hit a fade off a hook lie from the 13th fairway.
Access to pins on the 14th green
The second or 3rd to the 15th - diamond crunching stuff
The inability/unwillingness of the world's greatest players to access a back right pin at the 16th
Access to pins on the 17th green - an amazing number of 3's and 5's there have decided the tournament
The mountainous approach to the 18th. Painswickian.
Oh my. Trevino loved Merion. I love Augusta National Golf Club whether her legs are shaved or not and regardless of her complexion. I'm all in - 100% smitten even though she's unobtainable (and might not really be superior to CPC ;))
Bogey
-
Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...
Looking forward to the converse thread. Might I suggest a point:
1) Pacific Ocean. Rae's Creek.
-
Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...
George, give me some examples. I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.
Mike
-
They are two entirely different golf courses with different architecture and cultures.
They are both fantastic in their own right.
If you had to play either one, for the rest of your life, you wouldn't be unhappy and you wouldn't feel deprived that you couldn't play the other.
-
Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...
George, give me some examples. I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.
Mike
Pure Gold...
-
Forgot to mention the self-important sanctimonious chairmen at Augusta...
George, give me some examples. I don't see them being in the same league with C. B. Macdonald and Matt Ward.
Mike
Payne's comments yesterday just really rubbed me the wrong way. For a club that has made huge proclamations of rights of privacy recently (think Martha Burk - and I support them, not her, btw), to have him commenting on Tiger's private life struck me as about as hypocritical as it gets.
The course is certainly worthy of praise, even with changes I don't always agree with.
-
George, you are correct. Payne undermined my premise rather quickly yesterday.
Cheer, my friend.
Mike
-
Thanks, Mike. It was especially disappointing to me, as it undermined the sense of Southern genteelness.
Back to the courses...that's the fun stuff.
How do Cypress Point's par 5s stack up against one of the best sets of par 5s in the world? Does anyone have a better set than Augusta? Maybe PV? I love Oakmont's, but there are only 2...unless one counts #1, #2, #3... :)
-
CPC is playable year round. While their maintenance presentation is not Augusta's, if it were, that would take away at least one of your criticisms. The greens with in greens comment doesn't ring completely true either. It's proximity to the Ocean allows for greater winds.
I will concede that since ANGC came after CPC they had the upper hand in being able to create something better.
-
I will concede that since ANGC came after CPC they had the upper hand in being able to create something better.
Worthy of its own thread for sure...interesting comment.
-
Augusta National Golf Club's:
1. Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2. Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3. Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4. Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5. Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6. Greater visual intimidation
7. Blind shot requirements
8. Uneven fairway lies
9. Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.
My next thread: Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock. ;)
Bogey
We all make our drunk mistakes...
-
How do Cypress Point's par 5s stack up against one of the best sets of par 5s in the world?
George, in my sophomoric opinion the only compelling shots among Cypress Point Club's par fives are the drive at the second where the player has the option to bite off as much of the diagonal carry as he chooses and the tee shot at the 6th where a big slinging hook started over the carry bunkers on the outside of the dogleg makes the green reachable in two. I know the 5th gets a lot of praise, but often it's summarized by the fact that one can't see the myriad of bunkering when looking back down the hole.
The 13th and 15th at Augusta National Golf Club are well-chronicled (as for the latter I think the hole would be rather pedestrian over flat ground - the dropping elevation change makes the hole). I like the second as well based upon its placement in the round - the player has a little breather after the brutally hard first and perhaps a chance to regain a stroke lost at the first or bank a little store credit in anticipation of the very difficult 4th and 5th. I would like to see the fairway bunker moved back toward the tee and along the left hand side as originally designed. As for the 8th, I'd rank it with the 5th among the most underrated golf holes in the country. Every shot there offers a demanding option. The fairway bunker must be challenged to yield any opportunity to reach that green in two and even then the second is so daunting given the blindness and extreme uphill orientation. Jail awaits left and more often than not the big hitter leaves his second right of the green with a nearly impossible pitch to get close. Extreme fairway width at the top of the hill gives the more timid - or perhaps more strategic, player the option to approach the green with a full spinning wedge from far right. Finally, it is a joy to watch approaches, be they with fairway metals, bumped short irons or full wedges as the ball simply refuses to settle on the green. Again, its place in the routing is ideal as the player pressures himself to make 4 in anticipation of the difficult stretch of 9 through 12.
My $0.02.
Mike
-
Augusta National Golf Club's:
1. Superior elasticity accomodates the member yet challenges the greatest players in the game's history
2. Green surrounds invite shot selection/creativity
3. Vastly superior par fives, each with a meaningful second shot option
4. Greens within greens place a greater premium on approach accuracy
5. Two shot holes that bend both left and right
6. Greater visual intimidation
7. Blind shot requirements
8. Uneven fairway lies
9. Relatively firmer and faster
10.Better opener and finisher.
My next thread: Ten Reasons Augusta National Golf Club Can't Carry Cypress Point Club's Jock. ;)
Bogey
We all make our drunk mistakes...
Funny, that's what the cognoscenti thought at Pentecost.
How 'bout a real rebuttal young man. ;)
Mike
-
I have been to the Masters but haven't played Augusta. I've played Cypress and loved it. Cypress has those unbelievable ocean holes and some phenomenal inland holes. Awesome bunkering, lovely design, fabulous routing, riveting eye candy. And it's not nearly as good of a golf course as ANGC.
-
This thread reminds me that I tend to believe the most important element in determing the nature and quality of a golf course/golf design is the fundamental INTENTION of its architect(s), i.e. what philosophy do they operate under/want to see made manifest, what kind/degree of greatness are they trying to achieve, how do they envision the golf course serving the golfer etc. We often talk around here about various types/degrees of design 'bells and whistles' -- I tend to think that, compared to that initial and fundamental intention on the architects' part, it's ALL bells and whistles.
Peter - The Speculator on Golf Courses He Has Never Played.
-
Mike H..
As much as the tiitle of the topic made me bristle at first, when reading your ten reasons...
I have to agree with just about all of them.
Number two...the short game issue kind of goes along with the green within a green concept, so I put them as one.
The short games requirments of CPC are superbly challenging without creating putting surfaces that are " tricked " up.
But I simply cannot argue with the other opinions.
Whether or not this makes ANGC the better course, or the one I would rather play..I dont believe that was your intent to even question with this thread...
-
MWP, good read. I did overreach, on purpose, in my thread title. I'm simply intrigued by all the Augusta bashing that is rarely supported by any argument moves beyond Hootie, green, or changes and really having fun thinking about these things.
And, btw I had the good fortune of playing Crystal Downs last year and after initially being a little underwhelmed, might place it above Cypress Point Club but for the 9th, 10th and 16th. ;)
Kindest regards,
Mike
-
If we are talking about getting maximum enjoyment from the course, the fact that Augusta is closed a big chunk of the year can't be good. Then again, for a man in position to be a member at Augusta, it seems entirely plausible that he could join two summer clubs.
If I could choose one and only to play, it would be CPC. If I were guaranteed a lovely day - its a landslide.
Ciao
-
Augusta has been doctored more times then Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers combined ...
So add 700 yards to CPC to offset the technological gains and then we could discuss.
You do know that if the ANGC brass was running CPC there would be an 18th tee half way to Hawaii by now ...
-
MWP, good read. I did overreach, on purpose, in my thread title. I'm simply intrigued by all the Augusta bashing that is rarely supported by any argument moves beyond Hootie, green, or changes and really having fun thinking about these things.
And, btw I had the good fortune of playing Crystal Downs last year and after initially being a little underwhelmed, might place it above Cypress Point Club but for the 9th, 10th and 16th. ;)
Kindest regards,
Mike
9th, 10th and 16th at the Downs? What you got against those boys?
-
Bill, I'm fairly certain he meant those holes from CPC.
9 is one of the great short par 4's in the world. Something that is lacking at ANGC. Unless you want to call the 12th at ANGC a par 4? ;D
-
Michael,
What are we looking for in your argument?
A natural beauty or something that has been gauzed and photo-shopped. A serious test for the top echelon player from any tee or a walk in the park?
Take the par fives. ANGC has 2, 8.13 and 15 all superior to any but Cypress' number 2.
The par threes seem to even out. CPC's 15 and 16 are superb and are superior to anything at ANGC apart from the 12th, although I would hazard a guess that the 4th at the latter course is as serious challenge to scoring as is CPC's 16th.
I am still thinking of the par fours. I am convinced that ANGC's 18th is WAY better than CPC
Bob
-
You do know that if the ANGC brass was running CPC there would be an 18th tee half way to Hawaii by now ...
wasnt a tee in the Ocean one of Mackenzie's original ideas anyway.
That was the first thought that came into my haed standing on 18 tee...how cool would it be to be hittingfrom back there?
A nice tee on the rock outcrop..that being said I am one of the few who like number 18 at CPC..that tree canopy is captivating, although perhaps not condusive to a great finishing hole.
-
Couldn't 18 be vastly improved as it with just the removal of a couple of trees? I have only played it once but that is what I thought while walking up the fairway.
-
Sean,
Yes, but the likelihood of that ever happening is quite remote.
Bob
-
Michael,
What are we looking for in your argument?
A natural beauty or something that has been gauzed and photo-shopped. A serious test for the top echelon player from any tee or a walk in the park?
Take the par fives. ANGC has 2, 8.13 and 15 all superior to any but Cypress' number 2.
The par threes seem to even out. CPC's 15 and 16 are superb and are superior to anything at ANGC apart from the 12th, although I would hazard a guess that the 4th at the latter course is as serious challenge to scoring as is CPC's 16th.
I am still thinking of the par fours. I am convinced that ANGC's 18th is WAY better than CPC
Bob
I think #5 at CPC gets short shrift as a par 5 - I love the bunkers and the hop scotch you have to play up the hill.
-
Bill, I'm fairly certain he meant those holes from CPC.
9 is one of the great short par 4's in the world. Something that is lacking at ANGC. Unless you want to call the 12th at ANGC a par 4? ;D
I thought that might be true except for #10, which might be the weakest hole at CPC, and certainly not one of the better holes.
#9 CD is a sort of awkward par 3, #10 is a bland looking but great playing par 4, and #16 is a solid if not spectacular par 5. That's why I thought he meant Crystal Downs.
-
Bogey,
I have azaleas, rhodies, camellias, dogwood, magnolias, holly, ... in my yard, but that don't make it the best anything. ANGC has an artificiality to its look that does not suit my eye.
Double Bogey
-
I admit that it would be nice if a few of the greens at CPC were a bit more adventurous, BUT if it can really be said that ANGC is better than CPC then shouldn't we conclude that the good doctor must have botched the latter project. ANGC sits on very severe land that is only scenic because of the conditioning and the botanical ornamentation. I mean no offense, I live about an hour away just outside of Athens, Georgia, and I love this part of the country, but I bet there are hundreds of courses situated on better land across the globe; AND none more so than CPC! Therefore, if CPC is a lesser course then it must be an inferior design, because the raw land that it sits on had it all, and it is a much nicer walk than ANGC.
Don't get me wrong, I would jump at an invite to either course on any day, BUT (assuming that you have already played both courses) which one would you rather play again if you had to decide between the two? This is not a rhetorical question.
-
Its interesting that all the talk is based around ANGCs par 5s, which I would agree that it doesy dominate...
But lets talk about the par 4s. IMO, ANGCs par 4s are few less than the par 4s at CPC...especially if we're going to go to the sub-category, short par 4s...its miles apart.
-
Is this silly thread still going on? Bogey, it's nice that you promote your neighborhood course, but in this matter I will defer to Mr. Doak.
CPC - 10
ANGC - 9
And, I am confident that Hootie's tinkering has NOT raised ANGC's rating with Mr. Doak.
:P
;D
-
Galrland, let me get this straight: I give ten well thought out reasons to support my premise and your retort is basically "what Doak said?"
Thanks for the keen insight ;)
Bogey
-
Bogey,
Your well thought out reasons are certainly debatable. For example, I must remind you that courses have more than two holes, an "opener" and a "finisher". As you saw on the other thread, I conceded those two holes to ANGC.
However, I would suggest that Mr. Doak has far more experience than the two of us combined in these matters, so I think it would be best that both of us defer to him.
Double Bogey
My next thread, Is ANGC #12 the most overrated hole in golf?
;D
-
Bogie I too believe ANGC is a better test of golf. However the greens at Cypress are closer to ANGC than one might think. The green complexes at Cypress are cool cool with so many shot options. However I do not think any high profile course matches ANGC. One is equal iimho. Also I think Cypress could easily be made firm and fast if for an event. It is an interesting thread particulaly this week. cheers and Go Tigers
-
Its interesting that all the talk is based around ANGCs par 5s, which I would agree that it doesy dominate...
But lets talk about the par 4s. IMO, ANGCs par 4s are few less than the par 4s at CPC...especially if we're going to go to the sub-category, short par 4s...its miles apart.
Kalen,
How can you compare two courses when you're comparing them from two different sets of tees.
Why not compare the courses from the same tees, the members tees.
None of us, in their right mind would play the course from 7,400+ yards
As to short par 4's at ANGC, # 3 and # 7 are fabulous.
-
Its interesting that all the talk is based around ANGCs par 5s, which I would agree that it doesy dominate...
But lets talk about the par 4s. IMO, ANGCs par 4s are few less than the par 4s at CPC...especially if we're going to go to the sub-category, short par 4s...its miles apart.
Kalen,
How can you compare two courses when you're comparing them from two different sets of tees.
Why not compare the courses from the same tees, the members tees.
None of us, in their right mind would play the course from 7,400+ yards
As to short par 4's at ANGC, # 3 and # 7 are fabulous.
Pat,
Even if you forget about all the other shortish par 4s at CPC...#8 and 9 at CPC easily blow #3 and #7 at ANGC out of the water!!
-
Kalen,
Visually, or from the aspect of strategy and playability ?
Some would think otherwise
-
Kalen,
Visually, or from the aspect of strategy and playability ?
Some would think otherwise
All of the above Pat.
#3 has some interesting strategy, but #7? Its a penal golf hole at best.
-
Kalen,
Visually, or from the aspect of strategy and playability ?
Some would think otherwise
All of the above Pat.
#3 has some interesting strategy, but #7? Its a penal golf hole at best.
Kalen,
How many times have you played # 7 ?
What about it makes it penal.
-
Pat, if you have to choose CPC or ANGC, which one is it?
-
Can anyone make a semi-serious argument that yesterday's final round would have been better in any way if it has been contested at Cypress Point Club? Aside from the scenery I mean.
-
Is there room to stretch out CPC, if they wanted, to make it a challenge for the pro's? If so, would the longer course still be great?
-
Can anyone make a semi-serious argument that yesterday's final round would have been better in any way if it has been contested at Cypress Point Club? Aside from the scenery I mean.
Here's the serious side. You are talking about a contest between the world very best golfers on a course that has been "flexiblized" for them.
It is not appropo for golf in general. IMO you cannot use it in a comparison that is appropriate for the rest of the world.
-
No, I'm not claiming that Augusta National is a better golf course than Cypress Point just because it produces such a great championship most years. Obviously, Cypress Point is the far superior course all considered. ;D
But you've got to give Augusta its due. There's no other place that the Masters would be anything at all like the Masters. So you always must remember that you're comparing apples and oranges in a CPC/ANGC thread.
-
Is there room to stretch out CPC, if they wanted, to make it a challenge for the pro's? If so, would the longer course still be great?
I would have to imagine there would be room to stretch out CPC, because you have to consider what Augusta did. They bought land from a neighboring golf course, they picked up and moved entire holes, they moved complete existing on ground facilities such as the putting green. I hope no one is short sighted enough to take these kind of steps at CPC. The only thing truly more flexible about ANGC is the wealth that makes it possible to flexiblilze, (vandalize?) the golf course.
Furthermore, making ANGC longer made it less great. When you move a bunker to put it in play for the pros, you take it out of play for the vast majority of your golfing clientele.
-
Pat:
As to #7 at ANGC, it is no longer a short par 4 as it was originally designed to be and with that Perry Maxwell green. Even by tour pro standards 450 yards is definitely NOT a short par 4.
And I was very interested to hear Ben Crenshaw going over the history and strategies of some of those ANGC holes when they had him in the Butler Cabin on Friday. He is almost never critical publicly but he did say about #7 that he really believes they have made it too long. The original hole was something like 365 yards.
By the way, that green design and its greenside bunkering was one of Maxwell's virtual "models." I think he did it up to six other times on other courses including on my own course which arguably might have been the first time he did it.
-
Pat:
As to #7 at ANGC, it is no longer a short par 4 as it was originally designed to be and with that Perry Maxwell green. Even by tour pro standards 450 yards is definitely NOT a short par 4.
Your wrong.
# 7 remains a short par 4 from the member tees.
Please read my posts more carefully ;D
And I was very interested to hear Ben Crenshaw going over the history and strategies of some of those ANGC holes when they had him in the Butler Cabin on Friday. He is almost never critical publicly but he did say about #7 that he really believes they have made it too long. The original hole was something like 365 yards.
Originally, # 7 was 320 from the Members tees and 340 from the Masters Tees.
By the way, that green design and its greenside bunkering was one of Maxwell's virtual "models." I think he did it up to six other times on other courses including on my own course which arguably might have been the first time he did it.
While some are critical of the changes at ANGC, Maxwell's alterations seem to have been for the better, especially # 10.