[Michael Whitaker]

A good friend of mind is a member of the PGA tour. He is considered one of the up and coming young players and has done quite well for himself, already winning over 2.5MM dollars since joining the tour.

He is very bright and quite fun to be around. We have had many conversations about design, architects, tour courses, etc and although he has never visited this site, I think he would enjoy the banter and fit right in. He tends to enjoy straight forward courses that require shot making skills... for example, his favorite course in SC is Harbour Town.

Our conversation yesterday took an interesting turn... we were discussing his playing a recent outing at Seminole. He has played there several times and I asked him what he thought of the course. I was surprised when he said it was one of the most overrated courses he has played. He loves and respects the history, mystique and ambiance of the course and club, but he feels the course is just not a good enough test to be considered one of the top ranked in the world. He feels it gets too many "experience" points from the raters and that the course alone does not justify the lofty ranking it receives. "Without a very stiff wind the course is a par 65 or 66," he said. "But, they have one of the greatest old clubhouses and locker rooms in US golf."

I asked him if there were any other courses he felt were overrated. He said, to my amazement, that the MOST overrated course he had ever played was Cypress Point. "It is six of the greatest holes you will ever play, six average holes, and six of the worst holes you will find on a supposedly 'world class' course. 17 and 18 are two of the worst holes I have ever played on a good course."

Not having played either Seminole or Cypress Point I could only listen and express my surprise at his thoughts. I asked him to read Ran's reviews of the two courses on this site so we could have some common frame of reference when we next pick up the conversation.

What's your take? Any suggested questions or thoughts for our next conversaton?

[Tom_Doak]

Perhaps you could just slap him upside the head for me.

[Michael Whitaker]

 

Tom - That was my first thought, as well. As I've never played the courses I can only defend the opinion of those I respect, such as you and Ran. But, my friend is not an unschooled idiot. He knows golf, golf history, and he studies courses old and new. But, for some reason, these two courses do not rise to his level of "greatness." Is it just the overall difficulty factor?

[cary lichtenstein]

Heavens, he should be beaten to death with a wet noodle

[Geoffrey Childs]

Michael

A PGA Tour player who has earned $2.5 M is at least a +5 handicap.  Since he's consistent as well then an average course is par 67 to his handicap. Throw in less then firm "normal" conditions and normal (non) rough and you cna knock off another couple of shots.  

Therefore I ask what courses outside severe tournament conditions are not par 65 or 66 to these guys?

[Adam Clayman]

It's a perfect illustration of how those whose focus is on golf's renumeration for a living, have a totally different perspective than those who play the game for love of the sport.

Mike, your friends comment about relative par is the first clue that his focus is based on the game mind.

[Michael Whitaker]

I get your point, and agree that nearly every course is a par 68 to these PGA Tour guys. But, Seminole and Cypress Point have obviously stood the test of time and numerous generations of golfers... and raters.

Does Cypress Point have six holes that could be considered "bad?" What's his problem with 17 and 18?

[Tom_Doak]

Both courses are very short for a Tour player.  Heck, Claude Harmon shot 60 at Seminole nearly 50 years ago!  And I think most Tour players would tell you that Cypress Point is no longer relevant for them.

The question is how much that has to do with whether or not they are great golf courses.  A young Tour player is obviously biased in this regard, but he represents 0.001% of the golfing population.  For 98% Cypress Point would be one of the 5-10 best courses in he world.  It's really just an argument about how much importance we should attach to the other two percent.

I'd like to know which six holes are so bad at Cypress Point, though.  Is he downgrading #5 and #6 because they're easily reachable?  I can't count to six bad holes there.  Maybe he confused it with Pebble Beach.

[AndrewB]

,

[Brent Hutto]

There was a thread somewhere along the way in which it was pointed out that most good players are able to achieve a high degree of tunnel vision in which all that matters is the particular shot they are about to execute. I'm sure this tends to somewhat remove the tempation to grant extra credit to a course for its setting.

It's like that old conversational ploy of "How good would Pebble be if it were situated on a cliffside on Colorado, a thousand miles from the ocean?" as though such a question makes any sense at all. I enjoyed my morning at Cypress Point about as much as a person is capable of enjoying life. Yet if I muster up the concentration to mentally review specific shots on specific holes there are a few holes that I could say make no particular demand on ones game...

How could it not be otherwise? In all honesty it wouldn't be realistic to want to play the tee shots on the fifteenth and sixteenth over and over again for four hours now would it?

The first of the one-shot holes is just a tee and a green and not an especially cunning green at that. Surely that can't be a hole that excites a fine player like your friend. The second of the front-nine three-shotters wouldn't be all that memorable if you were concentrating on hitting a long drive into the short grass and then pounding a second shot somewhere onto the green (which is probably pretty receptive to such a shot). And the eighteenth is widely disparaged even on this group.

Now don't get me started defending the seventeenth. I have nowhere near a Tour player's ability to block out the setting when I recall that hole. My pleasure in standing on that tee, having just played the previous hole, will always be as fresh in my mind as it was an hour later. So perhaps for that your friend deserves a slap up-a-side the head. But if you are talking about "Good golf holes for a good player" I think a perfectly valid case can be made disparaging a handful of those at CPC from the so-called "shot values" point of view.

I suspect that comparing back tees to back tees, neighboring Spyglass Hill may have fewer "nothing special" holes for a good player than Cypress Point. But even though the best holes at Spyglass are astoundingly good IMO there a several at Cypress that top them. So in sum, I advise following up on the conversation in the future but forgoing any figurative head slaps.

[Joe Hancock]

Perhaps you could just slap him upside the head for me.

I don't know...maybe it's the margarita's talking but...that's one of the funniest things I've ever heard you type, Tom!

I'd change my tag line to your quote, but Dan Kelly and I have an understanding.....

Joe

[PThomas]

re CPC :  um, no, to say the least

[Matt_Cohn]

Did the guy say *why* he felt that way? Other than the degree of difficulty? Did he say why he thought certain holes at CP were bad?

[Gary Slatter]

To each his own, I feel sorry for his opinions, he probably thinks the same of Elizabeth Taylor!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Whitaker,

Perhaps this explains why so many modern PGA Tour players don't succeed at being great architects in their own right.

Low scoring by a PGA Tour player isn't synonymous with or indicative of inferior architecture.

I wonder what he would think of NGLA

It's also interesting to note that he deems architectural worthiness as a function of a golf course being a difficult test.

As to your next conversation, tell him not to give up his day job.

[TEPaul]

Michael:

I think your thread and your friend's opinions are most interesting and frankly pretty astute. It's also interesting he picks on both Seminole and Cypress because to be honest the look of them or their sites, their visual aura is very different.

It is not at all unusual to wonder what the big deal is about Seminole on one's first visit or one's first few, particularly if the wind isn't blowing. Frankly that has been happening for years at Seminole for first timers. Generally their opinions genuinely do change for the better over time and that frankly is part of the true mystery of that course because the altered feeling of golfers apparently is genuine.

Seminole with its two ridge lines is sort of unusual for south Florida but nevertheless the golf course really isn't the sexiest looking thing one has seen---actually quite the opposite.

Cypress, on the other hand is ultra beautiful and dramatic but really not until one gets to the back nine.

I do remember the first time I played Cypress being very disappointed by the look and aura of the front nine and I remember wondering what the big deal with Seminole was the first few times I played it.

And that was me. Someone above mentioned that these tour pro types are in a whole different world now and to them courses like these two are almost kiddie courses length-wise.

The only thing I would take exception with that your friend said (even for a player of that caliber) was his disappointment with Cypress's #17---but we must realize that Tiger playing that hole one time came very close to the green on his tee shot. That obviously tends to bring any hole down in the opinion of players like that if the hole wasn't actually originally designed as a short par 4 which #17 definitely wasn't.

I'm very sorry to say your friend sounds pretty astute in his opinions of those two courses but most of it, again, is logically because these tour player types really are in a different world now---eg they just hit all their clubs so much farther than courses like those two were designed for.

I can guarantee you, though, that if he played those two courses a number of times his opinion of both of them would certainly rise, in my opinion. The only real question to me would be---by how much.

[mike_beene]

What are his top 10 in the world?That might shed some light on his thinking.Also,how overrated?If he thinks CP is 10th ,he technically thinks it is overrated.My impression is he doesn't have it in his top 50?

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

If you think Michael's friend's comments are pretty astute, you've reached a new level of Idiot-Savantism.

[Michael Whitaker]

I'd like to know which six holes are so bad at Cypress Point, though.  Is he downgrading #5 and #6 because they're easily reachable?  I can't count to six bad holes there.  Maybe he confused it with Pebble Beach.

OK, I just got off the phone with my friend. He backed off the six bad holes at Cypress and said it was really more like four... two very short par fours (5 & 6?) and 17 & 18. We talked a bit about 15 & 16. He thinks 15 is a better hole. Says 16 gets all the pub because of its length.

As for Seminole... he thinks Palmetto in Aiken, SC is a better "short" course requiring a greater variety of shots. Oh, and he's very pleased with the changes to Palmetto and the direction of the improvements.  

Bottom line... "greatness" is not just about length or difficulty of shot values for my friend. He thinks there are plenty of old "short" courses that are great. Some of his favorites are in Australia... Royal This and Royal That (I'll save these for another discussion). He just doesn't think Seminole and Cypress fit into that category.

By the way, he also agrees with many on this site that the changes to Augusta National are going in the wrong direction. "It's the only course in the Top 100 that is adding trees," he said. "Bobby Jones and Alister MacKenzie are probably spinning in their graves each April."

[Andy Troeger]

TEPaul,

The interesting thing though is that that Michael says his friend has played Seminole a few times, so its not a one-visit judgement.

[Bill_McBride]

I haven't had the opportunity to play at Seminole but I have been told the greens are so fast as to be next to impossible when the course is set up for a pro am.  One of our members who is a member there took our head pro down a couple of years ago.  He reported that players were playing bunker ping pong across those slick greens and that there were many 4 putts.

Doesn't sound too easy to me when it's set up for serious competition.

Cypress Point?  Anybody who doesn't love it is a commie rat or worse.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Whitaker,

What "old", "short" courses in the U.S. does he consider better than Seminole and CPC ?

[Michael Whitaker]

I wonder what he would think of NGLA. It's also interesting to note that he deems architectural worthiness as a function of a golf course being a difficult test. As to your next conversation, tell him not to give up his day job.

I asked him about NGLA. He thinks it is outstanding. He just feels Seminole suffers from a bit of the "Emperor's Clothes" syndrome. "You go there thinking it has to be great because everyone says it is great. But, afterwards, you think there must be something wrong with you because you just don't see the greatness." "It is an amazing club, with a fabulous old clubhouse, and great members. But, when you judge the course by itself it just doesn't stand up. Palmetto in SC is a better course."

[Michael Whitaker]

Michael Whitaker,

What "old", "short" courses in the U.S. does he consider better than Seminole and CPC ?

I'll inquire.

[Michael Whitaker]

TEPaul,

The interesting thing though is that that Michael says his friend has played Seminole a few times, so its not a one-visit judgement.

That is correct.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()