News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« on: April 15, 2003, 07:25:21 PM »
Given their common architectural lineage,  I'm compelled to ask:

1.  Is there any green complex at CPC better than the 5th at ANGC?

2.  Is there any green complex at CPC better than the 14th at ANGC?

3.  Is there any green complex at CPC better than the 13th at ANGC?

4.  Is there any green complex at CPC better than the 16th at ANGC?

This is not meant to be rhetorical.  Disclaimer: I've walked both courses but played neither.  

Regards,

Mike
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2003, 08:29:06 PM »
Its a good question although I haven't played ANGC so I really couldn't compare.  I use to have a friend who was a member at both and he believed that CPC was far superior to ANGC.

My personal favorites at CPC are the 1st which is scary fast if you are above the hole and the 11th which is one of the best holes on the course.  The green on 11 has many different pin placements and has fantastic movements.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2003, 06:44:24 AM »
From having played CPC a few times, but only seeing Augusta on TV, I'd say:

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. Yes

The first three seem incredible to me, 16 seems one-dimensional with everything funneling down to the lake... it does make for dramatic play but there are really only two pinnable places, aren't there?

So I'd say several green complexes at CPC are better than 16 Augusta... 1 and 11 as Joel says but maybe also 4, 8, 9, 15 (love the bunkering)....

The other obvious question goes in reverse:

Other than 13, is there any hole at Augusta as it exists now with as much strategic merit as any of 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 at CPC?

TH

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2003, 10:26:52 AM »
I agree that 16 is the one green at ANGC noted here that is not better than most of the greens at CPC. However while I have played CPC 20 plus times I have never seen them at the speeds that ANGC has them for the Masters. I would think 1,4,5,8,9,10,11,12 and 13 would be better than 16 with similiar speeds. I would not try to compare them beyond thast for they are so different in character and setting.
While designed buy the same man, they have such different defenses that hole by hole comparisons seems without merit. ANGC has topography, normally(pre Hootie) wide spacious fairways with the heart and soul of the course being the greens. The balance of the front and back nines gives one an almost perfect match play course. Combine this with the strategic nature of this course, one finds the ultimate thinking mans golf course. CPC has the wind, the dunes, the routing, a setting second to none and a great blend of holes. The heart and soul of CPC to me is the whole package not the greens or a run of holes or the strategic nature of the holes. Maybe the setting is its heart if any one thing.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2003, 10:52:21 AM »
Well stated JB.

Left coast Tom, I fear you underestimate the strategic merit of ANGC. To wit:

At no. 2 the player must thread the longer drive between the right hand bunker and a low wooded jail to the left for any chance to get home in two.  As for the second shot, the hole is harmed by the narrowing of the fairway.  Did you notice how many players hit their third shots from the right-hand rough to access the back left pin on Saturday?

At no. 3 the fourth greatest player of all time makes a double on a 320 yard hole with no H20.

No. 5 now demands a longer tee shot to access the difficult pin positions.  How many times did players hit the green from the left-hand bunkers or right-hand rough.  

No. 6 has that fabulous back right plateau, forcing many players to miss right to avoid having to putt up and over.  Among the leaders, only Weir hit it close.

No. 8 requires the player to challenge the fairway bunker to have the distance and angle to get home in two.  IMHO, this is the most underrated hole on the golf course.

No. 9 is all about distance control on the second shot now that everybody's driving to the bottom of the hill.  Does a player dare to try to get close and run the risk of watching his ball roll back down the fairway as did Greg Norman at the start of his collapse a few years ago?  The resulting downhill lag putt is no piece of cake.  

No. 10 is also diminished by the rough.  Players used to sling big hooks down the right side and get the turbo boost necessary to yield a mid to short iron second.  There's still a good elevation change, but the line of charm is dictated.

No. 11.  Hogan's famous quote about playing right on the second shot is enough said.

No. 12.  See my other post.  Contrary to what many would think, this is not a dart board.

No. 13.  I don't understand the complaints about a lack of eagles here.  One of the playoff participants made 3 here.  Contrast that with The Beemer's debacle on Sunday.

No. 15.  I actually like the rough, but not the trees down the right hand side.  Contrary to another post, I seem to recall turbo-boosting mounds down the right IN the fairway.  This was already the preferred line given the older trees encroaching on the left.  The layup here does not yield an automatic par, much less birdie and the right green-side bunker provides a safe harbor but it's not that easy to hit.  

No. 16.  I like the either/or contours of this green.  Leave it out right to a left-hand pin and a treacherous two-putt follows.  Fail to keep it on the high right-hand side tests the players's ability to judge pace up the hill.  

No. 18.  The strategic merit of this hole has been compromised by its lengthening.  More players in the trees (both sides) this year and virtually no one playing from the fairway bunkers.  Very little chance for a winning birdie like O'Meara's or suspenseful misses like _______________(you fill in the blank).  

Just my opinion.   It ought to be yours ;)

Regards,

Mike
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

THuckaby2

Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2003, 11:00:41 AM »
Very well-assessed, Mike.  I gave this short-shrift most definitely.  And now I'm gonna do such again (I actually have to focus on work today):  I'll agree with all your assessments of Augusta, and say CPC still has greater strategic merit in the holes I mentioned.

There's some food for thought anyway...

TH

ps - if Rich Goodale ever reads this, please realize I am fully aware I am using the "strategic" term technically incorrectly.  It's just easier to do so for this conversation.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2003, 01:04:30 PM »
Would highly undulating and sloped greens like ANGC's even be playable in the type of wind conditions one often gets at CPC?  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

DMoriarty

Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2003, 01:27:59 PM »
Mike, I was thinking the same thing about the high winds at CPC.

Tom.  How can you leave one off the list of strategic holes at CPC?  I find it to be very strategic.  Challenge the trees and get a better angle and a shorter shot.  Play safe left and get a longer shot and poor, somewhat blind angle.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2003, 01:32:22 PM »
That was a bad oversight by me - good call, Dave.  #1 counts most definitely - you have it exactly right by my reckoning.

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2003, 03:07:22 PM »
Quite frankly, from what I have seen of our illustrious compadres of GCA, I doubt that anyone would break 90 at Cypress Point with Masters type green speeds. I probably would make money betting against some of us breaking a hundred!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: CPC vs. ANGC Green Complexes
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2003, 03:30:54 PM »
Ok Bob ... I'll take that bet ... you set up the tee time ;)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"... and I liked the guy ..."

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back