Pebble Beach Golf Links

Favorite Hole

No. 6, par 5, 420-498 yards

In describing the fourth hole at Fishers Island, Tom Doak said something I often think about: “While aficionados of golf architecture love to drone on about the importance of strategic design, the original spirit of the game is for the player to surmount great natural obstacles.”

So, sure, I could talk about how the tee-to-green strategy on the sixth at Pebble Beach works (the more you push your drive up in order to get in position to reach the green in two, the greater the risk of finding the bunkers on the left or the Pacific Ocean on the right), but the appeal of the hole is visceral, not intellectual. It’s “GOOD GOD LOOK AT THAT BIG-ASS CLIFF, I GOTTA HIT OVER THAT DAMN THING.”

On a smaller scale, the gully that funnels into the green is a delightful bit of topo. I’ve always wondered whether it’s natural.

{{content-block-course-profile-pebble-beach-golf-links-003}}

Overall Thoughts

Let’s start with three of Pebble Beach’s main virtues:

1. The stretch of coastline occupied by holes 4-10 and 17-18 is beloved for a reason. There are plenty of cliff-side properties in golf, but none as perfectly scaled for the game as Pebble’s, and none as varied, with landforms ranging from the cove alongside the fourth and sixth holes, to the high promontory housing Nos. 6-8, to the handsome bluffs along Carmel Beach, to the sea-level crescent where the 18th hole sits. It’s a miraculous mile and a half. So whenever I hear someone say, “Pebble Beach wouldn’t be as famous if it weren’t next to the ocean,” my response is, “But look at how it’s next to the ocean.”

2. The cadence of Grant and Neville’s routing is impeccable. The first and second holes build anticipation; the third provides the first full reveal of the ocean; the sixth, seventh, and eighth reach a crescendo that the ninth and 10th sustain; the next six holes venture inland, lessening the intensity; and the 17th and 18th bring the round to a thrilling close. As many other writers have pointed out, Pebble’s routing has the structure of a symphony or a well-told story.

3. The best holes aren’t just spectacular; they’re also strategically sound. Nos. 3, 4, 9, 10, 13, and 18 use the property’s underrated topography to ask strategic questions and examine a player’s shotmaking ability. On each of these holes, the fairway tilts in a direction that encourages a shot shape that 1) the slope of the green rejects and 2) the hazards, whether bunkers or cliffs, are positioned to punish. This relationship between fairway slopes and green design is the secret to Pebble’s ability to challenge the best golfers in the world in spite of lacking the length of most modern championship courses. (I went in depth on this topic in an article I wrote prior to the 2019 U.S. Open.)

{{content-block-course-profile-pebble-beach-golf-links-004}}

All of that said, for a place that charges $600 per round (not including the resort stay), Pebble Beach underdelivers in too many ways.

The lows are surprisingly low. Nos. 12 and 15 are frankly weak, and, as we’ll argue in a future Club TFE blog post, Jack Nicklaus’s fifth hole, added in 1998, is a misfire that creates a headache-inducing hitch in the routing and fails to take advantage of its bluff-top setting. Yes, 1 and 2 are fine, and 11, 14, and 16 are quite good, but all have probably benefited from a strain of “Pebble’s inland holes are underrated!” contrarianism that has become fashionable lately.

An even bigger problem is that the greens, in general, are uncompelling. This is the result of maintenance habits over time, not architecture. After MacKenzie, Egan, and Hunter’s renovations in the late 1920s, Pebble had medium-sized putting surfaces with a variety of shapes and subtle contours. Over the decades, bunker edges and mowing lines crept in, and internal ripples got smoothed out, perhaps through sand splash. It’s encouraging that the maintenance team has recently recaptured portions of the 11th, 14th, and 17th greens, but the work hasn’t gone far enough, and the choice to soften the eighth green last year was puzzling. Why not expand it? There’s even a high-quality photo to use as a reference point.

The disregard for history extends to the overall presentation of the course. In its early years, Pebble Beach had an open, rugged, windswept look. The interior of the site was comparable to Pasatiempo’s, crisscrossed by barrancas and accented by multicolored vegetation in the non-playing areas. Now, green turf takes up much of the property, blunting the golfer’s sense of the natural landscape. Ubiquitous cart paths and resort buildings don’t help, either.

I get it—the Pebble Beach Company isn’t running a museum for golf nerds. It’s running a mass-appeal resort, one that serves a continual influx of guests who may or may not be especially keen or skilled golfers. That’s why the course is presented as it is; it appeals to the guest, not the aficionado. But just because I understand the rationale doesn’t mean I won’t criticize the result.

At the risk of aligning myself with Anton Ego, today’s Pebble Beach is like Gusteau’s restaurant in Ratatouille before Remy arrived: one of the greats, but grown complacent.

1 Egg

(How We Rate Courses)

Too harsh? Maybe. First, keep in mind that even a one-Egg rating is meant to be a significant honor. But candidly, we went back and forth behind the scenes at TFE about whether to give Pebble Beach a second Egg. The property is sublime and the bones of the architecture are strong. But as Andy explained in his post about how we rate courses, the categories of land, design, and presentation are intertwined. In Pebble’s case, flaws in presentation weaken the design and muffle the natural beauty and playing characteristics of the land.

Additional Content

Sidehill Lies and Small Targets: Pebble Beach (article)

A Simple Change: The 7th at Pebble Beach (article)

Course Tour

{{content-block-course-profile-pebble-beach-golf-links-005}}