I did forget about the variant rule, but my point still stands... The whipping refers to Chichen Itza. It would have been much better to whip the monument. Right now we invest 10 turns without growth to get a monument by using that (awful

) 2h tile. So after 10 turns we have our 30h building and are size 1 with no food stored.
Had we worked the forest, we would have grown after 11 turns and could have whipped the monument then. In those 11 turns we'd have generated 22 hammers plus 30 hammers from the whip, or a total of 52. So for 1 turn more we get 22 hammers more.
Even better would have been to farm one of the grasslands. For comparison sake, if we'd have worked the forest for 8 turns and that farm for 2, we'd have the required food for the whip after the same 10 turns it costs working the 2h tile, but again with a bonus of 8*2+2*1=18 hammers, or more than half an expansive granary... In other words we'd have generated 48 hammers this way as compared to the 30 from working the PH. So working the food is 48/30 or 1.6 times better than working the bare hammers (even ignoring the extra commerce from a riverside farm).
I'm not an expert on food to hammer ratios, but I do remember reading a comment by kossin that even a plain 2f grass tile is better than a PH forest of 3h (makes sense with the 1.6 ratio I just calculated), let alone a 2h tile. I think he even called 3h tiles "junk".
Well, all this to indicate why my aversion to the 2h tile.
EDIT: On the same vein I can't imagine working the 1f2h tiles in Lakamha being better than the FP farm...