Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Matt_Ward on June 18, 2008, 02:08:16 PM
-
I often get comments from people to post my top courses I have played and often times I won't provide a thorough listing but the listing by The Met Golfer of the greater NYC's 50 top courses made me want to really study and think about the ones I would choose.
Given the reality how others are often tarred and feathered I decided to jump full tilt into the pond of GCA with my own listing.
Please keep in mind you will not find Friar's Head listed simply because I have not played the course to date.
So here goes -- more than willing to hear the comments provided those making them are prepared to hear my retorts.
By the way -- one further thing -- courses are listed alphabetically and in groupings of ten. And, given the strength of the area's courses -- only one public course cracked my listing -- Bethpage Black.
TOP TEN
Bayonne (NJ)
Bethpage / Black (NY)
Fisher's Island (NY)
Garden City GC (NY)
NGLA (NY)
Plainfield (NJ)
Sebonack (NY)
Shinnecock Hills (NY)
Westchester / West (NY)
Winged Foot / West (NY)
SECOND TEN
Essex County CC (NJ)
Fenway (NY)
Forsgate / Banks (NJ)
Hollywood (NJ)
Montclair #2 & #4 (NJ)
Piping Rock (NY)
Quaker Ridge (NY)
Sleepy Hollow (NY)
Trump National / Bedminster (NJ)
Winged Foot / East (NY)
THIRD TEN
Atlantic
Baltusrol / Lower (NJ)
The Creek Club
Engineers (NY)
CC of Fairfield (CT)
Maidstone (NY)
Metropolis (NY)
Ridgewood / E&W (NJ)
Wykagyl (NY)
Yale (CT)
FOURTH TEN
Baltusrol / Upper (NJ)
Deepdale (NY)
CC of Fairfield (CT)
Meadowbrook (NY)
Mountain Ridge (NJ)
Old Oaks (NY)
Somerset Hills (NJ)
The Stanwich Club (CT)
Wee Burn (CT)
Whippoorwill (NY)
FIFTH TEN
Alpine (NJ)
The Bridge (NY)
Canoe Brook / North (NJ)
Hamilton Farm (NJ)
Hudson National (NY)
Manasquan River (NJ)
Metedeconk National / 1st & 3rd Nines (NJ)
Morris County (NJ)
Seawane (NY)
The Tuxedo Club (NY)
-
Are there two courses at the CC of Fairfield? I have never been there and you list one in the third ten and one in the fourth. Winged Foot West and East are differentiated as is Baltusrol Upper and Lower. Just curious.
-
You missed Round Hill and Century. What are your thoughts on Blind Brook?
-
Matt
Is your Sleepy evaluation post Bahto-Hanse? Work continues and at a minimum, it is the best walk in Westchester County. Our green chairman George Sanossian is the subject of an interview with Ran which will be posted soon.
-
SPDB:
I did not miss Round Hill or Century. I like both of them but there have been improvements with a number of courses that receive little attention -- e.g. Seawane, which comes quickly to mind. I also like Blind Brook but it's more of a sporty course that drew plenty of attention because of the link to Ike.
Let me ask you a question -- do you see Round Hill or Century being better than another CT layout like Brooklawn? I don't know if you have been to Wee Burn recently but the upgraded layout there is quite good for what it offers.
Jim F:
My error on CC of Fairfield. I will need to re-calculate the listing as there is only one 18 there.
Thanks for noticing and bringing to my attention.
Corey:
Have not been back to SH since the work of Bahto/Hanse but if it happens to be better than what I have seen from years ago than clearly it's stock can only rise further.
-
The changes to CC of Fairfield have been made ...
SPDB, thanks for suggesting Century. I added it to the list to make up for the duplication with CC of Fairfield previously. Clearly, the layout in Purchase is worth including.
I'll be most interested in seeing the work Pete Dye has done with the new Pound Ridge. The official opening is set for July 1.
TOP TEN
Bayonne (NJ)
Bethpage / Black (NY)
Fisher's Island (NY)
Garden City GC (NY)
NGLA (NY)
Plainfield (NJ)
Sebonack (NY)
Shinnecock Hills (NY)
Westchester / West (NY)
Winged Foot / West (NY)
SECOND TEN
Essex County CC (NJ)
Fenway (NY)
Forsgate / Banks (NJ)
Hollywood (NJ)
Montclair #2 & #4 (NJ)
Piping Rock (NY)
Quaker Ridge (NY)
Sleepy Hollow (NY)
Trump National / Bedminster (NJ)
Winged Foot / East (NY)
THIRD TEN
Atlantic (NY)
Baltusrol / Lower (NJ)
The Creek Club
Engineers (NY)
CC of Fairfield (CT)
Maidstone (NY)
Metropolis (NY)
Ridgewood / E&W (NJ)
Wykagyl (NY)
Yale (CT)
FOURTH TEN
Baltusrol / Upper (NJ)
Century (NY)
Deepdale (NY)
Meadowbrook (NY)
Mountain Ridge (NJ)
Old Oaks (NY)
Somerset Hills (NJ)
The Stanwich Club (CT)
Wee Burn (CT)
Whippoorwill (NY)
FIFTH TEN
Alpine (NJ)
The Bridge (NY)
Canoe Brook / North (NJ)
Hamilton Farm (NJ)
Hudson National (NY)
Manasquan River (NJ)
Metedeconk National / 1st & 3rd Nines (NJ)
Morris County (NJ)
Seawane (NY)
The Tuxedo Club (NY)
-
Matt Ward,
Where's the love for Hackensack ? ;D ;D
-
Pat:
Tough call.
I like the Banks layout -- you can see Banks has a clear role in my selection for other layouts he did.
Keep in mind, Rees Jones did some nice upgrading of the place a few years back. I see plenty of similarities with a few of the holes -- witness the opening par-5's on both sides are fairly even to each other from a design perspective.
The other thing to keep in mind is that some of the more obscure layouts to some (e.g. Seawane, being one that comes to mind) have made major improvements to their overall layouts. All in all, Hackensack is a borderline line and likely would be included with other listings from those who have been able to play a wide smattering of courses throughout the NYC metro area.
-
Matt,
Would you rather play Deepdale every day or Hackensack every day ?
And, what about Westhampton ?
Surely you can't prefer Deepdale and some of the others to Westhampton, can you ? ;D
The Knoll also comes to mind, especially in the context of playing it every day.
I know your feelings on the Town of Parsippany's conditioning efforts, but the layout, the architecture, the routing and the individual features are spectacular.
-
Can't really quibble with the list too much. The inclusion of Tuxedo is dubious. Heck, I would even include Pine Barrens above Tuxedo, and it would add the company of a public to BB that you so desperately desire.
Round Hill should be included, and, yes, I would rate it higher than Brooklawn and probably a smidge higher than Wee Burn.
Can you or anyone tell me about Wykagyl post C&C?
-
Are you leaving out Friars Head for a reason?
-
Jeff, Matt said in his first post he has not played Friar's Head.
Matt -- how many of these courses make your top 100 in the U.S.? Top 50? Top 10?
-
IMO Yale and Maidstone are terribly underrated. Forsgate slightly overrated. You don't like Inwood? I was also impressed by St. Georges and Huntington, especially Huntington.
-
Very impressive, Matt. Thanks for taking the time to prepare the list.
-
Good work Matt. I have a question though. While I have not played it, how good is Mansion Ridge? I was talking to a friend the other day and he was raving about. (i think that is the name of the course, I do know it is Mansion something).
-
Matt, Have you played Huntington C C. A Dev Emmet 1910?
-
Pat:
The Knoll is not upgraded and frankly is more of a work-in-progress situation. I love the course but I don't rate my favorites based on what they might be. I rate on what they are now. Big difference to me. When the work of George Bahto is completed the full glory of The Knoll / West will be restored. At that time it will be back on my radar screen. However, it would be a major disservice to the other courses that have completed work and done well in doing it.
In regards to your comments on Deepdale v Westhampton -- that's a question of tastes. I prefer the Manhasset layout. I also see the LI design from Dick Wilson being ahead of Hackensack -- Pat, keep in mind, some courses will invariably fall out of the top 50 -- not just mine but yours or anyone else's for that matter. I am a big fan of Banks work and my listign does include several of them. Just not Hackensack for a top 50 inclusion.
Tom MacWood:
Glad to see you are still alive and participating here. Cuople of quick comments -- your mentioning of Inwood is a good one but the finished work at Seawane is worth just a bit more to me than it's rival nearby. If history alone were the criteria then Inwood would be there after hosting both the US Open and PGA. Stephen Kay's work at Seawane is well done and has brought back to life this gem in Hewlett Harbor.
In regards to Yale -- the turf conditions have improved but not so dramatically to my liking. Let me also point out there are a few holes on the inward nine at Yale that I find to be rather pedestrian when compared to the others.
You mentioned Maidstone and I find the place to be vastly overrated in various national polls. Here is a layout that benefits in having big time neighbors nearby -- e.g. SH, NGLA, Sebonack, etc, etc. I don't see the opening and closing holes as compelling architecture of the highest order and although I am a huge fan of the 9th and 14th holes I see much of Maidstone as being a little short of consistent and compelling architecture throughout the round.
Let's talk about Forsgate / Banks shall we. Don't know if you have played it recently but the layout has been significantly upgraded through the work of its new ownership group. All of the four par-3's are gems -- only Pine Valley quartet exceeds them IMHO and the overall upgrading of turf and day-to-day maintenance practices have truly elevated what Banks originally created. Ditto the fantastic restoration of the Biarritz hole at #17.
Don't have issue with St. George and / or Huntington and it's possible that one or both could crack through the remaining few spots at the rear of the list.
SPDB:
You say Tuxedo is dubious - what about the opening series of holes to begin the round? RTJ is often downgraded on GCA for a host of reasons -- I find his work at Tuxedo to be quite pleasant and the architecture engaging without being so utterly predictable as so many of his other designs.
Also, if you think Pine Barrens can make a top 50 metro NYC listing then you need to really see Ballyowen if public is your push. I didn't "desperately desire" to want to add another public layout because as I said at the outset the depth of private layouts in the overall region is likely the strongest in the nation.
We agree to disagree about Round Hill -- and you need to play / see what's been done at Wee Burn.
Last thing -- Wykagyl has benefited immensely from the C&C involvement. The layout was always there but the profusion of trees and the narrow nature of too many holes had in my mind really constricted the architectural qualities that were always there. If you have not been there recently by all means put it on your calendar.
Jim F:
Mansion Ridge is a nicely done daily fee layout from Team Nicklaus. If your friend is raving about it then I have to ask how many other top public courses within the greater NYC metro area has he played. Is it better than Ballyowen -- which I see as North Jersey's best public course? No. Is Mansion Ridge better than Centennial -- the upscale layout directly across the Hudson in Carmel? No. Is it better than what Stephen Kay did with The Links at Unionvale? No.
Mansion Ridge is built on a hilly site -- and there are a few holes of note -- the concluding hole, a 480+ par-4, brings you back to the clubhouse in fine fashion. Yet, the green designs are rather matter-of-fact save for a few.
If I created a top 50 public listing for the same region there's no doubt Mansion Ridge would be on it. It's likely placement might challenge for a top 10 position but I would need to really think about that before saying so conclusively.
-
This list alone is a compelling reason to move to the Metro Area. Wow.
-
Terry, first you would have to pass the NY bar. I hear its quite challenging!
I have lived in this area all my life and we are incredibly lucky. Matt has a couple of courses in the first two groups that I would barely find room for on the list, but that's what makes horse races. A quick word on my home course, Quaker Ridge. A renaissance is underway and there is a very good possibility that Quaker will, in the next several years, achieve a level of maintenance that, for the first time in my experience, equates to the level of architectural achievement present in the course. Many kudos to our new Superintendent and Green Chair and to Gil Hanse, who has been assisting them.
Also, to those of you surprised by the mention of Bayonne in such impressive company. It is worthy. Quite a place.
-
Jeff:
Thanks for your comments and seconding of Bayonne. For all the talk and hype that places like Shadow Creek get the work carried forward by Eric Bergstol there is well worth saluting and I would not place it among such an elite gathering of courses if the only aspect of the place was its construction. Eric has done well with a slew of marvelous holes located on property.
I'd be interested when you say there are a few courses in my first two groupings that would barely make or even not make your own listings. For disclosure purposes it would help if you can illuminate which ones you are speaking about. Try to realize this - a number of my choices came about because of fairly recent efforts by the respective clubs themselves to upgrade an dimprove upon the architecture that was there -- but was hidden or held back because of past omissions / errors.
Be very much interested in what shakes out with QR. I've always liked the course and if the momentum is present to take it to an even higher level then kudos to those spearheading the effort.
-
Matt:
Solid list. Highly accurate (save for a flip of Mountain Ridge over either Wykagyl or Metropolis...especially post restorations at each ;D). Having just seen Quaker Ridge recently, I'd 100% concure with Jeff Lewis. Finally, maintenance levels are rising dramatically and serve to highlight the course's architecture.
Had you been able to play Friars Head, I'd guess that it would handily displace Westchester/West. Thanks for your take!
S
PS...I too put Bayonne in the top ten upon it's opening...just wait until you hear from Tom Doak how it is no better than a Doak "6" ::)
-
Has anyone played both Bayonne and Chambers Bay? How do they compare ?
-
Sean:
I have not played both but can say this regarding Bayonne.
The Hudson County NJ site is quite small -- although Eric Bergstol made it a point to separate holes and to make sure that off-course views from the Jersey side were blocked by mounds in almost all instances. You do get views of the NY harbor area but it's no where near the intensity you get from nearby Liberty National although the layout there is primarily geared towards length and difficulty.
Hats off to Bergstol as well in getting the most out of such a piece of land. When playing the course you never get the sense that you are located in one of the most densely populated counties in all of the USA.
-
Sean L:
I haven't played either Bayonne OR Chambers Bay, but I've walked both of them.
The main differences are that Chambers Bay is twice as wide, and Bayonne's earthworks are at least twice as high.
Matt's tastes and my own are quite different, but I'm already on the record about most of these courses, and apparently some people are still sensitive about how I might rank some of the newer ones. ;)
-
Tom D:
While I can respect the fact that you and others may have "walked" courses in question the real issue comes down to the next step and that's actually playing them. No doubt your specific eyes are more attuned to certain things that others but when you play a course you go from what you think might happen to what can and does happen.
-
Matt, I played Morris County GC last week. I knew almost nothing about it before my outing. It was a very pleasant surprise. It wasn't long but the green sites were exceptional. And the trees were absolutely spectacular. It may qualify as a true hidden gem. I doubt many know about it.
-
Matt -
Did you say you have or have not played Friars Head? With the Southhampton courses listed I would have thought the North Fork would be represented as well.
-
Jim F:
Have not played Friar's Head to date.
Likely, given what others have opined it would be included somewhere on my listing -- possibly in the elite ten level.
Tommy W:
Glad you played Morris County -- gets little love because so many people likely have not heard about it. For those who are Seth Raynor fans it's a must play. The par-4 7th -- named "Big Ben" is one of personal best holes in the greater NYC metro area.
-
Matt:
I thought someone should answer Sean's question who'd seen both courses, so I did. Didn't say I knew all about them, but I don't think anyone who has played the two courses would dispute my general observations. Bayonne is tight with big mounds, Chambers Bay much more open with a couple of exceptions.
-
Where does Deepdale fit in? I know nothing about it except for the celebrity of some of its members.
(When I lived in the Metro area (1983), I usually ended up at Orange County, NY munis, so this is all very interesting to me)
-
Dan:
Deepdale is a VERY private layout located in Manhasset and is the handiwork of the late Dick Wilson. Well done layout with some of the more vexing greens you can find among the top tier layouts in the greater NYC metro area.
The course isn't long -- believe it's under 6,700 yards from the tips but it does place a tremendous amount of strategic thinking off the tee in order to have the proper angle into many of the well-protected putting surfaces.
-
A short time back Pat Mucci mentioned the sheer quality of so many metro NYC area courses that weren't championship type or those with plenty of yardage.
I am in the process in putting together a metro listing of courses that are less than 6,600 yards from the tips. Too often the desire to expand courses has meant a focus point only on those capable in hosting big time events.
Be curious to know those courses people like a lot but don't have that much total overall distance.
I'll post mine shortly.
-
For example, one clear example that would make my personal top ten for courses that are less than 6,600 yards from ther tips would be the #2 and #4 nines at Montclair GC in West Orange, NJ.
The #2 nine is the handiwork of Charles "steam shovel" Banks and the #4 nine is the design of Donald Ross. When you throw them together as is often the case when playing Montclair GC you encounter roughly 250 feet of elevation change and some of the most frightening greens in the entire region.
The overall lack of length matters not because the sheer details are indeed present. For those who may not be aware the club hosted the 1985 US Amateur won by Sam Randolph, to name just one noteworthy event that has been played there.
However, even if no events of stature were played there the pedigree of the design and what is there now is truly worth playing for those who venture to the area.
-
You mentioned Maidstone and I find the place to be vastly overrated in various national polls. Here is a layout that benefits in having big time neighbors nearby -- e.g. SH, NGLA, Sebonack, etc, etc. I don't see the opening and closing holes as compelling architecture of the highest order and although I am a huge fan of the 9th and 14th holes I see much of Maidstone as being a little short of consistent and compelling architecture throughout the round.
Of all your voluminous posts about how much you like hard golf courses, nothing crystalizes the differences in our points of view as much as this quote. Maidstone has some of the best green complexes in golf. If it were 600 yards longer, would you like it better? I'd like it less, I imagine.
-
Jeff:
With all due respect -- I don't rate Maidstone highly because it lacks length or difficulty -- if you believe that -- then look closely at my listing of layouts. There's plenty of courses far from the stereotypical belief that I only favor layouts with 75+ CR's and 145+ slopes.
Let's talk about Maidstone -- shall we?
The totality of the course is far less than the proponents would make it out to be. There are a number of pedestrian holes at the beginning and towards the very end of the round. Are superior holes present? Sure. There's a few of them -- but when we are talking about being in the nation's top 50 courses and the metro areas top 10 there's plenty of other candidates that often get far less attention.
You may not want to admit this but Maidstone gets a good bit of ink because of the locale it finds itself. Having big time neighbors like NGLA and Shinnecock have led many people to believe that this trio is an equal affair among all of them. In my mind, that's far from the case.
When you say Maidstone has some of the best green complexes IN GOLF (my emphasis added) then you'd better hustle over to Montclair GC and see what the combo of Banks / Ross have done there. I can name a number of other layouts that have superior green complexes but don't have a tony Hamptons location.
Before people start going all over the place with varous inane retorts let me say this again for the upteeeeenth time -- I'm not saying Maidstone is a fair or poor golf course. Not one bit. I just don't see it as being among the super elite courses that so many others do. I've given it plenty of credit for a range of things it does provide -- the steller 9th comes to mind quickly -- but if one were to look for compelling architecture through and through for the entire round you would find a picture that is truly only half full IMHO.
-
Based on your comment about improved turf conditions, can I assume you've been to Yale in the last year or so? I ask because each time I've gone back over the last 5 years it seems to be significantly better. The tree clearing has transformed the place, and the turf conditions could almost be described as good. If this trend continues, would you rank it higher, or is the back 9 too weak for your taste?
In my opinion, the back has some of the most memorable holes on the course with 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 17 all being very good. 18 has its haters, and 16 is a blah par 5, but the outrageousness of 10 makes up for that all by itself. I haven't played nearly as many courses in the area as you, so I have no basis for knowing if Yale should be higher or not. But on my personal list of favorites, both national and international, I would put Yale near the top. Even the bad holes (possibly 3 until they move the green, possibly 18, although the split fairway makes it more interesting than it was) might be disliked but they are rarely boring.
-
Thanks for this list Matt.
Having played very few courses listed I'm not sure how much the next comment is "worth", but . . .
I'd rather play each of the 3rd 10 than each of the 2nd ten.
-Ted
-
Dan:
I've been to Yale in the last year and while the turf has certainly improved -- frankly it had no place to go but up, there are a few holes at Yale which I see as being support players to the compelling architecture that is present -- that's part of my reasoning tied to the back nine.
Yale has a superb fan base within the confines of GCA and I can cetrainly understand it as there's a good many features that were able to shine once the turf and tree issues were handled.
Dan, the courses I've listed in the 2nd grouping are all VERY strong and in most instances have undergone major work to improve what was there already. Think of it this way -- a course in the 3rd listing -- would be anywhere from 21st to 30th in the metro NYC area. Given the sheer depth and qualities the area has already that's quite good in my book.
Part of the issue when rating anything is whether or not there is a depth of courses to compare / contrast. I concur with you on many points regarding Yale but I think you are giving the back side a bit more credit than I would. If you can show me that any one of the courses I've listed in the first two groupings is not worthy of its placement I'd be happy to hear your comments and rationale.
Ted K:
Since you mentioned my 3rd ten is better than my 2nd - I'd be more than interested in any details you can provide whether it be specific course to specific course or some generalized comments tied to specific areas that are lacking from my 2nd grouping.
By the way -- I don't know how recent you have played the courses listed int he 2nd ten. Many of them have made tremendous strides from where they were previously and unlike those who may not believe it the issue of length / cr / slope is far less meaningful for me than many might imagine. Look forward to your comments.
-
Jeff Lewis,
Maidstone falls into my "sporty" category.
My preference, day in and day out, is for "sporty" courses.
I routinely play two 7,200+ Florida courses from the tips, so I'm not adverse to playing long courses, but, in truth, the new lengths are beyond my ability and more importantly, beyond my "fun" threshold.
I used to have no trouble playing ANGC from the tips.
However, since the tips have been moved back, they're now beyond both thresholds, they're simply to long for me.
The same can be said of Winged Foot, Bethpage and other courses from the tips. It's not that I can't get home in two on a 500 yard par 4, just that it's not likely and it's not likely on a repetitive basis.
I like my 13 degree 3-wood and my 2-iron, but, not when I have to hit them hole after hole after hole.
As much as I might like playing them from all the way back, I'd confine the experience to once a year, at the most, since my mind knows not to bite off more than it and my body can handle.
But, I could play Maidstone from the tips every day and never tire of it.
The challenge remains along with the joy.
There is little joy in playing Winged Foot and Bethpage from the tips on a daily basis.
Perhaps a PGA Tour Pro or an amateur of considerable length would enjoy those courses from the tips, but, in viewing the broad spectrum of the golfing world, I can't imagine many golfers making that their daily choice.
Give me the Maidstone's, the Hidden Creek's, The Garden City's, the NGLA's and others that combine great architecture with a challenge that's still a joy to pursue.
-
Patrick, I agree. On any given day the chance to play Bethpage from the tips may be fun - but not every day. I wish to enjoy golf.
Maidstone was extremely fun to play. But if the low handicappers think that because it is only 6500+yds thay will be bored and will 'tear it up' I think they may be wrong.
On another note, a good friend of mine and a fella that should really participate on this site, played Atlantic today. He was MOST impressed. He's played Shinnecock and NGLA and could not say a bad word about it. He felt that it may be a little 'soft' on the approaches to really play like it was really intnded - but he had a great experience.
-
Matt, fine list, how close is it to the MET list?
I have played most of these, and would find a spot for Century. Round Hill will be up there also. As far as comments on Mansion Ridge, its far the quality of the courses on this list. I worked at GC of Purchase (another Nicklaus) for a number of years, but not sure it would make the list, but the greens were always perfect.
-
Matt, typing I M H O does not make one "H". I couldn't resist poking at you a bit in good fun. I would never consider starting a thread on my list of the best courses. I am not so bold as to presume that others would be interested, however sure I am that I am right!
-
Dean Stokes,
I've mentioned the problem with soft approaches and forward hole locations to several individuals at Atlantic.
I had heard that the issue was being addressed.
The golf course continues to improve
Maidstone's yardage can be deceptive as many rounds are played when the air is heavy
-
Pat,
How long is Maidstone from the "tips?"
-
Pat,
How long is Maidstone from the "tips?"
Phil,
The scorecard I'm looking at shows the yardage as 3,060 out, 3,255 in, for a total of 6,315.
However, this is not a very recent card and the course could be longer today.
-
Pat,
The reason I asked is that you specifically refer to playing courses from the "Tips" as not being fun. "I routinely play two 7,200+ Florida courses from the tips, so I'm not adverse to playing long courses, but, in truth, the new lengths are beyond my ability and more importantly... I used to have no trouble playing ANGC from the tips. However, since the tips have been moved back, they're now beyond both thresholds, they're simply to long for me... The same can be said of Winged Foot, Bethpage and other courses from the tips..."
Yet when refering to Maidstone you say that it is the "sportiness" of the course that gives you pleasure.
My question then is do you define a course' "sportiness" based upon it's length?
For example, can't you simply play ANGC from the regular members tees and find a golf course that really isn't that much longer than Maidstone?
I'm not picking on you, but your comments seem to imply that a course should be routinely played from the "tips" and I don't really think that is what you mean and would love if you would clarify...
Winged Foot and the Black as not being fun
-
Jeff L:
I simply listed my courses because of two reasons -- I get plenty of comments from people -- online and offline to list my courses and second because the listing from The Met Golfer poll was quite illuminating for both good and less than good reasons.
I'm more than happy to debate the reasons for my listing of such courses and if a case can be made I'd be happy to amend my listing as needed. In most cases, people are afraid to post their listings because they don't wish to offend and they also to don't want to be dis-invited for either future rounds or for initial rounds to those courses they seek to play.
Jim F:
Thanks for your comments.
I did not place CC of Purchase because so much of the course tends to the overly penal side of things. For the better player the thought of handling such a situation is not that daunting at most times but for the mid-range player the repetitive nature of the architecture there can be a waterfall of disasterous proportions.
When you mention Round Hill and Century -- I don't disagree about their qualities. But, the challenge is not for people to spit out a few courses and say they belong -- but to create an entire listing in order to get a total picture of the respective person's interests, tastes and preferences.
No doubt when you mentioned Mansion Ridge the creation of a total public list would also be of more interest because of the access issue. I'm in the process in thinking through such a comparable top 50 list and will post that soon.
Phil Y:
WF/W and BB should NOT be played from the tips unless the player is truly a low handicap golfer. That is insane for any person to do so and often causes the issue of slow play since the player is not capable in handling the intensity of the challenges provided.
However, if people do play either of the two courses at a length tied to their skill level then it is possible for them to enjoy what has been designed.
No doubt, both layouts are tremendously demanding and will repel even the slightest of miscues. Nonetheless, both WF/W and BB are superb creations from the hands of A.W. Tillinghast.
-
I neither encouraged nor recommended anyone, least of all Pat ;D, to play BB or WF from the tips. I merely commented on his statements.
-
Matt
I see you have Atlantic in the third ten, is that the Atlantic as designed by Rees or the newly improved/renovated course after help from the Super?
-
Matt, have you played Laurel Links. I have not played all the courses mentioned but I have played about half and would put it just a notch below them but thought it might make the top 50.
-
Corey:
The mentioning of Atlantic is post course that followed the work of Rees Jones. A more "new & improved" version if you will.
Tommy W:
Good mentioning of Laurel Links -- yes, I have played it.
I would likely add that to my listing and bump one of the other courses out. Kelly Blake Moran did a marvelous job in contouring the greens -- although I am not a fan in having housing stuck right dab center in the property.
The course offers a vexing challenge on many of the holes and you need to properly position one's shots in order to have even a remote shot on the greens.
It's amazing how the east end of the Island has really jumped up in quality beyond the big three that existed by themselves for so many years in Southampton.
-
Jeff,
I saw some of the equipment at QR while driving down the Hutch over the winter (when you can steal a look) and wondered what was happening.
Was most of the work done by Gil tree removal and restoration, or was their any major re-design at all?
A glimpse of Quaker Ridge is almost always worth rear ending someone. ;)
Thanks,
-
Pat,
The reason I asked is that you specifically refer to playing courses from the "Tips" as not being fun. "I routinely play two 7,200+ Florida courses from the tips, so I'm not adverse to playing long courses, but, in truth, the new lengths are beyond my ability and more importantly...
I used to have no trouble playing ANGC from the tips. However, since the tips have been moved back, they're now beyond both thresholds, they're simply to long for me... The same can be said of Winged Foot, Bethpage and other courses from the tips..."
Yet when refering to Maidstone you say that it is the "sportiness" of the course that gives you pleasure.
My question then is do you define a course' "sportiness" based upon it's length?
No, but, it's a big factor.[/color]
For example, can't you simply play ANGC from the regular members tees and find a golf course that really isn't that much longer than Maidstone?
Yes, ANGC from the Member's tees is quite sporty.
From the tips its excessive.[/color]
I'm not picking on you, but your comments seem to imply that a course should be routinely played from the "tips"
That's what you infered, it wasn't what I was implying.
I routinely play courses from the tips, however, courses that have been lengthened to accomodate PGA Tour Professionals are usually well beyond two thresholds, my ability to play them and enjoy them on a daily basis. [/color]
and I don't really think that is what you mean and would love if you would clarify... Winged Foot and the Black as not being fun
They're simply too long from the tips and not enjoyable on a daily basis.[/color]
-
One of the more unique aspects in re-assessing courses in the greater NYC area is the capacity for many people to avoid placing the "glass ceiling" on the idea that new courses can indeed make major breakthroughs and that previous "great" courses can also stumble for inaction and likely inertia.
The NYC metro area has seen the rise of a number of clubs that have taken the considerable time, effort and expense to reinvigorate themselves. That's a good thing because the bar for outstanding golf in the area has always been high.
I'll be posting a public listing -- likely only a top 25. The real unique aspect of the overall top 50 is that despite making major strides -- public golf has only one representative in the listing with Bethpage Black. Candidly, I am not thrilled that one of my previous favorite courses to play in BB has simply gone way overboard in the prusuit of distance and outright difficulty.
-
The list is very solid and I have to work hard to get Hackensack in the top 50. (It belongs there..but I aint naming the ones I would take out: too many member guest possibilities D.)
Matt, (I cant seem to be able to send you a private message) come play HGC and see what you think of our changes. More to follow as we return to our Banks roots! You will have it ahead of Forsgate soon enough...
-
Bill, I played Hackensack last week. It was in great condition as always. I love the changes to the course. I like how the third green was extended back to the tee. Was it 30 yards? Was this green a biraittz originally? I like the tree work on 16. Gives the hole a great look and makes it look more different than 8. Good tree work on 11 also. I always enjoy the greens at HGC.
Who did the work and what's next?
-
Bill:
Appreciate your take on Hackensack.
I also can understand your concerns for future invites to different clubs and their various member guest events. Unfortunately, the desire for "self interest" weighs too heavily on the minds of many people and often prevents them from being utterly candid in such a public forum.
Too often the discussion of ratings can make the skin boil for people who don't see the name of their respective club listed but many times it is these same people who may not have played all or nearly all of the candidates that have been selected, or even more importantly, seen what has happened at these respective layouts (see Forsgate as just one great example) in the last season or so as major improvements have happened.
Far too often a number of big name clubs that have always been at the top of any listing make the incorrect assumption that they shall always be listed at the top of the pecking order. I don't honor sacred cows simply because they are sacred cows and there's far too much kneeling in front of them by a good number of people -- plenty of whom are on GCA and many which are pursuing the desire to play them and will grovel in the pursuit of their objective.
Unfortunately, candor is often tempered by self interest and this site seems to be infected with that narrow-minded but clearly important objective to those who apply such weight to it.
Bill, one other thing -- I don't rate on what might be -- if work is indeed starting or planned to happen. I rate on what has been COMPLETED. That's a huge difference in my book.
Forsgate has done that work and it's there for people to see. Ditto the others I've mentioned. That's not to say Hackensack should not be commended for what they have done thus far and what additional work is being contemplated.
You are right -- it's time to play Hackensack again. Maybe we can hook up together for such a purpose. I have great respect for the work of Banks, as my list demonstrates, and the Oradell-based club does have a number of fascinating examples of his work.
One last thing Bill -- when you say "it (Hackensack) ahead of Forsgate son enough" that's quite a promise on your part because for the layout to be that far ahead it will need to be among some very elite company. We shall see ...
p.s. If you click on the icon under a poster's name I believe that will take you to the private message section.
-
Mike,
Thanks for your comments. The tree work has been ongoing for about 6 years. Holes 11 and 15 and 16 were cleaned up recently. We are doing the work in house and Rees Jones is the arch. Unlike some of his work on open-type courses, his task here was to restore in Banks' style. I know Rees takes a hit or two here, but I think people will be pleasantly surprised.
Hole 3 was most certainly a Biarritz! We are returning the front section to green height, and the front bunkers will be restored shortly, I hope! We found a GREAT old picture taken in the 30's, ask to see next time you are there. It shows the bunkers hooking all the way around the front "corners", so the restoiration is easy to follow.
When we restore 18, it will be an awesome Road Hole, arguably one of the best finishing holes in the Met area.
Did you try to fly the new (angled) bunkers on 1 and 10???
Matt,
I cant argue with you about Forsgate, it has many more true Banks features. Our course has really changed over the years. Forsgate does not compare condition-wise, but architecturally, I understand your ranking.
-
Bill:
My point on #1 and #10 at Hackensack is that you have essentially the same "type" of hole for both beginnings to each side. I see that as a potential weakness. Be curious to your take.
On the tree front that's very positive and kudos to the club indeed.
The issue with Hackensack is if there is anything beyond merely very good in the overall design. At Forsgate I can name any number of aspects Banks provided there and they have been recently improved even further. On the conditioning front I have to say that in years past you were right -- but Forsgate now is much improved on that side of the equation now.
-
Matt,
I agree that the first and 10th holes are similar short par 5's. But did you know that the first hole was designed as a par 4? The second hole was a par 5, designed with cross bunkers. The cross bunkers were never built. And at some point the irrigation pond was extended in front of the second tee, so they must have decided to shorten #2 (the carry over the pond would have been too long) and lengthen Hole 1 to a par 5.
You can't blame Banks...but I'll show you a 1960 plan of what William Gordon did...
-
Am i the only one that thinks Tamarack is better than at least five of the courses on the list?
Very cool Banks with some Silva polish. Like to hear others' thoughts.......
As Pat M would say, much more "sporty" and in my mind much more interesting than Stanwich, for example.
-
Jeff Loh:
It's always easy to say "X" course is better than five other courses and then not providing the names of the five other courses you mentioned.
Please do tell and also add the "why" rationale if you can.
I played Tamarack -- as recently as last year -- and it's a fine Banks layout. Is it better than Stanwich?
Please let me know how you see Tamarack fitting into the top course list for Connecticut. I don't see it being ahead of CC of Fairfield, Wee Burn, Yale or Stanwich.
Thanks ...
-
Matt
"better" is subjective but i would rather play Tamarack than Stanwich. Stanwich doesn't intimidate me; it just bores me. its in great shape all the time. kudos there. other than that i find it a slog.
cc of fairfield has a dramatic setting. is the land the holes are on that good? you obviously like it because you listed it twice.
No Bethpage Red??
The Red and Tamarack are both "better" than Wee Burn.
Old Oaks but no Century? Seems a little backward to me.
Never seen Atlantic but don't hear a lot of good things about it.
Hudson National? Again--some great vistas but is the golf that good?
So Tamarack in CT--behind Yale but ahead of Wee Burn and Stanwich. Top 3. Worst case Top 5. Still pretty good. And the Round Hill "ommision" is still nagging me.
-
Jeff:
Thanks.
No doubt people base their choices on where they prefer to play. Clearly, the application of the word "great" is also subjective too.
I don't doubt Stanwich can be a slog for those who see the Gordon design as limited. I am not a huge fan but still see it a bit ahead of Tamrack.
When you say no Bethpage Red -- I have to say this -- the NY metro area is blessed with the deepest array of private clubs likely anywhere. Public golf has certainly elevated itself in so many ways but only Bethpage Black can crack that elite grouping in my mind. The Red has plenty of fine holes but there are other metro public courses I would place ahead of it -- Ballyowen in Jersey being one of them.
Can't say the last time you played Wee Burn but the improvements there from the last time I played there was quite startling and interesting to see.
Century too is a fine course but Old Oaks has the more compelling property and overall routing, in my mind. No doubt it's possible one can like either a bit more but the other course is still a fine choice.
You downplay Atlantic simply from the comments of others. For Hudson National you don't say if you played it or simply base comments from others or from simply touring the property. I am not saying TF did a superlative job that would place it among his alltime best but the golf is not as bad as so many others have suggested.
In sum, we are talking about the extreme rear of the line for any top 50 choices and no doubt those towards the end of the line can be replaced with a few others of note. However, many people who chime in and say "X" course is better -- have not played the others -- in recent times -- that have earned the position I have provided them. Seawane is one that comes quickly to mind. There are others.
Jeff, you obviously relish the Banks connection. Have you ever played Whippoorwill or Forsgate? If you have have played either or both -- would you place either of them behind Tamarack. And if you do -- I have to ask you straight up are you member of Tamarack because membership in any club does have a tendency to influence one's assessment. If you are not a member and you have not played either of the two Banks courses I just mentioned -- let me also throw into the picture the #4 nine at Montclair GC in West Orange, NJ -- then you need to see them before trumpeting Tamarack to the level you are suggesting.
Jeff, my mentioning of CC of Fairfield twice was a typo on my part and has been corrected. I think the property there and the totality of the holes (not all are dynamic so I do agree with you on that point) is quite good and much fun to play even the total length is not that long.
You say the omission of Round Hill is "still nagging me" and I don't doubt there will be close calls. I would politely suggest that people post their entire listing because cherry picking courses to be off and on doesn't give the fullest of pictures on how they would place courses.
Kudos to the work done at Tamarack. Given my love for Banks you have peaked my interest in seeing it again. Thanks for mentioning it.
-
Matt -- thanks for the educated reply. sorry if i was a bit caustic..no harm meant. atlantic no play....just from what i've heard. got lucky with hudson national. a six pack of bud light got me on for 18 holes for about a year and a half every monday. dont get me wrong...good golf course but how do i say it. just leaves me a little "cold". perhaps i should have said it earlier....westchester west is the most under rated track in the met area. thanks for putting it in the first ten where i think it belongs. perhaps we are closer in philosophy than we know.
-
Perhaps a more telling list, and one with more relevance for most on this board, would be if Mr. Loh would list the 50 clubs in the Metro area where access is only a six-pack of Schlitz away.
-
Hamilton - Glad to see you posting again. I enjoy your perspective on many fronts.
-
Jeff:
Glad you and I are on the same page concerning Westchester / West. The Travis layout always showed up well when the pros were there and I got a kick out of the layout because it was one that Tiger -- in his limited appearances there -- could not tame.
The terrain, the overall diversity of holes -- I mean the 7th (as played during the former Buick Classic) and then you get a hole like the long dog-leg left 8th is very well done indeed.
Just shows that quality land, a superb routing and interesting greens have still got plenty of ummmph in the era of bomb and gouge.
Like I said before -- if you really like Banks designs be sure to play #4 nine at Montclair GC and of course -- Whippoorwill and Forsgate / Banks.
-
Matt;
You have to check out a cute kids program named "Phinea and Furb" on the Disney channel.
Your devotion to all things NY/NJ Metro reminds me of the show's antagonist, a evil genius who's main goal is to "take over the entire... TRI STATE AREA"
;D
-
Chip:
Thanks for the recommendation -- I'll be sure to watch !
Be curious to your take on my listing -- if you have others that should have been included -- or raised higher or lower.
-
Mr Hearst
That was Bud Light ONLY. Shlitz won't get you on Maple Moor.
I'm starting with the list now--burp.
-
Bill Brightly,
Westhampton recently returned their 17th hole to a true Biarritz, with a fronting bunker.
You should take a look at it, it plays from a little over 160 to 240.
-
Pat,
Hackensack's Biarritz is being restored to it's "full" version, with front bunkers that "hook" towards the middle. We have spent the last two years gradually reducing the grass height and hope to complete the bunker work this fall.
For those GCAers interested in what it takes to get a restoration approved by a membership...I can tell you that on an 18-hole plan 90% of the objections involved this hole... Happily, we just discovered a 1930's picture that clearly shows how the hole was constructed and that seems to have satisfied most.
-
And here it is as Banks built it:
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee169/wcb323/HoleNo3-sepiatone.jpg)
-
Bill, can you tell in the picture if the swale is part of the green? Or does the swale appear before the green, in the approach?
-
I have my own theory...what do you think?
-
Matt:
Have you played Easthampton? If yes, why do you not like it enough to include?
It sounds like you've played Liberty - no like?
You compared Inwood to Seawane but not to any others in the "bottom" 20 or so. What is it about Inwood that keeps it off your list? Have you played it since they re-did the bunkers and took out the trees? I think Tom Doak did that work although perhaps not.
You didn't mention St. George's in your reply to Tom Macwood re: Inwood. Have you played St. George's? If yes, same question as Easthampton above.
-
Jim,
I don't think ANY ofthe front sections were greens! I think Banks and Raynor and Macdonald wanted you to hit it through an approach that was bunkered on both sides.
But I favor "restoring" these front sections to putting surfaces beacuse a putting green is the closest thing we can get to the old hard and fast fairways of old, so golfers really can run it betweenthe traps. (Shorter hitters who need to run their ball on...nothing we can do about the big hitters flying irons to the green...)
-
Jim,
I don't think ANY ofthe front sections were greens! I think Banks and Raynor and Macdonald wanted you to hit it through an approach that was bunkered on both sides.
But I favor "restoring" these front sections to putting surfaces beacuse a putting green is the closest thing we can get to the old hard and fast fairways of old, so golfers really can run it betweenthe traps. (Shorter hitters who need to run their ball on...nothing we can do about the big hitters flying irons to the green...)
I'm real curious when the swales started becoming part of the green, why that happened, who first did it, and why so many then followed.
-
My guess is that Yale did it first, but George Bahto would probably have a better idea.
Once courses began installing irrigation systems, the front sections would naturally become much softer, so it would have become far more difficult to make the ball run through the swale.
Couple that with improved equipment and higher flying balls, and the holes really dont play as intended. So if you add length to the back tees and putting surfaces to the front, I think you can really replicate the designers' intent, IMO.
-
Be curious to know how many of the total 50 courses I listed have various people played ?
Would have to say that Westchester seems to possess the deepest array of quality golf in the metro NYC area.
-
Bill Brightly,
I agree with you on having the entire foot pad as putting surface.
Especially with the aerial nature of today's game.
Westhampton place a horseshoe like bunker in the front of the green, which presents a great tactical feature when the hole is cut in the forward portion of the front tier.
The Creek's version does the same except that water is substituted for sand.
The fronting hazard forces a minimum carry, which I like.
Tee variety can compensate for reduced golfing abilities.
A "full" Biarritz is a unique hole.
I hope to visit one day ..... soon.
-
Chip:
Allow me to address the suggestions you've made.
Liberty National is a very difficult course but I question where the compelling architecture is? No doubt when played from the tips at 7,400 yards to a par of 70 and with wind blowing through the site can make for a trying time. I might include it with a second visit but for now the answer is no.
Yes, I've played Easthampton but frankly it's not anything more than what better C&C courses have offered. I salute the routing given the tight quarters but the older courses that I selected have made tremendous improvements on what they previously offered.
Inwood is a close call and likely a case can be made for a few courses of that type to take a spot from one of the others rated between 40-50. There are no perfect lists or perfect answers.
Yes, Doak did some work a number of years ago and Inwood does have its moments. There's a reason the club hosted the PGA and US Open from years ago no doubt. My question to you is have you played Seawane since the work was completed there? I salute the club because so much of its qualities have been brought back to the forefront.
I've also played St. George's and it too is one of those close call courses. But, as I have said to others on this thread -- how bout people post their ENTIRE list instead of cherry picking one or more courses? That way I and others can better understand the nature of the full listing.
Chip, I said this before -- but having a listing of courses that are no more than 6,600 yards from the tips would likely be even more interesting because it would place courses that won't hold big time events in a real comparison / contrast situation with other like-minded layouts.
-
Matt:
I wasn't making suggestions, just asking questions. However, I can see why you might infer that a "question" on GCA (or any discussion group of passionate people) would be a thinly veiled "suggestion" (or maybe not so thinly veiled).
Although, by definition, I wasn't cherry picking with suggestions, I would only be tempted to do so if I had played the majority of the courses on your list plus 5-10 legitimate contenders. I'm guessing I've only played 5 of them more than once over the years so I couldn't begin to even do justice to a "Top 10" list.
My apologies for inferring that I preferred the courses I mentioned over any of those you selected. Since you have played all of them, you were most definitely able to completely answer my inquiries - for which I thank you.
Look for the thread on the < 6500 yarders real soon.
-
Be curious to know how many of the total 50 courses I listed have various people played ?
Would have to say that Westchester seems to possess the deepest array of quality golf in the metro NYC area.
Matt:
I've only been lucky enough to play four of your top 50: Bethpage Black, WF West, WF East, and Yale. I've always been amazed at how many great courses the NYC Metro area has (especially when compared to DC, where I live).
-
Chip:
No doubt, personal preferences are always a part of any golf menu for any player and for those you individually prefer so be it.
One of the more interesting aspects in living in the greater metro NYC area is how few people really see the different sub-areas that are part of the overall region. You do have Island people staying for the most part on the Island and many Jersey people do likewise. Ditto the types that play in Westchester / Fairfield.
The evolving nature of golf in the metro NYC area is clearly a by-product of the different clubs taking stock of what they have and going lengths to improve upon what they have long had.
So many people too often will apply a "tag" to a certain course -- whether it be on the "great" or "not great" listing and forever see that "tag" being a permanent feature. Unfortunately, closed eyes often lead to closed minds.
I've been fortunate have played a good smattering of the different courses and if those who have seen my list believe it is hubris on my part I do offer my apologies. It was meant to salute those clubs that have taken the time and considerable effort / $$ to continue to improve upon the compelling architecture that makes such visits so rewarding.
The most important point is that no course can expect to always be rated because of past performance.
-
Be curious to know how many of the total 50 courses I listed have various people played ?
Would have to say that Westchester seems to possess the deepest array of quality golf in the metro NYC area.
I have actually played the majority of the 50 courses you have listed and while I generally agree with both the courses that made the list and the breakdown of the lists, I have a few observations and disagreements. Observation--I am confident that once you play Friar's Head, you will have itin your top 10 (probably top 5). Disagreement--I don't really get Engineers being on the list at all let alone in the third 10. Yes, I know it has undergone renovations recently to lengthen the course but it still seems like a "gimmicky" course to me--tricked up so that guests don't come there and shoot a very low round. I have played most of the other courses in the third ten, fourth ten and fifth ten and really cannot imagine anyone (other than a member of Engineers) who could play those other courses (or numerous other courses (Century) and conclude that Engineers is superior in any way. I would also switch places between Hudson and Fenway. For what iit is worth, I would list my top 5 courses in the area (in order) as:
1. Shinnecock
2. Bethpage Black
3. Friar's Head
4. Garden City GC
5. Winged Foot West
-
Julian:
Thanks for your detailed comments ... I see you have BB as your #2 layout. Be curious to know why you would selected it over Friar's Head -- which I have not played to date yet others rave about it -- and how you see BB ahead of WF/W.
Ditto for understanding how you view Hudson National ahead of Fenway -- that's the first time I've ever heard that comment.
Since my list posted I have played Pound Ridge and now include that ... the updated listing is included for any comments ...
TOP TEN
Bayonne (NJ)
Bethpage / Black (NY)
Fisher's Island (NY)
Garden City GC (NY)
NGLA (NY)
Plainfield (NJ)
Sebonack (NY)
Shinnecock Hills (NY)
Westchester / West (NY)
Winged Foot / West (NY)
SECOND TEN
Essex County CC (NJ)
Fenway (NY)
Forsgate / Banks (NJ)
Hollywood (NJ)
Montclair #2 & #4 (NJ)
Piping Rock (NY)
Quaker Ridge (NY)
Ridgewood (E&W), NJ
Trump National / Bedminster (NJ)
Winged Foot / East (NY)
THIRD TEN
Atlantic
Baltusrol / Lower (NJ)
The Creek Club
Engineers (NY)
Maidstone (NY)
Metropolis (NY)
Pound Ridge (NY)
Sleepy Hollow (NY)
Wykagyl (NY)
Yale (CT)
FOURTH TEN
Baltusrol / Upper (NJ)
Deepdale (NY)
CC of Fairfield (CT)
Hudson National (NY)
Mountain Ridge (NJ)
Old Oaks (NY)
Somerset Hills (NJ)
The Stanwich Club (CT)
Wee Burn (CT)
Whippoorwill (NY)
FIFTH TEN
Alpine (NJ)
The Bridge (NY)
Century (NY)
Hamilton Farm (NJ)
Hudson National (NY)
Manasquan River (NJ)
Meadowbrook (NY)
Metedeconk National / 1st & 3rd Nines (NJ)
Morris County (NJ)
Seawane (NY)
p.s. Tuxedo is now out -- replaced by Century
flipped Ridgewood with Sleepy Holloy
cc of fairfield also drops one grouping - replaced by pound ridge
-
Hudson National is good, but not good enough to be listed twice...
But save that spot...
-
Funny you ask about my order of Friar's Head and Bethpage because I went back and forth on which course should be ranked higher. I think Bethpage is still marginally ahead as a pure golf course. Keep in mind that my assessment of Bethpage is based assuming a very early round there (any time after 7:30am is a very long round and nobody rakes the bunkers so after several rounds during a day, you will have lies from footprints). Also, you need to bring your own caddie at Bethpage. In addition, right now and for the past year or so while they are building their clubhouse, the opening hole at Friar's Head is the 3rd hole (which although a great hole is not a great opening hole) which takes away from the natural progression of the course that was intended. Both are terrific and I would have no issue with somebody swictching my order. As to Winged Foot West--although I recognize its greatness, I just think it is weaker than Bethpage--when I play the two courses, it is clear that they had the same designer (which cannot be said of all Tillinghast courses) because of such similar characteristics, but other than the fact that Winged Foot is private and therefore more enjoyable for obvious reasons, Bethpage to me, is the superior course--each hole at Bethpage is memorable while Winged Foot has several that are not. I also love driving out of some of the chutes at Bethpage.
Hudson v Fenway. In terms of conditioning, Hudson is far superior. The sand at Hudson seems like it is replaced on a daily basis. The fairways are always tight (sometimes a bit too soft) and the greens are terrific--always true, consistent and fast. Fenway has areas in the rough that are patchy with dirt spots. Also, I think Hudson only has one bad hole (17) while Fenway has a few. I also think Hudson is a much better second shot course (i.e., assuming a good drive down the middle on the par 4s, the second shots are always better shots). Quite franky, I think the second shots are what makes Pine Valley the finest course in the U.S.
I see you added Pund Ridge--I am scheduled to play it in a few weeks--heard great things.
BTW, have you played Garden City GC recently--it is in spectacular shape and is close to perfect in every way--even though I put it fourth on my list in terms of the quality of the golf course, I would put it first in terms on enjoyability and the course I would most like to play every day.
-
Julian
I am not sure I come anywhere close to agreeing with you in regard to Hudson National and Fenway. In fact, I would offer that Hudson has no real superior holes and a few outright bad ones 5,8,17 while Fenway has no bad holes (17?) and a few superior ones 2,3,15.
-
Bill:
Thanks for noticing the second printing of HN.
The updated listing includes the following ...
TOP TEN
Bayonne (NJ)
Bethpage / Black (NY)
Fisher's Island (NY)
Garden City GC (NY)
NGLA (NY)
Plainfield (NJ)
Sebonack (NY)
Shinnecock Hills (NY)
Westchester / West (NY)
Winged Foot / West (NY)
SECOND TEN
Essex County CC (NJ)
Fenway (NY)
Forsgate / Banks (NJ)
Hollywood (NJ)
Montclair #2 & #4 (NJ)
Piping Rock (NY)
Quaker Ridge (NY)
Ridgewood (E&W), NJ
Trump National / Bedminster (NJ)
Winged Foot / East (NY)
THIRD TEN
Atlantic
Baltusrol / Lower (NJ)
The Creek Club
Engineers (NY)
Maidstone (NY)
Metropolis (NY)
Pound Ridge (NY)
Sleepy Hollow (NY)
Wykagyl (NY)
Yale (CT)
FOURTH TEN
Baltusrol / Upper (NJ)
Deepdale (NY)
CC of Fairfield (CT)
Meadowbrook (NY)
Mountain Ridge (NJ)
Old Oaks (NY)
Somerset Hills (NJ)
The Stanwich Club (CT)
Wee Burn (CT)
Whippoorwill (NY)
FIFTH TEN
Alpine (NJ)
The Bridge (NY)
Century (NY)
Hamilton Farm (NJ)
Hudson National (NY)
Manasquan River (NJ)
Metedeconk National / 1st & 3rd Nines (NJ)
Morris County (NJ)
Seawane (NY)
Tuxedo Club (NY)
Julian W:
Thanks for the detailed reply.
Let me go over a few point you made. You harp on the conditioning dimension for Fenway v HN. How bout you begin from the design perspective? You also state vaguely that Fenway "has a few" bad holes. Care to elaborate / explain?
Julian, I think you missed the point on how Fenway changes pace so well -- how the routing takes you throughout the property and how the greens are well contoured and protected.
You also state that BB is superior to WF/W. How do you possibly account for the better defended greens at WF/W compared to the benign ones you face for the most part at BB. Any approach at WF/W is well protected and missing to either sides guarantees a real struggle. You state that BB has all memorable holes - Julian, please explain for me how "memorable the 18th hole" is for a closing hole of such a highly rated course like BB? Also, isn't it fair to say that BB has overdosed on the muscle dimension when playing -- where is the finesse play?
You also state WF/W has "several that are not" (memorable holes). Can you elaborate the specific holes and your reasoning. One last question -- how many times have you played each?
Thanks ...
-
I have played each of Winged Foot West and Bethpage Black several times in the past year, each time from the tips. I am fairly long off the tee and my playing partners each time are very long hitters. My main issue with Winged Foot West is the lengthening of the course. I do not think it was the intent of Tillinghast to hit long irons and utility woods with your second shots into those greens. It seems as if the course is now designed just for the pros in the US Open. The greens are very undulated and a precision shot is necessary--even with a great drive (265 plus), the second shot into many of the par 4s requires a long iron or a utility wood. Bethpage, also, a "bomber's" course requires the same, but the greens are more receptive to a long iron. In addition, the par 3 3rd hole at Winged Foot West, which I think used to be a great hole, is not 240 plus yards (with no run-up area) to a green which requires a very high shot (certainly not a long iron or utility wood). I probably misstated that there are a few holes that are not memorable--the problem is the second shots on the par 4s get jumbled because (assuming you are trying to get on in 2) you are always using long irons to get to the greens.
As to Hudson v Fenway, I have only played Fenway once so I am going to play it again before I critique it any further. I have played Hudson many times.
Thanks.
-
Matt:
Your inclusion of The Bridge caught my eye. It never seems to get much positive press as a golf course (and not just because it's Big 3 neighbors + Atlantic, FH and Sebonack get all the attention). Even Bayonne and Liberty Natl seem to have more fans. It just seems like nobody thinks much of it except you until now. There are other boosters out there, for sure.
This is not a suggestion, just a question. Why The Bridge over Easthampton (an easy comparison) or perhaps the better question is, why The Bridge over the 10+ close calls already mentioned in this thread?
-
Julian:
Appreciate your comments but you forget the marching orders Tillie received when designing the courses there at WF -- "build us a man-sized course." Over the course of time because of advancing ball and club technology advancements the nature of a number of holes at both layouts at WF were altered. Adding length in certain key spots was needed to bring back into focus what was originally sought. I am not a proponent of added length at all the holes -- most notably the silly extreme length at #12 on the West. I do agree with your example on the 3rd at the West -- no need for 240 yards. It wasn't exactly being killed for birdies when the hole played "only" 218 yards.
When you say the West is now only designed for the pros in a US Open -- how do you square the desire for the massive yardage increases at Bethpage Black?
Let me also point out that dexterity off the tee is the more tested dimension at WF/W. Not only is distance required at both courses -- but you need to work the ball better at the Mamaroneck layout than the one in Farmingdale. WF/W has a number of turning points off the tee -- the 1st, 4th, 8th, 14th, 16th, 17th and 18th, are all quick examples of each. BB is more straightforward in just hitting it long. On the green side of the argument, WF/W is easily the more demanding because of the way the bunkers are squeezed tighter to the landing areas and the pitch of the greens canbe rather demanding for any mis hit into them.
The lone aspect that BB does have over WF is the scale of the property and the unique rolling Manetto hills you encounter when playing there. If anything WF is proof positive that you don't need a home run site to have a home run course.
Chip:
Many thanks for your always insightful questions.
For me, The Bridge possesses one of the most unique sits in all of the metro NYC area. I was enthralled on my first visit from simply hitting practice balls on the gorgeous range which overlooks The Great Peconic and all the spectacular scenery.
I was also impressed with the rolling nature of the actual golf course itself. I can only say that the inclusion of power carts since its opening days is a must because the severity of the property -- especially on heat / humid days we are encountering now -- makes a walk there quite exhausting -- even Bethpage Black is an easier walk and that says something to me.
Easthampton doesn't have the site that The Bridge occupies. It is crammed into a small piece of property and I salute what C&C did in order to fashion an 18-hole routing that works well inso many spots. The issue for me is whether C&C have advanced their efforts through the product at Easthampton. Frankly, it doesn't for me. That's not to say the layout is not good -- it is but it's not cutting new ground in terms of what they have done previously. In comparison, Rees Jones did add a good bit to his resume, at least for me, with his work at The Bridge. No doubt the proponents of C&C will always prefer the "look" they provide to their courses. On the flip side those who are avowed fans of C&C will likely detest much, if not all, of what comes from Rees Jones. I take a more pragmatic and elastic viewpoint on that point.
Chip, the "close calls" you mention are really towards the back end of my listing. I agree with the take Tom Doak provides that you often have a greater range of courses that fall in the 5-6 range but when you move up to 7 the list narrows and clearly when you get to 8 it becomes even narrower.
I've played The Bridge a few times and Easthampton twice. Many of the detractors of The Bridge have likely only played it one time. Clearly, the course is not at the highest of levels with its lofty neighbors. But, it's far from being some wasted effort that I have seen a few people opine about.
The Bridge would have fared better if Rees did less of his scripted look and formula. Sort of borrowing what he did with the sensational Olde Kinderhook -- which if located in the NYC metro area would be a bonafide contender for top ten status among the top courses I have played.
In sum, The Bridge gets plenty of help from an outstanding site with an above average design. It could have been better and I still see enough there for it to grab a top 50 spot among the layouts I have played. No doubt, it's just my opinion.
-
Chip,
Matt is not alone. The Bridge also made it to #90 in the US on the Ran Morrisett and Tom Doak paneled Golf Magazine list in 2005.
In addition, after a slow start, it has been an overwhelming financial success, which some of its modern neighbors cannot say.
-
Matt,
21, with only 3 of your bottom 20, but playing one of your top 10 next Friday so I'm excited about that.
I think it's great you put your list and opinions out there and are willing to debate them, even when we disagree sometimes.
-
Mike:
Good to hear that.
Be curious to the one you are playing and what your take is on it. I'm guessing it might be Bayonne!
If it is the main thing to keep in mind is the massive vision one had to have in order to pull the project together in so many ways. Many people lob compliments to Shadow Creek but building on flat land in the middle of Vegas is not the same as building from absolutely a dreadful site from which Bayonne was created. Eric Bergstol did a superb job.
Mike, the real unique dimension of NYC metro area golf is, as you already know, the sheer depth of quality private clubs that are a step or two below the very elite ones.
Anyone visiting the area would help themselves immeasurable by including them on any play list if access can be secured.
Mike S:
Be curious if you have played The Bridge and your comments about the course ?
Thanks ...
-
Mike S:
Be curious if you have played The Bridge and your comments about the course ?
Thanks ...
I played it the first season. They have done a bunch of work since then and I would like to see it again. It was not a Top 100 club to me but would be a Metro 50 for me.
I have played about 35 on your list, and there are a bunch of public and privates that I would put ahead of Metropolis. The rest of the list would really just be minor tweaking up or down one level. Friars Head would be Top 10 for me.
-
Mike S. I am curious about your thoughts on Metropolis. How many times have you played it and when was the last time? What courses would you put ahead of it and why? Thanks.
-
Mike:
Ditto what Julian asked about -- Metropolis is unique for a host of reasons. Curious to know which Westchester area courses you would place above it.
-
Mike S. I am curious about your thoughts on Metropolis. How many times have you played it and when was the last time? What courses would you put ahead of it and why? Thanks.
I think 3 times and the last was probably 3 years ago after the renovation by Ken Dye (?). I have a business friend there and he is a good senior player. As he is showing me around the course, he is hitting tree after tree. Now with my game, that means I am deep in the woods! Trees in front of fairway bunkers, trees shading greens and more trees!
Obviously a very nice Tilly course when they complete the renovation by clearing out the trees. I don't know what was there before Ken Dye, but they seemed pretty happy with his work.
-
I am not sure that tree work has been an important element in any of the Ken Dye metro area renovation plans. Why immediatly give the membership a contentious issue which might cost a fee?
Is Dye presently working on any Met area courses?
-
I played with a guy the oth erday that said given 10 rounds to choose from Hudson Nat'l, Quaker Ridge, and the two Winged Foot courses, he would play 7 at HN and 1 each at the other three. Different strokes for different folks.
I played Garden City for the first time the other day as well. Wow what a fun place. What a great membership too. I cannot recall a club that had that much fun. Plus the members are dedicated to keeping pace of play. If you are playing slowly, you best let the group behind play through.
-
Mike Sweeney, et. al.,
Metropolis is a good golf course.
It was a lot better before they put the tennis courts in and ruined/modified a number of holes.
Ditto the 1st nine at Montclair.
Julian,
AWT meant for golfers to hit long irons and 3 & 4 woods into WFW's greens.
Having played it shortly after Billy Casper's win in 1959 I can attest to the fact that you could wear out your long irons and 3-4 woods.
It was always a long demanding course.
It's interesting that WFW and many, many, many other courses fell victim to tree planting programs starting in the 60's. Now, they're removing the trees to return the course to its intended configuration.
Unfortunately the same process is taking place with the putting surfaces.
Club after club is softening/flattening them.
However, I don't think they'll ever be able to restore them once they figure out that they made a mistake.
-
Jim Franklin,
I'm afraid you are incorrect about slow play at Garden City. If you play slowly there you are requested to resign.
-
Mike S, et al:
You raise a valid concern on the tree front -- but candidly how many trees is enough trees? For some -- it's anything more than one !
Metropolis is still a sound and very well done layout. If you were spraying the ball a tad too much I can understand your feelings. Still, you didn't answer the second part of my post -- if you don't see Metropolis as a top tier layout what other Westchester courses would you place above it besides the ones at WF, QR and Fenway, to name just four?
-
Still, you didn't answer the second part of my post -- if you don't see Metropolis as a top tier layout what other Westchester courses would you place above it besides the ones at WF, QR and Fenway, to name just four?
Sleepy by a mile. Metropolis should look at Sleepy's tree work, and Sleepy still needs some more work in the hole 7-12 area. Sleepy is now my favorite course in Westchester.
Hudson National - shoot me I like (not love) the place. :D
Branton Woods - Okay the two holes got squeezed and the greens are not as good, but there are some heroic shots there. It is not actually in Westchester, but Westchester can get there.
Wykagyl - I have not played it, but I am anticipating some good stuff from the C&C renovation.
Westchester CC - I think the Big course is great, and the little course is on par with Metropolis which is nothing but praise for Metropolis.
Westchester has great courses, but they are somewhat one dimensional parkland style. Sleepy and Hudson are at least different.
-
Mike:
You will, at least I think, be impressed with what has happened at Wykagyl. Always had a wonderful site but the tweakings have addaed a good bit to the place.
Please say ain't so with Hudson National -- no way above the likes of Metropolis.
You mentioned Branton Woods but you mentioned your own answer -- it's not in Westchester County.
The little brother at Westchester is a fine diversion but again you are stretching a bit to say it's comparable to Metropolis.
Interesting last take on your saying that a number of Westchester courses are "one dimensional parkland style." There's a good bit of distinctions between them -- depending upon specific location and how much up and down movement you get.
Last point -- Mike, the anti-tree crowd needs to realize that courses that remove "x" percentage of them have done a yeoman's job in moving things forward. No doubt it may be the ideal but it's better than what was there previously. No doubt the improvement -- once it's really noticed -- can and often does spur even more action on this front.
-
Mike Sweeney:
Wanted to add a bit more on Pound Ridge since I played it again yesterday during an MGWA golf event there.
I do agree on the penal nature of the course -- unless you are driving the ball consistently straight with sufficient distance for the tees you are playing it can be quite demanding. Intense is the likely better word.
I will add that the containment mounding that Pete and Perry included is also a bit of a distraction and needs to be cut accordingly to provide for balls to roll back into play. As it stands now -- the sides are covered in rough grass -- about 3 inches in height -- and it only further complicates the possibility of recoveries.
Providing a bit more fairway width in a number of locations would add to the overall playability while not compromising the inherent challenge. It seems as if the Dyes have followed the ole Trent Jones "choke hold" strategy on a number of holes there -- the 2nd being a good case in point.
The other dimension concerning the 18th hole was one my fellow playing partners agreed with that it's simply overkill to a hole that is already quite demanding.
Nonetheless, Pound Ridge does provide some really outstanding holes. The question is whether future tweakings of the course will come into fruition. We shall see ...
-
All of this is making me queasy. I moved away from the metro NY area hen I was 18 to move to so Cal, and looking at the comments about all of these courses just kills me.
I have said for a long time that southern Cal has been a barren wasteland as far as golf goes, due to the fact that I was blessed to grow up in the New York area. Man I miss so many of these courses.
-
Matt,
One other course that I think deserves consideration is Hawk Pointe In NJ. Redanman and you have your weird obsession with Morgan Hill (cousin to Hudson Hills and Pound Ridge for "tough property" ;)), but I thought HP was the best Kelly Moran course that I have played. In contrast to Laurel Links, the houses only touch on the last hole or two (a few years ago) and it is really a pretty property. It seems to have been lost here since it went private a few years ago. For me it would replace Seawane and by a nose or Alpine on your list. Thoughts?
-
Mike:
Don't doubt the qualities of Hawk Pointe but Morgan Hill takes what Kelly did there and goes a bit further.
Hawk Pointe unfortunately overdoses on the same length of par-4 -- the midlength variety time after time. There are a few exceptions of note -- the short 6th comes quickly to mind.
Mike, the "weird obsession" you state is based upon the architect taking such a tough site and doing absolute miracles to get such a finished product. Morgan Hill is a testament to Kelly's wherewithal to overcome long odds in getting a golf course situated there inspite of the terrain. That's not to say his work at Hawk Pointe is not be saluted but his work at Morgan Hill only serves to further his ability to handle tough situations and still achieve big successes.
Mike, you need to play Seawane NOW. I don't know when you were there last -- but the course has certainly lost the inane tree growth / coverage and it's more exposed to the various winds that can howl through the site. Stephen Kay and the leadership at the club deserve praise for the finished work.
In regards to Alpine - no way does Hawk Pointe take it out. Alpine just hosted the Jersey State Open and did very well. In fact, the course only yielded a handful of rounds under par and the winner's total two-under-par for 54 holes. The Tillie green contours and the unique nature of the site where level lies must be earned makes for a fine layout that flies considerably below the radar screen for most design junkies on this site and elsewhere.
The one course you mentioned that certainly has quality and can make a top 50 list is Laurel Links. I liked it a lot -- save for the centrality of the housing. Only issue is the nature of the green contours and if the speed of the greens can get too fast to be akin to putt-putt on a few holes.
-
I guess what a listing of courses in the NYC shows is just how deep the array of private club options there are throughout the immediate region.
A number of clubs have now taken stock in what has happened to their respective courses and seen fit to make upgrades, corrections, call it what one will. Not every correction is a good one but there are plenty of onesin which the work that's come forward has clearly benefited the course(s).
The issue becomes one of others taking the time to notice these improvements and not automatically assuming that courses of high standing from years ago are still meriting such acclaim now.
-
Matt,
From my perspective, Bayonne is an engineering marvel, and in many ways, it's a tremendous and exciting golf course. I'm fairly certain that Eric Bergstol got what he wanted out of the design, which is very high on visual dramatics.
I wouldn't rate it as high as you have it, however. I can't imagine what the average score is out there, frankly, and given the wind conditions, I question the narrowness of a number of holes, I question the length and thickness of the fescue surrounds, and I most seriously question the wild undulations of the greens.
Most links courses tend to have more subtle, sedate greens, and that's for a good reason. While I know The Old Course has wild ones, there is also enough width and playability to land a large jet. At Bayonne, the exactitude required by the severity of the hole locations borders on overkill in any kind of wind.
All in all, it's a really fun, exciting course and brutally demanding. I'm also betting that it could host a US Open, and in that regard, I believe it's more difficult than Whistling Straits. Still, I can't imagine playing it every day, and most of the courses in my top 20 don't share that caveat.
-
Mike:
Thanks for the detailed post / re: Bayonne.
A few reactions to your comments.
Mike, I think you are being a bit tough in your mind regarding the actual architecture present at Bayonne. The visual and engineering aspects need to be celebrated as you have indicated but Bayonne is just not some sort of "man overcoming nature and endless red tape" to create what is there today. In my mind, Bayonne goes far beyond the likes of Shadow Creek and that course is so richly celebrated for a whole host of reasons that are tied more to the creation story than what was eventually produced.
Bayonne has meat on its bones and there are plenty of holes which demonstrate that.
Eric is well traveled and has personally seen / played a number of the great courses in the UK and Ireland. His eye and appreciation is a good bit more than just some sort of developer with a vague promise on what can be done here in the States.
Mike, when you speak about the general wind conditions I have to go back to the usual retort -- it depends upon the tees one plays. Too many people are playing courses beyond their immediate ability level and then after the round concludes weigh in on the overall fairness and proclaim that such courses of this type are not playable. The reality tells me that, more often than not, players would likely form a different opinion if they adjusted where they play from rather than hold in scorn the course itself.
Does the wind blow by New York harbor. And how it does !
But, I've played in windy conditions overseas that are no less than there. Ditto for courses here in the States.
Mike, you mention "in any kind of wind" that's a bit dramatic and with only one play I can only ask how hard the wind was blowing on the day you played. When you generalize to a broader application to mean "any wind" is a bit of a sweeping generalization on your part.
Mike, if you question the narrowness of holes then check out Crystal Downs in Michigan -- where the rough is no less punishing and the narrow nature of a number of holes there is also quite exacting. Ditto the likes of Dunluce at Royal Portrush in Northern Ireland. I can name a number of other courses that follow the rough equivalent of these types of presentations. If Bayonne is held to that standard then should not these other courses?
When you talk about the wildness of the greens again I can name a number of other courses -- the upcoming PGA at Oakland Hills / South comes quickly to mind where the contours are extremely severe and require a jeweler's touch to negotiate them. Keep in mind, that at Bayonne there is sufficient space for one to land your ball and the overall length of the holes doesn't require one to land a 3-metal on the top size of a car hood to be successful. If the course followed the routine of nearby Liberty National in which they sport a layout in excess of 7,400 yards to a par of 70. If you have specific holes which are unfair or play towards that side of things I'd need to hear more from you to discuss fairly.
Mike, the course could never host a US Open because of space restrictions -- from parking to any number of other issues. The driving range is also a second tier admission since land is lacking.
Like I said, Bayonne will not be everyone's cup of tea but I truly believe it offers a playing dimension that is truly a combination of engineering daring do coupled with a golf linkage to what the great courses overseas provide. Granted it's not an exact match but one that is clearly fun and entertaining nonetheless.
-
Mike:
It would help me understand your position more completely if you can place Bayonne in some sort of context. Better than what metro NYC courses you have played and which ones it would fall below.
Thanks for your thoughts / comments.
-
Mike Cirba,
The fairways at Bayonne are quite generous.
It's the density of the Fescue that needs to be dealt with..
Irrigated Fescue roughs are not conducive to a good golfing experience, let alone scoring.
At Hidden Creek they don't irrigate the Fescue, which allows you to find your ball, and hit a reasonable recovery shot.
Bayonne's Fescue is excessively penal.
You may not find your ball even if you know where it landed, within a foot or two. And, extracting it may cause you a strained ligament or worse.
If Bayonne reconfigured their irrigation system for the rough I think it would improve the golf course tremendously.
Eric did a fabulous job of creating a neat golf course from nothing.
-
Pat / Mike, et al:
The issue of the depth and penal nature of fescue rough is really tied to just how close the stuff is to the line of play.
I have no issue with hay-like grass PROVIDED it is not immediately next to the line of play -- for examp,e, if one had fairway then a six foot strip of secondary rough and then you immediately hit the hay-like stuff.
That would be extreme -- that's what I encountered at Dunluce at Royal Portrush when I last played there a few years back on a number of holes there.
When I have played Bayonne I don't doubt the penal nature of the fesuce rough in many spots. However, that type of grass growth was not so close to the fairway areas. You needed to truly hit an offline shot to get to the most demanding of circumstances.
Pat, in your own words the fairways at Bayonne are "quite generous." If someone hits a shot that is 20 or more yards offline then the penalty for such situations can be extreme and the golfer is subject to whatever the golf gods allow.
That's totally fair game in my book.
-
I just had another low handicap friend of mine play Hudson National and he LOVED the place. He was raving about the course and that the greens were perfect. Why do so many on this site not give Hudson credit?
-
Matt W -
Enjoyed your Top 50 and certainly confess to some differences of opinion... but that's expected. I applaud your inclusion of Bayonne in your first 10. I wholeheartedly agree... one of the most inspiring and fun golf courses I've seen, period.
Must admit that I didn't read every post in these four pages... but a couple of questions...
1. Suprised not to see any reference to Manhattan Woods. Have you played it and if so, why does it not qualify?
2. I love 15 holes at Plainfield but the three down in that flat back corner of the property definitely would eliminate its chances to be in my Met top 10.
I'd be curious to hear about the other noteworthy Met tracks that you have yet to play and are high on your list.
SN
-
Scratchy -
Friars Head is one Matt has not played, and probably the only one of note.
-
Jim
What does having "perfect" greens mean? Would that be perfect like Prairie Dunes and Merion and Friar's Head or perfect like any of newer courses with a large maitanance budget and USGA greens running at 13?
How much credit do you want people on this site to give to Hudson National? Matt has it in his Met area top 50 which is pretty darn good.
I have not played the majority of the top 50 but I can certainly think of a few Met area courses not on his list that I prefer to play over Hudson National (Rockaway Hunting and Huntington CC come immediately to mind.
Nonetheless, regardless of "where I would prefer to play" it is a Doak 6.
Why don't you ask some questions of your friends that are providing you with all this information?
-
What questions would you like me to ask? They like the greens that roll at 13 and I can't blame them. I am not going to take points away from HN because they have a large maintenance budget. When one friend that plays the New York courses a lot more than I tells me he would play HN 7, WFW 1, WFE 1, and QR 1 out of ten, then that means something.
I prefer Garden City or National.
-
Scratch:
For me, the greatness of Bayonne is the twofold story on man's determination (Eric Bergstol) to overcome long and demanding odds to build such a quality course. I still find it hard to believe that golf of that caliber could be built in Hudson County of all places !
You comments on the layout being inspiring and fun is well placed in my mind. I don't doubt many will comment upon the tightness of the property but as Pat Mucci said previously, there is sufficient width in so many spots. I also like the transition sequence of different holes. It reminds me of a classic baseball pitcher who can alter speed, type and location of one's pitches.
You asked a few questions. Couple of quick retorts.
Manhattan Woods is a hodge-podge of different hands on the golf course itself. It's not that anything is really that bad -- it's that little which is there is good enough to crack a listing in such a highly competitive golf arena -- clearly the #1 location among private clubs in the USA. I've played Manhattan Woods several times and everytime I come off the course I get the same reaction I get when I played the time before -- there's nothing there that really drives me to say I REALLY want to play there again.
The issue with Plainfield is one I can certainly agree with in terms of how different holes fit with the rest of the layout. Nonetheless, the totality of what is at Plainfield is superior to so many courses in the metro NYC area. You'd have to tell me in specific terms what courses you see ahead of it. In Jersey I don't see anything touching it -- save for the likes of PV but that's not in the NYC metro area. It would also help for you to tell me what is deficient with the "extra" holes created at Plainfield. Truth be told, I'm not a huge fan of the par-3 14th when played from the extreme back tees to a frontal pin placement.
The main major candidate I've yet to play is Friar's Head and given what others have told me -- in person and on this site -- it would likely grab a top 50 placement as well. Possibly even the top ten but I won't comment until I've played it to say for sure.
Jim F:
Hudson National made my top 50 which means I value what's there. But try to realize when you stack up the older classic designed clubs in Westchester County you have some really high caliber competition to move aside. Hudson National has an easier time cracking the top 50 then it would have in cracking the top five in Westchester. That's not a putdown to HN but more of an elevation in what other layouts exist there.
Jim, regarding your buddy -- many people don't like WF/W because they get their butts royally kicked when they play it. Ditto to a lesser degree with WF/E. I think your friend needs to think it through as well with the QR round total. Hey, it's his opinion -- be curious to know how you would split your time among the courses in question?
-
Matt -
I still need to play Quaker Ridge. I was supposed to play it two weeks ago, but it fell through. I belong to a Tillinghast course and love his work. I predict a 3,3,3,1 for me with HN being the one. I did enjoy the course and think I liked it better than most here, but Tilly is Tilly and it is tough competition.
-
Thanks for the thoughtful response, Matt. I'm a big fan of Manhattan Woods (full disclosure: I'm a former member... moved from the Met section to south FL, otherwise I would still be). I think it stands up very favorably to many of the esteemed courses on your list. When thinking about my positivity about the layout, I always mentally return to my first round there. I walked off the course incredibly impressed with the uniqueness of the course, variety of looks and assignments, fairness and challenge, and the lack of intrusion by cars, homes, power lines, etc. After one round, I easily remembered every hole and even particular architectural features that I liked throughout.
I always felt that if a couple of changes could be made, it has Top 100 U.S. quality:
- the 18th green which is quite tricked-up and un-natural needs dynamite treatment
- the short par-5 15th (originally designed as a very long par-4 and then unilaterally changed by course's owner... without any revision to the green, whose size and contours were built to receive fairway wood and long-iron shots, not 3rd shot wedge approaches) should have the green reduced in size and more menacing hazards should be added in fairway and greenside for its 490 odd uphill yards to work.
With regard to Plainfield... the 15 exceptional holes owe much of their greatness to the brilliant Ross use of elevation/contour of the property. I understand when the course was re-routed to make room for the driving range (in the 1930s if I remember correctly) the course purchased that flat land where holes 13-15 were built. My impression is that those flat holes do not seem part of the whole and, while not exactly poor holes, they are out of character with the more three-dimensional designs that make the other holes at Plainfield so magnificent. I'd give it 2nd 10 status because of those demerits. You don't think 13-15 are a let-down compared to the other holes?
-
Jim
You have played Hudson National? why don't you tell us what you think of the course rather than give us your friends comments? that might make a reasonable discussion easier.
-
Matt Ward,
While the fairways at Bayonne are quite generous, you have to factor in the strong winds that sweep the site, thereby reducing the effective width of the fairways.
Searching for balls in deep thick fescue takes time, produces big numbers on the scorecard and detracts from the experience.
Hidden Creek has very generous fairways, as does GCGC and NGLA, but, the fescue is thin, not thick, because it's not irrigated.
Bayonne would be a far better golf course with thinner fescue rough.
Scratch Nathan,
Manhattan Woods with a couple of changes a top 100 ?
While I'm sure that I haven't played it as often as you have, I don't see it being a top 100 if they made 100 changes.
Can you name 5 great holes at Manhattan Woods ?
As to Plainfield, 13, 14 and 15 are pretty solid golf holes.
While the bunkering on 13 and 14 could be more in tune with the rest of the golf course, their strategic substance prevails even if their form doesn't.
-
Scratch:
With all due respect -- MH is not a top 100 candidate from the courses I have played. The architectural hodge podge of contributions from so many people (e.g. Watson, Player, Kay, et al). My God one needs a road map to figure out who did what and who made what corrections, changes. etc, etc.
I also don't see how the course merits a 75.7 CR and 149 slope from the tips. My God that would make the course nearly on par with the likes of WF/W and BB on that front. It's tough in spots but not THAT demanding.
Scratch, my list has come under a fair microscope from the varied participants. Please tell me in specificity where MH would finish on a top 50 listing. Are you saying it belongs in the top ten? Second ten? Please help me out because saying a course is good, or great, without providing some actual context is nothing more than a polite tap dance around the final result don't you think?
You say you "easily remembered" the holes -- that's a good statement because after playing there a few times I only wanted to remember a few holes period.
When you say the existing 18th green needs to receive "dynamite treatment," I have to wonder just how good that hole and others are?
Let's speak about Plainfield shall we. Yes, the holes in question were altered -- but how do they fundamentally lower the overall rigors you face from a shot values perspective? If we are going to apply a "look" factor that must be consistent at each and every turn then there are other top 100 courses in the USA (see Augusta as prime subject #1) plus others in the metro NYC area that have made modifications to their respective courses since their original opening.
Scratch, you ask are the holes in question a "letdown?" Sure to some degree but they are not fundamentally weak or so completely out of character as to make the time spent at Plainfield one iota less compelling. When you say "letdown" I don't see that a layout at the top ten level in NYC must have 18 bulletproof holes. Does Bethpage Black have 18 top holes without even the hint of flaws. No, it doesn't. Neither does Winged Foot / West and a few others at that high level. However, the sheer TOTALITY of what is there at Plainfield carries the day for me inspite of whatever minor elements that holes 13-15 bring forward.
Take what Nicklaus did at PB -- with the par-3 5th. Did his thoughts on that hole take away from the Neville design at that sacred layout? I don't think so. If you were to throw into the mix what the Fazios did with Inverness and Oak Hill / East I'd agree with you that in those instances the result that came forward stood out like a sore thumb.
Pat Mucci:
The fairways at Bayonne are wider than the ones at Dunluce at Royal Portrush and the fescue roughs / hay there borders on encroachment just off the secondary rough. Few people, save for me and a handful of others, ever bemoan that condition. And, it's a condition that exists at more than a select few top tier UK and Ireland links type courses.
At Bayonne, if you hit it thaaaaat wide of the mark then you deserve whatever the lies you get.
Pat -- how much wider than 40-50 yards across does anyone need ?
If the fairways at Bayonne were the limited width of Dunluce then I'd be in full agreement with you. They are much wider -- the only ones that are a bit narrower are the shorter holes and even then you have sufficient room.
Now, if a hurricane were to blow thru the property then that would be a different story.
The issue is proportionality to what the given widths are. At Bayonne proportionality has not been sacrificed. The other issue is getting people to play the appropriate tees for their respective game.
-
Matt Ward,
I'll guarantee you that if you played your first round at Bayonne and only hit one ball off each tee, you'd agree.
Some of the visuals are very deceiving.
I'd ask you, on the first hole where should a golfer aim ?
Without a previous experience, the golfer is clueless.
The same applies to # 10
And to a good degree on # 2, # 4, # 8 and many, many more fairways.
The width only becomes apparent when you're in the fairway, and not necessarily when you're on the tee.
A first time golfer is at a huge disadvantage and has to feel very uncomfortable as he stands on the tee.
I was lucky, I played Bayonne when I was in a great driving cycle, so, I was able to hit my drive where I was directed to hit it. Had I not been in that cycle I'd be even more critical of the Fescue.
I like the course, but, the dense Fescue detracts from the play and the experience of the golf course.
-
Corey -
I have played HN, but I did not like it as much as my friends did. I have had three seperate friends play the course and all three were excellent golfers and all three raved about the place. In fact, all three are from vastly different parts of the country to boot so no regional bias. I liked it. As I said to Matt, I would play 3,3,3,1 if I had 10 rounds between WFW, WFE, QR, and HN.
I think Fazio did an excellent job with a difficult site. The greens are fantastic and I would enjoy putting on them on a daily basis. I have not played the breadth of courses in the metro area that Matt has, but I would think HN is better than 4th 10, but I have not played the others. Hell, I thought Somerset Hills was better than what Matt thought as well.
-
Matt/Patrick,
I think Patrick's last post is an extremely valid and insightful one, and I had a very good caddie as well who gave me the proper lines, etc., but it's still very difficult to accept what the eye sees and commit to it.
One of the great things to me about Bayonne is that it IS uncompromising. It is NOT architectural light. There are blind shots, and lots of them if your line and distance aren't both appropriate. It is not a course to be trifled with, nor is it a dumbed down version of links golf polished up like Chinese food buffets for the American palate.
I absolutely loved that aspect about Bayonne.
On the other hand, Matt...when you ask what tees I played and whether they were appropriate, I'm feeling a bit patronized because we've played together a number of times and you know my game. If you tell me that I was playing the wrong set of tees at the blue 6700 yard tees, then I think you're getting too used to putting out pat responses as debating points because distance was not the issue in the least.
The wind, like most summer days along the NYC and Long Island shorelines, was relatively calm in the morning with increasing breezes by noon and beyond. By the early afternoon, winds were gusting over 20mph and steadily at 15 or so. Definitely enough to cascade shots not struck 100% solidly sideways as blithely as a ping pong ball, so that's where width matters most and that's where Patrick is absolutely correct....if you can't find your ball in the fescue, or the faux dune is so steep as to make even hacking it out to the fairway a major ordeal, then the game loses some of its fun and even challenge.
I'd also contend that hitting those greens in the appropriate spots in the wind is nigh impossible for the vast majority of golfers and I'm betting that 3-putts are as common as 2 putts on a regular basis.
You mentioned the greens at Winged Foot, or other inland courses, but I can't think of very many links courses with wildly undulating greens, save the Old Course example I mentioned earlier.
Similarly, there are the Portrush and Carnoustie examples, but similarly, I think inpenetrable rough is the rarity on links golf, and not nearly as enjoyable as the joy of hitting your ball, going to find it (and being able to), and hit it again (and being able to), that is such the pleasure on hard, firm, running, unpredictable, and raw natural links golf, much of which Bayonne presents wonderfully well.
-
Pat Mucci:
When you say an aiming point at the 1st hole is difficult -- guess what Pat, the same can be said for a ton of courses in the UK and Ireland with difficult to discern site lines for tee shots and the like. So what does that show to the point you originally made about fairway widths?
When you say the width only "becomes apparent" when you are in the fairway as a compliment to designer / developer Eric Bergstol. Many top tier courses give the "appearance" in order to put mental pressure on the player to execute properly. I don't see that as a flaw --either in Bergstol's approach or the holes in question.
You say a first timer will feel "uncomfortable" -- Pat, if the person is hooked up with a top shelf caddie the "uncomfotable" feeling can be minimized if not negated entirely.
Pat, go over and play Dunluce at Royal Portrush and other courses of that type. They are treated as world class layouts but the overall narrow nature of those courses is much more constricted than Bayonne and these same layouts have fescue rough that lies just off the secondary rough cuts on many of the holes that is as thick, if not thicker and deeper, that what you find at Bayonne.
If people are going to apply a standard of playable fescue roughs then that argument needs to be spread evenly to all such courses.
Bayonne has miles of width -- if it was anywhere near what I have found at Dunluce and other such related courses I would be happy to agree with you. Not here though.
Mike C:
Mike, I'll say this again -- discerning the proper line is part of the puzzle of any course. The celebrated and storied layouts in the UK and Ireland do this all the time. Does that make the respective golfer feel a bit uncomfortable prior to pulling the trigger at the tee. Sure it does. Guess what? That's solid golf design. Making the player unsure and failing to execute properly is what makes for a grand time at any course - including Bayonne. That's why a place like Bayonne has caddies -- if you don't have a good one that's unfortunate. Those who do have a good one -- can be blessed in so many ways.
Let's get back to the original point -- the depth and tenacity of the fescue rough at Bayonne. The fairways there are PLENTY wide -- as I said previously. My God -- is 40-50 yards across not wide enough? Should we have 100-yard fairways on such a small piece of property?
Mike, I asked what tees you played from. Yes, we've played together and I know your game to a degree but I don't where you played from when you are were at Bayonne that day. The question was a simple one -- not accusatory and it is not some sort of "pat responses" I mention as a recurring debate point. But I stand by my comment that far too often many golfers play the wrong tee boxes and then to cover up for their own poor play will use the argument of unfairness or other such drivel for the time they spent. My comment was not directed to you personally either then or now.
When you make the argument about the wind -- Mike, I'll say this again for the upteeeeeenth time -- when people play in the UK and Ireland you can play courses with heavy wind and with fairway widths that are considerably NARROWER than what you find at Bayonne and have HAY-LIKE conditions just beyond the narrow 6-foot strip of secondary rough. These same courses in the UK and Ireland are raved about here on GCA and elsewhere. Where's the consistency in the application of such comments? How bout Dunluce then be taken down a few pegs on the greatness ladder because of the conditions you and Pat talk about. I don't see people doing that and Doak has it as a 10 on his scale.
Eric is no fool -- he provided the width factor I have mentioned countless times because of the circumstances tied to the wind patterns that blow through the greater NYC harbor area. Show me a hole where you have only 20-25 yard widths with fescue rough of hay-like and dense-like situations that is awaiting the player beyond the six-foot strip of secondary rough. Please cite the clear examples because I've played the place a few times and don't recall any.
I do admit there is very dense and nearly impenetrable rough in any number of areas at Bayonne. But, the proximity to those areas is governed by the comments I have made previously and on this post now. If someone hits it that wide of the mark and expects to have a lie that allows ALWAYS for an easy and quick recovery then they have been really sipping some strong tea.
Let's talk about the greens. The green sizes are HUGE in many spots so that the wind patterns and shot executions which are needed can be accomodated. You don't find greens the size of the 8th at PV at any holes at Bayonne. Let's talk about contours -- you would need to give me a clear example where a particular green is sooooooo off-based or unfair to sound shot execution.
Is Bayonne tough in spots? Sure. But is it unfair either from a design standpoint or from a preparation mode in terms of the grass lengths? I don't see it that way and I respect what you and Pat have said.
Mike, if this site is going to praise Dunluce and other types of courses which feature narrower fairways than Bayonne and sport HAY-LIKE conditions just off the secondary six-foot rough sectins then some sort of equity and overall fairness is long overdue. I've played my share of links type courses in the UK and Ireland and the rough at quite a few of them is much more in play and they have fairway widths that can be quite vexing to find when wind speeds of 25 mph or more occur.
Jim:
Thanks for your comments -- but got to say this -- who can you say I'm wrong about HN being in the 4th ten until you have played all the other courses I have placed ahead of it?
To finish in the top 40 among courses in the greater NYC metro area is no sin or fault with that layout. But, I'll say this again -- Westchester County is likely the most COMPETITIVE county in all ofthe USA when just private courses / clubs are assessed. HN would not make my personal top five in Westchester but as I said previously that's testament to the superior depth of courses that are there.
In regards to Somerset Hills, I really like the place. But there are courses of the same relative lack of total distance -- Montclair's #2 & #4 nines comes to mind immediately, that get little national attention but have more than its share of total substance.
SH has some of the best green contours but it also has more than its share of pedestrian holes. The closing duo is rather poor and the range of qualities of the par-5 holes is not Tillie's best work by far. I do like the 11th hole but the 12th is just an overrated and over-glorified short par-3. The metro area has plenty more of this type that are better and less celebrated.
-
Mike:
Just one quick question -- where would you place Bayonne among your top courses in the metro NYC area. If not the first ten -- as you said previously -- then where specifically?
Thanks ...
-
To finish in the top 40 among courses in the greater NYC metro area is no sin or fault with that layout. But, I'll say this again -- Westchester County is likely the most COMPETITIVE county in all ofthe USA when just private courses / clubs are assessed. HN would not make my personal top five in Westchester but as I said previously that's testament to the superior depth of courses that are there.
Matt,
Have you ever been to Suffolk County, New York? You neeeeed to play some courses out there sometime. :D
-
Matt -
I agree I need to play more and also that me saying HN should be higher holds little value since I have not played the majority.
-
Matt,
There are a number of courses in your top 50 that I haven't played, including some of the most renowned, so it is difficult for me to accurately speculate where Bayonne would fall among them.
As I mentioned, I think it's a terrific golf course with a lot of strengths but just a bit bordering on overkill.
If I had to guess based on assumption of my impressions of some of the others I've yet to play, it would likely fall around 15-20.
With the fescue as it currently plays, however, I have to ask;
What is the difference between thick, impenatrable fescue and a course with water on both sides of 50 yard wide fairways? ;)
-
Mike S:
Been to Suffolk many times -- be happy to line-up the top ten in Westchester versus top ten in Suffolk. If you make the listing even longer -- say top 15 or top 20 then it's absolutely no contest for Westchester.
Jim:
Be curious as to what deficiencies your friends see with both layouts at WF and QR.
Thanks ...
Mike C:
Thanks for the reply.
Mike, I have to take you to task on the inclusion of the word overkill. Bayonne has plenty of width -- in a number of cases the fairway widths extend 40-50 yards across. I mean how much more is needed?
If the fairways were on average below 30 yards across and then you had hay-like rough immediately beyond the six-foot wide secondary rough I could more easily accept your position.
In regards to your last point I would ask you to re-read what I just posted in the above paragraph.
Mike, if someone has real difficulty in hitting 50-yard fairways then they should really love the under 30-wide fairways that Dunluce at Portrush offers. Last I checked Dunluce is listed among the top 10-15 courses in the world. If one wants to hammer Bayonne then Dunluce, and others like it, need to take a major drop as well.
-
In no order
fishers
shinnecock
national
sebonnack
friars head
maidstone
atlantic
st georges
westhampton
the bridge
Matt
If you can find two guys here that would prefer your soon to come Westchester list I will be shocked.
ps Yes fishers is in suffolk and bethpage is split by the county line but i kept it off.
-
Matt, I respectfully disagree on the question of Suffolk vs. Westchester.
I don't think there is a case where if I ranked both 1-10 that there is any spot in the batting order where a very impressive Westchester lineup would be preferable to its counterpart.
1. Shinny vs. Winged Foot West.....Shinny by miles.
2. National vs. Quaker.....National
3. Friars vs. WF East.....Friars
4. Fisher's vs. Fenway....Fisher's
5. Maidstone vs. Century....Maidstone
6. Atlantic vs. Wykagyl...Atlantic
7. Westhampton vs. Westchester....Westhampton (maybe the most debatable to some)
8. Sebonack vs. Sleepy....close but I'd give it to Sebonack
9. Easthampton vs. Siwanoy...close but I'd give it to Easthampton
10. Southampton vs. Old Oaks....close again, but I'd give it to Southampton
-
Jeff Lewis:
Hold the phone amigo ...
Shinny is not "miles" beyond Winged Foot / West. I may concede it's ahead of it but we are talking by the tiniest of margins.
In regards to Friar's -- I can't truly comment because I have not played it thus far but WF/E is not a lightweight by any means.
Forgive me for your assumption that Century takes a backseat to Maidstone. The East Hampton layout has just a few holes of note along the water -- the 9th especially. Very much overrated by a whole host of people. Century is more consistent throughout the round.
I don't see Fisher's Island as part of the Suffolk scene for reasons already mentioned. Fenway is not chump change when held against Fisher's. The Scarsdale layout can more than hold it's own.
I do concede that NGLA does have QR.
Jeff -- enough of the nonsense with Easthampton being better than Siwanoy. How bout we line up the C&C layout against the likes of Wykagyl. In that case the Westchester layout sports the edge.
You say Sebonack is over Sleepy -- I'll concede that.
Westchester is beyond the likes of Westhampton -- you are simply ignoring the qualities of the Travis layout.
How bout Atlantic v Hudson National ? That's a pick-em in my book.
You also mention Southampton over the likes of Old Oaks. No way jose.
In sum -- a very tight call.
Expand the listing to a top 15 or top 20 as I mentioned previously and Westchester has the clear edge.
Mike:
Read what I posted -- I didn't say the top ten would be an overwhelming win for Westchester but that it would still prevail.
No doubt you have a solid mix with your top five -- Shinny, NGLA, Friar's, Sebonack and likely Maidstone, but it begins to lag the further down the list you go.
Mike, you can't count Fisher's because it's really not part of the Suffolk scene although technically it's listed that way. Fisher's is more related to CT -- since that is where most access comes from. Bethpage is more about Nassua then Suffolk -- only a handful of holes are in the county.
Ad a top 15 or top 20 listing and Westchester wins big time.
In no particular order ...
Winged Foot (2)
Westchester CC
Quaker Ridge
Fenway
Century
Sleepy Hollow
Metropolis
Old Oaks
Pound Ridge
Wykaqyl
Whippoorwill
Apawamis
Anglebrook
I can list plenty more -- your Suffolk listing is top heavy and then becomes real thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin ... ;D
-
Mike S:
Been to Suffolk many times -- be happy to line-up the top ten in Westchester versus top ten in Suffolk.
Okay since you are conceding defeat on the first ten by asking for an expanded list, here goes:
Montauk
Huntington CC
Southampton
Easthampton
Laurel Links (recently praised by Matt Ward!)
Did I mention the county line goes through Bethpage?
Matt,
I don't see Fisher's Island as part of the Suffolk scene for reasons already mentioned.
You have Fishers listed in your Top 10. What scene is it apart of? Westchester? When David Patterson ask the Jersey guys to re-configure the NY county lines feel free to throw Fishers to Connecticut, until then we will keep it to courses in the county. Did you not recently throw out Branton Woods on one of my post?
Not enough Tilly for you? Let's go to Southward Ho!
Again two people who back you up and we will concede!
Matt, what courses in Westchester play on the water bringing wind into the equation?
Should we compare the public courses in each county Matt? That might work out well for you Matt!!
Matt,
It is the Triboro Bridge, try the Queens exit occasionally!
-
Pat M.
I'd say there ARE five great holes at MW and all others except 18 are good to very good:
Greats: 3, 5, 6, 11, 13, 16
Matt W.
I know your list is going under the microscope and I'm sure you knew that would happen when you put it up. You're one of the lucky ones who have played almost all of the best tracks in the area with the highest concentration of great courses. Ranking them is like splitting hairs once you get beyond NGLA, Shinnecock, WF West, Friar's Head (of course, it's THAT good) and Bethpage Black.
Methinks your knowledge about the hands involved in MW and your "need to know who did what" might handicap your evaluation of the place. How did you get around Sebonack without having a coniption ;D
The only possible evidence of Watson would be the routing, Player did almost nothing (except design the green and pot bunker elements of the course's weakest and poorest fitting hole - #18) and 17 holes of the course are absolutely Stephen Kay and Doug Smith's work... can't really figure out how you're seeing anything disjointed beyond the closer, which I already called out. What do you think looks inconsistent with the rest?
The fact that 18th green needs to be dynamited doesn't eliminate the value of the whole. That's the point you were making about the "totality" of Plainfield. My comment about MW being "Top 100 Quality" was qualified by the fact that changes to #15 and #18 would have to happen EVEN FOR ME TO THINK SO... but IMHO, the totality and individual collection of holes at MW is very unique and terrific, and I prefer the design to Atlantic, Hudson, Sleepy Hollow and many other met courses that get a lot of respect. Perhaps you could give it another look sometime when I'm up north again!
Interesting that you mentioned Fazio's work at Oak Hill... I'm playing there tomorrow for the first time. Should be interesting. Wish me luck!
SN
-
Pat M.
I'd say there ARE five great holes at MW and all others except 18 are good to very good:
Greats: 3, 5, 6, 11, 13, 16
Scratch,
I am not as low as Matt and Pat on Manhattan Woods, nor am I as high as you. I think you can make a pretty good argument that it is one of 25 or so courses that could make the bottom 10 of Matt's list depending on personal taste.
Matt is sinking in quick sand right now and since he is rerouting NY County lines maybe he can bring Manhattan Woods over the river to Westchester!
-
Matt,
This is a really good thread...I appreciate you starting it. As I mentioned earlier, I also appreciate you putting your opinions on the line, whether I agree or not. That sometimes makes for interesting discussion.
Since we're talking about Bayonne, it is currently rated number 32 on the Golfweek Modern listing. Where do you think it belongs?
When I say "over the top", I'm not talking strictly about fairway widths, or fescue depth/thickness, but about the totality of many of the golf holes. For instance, you have a hole like the 16th that requires a long accurate drive from a high perch (affected greatly by wind), and then a well-struck lengthy approach to a green stuck out into a peninsula, which depending on the drive, might be semi or totally blind. Then, coming into the green, you have an abrupt rise in front only to fall off sharply just beyond, and generally has various humps, bumps, quadrants, and knolls to contend with.
Much of this general theme is repeated again on the 17th, only without the advantage of the downhill teeshot.
It's a very exciting, very stimulating, and very adrenaline-filled course, but in stretches, I believe that a bit more restraint architecturally would have provided a more timeless and enjoyable quality to the course.
Frankly, I won't be surprised if Eric Bergstol recognizes this and makes some adjustments in coming years. It's a really worthwhile effort that just needs further refinement IMHO.
-
When you say an aiming point at the 1st hole is difficult -- guess what Pat, the same can be said for a ton of courses in the UK and Ireland with difficult to discern site lines for tee shots and the like. So what does that show to the point you originally made about fairway widths?
Matt,
Naming other courses that may have the same configuration/design flaw doesn't legitimize Bayonne's penal rough.
When you say the width only "becomes apparent" when you are in the fairway as a compliment to designer / developer Eric Bergstol. Many top tier courses give the "appearance" in order to put mental pressure on the player to execute properly. I don't see that as a flaw --either in Bergstol's approach or the holes in question.
I do.
When a ball becomes lost within three feet of the edge of the rough, on a repeat basis, I consider that to be a flaw.
But, you must look beyond the current rough.
I have no doubt that some/much of the rough was planted to stabilize the dunes, and that with maturity the rough will be thinned out, but, currently, it's excessively penal.
You say a first timer will feel "uncomfortable" -- Pat, if the person is hooked up with a top shelf caddie the "uncomfotable" feeling can be minimized if not negated entirely.
I don't buy that either.
No matter how good the caddy, he can't overcome the insecurity in the golfer's mind derived from the signals sent to his eye by the architectural features.
Pat, go over and play Dunluce at Royal Portrush and other courses of that type. They are treated as world class layouts but the overall narrow nature of those courses is much more constricted than Bayonne and these same layouts have fescue rough that lies just off the secondary rough cuts on many of the holes that is as thick, if not thicker and deeper, that what you find at Bayonne.
Citing courses with the same problem doesn't diminish the problem.
You can't ignore it.
But, as I stated, I think, with time, that the rough will be thinned out.
If it is, that would justify/support my opinion.
If people are going to apply a standard of playable fescue roughs then that argument needs to be spread evenly to all such courses.
Agreed, that's why I cited NGLA, GCGC and Hidden Creek.
They all have wide fairways and fescue roughs, but, the roughs are far thinner than Bayonne's, although GCGC is more difficult than the other two.
Bayonne has miles of width -- if it was anywhere near what I have found at Dunluce and other such related courses I would be happy to agree with you. Not here though.
We disagree
-
And While you guys argue over Westchester, Sleepy Hollow, Winged Foot et al,
I'll gp play Dove Canyon, or God help me Big Canyon
Why did I let my parents move me to California!>!?!? :D
-
Matt, do you think Bayonne would be better if they thinned out and/or lowered the rough?
-
Scratch:
Good luck at Oak Hill / East.
Suffice to say -- we see MH a bit differently. No doubt the course is tough but it's CR and slope are a tad beyond what I think is appropriate.
Is the layout a top 50 course for the NYC metro area. In my mind, it falls just outside it. Others, yourself included, see it differently. Differences in opinion make the world go round.
So be it.
Next time I have the opportunity play MH I'll be sure to look closely at the different holes you outlined.
Jim Nugent:
I don't see the fuss concerning the length of rough at Bayonne. If you go to the other more celebrated courses I have already mentioned they have daily conditions that are the same as Bayonne and HAVE even NARROWER fairways.
Will Bayonne lower the rough over the course of time. I can't really say but I can say this -- the sheer imagination to get the course built and to have varied and interesting holes speaks volumes for Eric Bergstol. For all the hype that Shadow Creek gets the Bayonne GC story is even better.
Mike C:
I went to the golfweek site and checked out the modern listing -- Bayonne is not listed yet.
Let's talk about the holes you mentioned.
The 16th generally plays downwind -- the shot is initimidating but it doesn't require close to the Herculean blow you mentioned. Strong players really don't need to hit driver there. If you miss to the right then you put yourself in a very precarious position -- as one should be.
If you play down the left center of the fairway the entire green opens up for the approach. If you hit near enough the separation point of the fairway the player has no more than 160-180 yards to the target. I don't see that as being over the top in your words.
Mike, you also forgot to mention that balls can be rolled up as the green does provide an open avenue in that regard. Is the hole tough? Sure? Is it excessively difficult? Not in my book.
In regards to #17 you play Bergstol's version of a cape-like hole.
I have to emphasize that playing the appropriate tee is key here. The extreme rear tee places tremendous pressure on the player because of the sheer length (490+ yards) and the fact that the prevailing wind is generall into the player. Hats off to Bergstol for an expansive tee that allows for the same type of cape effect but making sure that the sheer physical dimensions are kept in a reasonable manner.
After one finds the fairway -- again it is quite wide and you have plenty of bail out area to the right side. There is a landing zone for those who don't want or can't hit deep enough to the green itself. I have played plenty of unique holes in the UK and Ireland and don't see Bayonne is excessive in any manner. No doubt the velocity of the wind impacts play but there are bailout areas and angles of attack that provide alternate means of access to the hole. I consider that dimension to be quite reasonable.
Mike, you constantly mention the word "restraint." You must have seen a totally different courser than I have on the different times I have been there.
Will Bayonne modify certain aspects of the course. Likely it will. Nearly all courses do in some form or fashion. But the general presentation / theme of the holes there is well done -- for all the ink that Shadow Creek gets for being the ultimate in man-created courses I see the story of Bayonne as being even more compelling. However, unlike Shadow Creek -- the golf architecture contained within is even more unique and enjoyable to play.
Mike, you forgot to mention the greatness of the par-4 15th -- just 316 yards up the hill. With the several bunker protecting the right side. Under certain conditions -- the green can be driven but the smart play is to get into position for the short iron approach. A great transition hole between the par-3 14th and the long par-4 16th.
There's plenty there that really is a testament to Bergstol's creativity.
Pat:
You can argue all you want but let's face some reality here -- Bayonne is amply wide -- 50 yards across in many spots. Pat if someone can't find a 50-yard fairway then the player needs to revisit the practice area and get their swing in order. If the player has that much "insecurity" with that amount of width I can only imagine the kind of "insecurity" that same player would have if they played Dunluce at Royal Portrush or Crystal Downs or any other course where the hay-like rough is right on top of the narrow playing areas.
Pat, I can name plenty of top tier layouts that have narrower fairways than Bayonne -- and have as penal if not more penal rough that encroaches just outside the fairway areas. Do these courses get demerits for the presentation they provide players? A number of these courses are celebrated here on GCA.
I just want the standards to be applied evenly.
Mike S:
Get real OK !
I didn't concede a thing.
Fisher's Island is separate and apart from the general locale of Suffolk County. The main access comes via New London, CT. Mike - shall I send you a compass and map?
If you want to add Fisher's to your territorial border -- then I've got to expand Westchester to include portions of Greenwich or Fairfield County.
Let me mention that certain people here on GCA and elsewhere consider Pine Valley to be part of the Philadelphia golf section even though it is techincally in New Jersey. Guess what? I agree with them.
Mike, follow the course-to-course hook-ups that Jeff Lewis did. Be more than happy to demonstrate that after you get past the top five -- which Suffolks wins by a smaller margin than you think -- and the issue falls towards Westchester. You mention the impact of the water -- where does the physical water inrtude in the actual playing of the holes on Suffolk County? Her Mike, the H20 makes for a wonderful view but it's interplay is more cosmetic than real.
Let's talk about Bethpage shall we -- the county line includes only a portion of the 8th hole and 9th tee and some of the 10th as well. Forgive me Mike, we should include the Black because of such a limited connection. OK, sure! ::) With that type of reasoning I'll be sure to include the layouts from Rockland County since it's just across the Hudson from Westchester.
Mike, I will concede that the public dimension is better in Suffolk because of the availability of the land and the push to capture daily fee players. Westchester is simply too developed and far too expensive to go that direction.
Final comment - Mike, go the route Jeff Lewis did and I'll be more than happy to go one-on-one on any of the layouts.
-
Matt,
Pine Valley GC is a member of the Golf Association of Philadelphia. No agreements necessary.
The Philadelphia Open and Amateur have been played there. Has there ever been a NJ Open or Amateur at PVGC?
-
Wayne:
No NJSGA Am or Open have ever been contested at PV.
If memory serves, this year's Am at Little Mill was the first that ventured to that
section of the Garden State although I believe NJSGA events have been played in the AC area.
I believe PV is also a member of the NJSGA.
-
Matt,
You're right, PVGC is in the NJSGA, but they didn't want anyone to know about it. It is their dark secret and shame. Nice going outing them ;)
-
Wayne:
It's not so top secret -- you can access via the NJSGA Website for all members of the association.
-
Perhaps the Fishers Island question can be adjudicated (spell?) this way: is it a member of the Long Island Golf Association? I don't know, but the LIGA website will have the answer.
I don't want to argue the point - it's too much fun watching you guys slug it out.
I've played a few more of the Suffolk courses than Westchester County. It seems to me that a good deal of any person's overall preference will be a function of whether they prefer pure parkland courses a la Westchester County or the "semi-links" that make up the majority of the Suffolk County team. Also, the LI courses are such wonderful "golf places" - which could enhance a person's rating above & beyond the architecture on the ground (e.g. Maidstone).
-
Chip,
very good observation, I wonder what folks would prefer among quartets such as:
Inwood, Noyac, Rockaway, and Southampton (Long Island near water) or
Century, Siwanoy, Old Oaks, and Wykagyl (Westchester Parkland)
...calling Sean Berry
-
Chip:
The issue of whether a club belongs to one golf association or another is really a secondary issue. Think of the reality -- you don't access Fisher's Island from the rest of New York unless it's by private craft -- boat or plane.
All regular access comes thru New London, CT -- for the short ferry trip across. If you gauged the total miles between Fisher's Island and the mainland of New York and CT -- the Constitution State wins.
One other thing -- Fisher's Island is NOT a member of the LIGA -- but is a member of the CT State Golf Association.
In my mind -- Matt hits a home run on this topic -- Sweeney gets a called strike three.
Mark C:
Any reason why you hooked up specific courses to face-off against one another?
Siwanoy has the edge on Inwood -- better terrain and more consistent shot values across the board.
Noyac is a lower tier Suffolk County golf option -- even the most ardent supporters of the east end would likely relegate the layout to a lesser overall position. Old Oaks is not everyone's cup of tea but like Siwanoy would win out because of its more consistent presentation. In the last instance -- Southampton is a fine layout but the work C&C did with Wykagyl has clearly raised the profile of a club that was in real need of major attention. The work has certainly paid off.
-
Hold on PAaaaaaaaaaaaaaardner
Matt :you have Yale on your hit parade. YALE GC is so far EAST of FAIRFIELD County that it has membership in the RHODE ISLAND links trust.
I know the GARDEN STATE has top notch schools but was your geography teacher Springsteen , Sharpe James, or van Halen
-
Mark:
I counted courses that within 75 miles of Times Square (with all of LI being the single exception to that mileage limit) -- believe Yale makes the cut in that regard.
If you think it should be out -- fair enough -- drop Yale out and I can replace it quite easily given the sheer depth of courses in the metro NYC area.
My geography is quite good Mark -- go back and see the Fisher's Island situation and let me know who's got the better case on that one.
You still have not explained how you paired certain Westchester courses versus those on the Island.
-
Mark:
I counted courses that within 75 miles of Times Square (with all of LI being the single exception to that mileage limit) -- believe Yale makes the cut in that regard.
Matt,
Thanks for clearing up the Fishers Island situation. Since Fishers is obviously past your 75 mile limit, it falls into the Metro Ward 50 Long Island exception (Maidstone, Shinnecock, Atlantic .... all over 75 miles). Since Fishers is on your original list, according to your parameters, Fishers Island falls under the Metro Ward 50 Long Island exemption and is a part of Suffolk County, Long Island.
Thanks Matt!
By the way, I would give the nod to Atlantic over Hudson National, and you took me to task for admitting that I like Hudson. When will the tap dancing stop and you put up your 11-15 Westchester list? Mine were:
Montauk
Huntington CC
Southampton
Easthampton
Laurel Links (recently praised by Matt Ward!)
-
You can argue all you want but let's face some reality here -- Bayonne is amply wide -- 50 yards across in many spots. Pat if someone can't find a 50-yard fairway then the player needs to revisit the practice area and get their swing in order.
Matt,
50 yards effectively becomes 25 yards with the winds that sweep Bayonne.
If the player has that much "insecurity" with that amount of width I can only imagine the kind of "insecurity" that same player would have if they played Dunluce at Royal Portrush or Crystal Downs or any other course where the hay-like rough is right on top of the narrow playing areas.
You keep citing Dunluce as if it's the benchmark, it isn't.
We're talking about Bayonne.
Pat, I can name plenty of top tier layouts that have narrower fairways than Bayonne -- and have as penal if not more penal rough that encroaches just outside the fairway areas.
Name just five (5) in the U.S.
Do these courses get demerits for the presentation they provide players? A number of these courses are celebrated here on GCA.
Until you cite them, no one can draw a comparison because they remain phantom courses.
-
Matt,
A critical factor that I forgot to mention is the blind nature of many of the shots, tee shots, 2nd shots and approaches.
When you add that element to the excessively penal rough and strong winds it creates a perfect storm that many golfers, including good golfers, can't weather....... enjoyably.
As I've stated, I really like what Eric accomplished and the golf course, but, thinning the thick fescue will improve both the play and the experience at Bayonne.
-
Pat:
I can understand all that you said ... I still see Bayonne has being playable and when you have the proper caddie steering players along it can make for a worthwhile time on the course. My main point is that other courses throughout the golf world follow the pattern of Bayonne with extremely demanding fescue rough -- but the fairway widths at those place are much more narrower and they often also feature blind tee shots, 2nd shots, etc, etc.
Here are the five layout to start with ...
Bethpage Black *now kept narrower than in previous Open days. Rough can cause in spots lost balls and the related slow play.
Oakmont *day-to-day very demanding and narrower than Bayonne.
I mention Dunluce at Portrush previously and can also throw into the mixture County Down in certain specific instances.
Crystal Downs plays much narrower than Bayonne -- and the rough is no less, if not more vexing.
GC of Purchase -- very penal and overly narrow course. Don't see how members can enjoy playing there or anyone else for that matter.
Oakland Hills / South -- again more than just getting ready for the PGA Championship. Excessively narrow with rough that will limit recovery options.
Pat, you need to examine other courses that are given all-world status but play narrower than Bayonne -- much narrower in most spots, and have rough that is truly beyond what you encountered at Bergstol's Place. Consistency is needed here.
Mike S:
I included Fisher's Island originally since it's technically counted as part of Long Island. I can easily drop it off for the reasons I mentioned in the last few posts.
Mike, you embraced Fisher's Island as part of your Suffolk County team of courses. I explained -- for what it was worth -- that Fisher's Island, while technically a part of Suffolk County but is really disconnected for the reasons I spelled out previously. If you seek to include it on your course listing I'd be happy to bump into the picture courses in Greenwich or Fairfield County that are literally on the doorstep of Westchester County.
My top 15 would include ... in no particular order
Winged Foot / West
Wigned Foot / East
Quaker Ridge
Fenway
Century
Old Oaks
Pound Ridge
Hudson National
Metropolis
Sleepy Hollow
Siwanoy
Westchester CC / West
Trump National
Wykagyl
Whippoorwill
-
Pat:
I can understand all that you said ... I still see Bayonne has being playable and when you have the proper caddie steering players along it can make for a worthwhile time on the course. My main point is that other courses throughout the golf world follow the pattern of Bayonne with extremely demanding fescue rough -- but the fairway widths at those place are much more narrower and they often also feature blind tee shots, 2nd shots, etc, etc.
Here are the five layout to start with ...
Bethpage Black *now kept narrower than in previous Open days. Rough can cause in spots lost balls and the related slow play.
The rough at BPB is benign compared to Bayonne.
You're not going to lose balls that are 3 feet off the fairway at BPB.
The comparison isn't valid
Oakmont *day-to-day very demanding and narrower than Bayonne.
The rough at Oakmont is benign when compared to Bayonne.
You're not going to lose balls that are 3 feet off the fairway at Oakmont.
I mention Dunluce at Portrush previously and can also throw into the mixture County Down in certain specific instances.
Confine your comparison to U.S. courses[/color]
Crystal Downs plays much narrower than Bayonne -- and the rough is no less, if not more vexing.
I can't comment on Crystal Downs as I've never played it.
But, I'm well qualified to comment on Oakmont and BPB in comparison to Bayonne, and it's not even close. The rough at Bayonne loses balls at a voracious rate.
GC of Purchase -- very penal and overly narrow course. Don't see how members can enjoy playing there or anyone else for that matter.
I can't comment because I've never played it
Oakland Hills / South -- again more than just getting ready for the PGA Championship. Excessively narrow with rough that will limit recovery options.
Never played it either, but, TV will show how benign the rough is in comparison to Bayonne. I'll guarantee you that they aren't searching for 5 minutes for balls hit 3 feet off the fairway, and that lost balls 3 feet off the fairway aren't the norm.
Pat, you need to examine other courses that are given all-world status but play narrower than Bayonne -- much narrower in most spots, and have rough that is truly beyond what you encountered at Bergstol's Place. Consistency is needed here.
Matt, you're out of touch with reality.
The issue isn't width, it's width in conjunction with what lies beyond the fairway.
Lost balls are the norm at Bayonne, not the exception.
I'd venture to say that each foursome loses balls during the course of the round., and that can't be good.
-
Matt,
It is nice to see Metropolis on your list, I played it long ago and liked it a lot, but my memory is hazy. I remember liking two consecutive holes on the back ( 11-12 ?). Other than the famous and narrow 6th at Metropolis, what are some of your favorite holes there. Any nice par threes ?
thanks
-
Pat:
We shall agree to disagree because you seem to believe Bayonne is soooooooooo windswept that 50+ yard fairways are not sufficient to handle play. I don't see it that way. The high fescue grass you mentioned is not in play unless you earn that distinction. One other thing -- there is a secondary rough dimension at Bayonne -- usually 6-8 yards wide just off a number of the fairways. All of the fescue areas are also not 1000% uniform in terms of density and penl nature.
Speaking of reality Pat, you need to examine the nature of real width versus those courses that are left extremely narrow in a day-to-day fashion and the appropriate reward / penalty aspect is completely turned on its head. Lost balls only happen at Bayonne when extremely poor played shots happen. People encountering such situations have a couple of alternatives ...
1). Get lessons
2),. Move up to a more appropriate tee yardage for them.
3). Seek other courses to play
Pat, I've played Bethpage Black over 200 times -- the course is NOW kept extremely narror -- far narrower than it should be -- the high grass there is more than able to capture balls at the voracious rate you misapplied to Bayonne.
You won't convince me -- and I know I won't convince you. Nuff said.
-
Matt:
I don't think Crystal Downs plays narrower than Bayonne. Crystal Downs has 30 yards of bent/poa fairway with about 15 yards of bluegrass rough on either side before you get to the native.
The native roughs can be brutal in the late spring and early summer, but after that they thin out and are pretty playable. Many of the woody and weedy materials have been cleaned out in recent years, so with the exception of about four holes, you can usually find the ball even after a wild shot and play it.
It seemed to me that Bayonne had more consistently thick secondary rough, and that on many occasions you would have to stand on your head to get a stance to play out of it.
-
Matt,
I'm not sure how moving up a set of tees makes a crooked tee shot go any straighter? Can you explain that one to me?
-
We shall agree to disagree because you seem to believe Bayonne is soooooooooo windswept that 50+ yard fairways are not sufficient to handle play.
That's correct, especially when you factor in the blind nature of many of the shots.
I don't see it that way. The high fescue grass you mentioned is not in play unless you earn that distinction. One other thing -- there is a secondary rough dimension at Bayonne -- usually 6-8 yards wide just off a number of the fairways.
Some of the fairways are angled, so the width you mention isn't practical width in terms of driving the golf ball. When you combine the angled fairways with the wind and blindness that diminishes their practical width.
All of the fescue areas are also not 1000% uniform in terms of density and penal nature.
Matt, when two caddies and four golfers spend an inordinate amount of time searching for balls that were well spotted, that's excessive.
When the time is spent, hole after hole, that's excessive.
Not everyone who plays the golf course is a PGA Tour Pro.
When 5, 10, 15 and 20 hadicappers form a foursome it wouldn't be uncommon for a LEAST one ball to be in the rough on every hole.
When you play Bayonne, one your first drive, on average, how many fairways do you hit ?
I missed 2.
One due to a blind tee shot and not knowing that there wasn't fairway where I aimed. The other into a good wind on # 18 where I let the ball get away to the the right.
Speaking of reality Pat, you need to examine the nature of real width versus those courses that are left extremely narrow in a day-to-day fashion and the appropriate reward / penalty aspect is completely turned on its head.
Matt, you're not getting it.
I understand narrow fairways, I've played a lot of courses with narrow fairways, but, that's not the issue. The issue is the excessively penal nature of the rough on a wind swept course with a good number of blind shots.
You think the rough is perfect/acceptable and I believe it's too thick, too lush, mainly because it gets irrigated.
Lost balls only happen at Bayonne when extremely poor played shots happen.
That's not true.
You can hit a good shot that doesn't quite carry a mound/dune and never find your ball.
You can hit a driver into the heel, into the wind and see it carried into the rough or over a dune into the rough and never find it again.
I like Bayonne, but, not to the point where I'm wearing blinders with respect to my ability, other golfers abilities or the excessively penal nature of the rough.
People encountering such situations have a couple of alternatives ...
1). Get lessons
So PGA Tour Players on windy courses with blind shots never hit it off the fairway ? ? ?
Should they take lessons ?
2),. Move up to a more appropriate tee yardage for them.
That's not going to solve shot pattern dispersal on a windy site with blind holes.
3). Seek other courses to play
If the rough isn't thinned, that will happen and a good golf course will be in trouble. Golfers have to want to play a course reptetively for it to succeed.
If the experience ceases to be fun, the club/course will perish.
Pat, I've played Bethpage Black over 200 times -- the course is NOW kept extremely narror -- far narrower than it should be -- the high grass there is more than able to capture balls at the voracious rate you misapplied to Bayonne.
I'm aware of that, but, that's not the point.
At BPB you can FIND your ball within 5 minutes.
At BPB you can extract your ball without breaking your wrist.
That's not the case with Bayonne.
The rough is too thick and too lush.
With thinning out the course can ONLY get BETTER.
If the rough isn't thinned out, the future of the course, it's ability to attract members will be challenged
You won't convince me -- and I know I won't convince you. Nuff said.
That's why they have judges and juries.
I've made my case, I'll let them decide.
-
Pat M:
I'll say this again -- if Bergstol had created a narrow corridor of 20-25 yards fairways with grass of the type you have indicated then your argument would have standing. That's not the case -- if people can't hit such targets then the real fly in the ointment isn't the course but likely the golfer themselves.
Pat, you keep on leaving out one element I've mentioned countless times --it's not just narrow fairways but courses which COMBINE narrow fairways and then have extremely penal rough that borders the course. Bethpage Black is now much more narrower than it was meant to be played or how it was played prior to the US Open formula they now follow. Then the rough at BB is extremely dense and lush and likely lost balls are the norm there. It's even worse than Bayonne. You don't find the ball within five minutes as you so quickly opine. I can attest to that after having played there this year and sitting behind group after group conduct a full scale FBI search for their lost ammo -- the result being six hour golf.
Like I said before -- I've made my case. You won't convince me - or vice versa. I've played the course (Bayonne) more than once -- likely far more times than the people who are bellyaching on this lone aspect.
Mike C:
When people play certain tee markers many times they'll choose to play markers on the edge of their respective games. What this means is that people will NEED to marry both sufficient distance and optimum accuracy in order to attempt to successfully handle the demands presented.
If these same people were to move one box forward it's likely the self-imposed pressure to do both things as I mentioned above would be less so and the likely possibility that they would hit more fairways and be in better position to score would in all probability increase.
Mie, c'mon for God's sake -- the fairways at Bayonne for many of the holes are 50+ in terms of total width. How much wider should they go -- 100, 200, 1/4 mile?
Yes, the site does feature wind but Bergstol was smart to provide such width as to allow people ample maneuvering room to get around.
Mike, if someone truly can't hit a 50+ yard fairway then it's not the fault of the course -- even if hay-like rough exists. Mike, if you played Dunluce at Royal Portrush or even the exalted County Down you would, for your argument to have any sustained logic / credibility, need to denounce in likely even stronger terms those respective courses even more so because they don't have anywhere near the width of fairways Bayonne consistently provides.
Tom D:
If you think Crystal Downs plays wider than Bayonne then we see those two courses in very different light.
I found CD on the two separate occasions that I played it to be extremely snug in terms of fairway widths -- narrower than Bayonne without question on any number of holes.
Let's keep in mind that the 15-yard secondary is quite dense in its overall character and even playability. In my times at CD it was much more than a secondary function but to be fair I have not been back to CD for several years so I can understand your point until I have had an opportunity to return.
Tom, when you say Bayonne had more consistently thick secondary rough I don't see that as being the case. For the sake of argument I'll say it's a draw w CD at worst. When a golf course offers a player 50+ fairways I don't see much of a case that someone can piss and moan about its overall playability. Like I said Tom to Mike, check out a number of courses across th epond where the secondary dimension is no more than a strip of 10-12 feet before you hit the really hay-like stuff. No one argues that such courses are too penal or prepared incorrectly. If Bayonne is to get thrown under the bus because of that one dimension then it's long overdue for that same criticism to be applied to other courses too.
On your last point about "standing on one's head." I find that rather amusing because I'd have to know exactly what hole / situation you were outlining in such a comment. Is such a demanding stance possible? Sure it is. But I don't see situations like that which border immediately on top of any fairway there. If a shot is hit in such a wild fashion then the penalty for such a play will be handled accordingly and that mean dire results for the poor player who failed to execute. That's fair game in my mind.
-
I know Mike C has weighed in on where Bayonne stands for him when held against the other top metro courses he has played to date.
Be curious for any who have or might post that have played the course to point out where they would place the course as it is today among the top ones they have played in the greater NYC metro area.
-
Pat M:
I'll say this again -- if Bergstol had created a narrow corridor of 20-25 yards fairways with grass of the type you have indicated then your argument would have standing.
Matt, With the wind and blindness, some fairways are effectively 20-25 yards in width.
That's not the case -- if people can't hit such targets then the real fly in the ointment isn't the course but likely the golfer themselves.
Matt, With the wind and blindness, some fairways are effectively 20-25 yards in width.
But, if you think it's the golfer, let's arrange to play the course from any tees you choose and I'll bet you that you'll be in the rough four times or more on a windy day. Even though we'll have two caddies, I'll bet that it takes a good deal of time to find balls in the rough.
The first hole is a classic. I played with a 2, an 8 and a 12 and we had to look for more than 5 minutes to find two balls on the first hole alone.
The green is totally blind, with a large dune fronting it, and, it's totally surrounded by tall, deep, thick, well irrigated fescue.
Pat, you keep on leaving out one element I've mentioned countless times --it's not just narrow fairways but courses which COMBINE narrow fairways and then have extremely penal rough that borders the course. Bethpage Black is now much more narrower than it was meant to be played or how it was played prior to the US Open formula they now follow. Then the rough at BB is extremely dense and lush and likely lost balls are the norm there. It's even worse than Bayonne. You don't find the ball within five minutes as you so quickly opine.
I can attest to that after having played there this year and sitting behind group after group conduct a full scale FBI search for their lost ammo -- the result being six hour golf.
Probably because they didn't have caddies.
The rough at BPB is benign when compared to Bayonne and BPB doesn't have anywhere near the wind that Bayonne has, and, BPB isn't BLIND on many of the holes.
There's no comparison
Like I said before -- I've made my case. You won't convince me - or vice versa. I've played the course (Bayonne) more than once -- likely far more times than the people who are bellyaching on this lone aspect.
It's a critical aspect.
As I stated, the course will get better as the fescue thins
-
Matt!
How could you leave Dyker Beach off this list!!! ;D
In all seriousness, what about Bethpage Red. What would it take to make your list?
Jeff F.
-
Jeff:
I love Dyker Beach !
Just not T-H-A-T much.
In regards to Bethpage Red it's a fine layout but I don't see it as being among the top five public courses in the metro NYC area. There was a related thread that I posted on this topic a very short time ago. Likely you can pull it back up for those discussions.
The Red at Bethpage is very good but the private depth throughout the metro NYC area is soooooooooo good -- from top to botton -- that cracking my personal top 50 is not that easy -- nor should it be given the character of the courses in general.
Jeff, one other thing -- while there are number of unique holes on the Red I also believe it benefits immensely from having the Black as a big brother. What would really be interesting is to see if one could combine the front nine of the Blue Course with a smattering of nine key holes from the Red. That would make for an interesting combo indeed.
p.s. If you see the Red as being a part of your top 50 -- where would you place it?
-
Matt,
I wonder if you gave consideration to Crestmont. I had never played it before today's NJ Seniors. Really nice Ross course that seems extremely true to his design intent. Classic bunkering with fescue-hairy eyebrow look, lots of tilt to the greens. My two best irons hit where you are not supposed to land...and bounded of the side of the green.
Having just played all the Ross Pinehurst courses this spring I felt like I was back in nOrth Carolina. A few too many pines trees for my liking, but a very fun course.
Then again, I have NO idea what course I'd knock off the list...
-
Bill:
Crestmont is a fine layout and a superb Ross contribution to the NJ golf scene.
However ...
I am not a fan of the par-5's there -- the 1st is rather ordinary although the green is quite testing. The 9th and 18th both play up the hill to the clubhouse. The 14th -- I believe that's the number is likely the best of the lot.
On the par-3 side the 11th can play to the extreme with its severe back-to-front pitch.
I really like the course but if you held Crestmont against the other top Jersey courses it would not make a top 20 list because the sheer depth of courses in the Garden State is that much better. Still, I like the layout because the property is so unique and beautiful.
-
Bill:
Kind of unique when you mentioned Crestmont but the town of West Orange has a number of interesting and well designed separate courses -- likely among the best certainly in NJ and even the metro area with the likes of the following:
* Essex County CC
* Montclair GC (particularly nines #2 + #4)
* Rock Spring (which hosts the Jersey Open next year)
* Crestmont
* Although not what it used to be one needs to mentioned Francis Bryne and its former past glory days as Essex County West.
-
Matt,
I believe Essex Fells CC also lies within West Orange.
And, don't forget the NLE which is now Essex Green Shopping Center.
That's eight 18 hole layouts in one small town.
And the little 9 holer that NLE off of Pleasant Valley Way.
-
Be curious to know from those who don't live in the immediate area when they did make a visit if there were any real surprises given what they knew about the area's golf courses and what they actually gleaned from a personal experience.
Did all of the top tier layouts match / exceed what you thought about previously?
Were there any clear choices that were a good bit less and why do you think that was the case?
-
For those who may not have seen it - good review by B Klein in the 8/23 issue of golfweek / re: Pound Ridge -- the new Dye layout in the greater NYC area.
Love the last line about "a dynamite entrance" into the greater NYC marketplace.
Anyone playing there will surely notice all the granite rock that's a part of one's time there.
-
Matt Ward,
Any chance you'll revise this list and promote Ridgewood (NJ)
Do you still feel that Trump (NJ) is a better golf course ?
-
Pat,
Thanks for carry the RCC mantel so well, especially given your recent surgery. How do you think RCC compares to Montclair 2 and 4 and also to Westchester West?
Cheers
-
Mike,
I've always felt that Ridgewood was under rated and unappreciated.
The greens are fairly small, well protected and well contoured/sloped.
# 3 West may be the only flatish green on the entire 27 holes and that green has some decent slope to it.
What's interesting is the following.
Look how good the 9 holes are that weren't part of the Barclay's routing are.
# 8 & 9 East, # 1, 7, 8 & 9 Center and # 1, 2 & 3 West.
That's a great nine holer.
Ridgewood has lived in the shadow of other AWT courses in the area due to THEIR exposure. Now that Ridgewood received equal EXPOSURE I think many are reassessing their views and judgements.
-
Patrick,
Yesterday on XM146, Peter Oosterhuis said it (Ridgewood) was now in his personal top 10 in the world. When asked if it could hold a major, he repied, "Certainly."
In another thread, treehouse member Sébastien Dhaussy found this:
According to this article from John Hawkins in GolfWorld online, a pro choose to play an other course during the Barclays week :
"Although the Barclays is scheduled to return to its old site in what amounts to a 2011 cameo, it won't be a year too late -- Ridgewood was as big a hit as you'll find among 144 guys with $10 million on the line. "Best golf course we've played all year," said Tom Pernice Jr., not the easiest man to please. The old-school look and imaginative medley of holes make this A.W. Tillinghast design a keeper, which doesn't explain why the tour will follow its commercial nose and flee to snazzy-but-raw Liberty National for the 2009 gathering.
"If this one's a 10, that one's a 2," said a veteran who played next year's site last week. "
-
Dan,
What many forget is that Ridgewood, like most clubs, is a member club, so we shouldn't confine our thoughts and comments in the context of play by PGA Tour Pros.
As a member course Ridgewood is spectacular.
Three good nines, each with their own personality.
I think it's a great member's golf course.
My one complaint is the narrowing of some fairways, especially # 7 West.
What many missed is some of the wonderful and I mean wonderful contouring that exists on the greens, like # 2 West and # 7 Center.
In addition, almost all the greens contain a good measure of slope and/or contour, so, there's never a dull moment on the greens or approaching them.
And, the greens are very well protected vis a vis bunkering.
There are uphill holes, downhill holes, doglegs left, doglegs right, short holes and long holes. It's also got a great practice facility and a world class practice putting green that will drive you crazy.
It's a real GOLFER's Golf Club.
-
Patrick - that's the exact vibe I got from the members with whom I spoke. Ridgewood didn't seem like the debutante ball type of place - rather I found to be a place where golfers ran things. And those members were beaming with pride!
-
Pat and Dan
I spoke with about 40 players and caddies at the Barclays. They were all saying what Pernice said. VJ hopped in my cart and asked about the nine holes they were not playing. He said he and others were wondering why they were not included. He asked about the 9 center green. I told him how Hanse raised the right from a foot and half. I then drove him up to the green and we discussed greens speeds now and then and the implications on the greens.
Aaron Baddely echoed everyone elses comments. I asked him why the pros liked it. He said it wasn't tricked up, you had to use strategy each hole to make sure you hit to the right spot on the fairway to give you the best chance of hitting the green in the right place. He liked that shots had to be shaped to hit the fairways in the right place. He also liked that while the rough was tough, recovery shots were there to be made. He had a big smile and said it was fun golf.
Interesting stuff to me who thought the lack of fairway bunkers was a missing element.
-
Mike - GREAT information.
Shoot - I didn't know Gil did work there.
-
I spoke with about 40 players and caddies at the Barclays.
Mike,
Did any of the players, amongst all their praise, say anything about any trees they thought should be removed?
I remember hearing comments from some players in the 2001 Senior PGA Championship that the trees left and short of the greens on 5W (14) and 6W (15) needed to go. Both of those (and many other) trees have been removed since, but I'm curious if the players were bothered by the trees left on the 3C (6) and 7E (11) tee shots, or right on the 5E (9) approach, or right on the 9W (18) tee shot. I'm not claiming those should be removed, but I do hear complaints about those trees more than any others on the course now.
Thanks.
-
Andrew,
Funny that you mentioned the trees on 6 (3C) because I was amazed at how many hit it over the trees on the left! Cabrera, Perry, etc all hit it right over them! These trees must be 230-250 yards from the tee and 80 feet tall. I was stunned.
I think trees that far from the tee are fine and present a fair challenge. Many pros tried to avoid the left trees with 3 wood, only to hang their shot right and have tree trouble on that side. Trees that are in play less than 100 yards off the tee, IMO, are the ones that have to go.
-
Pat:
I am a big fan of Ridgewood but I don't rate composite courses. The argument can be made that either the East or Center Nines could be used with the West. Either way it's a close call -- have to say this in defense of Trump National's original 18 -- it's a very good design and a close call with the likes of Ridgewood. In this case, I'd still opt for The Donald's contribution although the difference between them is no more apart than the space Affrmed had over Alydar in the Triple Crown races from years ago.
Mike P:
For what's worth -- the unique design of Montclair's #2 and #4 nines comes from the unique duo of what Ross and Banks did there respectively. The greens are indeed among the toughest in all of Jersey -- candidly, for a course just over 6,500 yards fro the tips, Montclair rarely suffers any fools.
In regards to Westchester West -- the layout that originally hosted the Classic for so many years is a one of kind gem. Better land than Ridgewood -- better combination of holes and the roster of champs over the years is among the very best the PGA Tour can produce.
Andrew:
The tree issue is still an issue -- a number of them can still be cut. You are spot on with that comment.
Gents:
What people don't realize is the serious depth of courses in the metro NYC area. The top tier has always received the rightful fanfare -- now othes can bask in the light. Next year Liberty National will present a totally different presentation. Be interesting to hear the comment from those participating in '09.
-
Matt,
I was speaking to a caddy as we walked up #3... I asked him what he thought of the course and he replied, "Fantastic. And bloody better than Westchester"
-
I am a big fan of Ridgewood but I don't rate composite courses.
The argument can be made that either the East or Center Nines could be used with the West. Either way it's a close call
East and West always seemed like the strongest combination to me, so let's use that course for comparison/rankings sake.
-- have to say this in defense of Trump National's original 18 -- it's a very good design and a close call with the likes of Ridgewood.
I've played there and don't think it's even close,
on a hole vs hole or a global comparison.
But, that's what makes horse races and bettors.
In this case, I'd still opt for The Donald's contribution although the difference between them is no more apart than the space Affrmed had over Alydar in the Triple Crown races from years ago.
The "Donald" inherited the routing.
If I had a choice of playing the two, it would be 9 or 10 out of 10 for Ridgewood.
What would your preference be ?
-
Andrew, I am out of town but I believe the Master Plan calls for the three birches and the pin oak just at the front left of 7 east tee to come down. No further tree work is called for in the holes you mentioned. There are however numerous other trees that are to be taken down per the Master Plan. Every year a few more come down.
A couple of guys clipped the pin oak on 7 east just 75 -100 yards off the tee. I would like to see some trimming on the left side of 8 west or 17.
As for 9 west or 18, both Sergio and Vijay drew the ball high over the trees. Us lesser players will still have to move the ball left to right.
-
Dan H:
With all due respect to the caddie you spoke to -- he's "bloody" daft if he remotely believes Westchester is somehow miles behind Ridgewood. I'd be happy to compare / contrast in any form you wish. Keep in mind Ridgewood played over 7,300 yards and the players still shot nearly double digit under-par and much of this has to be attributed to the fact that they players were not familiar with the course.
Westchester is well known by the players and to a man the respect the course got over the years is played out by the who's who of top tier names that won there -- the major exception being Tiger. One other thing -- compare the land, routing and sheer diversity of holes at Westchester. You want a short par-4 -- try the 7th and 10th (when routed for the former Classic event) -- you want long par-4's -- how bout the 8th, 11th, 12th and 15th -- FYI -- the 11th and 12th routinely were among the toughest par-4's played on the PGA Tour.
On the par-5 front the finale has always produced superb drama -- how bout Padraig's winning putt a few years back -- how bout Gilder's closing double eagle from the early 80's.
I love Ridgewood but don't sell short Westchester's West Course.
Pat:
I'm not sold on the East / West combo at Ridgewood. The Center does very well - especially when the 4th hole plays as par-4 as it did during the Barclays. Ditto the 2nd on Center playing as a par-4 -- the toughest hole for the entire Barclays.
Opinions are fine -- you see Ridgewood ahead of Trump National's original 18. I see it very close but I give TN the edge. Ridgewood still has tree issues that need to be trimmed or cut back entirely. A bit more air would help the place immensely and given what Mike P has added I am looking forward to when even more trees are removed or trimmed back significantly.
In terms of total rounds -- if I had ten rounds I'd opt for TN on a 6-4 margin.
-
I'm not sold on the East / West combo at Ridgewood.
The Center does very well - especially when the 4th hole plays as par-4 as it did during the Barclays. Ditto the 2nd on Center playing as a par-4 -- the toughest hole for the entire Barclays.
Matt, in a post above you indicated that you don't rate/rank/evaluate composite courses. Surely, you don't rate/rank/evaluate holes that don't exist.... save for 4 days in their lifetime.
Opinions are fine -- you see Ridgewood ahead of Trump National's original 18.
I see it very close but I give TN the edge.
Ridgewood still has tree issues that need to be trimmed or cut back entirely. A bit more air would help the place immensely and given what Mike P has added I am looking forward to when even more trees are removed or trimmed back significantly.
I think Ridgewood is moving in the right direction.
Tree removal is always a sensitive issue.
However, TN has some tree issues as well.
Trees were planted so close to the bunkers that the roots will soon be in the bunkers AND in the fall the bunkers will serve as a recepticle for the leaves. Just examine the rightside fairway bunker on # 18 and you'll see what I mean.
In terms of total rounds -- if I had ten rounds I'd opt for TN on a 6-4 margin.
You don't find a sameness in the par 3's at TN ?
-
Pat:
Fair point on the par-3 side but overall the demands off the tee and for shots into the green Trump National's original 18 is quite solid.
Even if the 2nd and 4th holes for the Center were par-5's as they normally play that respective nine is quite good. I don't see the East being that good until you reach the 3rd tee -- the first two are merely window dressing. The ending hole for the side is also rather ordinary. Either way -- it's a close call to see which one should be paired with the West.
When talking about the tree issue -- Ridgewood hass more to do on that front than TN. Too many of the trees at the Paramus layout overhang into the fairway areas. They've done a good job but more can and should be done.
Like I said -- it's close between the two but I'd give TN the slightest of edges.
-
Matt:
Any idea when you're going to play TN New?
It's opening this weekend, with DT himself hitting the first ball tomorrow morning.
I'm curious to see what you think.
I was VERY impressed.....from what I saw. I didn't play it.
-
Matt Ward,
The success of the Barclay's should serve as a catalyst with respect to accelerating the tree removal/pruning project.
Ridgewood just came up on some radar screens and as such, the efforts to improve the golf course will probably continue, hopefully, at an accelerated pace.
Ridgewood is on the ascent.
# 2 on East is more challenging than most think, especially at its increased length.
# 9 could be enhanced, but, for amateurs it presents more than an adequate challenge.
-
Jed:
I hope to play the new TN layout shortly. I am in the mountain time zone now for roughly two weeks and will not be back in the Garden State until sometime in early September.
Jed, can you provide any details even from what you saw. Is the new 18 going to be really different than the first? I've heard a number of good reports and frankly it has peaked my curiosity to see what goes.
People often bash The Donald but TN deserves plenty of credit for being a really fine layout in such a short time. What will be interesting to see is when the US Junior Boys and Girls event is played there - believe it's in '09. That will tell plenty on what other events The Donald has in mind. I believe that after Liberty National in '09 The Barclays will go there in '10. Nothing concrete mind you -- just a hunch on my part.
Pat:
You're preaching to the choir regarding the very favorable impressions that Ridgewood generated. The club deserves plenty of credit and ditto the PGA Tour staff for getting the course to present a very fair and stern challenge at the same time.
The tree issue is still one that needs attention. Whether that will prompt more action on that front is for me a wait and see situation. I hope more will be done because the clogged areas can be a downer that takes away from what the Tillinghast layout provides.
When you say Ridgewood is on the ascent -- keep in mind that other metro NYC area courses are equally making moves. You see TN as being less so than Ridgewood -- fair enough. I see the work being done there as quite impressive and worthy of a big time event to demonstrate what it can provide.
In regards to the two holes on the East -- I don't see #2 as being really that special of a hole. Other par-3's at Ridgewood offer a good bit more. The 9th is also a mediocre closer for that side.
Kudos to Ridgewood for a great event -- be curious to find out if the Tour / Barclays would entertain coming back in some sort of rotation.
-
Matt,
I won't say that Liberty National is inaccessible, but, logistically, TN has to be a vast improvement even if it's more than a little remote.
I look at TN and Ridgewood as follows.
When I wake up in the morning I like to look next to me and see a woman who doesn't need to spend two hours with make up and hair preparation.
The raw beauty is there. So it is with Ridgewood. The trees you find so objectionable are like excess makeup, easily removed. However, you seem fixated on that minor element, choosing to ignore the underlying attributes of the golf course in favor of a glitzy new comer.
Some of the holes at TN are mediocre to bad holes, Ridgewood doesn't have any mediocre to bad holes.
-
Pat:
C'mon - please. I've seen Ridgewood up close no less than you. I respect the course immensely but the tree situation is still there. They have done a good bit of work and deserve credit for that. I've said that -- several times. But, the tree removal / trim jobs are still needed.
TN doesn't have the tree issue to any degree that Ridgewood has.
It's not a "minor element" in my mind and for us to bat this ball back and forth won't change your mind or you mine. We see it differently - simple as that.
Pat, another misnomer on your part. I see TN as being slightly ahead of Ridgewood. That's my opinion. You don't share it. So be it -- again.
I do take issue with you concerning my placement of courses because you seem to believe I'm in "favor of a glitzy new comer. My analysis of TN doesn't give brownie points to the facility because of The Donald or any other such irrelevant factor. I simple opined on what I saw there and stated my collective listing of courses that I have played. Pat, my experience in weighing the merits or lack thereof of different courses isn't swayed by some sort of gimmick or other such trivial or inconsequential aspect. Disagreements will happen but I do have Ridgewood rated very highly among all the metro NYC area courses I have ever played.
And, again, let me point out, I did salute the course for what it provided during The Barclays. Several times over and over and over.
You close your comments by saying that TN has "some ... holes at TN are mediocre to bad holes." Would enjoy seeing your listing with details to support such a conclusion on your part.
-
Matt - I was just relating the caddy's comments. I've never set foot on Westchester, and am therefore completely unqualified to speak to its quality.
-
Dan:
If you ever get an opportunity to either walk or play Westchester West jump on it pronto.
It's a gem of a layout which proves that distance isn't needed to make the top players really think on all types of shots.
-
Matt,
How would you classify # 15 and # 16 at TN ? (current # 12 & # 13)
Great ?
Good ?
Mediocre ?
Bad ?
As mentioned before, the par 3's are all clones of one another, hardly a trademark of greatness.
-
Pat:
Before answering your question - how bout you answer mine which came initially from you making the statement that TN has "some ... are mediocre to bad holes."
I then asked you to explain your reasoning. Then you play tapdance and ask me to answer first. Pat, how bout you bat the ball and I'll be sure to field it after you take your swing?
One further thing -- Ridgewood isn't bulletproof and I mentioned a few holes that are indeed less than stellar. Let me also add the 1st two holes on the West Nine in that category and also the 1st on the Center Nine.
Look forward to your detailed reply to your original statement.
-
Matt Ward,
The original 16th, current 13th isn't the best of holes
With any breeze in the golfers face they can't carry the water hazard that sits well below the tee.
The area short of the water doesn't allow for laying up.
If one hits short of the water, into rough, the approach shot is nearly impossible with a relatively narrow green on a semi dogleg hole, not to receptive to a long approach from that angle, with dense woods left of the fairway and green making that approach shot even more penal, if not impossible.
The hole plays to the following yardages.
Yards
480
438
405
337
268
From 438 and 405 it remains a difficult tee shot to carry the water into a breeze, which is quite prevalent with the tee sitting high up on that hill.
The previous hole is no bargain either.
It's a fairly severe uphill hole, blind on the approach with disaster short, left and right off the tee.
While your opinion may differ on these two holes, I've heard enough about them from others, that when combined with my own experience and views, reinforce my opinion.
-
Pat:
I can understand your comments but I don't see those elements significantly lowering the course to the degree you mentioned. I also pointed out the fact that Ridgewood is far from being bulletproof.
Either way -- I still see Ridgewood as an elite area course.
Since you have seen my listing of courses -- I'd be curious to know where you would place Ridgewood in the overall metro NYC area of courses you have played? Would you have it in the first ten ? Second ten ?
Is it the best NJ course in your mind besides Pine Valley ?
Glad to know your opinions have been reinforced -- I simply see it differently.
-
Matt Ward,
The original 16th, current 13th isn't the best of holes
With any breeze in the golfers face they can't carry the water hazard that sits well below the tee.
The area short of the water doesn't allow for laying up.
If one hits short of the water, into rough, the approach shot is nearly impossible with a relatively narrow green on a semi dogleg hole, not to receptive to a long approach from that angle, with dense woods left of the fairway and green making that approach shot even more penal, if not impossible.
The hole plays to the following yardages.
Yards
480
438
405
337
268
From 438 and 405 it remains a difficult tee shot to carry the water into a breeze, which is quite prevalent with the tee sitting high up on that hill.
The previous hole is no bargain either.
It's a fairly severe uphill hole, blind on the approach with disaster short, left and right off the tee.
While your opinion may differ on these two holes, I've heard enough about them from others, that when combined with my own experience and views, reinforce my opinion.
Pat:
You are only partially right. The forced carry on that particular hole is no more than 190 yds from the 405 tee box. Yes, there is no bailout, but anyone unable to give it a reasonable go should move up to the white/reds (on the other side of the H2O). The predominant (prevailing) wind is from the SW and thus at the players back way more often than not.
What's more troubling about the hole (and redundant of the 7th as well) is its severe and narrow green that is well-crowned on three-out-of-four sides. The green rejects most anything less than perfectly lofted 7> iron onto the the middle area of it's "L" shape. The 7th's green, a rather poor attempt at a reverse redan, rejects nearly all shots without full air brakes and parachutes. A low-trajectory knockdown won't work on either green.....not exactly a great design feature , is it? These two holes (and NOT the old 15th/re-routed12th... an excellent uphill par 4) are examples of poor design and playability IMHO. Otherwise, the course is a very sturdy test on a marvelous piece of property.
For those who care, I'm told the new course opened this weekend and is visually beautiful. Friends tell me it plays much, much easier than the "older" course, as the Pro's and Super have set the tees near 6470yds and made the holes fun and pleasurable for their members, without sacrificing the strategy that remains embedded in the Tommy Fazio, Jr. design. Having walked/biked it a few times, it flows around the old course and has the bulk of its holes along the windswept ridgeback that dissects the property. It doesn't feel like excessive dirt was moved around by this Fazio. Wind will definitely impact this course and may ultimately be the fangs that toughen this track. All in all, a very solid effort by this Fazio!
-
Steve Lapper,
The 405 tee is a forward tee, the hole has a tee at 438, which would require a carry of 223 and a tee at 480 which would require a carry of 265.
I consider both carries to be more than heroic into any wind, let alone a good breeze.
If the golfer can't carry the pond, there's no where to lay up.
And, as you and I both stated, the green is extremely difficult to hit.
It's simply a bad hole despite Matt Ward's praise.
And, the four par 3's are almost identical to one another, in terms of yardage and the carry over the ponds/hazards.
# 1 and # 2 West and # 1 Center at Ridgewood aren't BAD holes.
For member play I find them to be terrific opening holes and I think # 2 can be a very demanding hole with great contourning in the putting surface, great bunkering surrounding the green and a fairly demanding drive.
# 1 Center has eaten more than a few players lunch.
# 1 West is a fairly benign starting hole, but certainly not a pushover, especially for the members who play it every day.
-
For those who care, I'm told the new course opened this weekend and is visually beautiful. Friends tell me it plays much, much easier than the "older" course, as the Pro's and Super have set the tees near 6470yds and made the holes fun and pleasurable for their members, without sacrificing the strategy that remains embedded in the Tommy Fazio, Jr. design. Having walked/biked it a few times, it flows around the old course and has the bulk of its holes along the windswept ridgeback that dissects the property. It doesn't feel like excessive dirt was moved around by this Fazio. Wind will definitely impact this course and may ultimately be the fangs that toughen this track. All in all, a very solid effort by this Fazio!
Jed:
I hope to play the new TN layout shortly. I am in the mountain time zone now for roughly two weeks and will not be back in the Garden State until sometime in early September.
Jed, can you provide any details even from what you saw. Is the new 18 going to be really different than the first? I've heard a number of good reports and frankly it has peaked my curiosity to see what goes.
Matt:
I posted pictures on this website of virtually every hole.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35774.0.html
I was very impressed by what I saw, and I believe that it will be a very enjoyable layout, more "fun" than the Old course from the looks of it.
I'm extremely excited to see it, and may have to schedule a special trip to do just that next summer sometime.
-
Steve:
Well said -- TN does have a solid site that few really talk about.
Pat:
Hold the phone amigo -- where did I "praise" the hole in question at TN. I don't see it as being as bad as you mentioned. Big difference.
Pat, the holes I listed from Ridgewood are not as grand as many others. The 1st of the West is still choked w trees and needs a good buzz cut. #2 West is another so-so hole that doesn't really add much to the table either. The 1st of the Center is really quite weak in my mind and I am aware of your feelings being different. Frankly, the tree issue is more prevalent than you let on. No doubt there's a sensitivity to the issue but other clubs have done far more on that front and Ridgewood can do more to alleviate the clutter they provide.
I do love the Paramus layout but it's far from being bulletproof. I also asked you in a previous message where would you place Ridgewood (any combo) among the top metro NYC area courses? Still waiting for you to provide some meaningful perspective on its overall placement beyond the fact that you see Trump National as a course with a number of mediocre and bad holes.
Let me also point out that Ridgewood has a redundancy with two par-3's -- the 5th on Center is a drop shot type hole -- albeit quite tough at 217 yards from the tips. You also find a similar design feature with the 6th on the East which plays downhill to a yardage of 230 yards. Not much difference on that front. The 2nd on the East is also a yawn hole for me and others. I think one of the better par-3 holes is the 3rd on the West with the bunker that cuts in on the right side to a nicely elevated target. The 6th on the West is also a mediocre hole -- nothing more than a simple short iron to a green that is quite big -- too much in fact -- for the shot being played.
Pat, like I said previously, you've repeated over and over again you love for Ridgewood. I've said it too -- just not ahead of TN. So where do you place Ridgewood overall in the metro NYC area?
-
Matt, which courses in your Metro Area Top 50 make your U.S. Top 50?
Will you do a separate post sometime (soon) of your U.S. or World Top 50?
-
Jim:
As an FYI -- I did a companion top public listing for the metro NYC area. Likely you can access that if interested.
In regards to your question of what Metro area courses make the USA top 50 or 100 I'd have to think that through. No doubt a number of them will but some won't because as I opined on this subject there are a number of unique courses in the metro NYC area that fly below the radar screen of national attention.
I have my own private listing of the top 100 courses I have played in the USA -- it does evolve. In regards to a possible world top 50 I would need to hold on that because I have not visited certain parts of the globe that likely would provide a number of key candidates for inclusion (e.g. Australia, New Zealand, Japan, to name just three).
-
Matt,
I'll respond to where I believe Ridgewood belongs in the Met Area in the next day or two.
I don't think you can compare the cookie cutter par 3's at TN to the variety that exists at Ridgewood's par 3's
-
Pat,
While I think Ridgewood's par 3's are all good golf holes, wouldn't you say that as a group, the Par 5's rank #1, the Par 4's second, and the Par 3's third?
While 3 of my 5 favorite holes there are Par 4's, ALL the Par 5's are great. So "on average" the Par 5's are the best.
-
Bill Brightly,
Years ago I remarked that Ridgewood had one of the finest sets of par 5's of any golf course.
Just because their par 5's and par 4's are outstanding, doesn't mean that their par 3's are inferior.
-
Pat:
In your reply from 9/9 you said you would reply "shortly" with your reply on where Ridgewood belongs -- I'd also like to see what other layouts you would have among your elite favorites.
Thanks ...
-
Matt,
I'm thinking Pound Ridge would be more towards my 5th 10 if it made my top 50....again, I've only played 23 now in your top 50 so it's tough to make a complete comparsion.
I think there are some real property limitations there that lead to an extremely penal design although it does feature a pretty tremendous set of green complexes.
It's amazing to me that Dye was able SQEEEEZZZZZEEEE 4 holes into the routing in the stretch from 10 through 13 given the slope of the land, the serious amount of rock, and the seemingly everpresent wetlands in that part of the course. Then, once he does, your left with trying to play the extremly ungainly (with a huge forced carry from the tee) 14th hole.
I couldn't help wishing that Dye had another 50 or so acres of usuable property here, because as mentioned, the greens offered some of his most refined and mature ideas that I've seen from him.
-
Mike:
I'm glad you've played PR and weighed in with your comments.
I like PR for what it is -- no doubt many will find it over-the-top and quite penal -- especially in the driving zones provided. This is one course where the Eastwood famous line, "a man's got to know his limitatins," is quite apt and needs to be heeded completely. Play the wrong tees at PR and it's a big time ball donation for any round played there.
Mike, when you have property literaqlly "carved" out of dense trees and other assorted developmental issues -- you will get a layout with a very high CR and slope that clearly doesn't make it very user-friendly.
I respect what the Dyes did there and would include the course among my metro area top 10 public but it's not likely to find a place among my overall top 50 because the design had to be shoe-horned with such a forced feeling.
I still get nervous standing on the tee of the par-3 11th hole and knowing firsthand that tee balls from the 10th can reach you and that incoming fire can also happen with the directly opposite 12th hole. The 13th is also too narrow for sane play. I like the gambling aspect of the hole but most good players if pressed to make score there in a metal play event would hit no more than a five-iron off the tee and then another five-iron before hitting some sort of wedge. Going with driver is simply more risk than any reward can provide.
I see your point on the 14th but the more pressing issue that you didn't mention is how grass is on the containment mounding that frames the hole. This grass allows balls to STAY where they are and you are then forced to strike a pose that any modern artist would salute you for achieving and maintaining during any attempted play. The containment mounding should have been cut to fairway height to allow balls to roll down.
Mike, the problem w PR is that you also have a closing hole in which a tree is placed directly in the line of play from the tips and next tees in front of them. You have to avoid mega bunkers down the left side and silly containment mounding on the right side that is way too high with grass height. In addition, you have baby pine trees that are nothing more than poster children for various unplayable lies with any ball that even remotely comes near them.
I like PR but it runs the risk of being tagged the Westchester version of Shore Gate. No doubt the coursre will need to be tweaked because if you they get a full compliment of players 200+ they will need various on-course personnel to serve as forecaddies and the like.
Dye deserves credit for what they had to do on such a difficult site but PR can be even better if it realizes that one time play may be the reality for too many people and as a result the overall botton line may be impacted.
We shall see ...
-
Have to mention after being on site for the playing of the NJ PGA Championship the fantastic overall elements of Essex County CC in West Orange.
Hats off to Gil Hanse and George Bahto for the superlative efforts they have done to reassert the tremendous architectural elements that have always been present at this famed club. The design elements of Tillinghast and Banks are part and parcel of the course. Best of all, the weaknesses of the front side have been strengthened - they are not on par with the fantastic back nine but they reduce the disparity greatly between them.
For those who venture to the NY / NJ metro area a visit if possible to ECCC should be a mist item. Candidly, the course has the goods to be considered for Golfweek's top 100 classic designs.
-
A number of people contacted me and wondered if a listing can be created of top designed layouts in the NYC area that are no more than 6,600 yards from the tips. There are a number of ones worth including.
Be curious if any of the folks who post here has any candidates before the listing is included. Don't believe I can come up with a listing that is more than a top 25.
-
Since a few people have asked me I've included a listing of the top under 6,600 yard layouts (from the tips) within the greater NYC metro area.
Comments are most welcomed ...
In no particular order - my top 20 would include ...
Maidstone
Morris County
Montclair (#2 & #4)
CC of Fairfield
Somerset Hills
The Creek
Cold Spring
Sleepy Hollow
Old Oaks
Siwanoy
Fenway
Fisher's Island
Gardiner's Bay
Spring Lake (NJ)
Knollwood
Westhampton
Seawane
Southward Ho!
Rockaway Hunting Club
Shackamaxon or possibly Huntington
-
Pat,
While I think Ridgewood's par 3's are all good golf holes, wouldn't you say that as a group, the Par 5's rank #1, the Par 4's second, and the Par 3's third?
While 3 of my 5 favorite holes there are Par 4's, ALL the Par 5's are great. So "on average" the Par 5's are the best.
I was lucky enough to play 1 round at Ridgwood about 4 years ago.
The 2 holes I remember best are the five and dime and the par 5 along the cemetary with the really small green. I loved that par 5!
-Ted
-
How about these under 6,700:
Maidstone
Westhampton
Creek Club
Huntington
Fishers Island
Rockaway Hunt Club
Southward Ho
Seawane
Nassau
Glen Head
Inwood
Gardiners Bay
CC of fairfield
Sleepy Hollow
Fenway
Apawamis
Wykagyl
Canoe Brook south
Deal
Somerset hills
Essex fells
White Beeches
-
Robert:
Like your list because it's so similar to mine.
However ...
When you expand the boundary to a max just under 6,700 yards it really defeats the purpose because the listing is meant to highlight courses that aren't really long.
One other thing ...
There is no way in God's green earth that the likes of Canoe Brook / South and / or White Beeches can remotely sniff the quality of Montclair #2 & #4 nines. Not even close. Ditto with the like of Deal. You also left out Convent Station's Morris County GC -- a real gem for a Seth Raynor design.
I can say your choice of Essex Fells is a bit better -- you could have also mentioned another Jersey course with the likes of Wayne's North Jersey CC.
I personally think the work George Thomas did w Spring Lake is better -- gets little fanfare given the amount of attention that Hollywood draws when in the immediate area.
One last comment for now -- Siwanoy is the better of the two when you throw Apawamis against it. Better terrain and better consistency of holes throughout the round.
Just shows the utter depth of courses within the region.
-
Have to mention after being on site for the playing of the NJ PGA Championship the fantastic overall elements of Essex County CC in West Orange.
Hats off to Gil Hanse and George Bahto for the superlative efforts they have done to reassert the tremendous architectural elements that have always been present at this famed club. The design elements of Tillinghast and Banks are part and parcel of the course. Best of all, the weaknesses of the front side have been strengthened - they are not on par with the fantastic back nine but they reduce the disparity greatly between them.
For those who venture to the NY / NJ metro area a visit if possible to ECCC should be a mist item. Candidly, the course has the goods to be considered for Golfweek's top 100 classic designs.
Matt,
I absolutely agree. It's a terrific course made much better in recent years by the continued progress on the Hanse/Bahto Master Plan, which is about 90% implemented.
It's also a tough son-of-a-gun, but one with grace and charm.
-
Mike:
The issue for me is that far too often people -- this includes many non area people -- see the Garden State as the home of just a very few number of stellar courses.
No doubt PV takes plenty of attention as it should. But then you have people who erroneously think Baltusrol is the next best in the state. Candidly, there haven been major strides in recent times by a full range of clubs within NJ to bolster / reinvigorate what they have.
Essex County CC in West Orange is nothing short of a tremendous success in this regard and I salute the club's leadership in hiring Hanse / Bahto for bringing to full life all the elements that Tillinghast, Raynor and lastly Banks provided.
The back nine at Essex County was always first rate -- the front nine has been strengthened without being overly fixated on the difficulty meter.
Mike, there's plent of grace and charm there -- the issue now is for raters and everyone else to make sure they include that West Orange gem on their short list of "must plays" when in the area.
As you well know -- they will not be disappointed.
-
A few people wanted me to put the courses that are under 6,600 yards in some sort of groupings ...
In alpha order ...
1st Group
Fenway
Fisher's Island
Maidstone
Montclair #2 & #4
Sleepy Hollow
2nd Group
CC of Fairfield
The Creek
Morris County
Somerset Hills
Westhampton
3rd Group
Huntington
Knollwood
Old Oaks
Seawane
Southward Ho!
4th Group
Cold Spring
Gardiner's Bay
Rockaway Hunting Club
Siwanoy
Spring Lake
There's no doubt a few others could make the final group since a number of them are quite close -- e.g. Essex Fells, North Jersey, Shackamaxon, etc, etc.
-
Matt,
Fenway needs come off this list as it has certainly passed 6600 yards in recent years. At par 70 with two par 4's less than 300 yards, it certainly doesn't play short either.
Might I suggest sliding Mt. Kisco into the list?
Wait until next spring to take a look at Essex County again as there are still many trees on the chopping block this fall. In addition, fairway and green space will be reclaimed on a number of holes, new back tees will be added on some of the longer holes, and about 8 fairway bunkers will be restored.
-
Matt,
I think you have to differentiate between par 70, par 71 and par 72 courses.
Surely a par 70 golf course, like Westhampton, is more difficult than most par 72 golf courses in excess of 6,600 but under 6,800.
Likewise with Montclair and others.
-
Greg:
Fair point - I stand corrected. The "new" official yardage for Fenway is not listed at 6,742 yards and thus is not eligible for the listing.
Excellent choice -- I simply had for gotten about Mount Kisco -- for those not in the know the layout plays just over 6,500 yards from the tips and comes in with a healthy 72.0 rating and 142 slope -- the slope element is one of the highest in the Met region for a course of such minimal length.
For those who have not been there -- a network of streams comes into play on roughly 13 holes and makes for a wonderful array of holes.
Thanks Greg for the mention.
One last question -- do you see Mount Kisco having more compelling architecture than the likes of Knollwood, Old Oaks and Siwanoy -- since all are in Westchester County? I have my thoughts but would like to get yours and any other person who might want to weigh in.
Pat:
No doubt a differentiation can take place with reference to a par designation. However, keep in mind I simply decided to use a par designation. No doubt there are times when a par-72 may play "easier" than courses with a par-70 designation likely because of the lesser number of par-5's available to be played.
-
Interesting to see The Met Golfer highlight Pelham (it's celebrating 100 years of existence) -- one of the better courses for layout with minimum length -- not even 6,400 yards from the tips. The par-3 2nd is without question one of the best par-3 holes not only in Westchester but throughout the metro area.
Be interesting to hear from people who have played there and whether others see it being one of the 25 best for layouts less than 6,600 yards. I see it as a close call.
-
With all the talk concerning The Creek on a few other threads I find it amusing when people say The Creek should be rated higher than it is. No doubt a case can be made -- but at least The Creek is rated.
The metro listing I posted contains a few notable layouts that get at best minimum attention -- e.g. Essex County, Forsgate, Montclair for NJ; Metropolis from NY and CC of Fairfield from CT are a few others to note as well.
Clearly, a few of the courses mentioned in the metro area get justifiable rave reviews -- but there are others, beyond the next level down such as The Creek and Piping Rock, which are also well worth saluting.
-
I haven't seen Alpine mentioned anywhere here. It's been awhile since I last played it, but I remember a number of very challenging and interesting holes (#'s 1 and 10 come to mind), and some of the greens were close to impossible but in a fun way.
-
David M:
You may not have looked through this entire post but Alpine was one of the top 50 I mentioned.
The course hosted the NJ State Open this year and while a few of the competitors harped about some of the greens being unfair -- notably the 10th and 17th, the rest of the field was impressed with the Tillinghast layout.
Alpine gets little attention locally because of the fanfare paid to nearby Ridgewood. Others who have not played it should check it out when in the area.
-
Thanks Matt. I must have missed it from early in the post. Only played Alpine a couple of times, but thoroughly enjoyed it.
-
David:
That's one of the issues that needs more attention -- there are more than a few courses in the greater NYC metro area that get far too little attention.
Most of the people who visit generally only mention the usual top tier suspects.
The sheer depth is truly unique and quite special.
-
Wanted to add this bit of info to the interest in the Plainfield update -- people who visit NJ often miss so many of the "second" tier roster of layouts that get so little outside attention (interest from beyond 75 mile radius) -- I would include the following trio -- two of which are in the same town.
Essex County CC (West Orange)
Hats off to Hanse & Bahto for taking the course to an even higher level. The back nine has always been rightly noted but the sheer totality of the place has now really made significant improvements. Only issue is the need to keep the rough from being too high and too dense. No need to use such a crutch mechanism when such a pure design is present.
Montclair GC (West Orange) / #2 & #4 Nines
A mixed layout with one nine by Donald Ross -- the other by Charles Banks. Proved itself against tough competition when it hosted the '85 US Amateur and for a number of years the US Open sectional qualifier for the NYC metro area. Tough greens and a terrain that features 250 feet of elevation. Arguably, the toughest layout in NJ for a course that doesn't exceed 6,600 yards and at a tough par of 70.
Forsgate (Monroe Twsp) / Banks Course
Hats off to RDM Management (the owners of the layout) and the contributions made by architect Stephen Kay -- the remodeled 17th hole with its renowned Biaritz green is something to behold. Some of the more unique holes created by Charles Banks and the quartet of par-3 holes is only surpassed by the likes of you see at Pine Valley. Ditto the classic back-to-back par-5's with the superlative uphill 8th hole and the do-or-die go-for-it 9th hole.
-
Matt,
I'd add Sleepy Hollow to your list.
Since the renovation/restoration, it's really, really superb and much improved.
Agree with your Essex County call, as well.
-
Mike:
The sad reality is that few people really explore below the "usual" suspects in a given area. Sleepy Hollow is to be rightly celebrated as well as the other layouts I have mentioned.
The thing to keep in mind is that more attention and focus needs to be made to those courses that do improve. Glad to see Digest add a category in this area for recognition but it needs to be handled through one person rather than a general committee in my mind in order to have better consistency and interpretation.
-
Matt:
My experience at Montclair is limited but I thought the green speeds were a bit over the top considering the amount of slope/contour - caddie said it was because Reese wanted them that fast - I cannot imagine that the architects ever envisioned them being at such speeds.
I always thought of Somerset Hills as one of the great courses in NJ, right up there with Plainfield - I only played it once but I was impressed.
You know I'm a huge fan of Essex County
Jerry
-
Jerry:
A few quick comments ...
When you talk about green speed / re: Montclair -- I do agree things can get quite speedy there -- but frankly, I've played Somerset Hills when things are no less swift and equally borderline.
I also don't know what specific nines you played at Montclair. From my experience with Jersey courses I'd say Montclair #2 & #4 nines feature the more compelling architecture when compared with the layout from Bernardsville. One other thing to do keep in mind -- the finishing two holes at Somerset Hills are major letdowns.
If you see Somerset Hills as "great" then candidly I'd have to say places like Essex County, Forsgate and the two nines I mentioned from Montclair are even greater.
-
Be curious to know what metro courses people see as being overrated ?
No doubt, a few of them would still be rated high -- but likely for a bunch of reasons tied to
other elements -- the tradition argument is often used for this purpose.
I'll kick the ball off with this trio ... one from NJ, Westchester and Long Island.
Baltusrol
Club gets high marks for staying in the picture of major champ play with its recent involvement w the PGA but the Lower is still a bore in so many ways. The land is fairly uneventful and there's little on the architecture side that is compelling.
If anything the Upper is the more fun course to play but I don't see it as being remarkably unique either.
Quaker Ridge
I like the course -- just not as much as others. It helps to be in the neighborhood with places like Winged Foot but QR is not as compelling as the Jersey equivalent with Plainfield but for some reason the Garden State layout never gets mentioned as highly as the Scarsdale course.
Maidstone
I've mentioned my comments on this course a number of times. No doubt the oceanside holes are really something -- most especially the par-4 9th -- a hole I would have on my short list for great American holes. However ... and this where many of the fans of Maidstone develop amnesia -- there are a number of so-so holes and a few which are nothing more than filler between others.
-
I had rated BB quite highly originally but frankly the desire to provide the golf equivalent of Barry Bonds -- has made me less of a fan -- and for me to say such a thing really hurts to say.
The penchant for a US Open has become more and more of extending tees until they jump the hedges and have you hitting from a nearby neighbor's porch.
One of the more striking comments Tom Doak has previously made is that a really stellar layout cannot be considered world class without at least one superlative short par-4 in its routing. I agree.
BB is a fastball oriented course to use a baseball metaphor. There are few change of speeds that are especially noteworthy -- unforunately there could have been options but again the impulse for mega length is the game plan.
A re-assessment of courses is healthy and likely others can weigh in with their own situations. I will likely repost my list later this year as I plan on returning to a number of them.
-
I had rated BB quite highly originally but frankly the desire to provide the golf equivalent of Barry Bonds -- has made me less of a fan -- and for me to say such a thing really hurts to say.
The penchant for a US Open has become more and more of extending tees until they jump the hedges and have you hitting from a nearby neighbor's porch.
One of the more striking comments Tom Doak has previously made is that a really stellar layout cannot be considered world class without at least one superlative short par-4 in its routing. I agree.
BB is a fastball oriented course to use a baseball metaphor. There are few change of speeds that are especially noteworthy -- unforunately there could have been options but again the impulse for mega length is the game plan.
A re-assessment of courses is healthy and likely others can weigh in with their own situations. I will likely repost my list later this year as I plan on returning to a number of them.
Matt,
I would be interested if much has changed in your initial top 50 from 2008. Not that there is much new but there has been a lot of renovations and changes in conditioning since this list was originally complied. I enjoyed reading the discussion in this thread and would be interested in reading an update if you have the time and interest in ding so.
thanks
Dan
-
I would think since the magnificent restoration, Southampton Golf Club would land in the 2nd ten of courses under 6600yds. It is surely as good as Westhampton and CC of Fairfield, both Raynors as well.