Before I get to the latest round of comments, I wanted to post this excellent article on Ferry Point that was featured in the MGA Magazine several months ago (written by Jeff Neuman, who just wrote another excellent piece, this time on Cabot Links, Cabot Cliffs, and Highlands, in the latest edition):
http://www.metgolferdigital.com/i/416463-nov-dec-2014-jan-2015/38Also, I know we've mentioned several times that the course was built with professional tournaments in mind, but I didn't realize that it has already been awarded the Barclays in 2017 and 2020:
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/donald-trumps-ferry-point-course-host-barclays-pga-tour-event-2017Jon W.: Fair point about the diversity of "real" links, but note that Ferry Point does present topographical diversity--there is a nice mix of flat holes, downhill holes, and uphill holes. Sure, there's not much diversity in terms of flora, although the marshes on 16, 17, and 18 provide a nice contrast toward the end of the round.
Grant: As you say, we could just have different aesthetics preferences. And that's totally fine. But I will say that, in real time, the eye wanders naturally to the urban surrounds, which are huge, everywhere, and legitimately mesmerizing. It's easier to be distracted with a static image that you can dissect at the comfort of your computer. To me, the one man-made element of the course that bothered me most were, as usual, the cart paths (although, to be fair, they are not especially visible to the walking golfer). Obviously, on a real links, cart paths would be nowhere to be found. I really wish the course were, with few exceptions, walking only, and that they provided push/pull carts instead of motorized golf carts. I mean, if you're going to try to replicate the links experience, you might as well go all out.
Sean: Thanks for clarifying. Yes, there are several places where you can be in the fairway and have a dune/mound- obscured shot (I'm not including the many occasions where you find yourself in that situation off of the fairway). The following holes come to mind: 5 (left side of fairway), 6 (left side of fairway), 10 (left side of fairway), 13 (left side and middle of fairway), 14 (left side of fairway), and 16 (off the tee, assuming you try to reach the right-most side of the fairway, over the huge dunes/mounds 150 yards away from the tee).
Tom: I appreciate your and Grant's point of view, but I'm still of the opinion that a Raynor-type geometric design at Ferry Point would be too much of the same thing, competing with, as opposed to complementing/highlighting, the surrounds. But, again, I'm someone who appreciates and even values contrast, especially when it comes to aesthetics.
Scott: I obviously agree with you. Liberty National, to me, suffers from an identity crisis above all else. Ferry Point does not.
Carl: Glad you enjoyed. We played in 4:40. Note that we started as a foursome, allowed a twosome (which proceeded to play two balls each!) to play through on the 3rd hole, became a twosome on the back nine, and were stuck behind a foursome that plumb-bobbed every single putt on every single green, even with the sun setting. I believe we played the front in 2 hours and the back in 2:40. The course suggests a 4:30 time for foursomes; I suppose that's good for NYC public courses, but I wish they had been more ambitious and suggested 4:00. It's definitely doable on the course, which is eminently walkable (with only three longish green-to-tee walks), although I imagine times will balloon if they decide to grow the fescue high and lush in the summer. Fingers crossed that they do so only for the pros.
I'd be really interested to hear any architects' perspective on the Ferry Point design. Would you have chosen a similar design as Nicklaus/Sanford? If not, what design would, in your opinion, fit the site better? Does the current design look too "fake" (contrived/manufactured etc.) to you? Are you generally opposed to so-called faux links?