Mountain Ridge - NJ State Amateur - GCA.comers

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mountain Ridge, a wonderful Donald Ross golf course recently the object of Ron Prichard's work, hosted the NJ State Amateur this week.

Greg Stebbins, a frequent contributor finished 4th.
However, Greg shot the lowest score of the tournament, the only player to break 70 with a two under par 69, and he did it twice, and he did it on the final day at 36 holes, a remarkable accomplishment under any circumstances, but especially in 100 degree temperatures.

Greg, Congratulations.

I'd be interested in hearing your views on Mountain Ridge and its architecture.

In addition, Jamie Slonis played well, finishing tied for 31st.
Jamie's final round in the heat cost him a top ten finish.

Jamie, Congratulations.

I"d also be interested in hearing your views on Mountain Ridge and its architecture.

[Mike_Sweeney]

I played it for the first time last year, so I can't comment on the before - after. Wonderful quiet place. The course conditioning was Tournament-like the day that I played with fast greens and thick rough. In terms of architecture, it was maybe the most consistent Ross parkland course that I have played sitting alongside courses such as Winchester and The Orchards.

The only thing that was missing was that it did not have any outstanding never forget them type of holes. I think that is what separates Plainfield from the other Ross courses that I have played.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Sweeney,

Did you play the 18th hole ?

It's one of the most demanding, memorable finishing holes you'll ever play.

How about the par fives, the 6th and 17th holes ?

How about # 1, into the prevailing wind.
The 8th hole into the prevailing wind.

The par 4's are terrific, # 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, and # 18  are superior.

You must have been preoccupied or drunk at a BC outing  

Redanman,

Over rated ?

By whom, and over what courses ?

[HamiltonBHearst]

Redanman

While you are answering Pat's questions I would be interested in learning more about the comment about Pritchard being visible.

Was it not a restoration sympathetic to Ross?  
Do you know the clubs mandate?
Was it better before the work?

[Matt_Ward]

Pat Mucci:

Since you followed-up on redanman's statement concerning Mountain Ridge's overall position among Jersey courses -- I'd be very curious as to what courses you see that are ahead of it?

Frankly, even with the improvements made by Ron P I don't see it climbing into the state's elite ten.

I also think what Mike S says is accurate when one sizes up the two Ross courses -- MR v Plainfield.

[Mike_Sweeney]

You must have been preoccupied or drunk at a BC outing  

Patrick,

Interesting timing as The Green Plaid is currently being held this weekend in Mr Moore's home state of Maine. http://members.aol.com/b12pmegpi4/noone_gpi04.htm
The choice for 2005 negotiations with The Boss was Sand Hills versus Green Plaid, and to date I have never chosen the Green Plaid!  

However, back on topic, yes the 18th at Mountain Ridge is an excellent hole, the others I don't remember as well. I was playing 9 holes over at Bergen Hills (Orin Smith) this afternoon, and this is more a reflection of my game, I prefer Bergen Hills, the course not the club.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

I'm not as preoccupied with rankings as others, but, Plainfield has enjoyed the spotlight far longer then Mountain Ridge because that's the nature of both clubs.  ONe has always wanted the spotlight, the other has avoided it.

Golf Digest ranked Mountain Ridge # 12, behind some of the courses listed below.   I'll let you address the merits of the following golf courses compared to Mountain Ridge:

Atlantic City ?
Gallaway National ?
Metedeconk ?
Hamilton Farms ?

Over the years, Plainfield hosted many events and "Red" the superintendent always prepared the course in a diabolical fashion, which gave the course a great deal of notoriety, especially with those that equate difficulty with greatness.

Plainfield enjoys more diverse terrain, but Mountain Ridge is it's equal in many ways.  AND, Mountain Ridge is all Donald Ross, with little, if any, deviation from the original design.
Plainfield doesn't enjoy that status, as it's a hybrid golf course, altered substantially from Ross's original design.
   
And, Mountain Ridge enjoys an almost constant breeze,  which adds a catalytic dimension to the golf course.

Mountain Ridge's par 4's are as good, if not better than Plainfield's.  Plainfield's par 3's get the nod and the par 5's are close.

Those that say that they can see Prichard's work at Mountain Ridge are full of baloney and/or manure.  If you knew nothing about the golf course you couldn't tell who did what to it, where and when.

Mike Sweeney,

You need to get back to Mountain Ridge again.
Perhaps TEPaul can lend you Coorshaw for the day.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pat,
If Mountain Ridge is anything like Hidden Creek in regards to it sneaking up on you and getting you to fall in love with the place, then well, I just have to see it next time I'm in Jersey!



 

[HamiltonBHearst]

Pat

Only Redanman said he could see evidence of Prithard's work.  I am hoping he will educate us a little as to why he feels this way.

[Steve Lapper]

I think many here are missing the larger picture about Mtn Ridge and it's place among it's neighbors and peers in NJ.

The course is, as I've said here on other threads, a "little brother" to it's relative, Plainfield, and combined and attributed to Ross, they both have a similar and well-reasoned comparison to what Fenway and Quaker Ridge are to Tillinghast.

MR has a similar temperment to Fenway. They both are sporty courses with marvelous pedigrees, have enjoyed brillant restorations by high-quality architects that have reflected a strong and well-balanced program by their membership committees, and resist scoring through a variety of traditional methods (stiff roughs that catch wayward tee-shots, firm fairways and speedy, well-sloped greens).

Neither course is especially long, or as R-man & Mike S say, replete with "memorable" holes. Instead, a handful of well-crafted short and long par 4's and 5's produce a wonderful example of balance and test. Both tracks can be stiffened to raise scores, but any average day at either present fast, heavily sloped greens, raised primary rough and strategic angle difficulty that the average or above-average golfer will find a handful to manage.

Unlike their aforementioned siblings, neither MR, nor Fenway overwhelm you with stature, length, or championship or beauty. Instead, and especially in MR's case, the architecture (and subsequent resorations) allow for more creativity and sporty-like play. Approach shots on holes like 1,2,5,8,& 9 (among several others) allow for run-ups onto their greens while others on the front demand aerial approaches. The back nine has plenty of banked greens coupled with well-angled doglegs that reward strategic tee-shot placement.

  MR will always lack the splendor of a Plainfield (as Fenway does compared to Quaker Ridge). But MR won't lack for game or test, even if it looks, feels and plays junior to PCC.

R-man is way off-base on his perception of evidence of any Pritchard heavy-hand. It simply doesn't exist. Other than the clubs new desire (and I strongly suspect R-man NEVER saw this when he last was at MR) to grow fescue at and behind some of it's bunker faces, it looks, feels and plays near pure Ross.

As for it's place among NJ-rankings (and let's not forget that only Matt keeps the keys to this list!), it easily belongs above the likes of a "tedious" Metedeconk, and "over-bunkered" Hamilton Farms, a radically "re-worked" Atlantic City and IMHO, quite a few others. But the club doesn't seek a "higher" ranking or the accompanying BS that defines that process.

As for Mike Sweeney's comments, I'd add:

   Mike, you saw parts of MR that day that were never addressed by architect, greenskeeper, or membership . Instead, they were neighboring properties and real estate! By the time we got you back to the fairway or greens, you were already discombobbled and distraught ! Maybe we can next discuss the firm and fast conditions of the West Caldwell General Aviation Airport's runways!

Pat,

  You are correct....the 18th is absolutely one of the finest closers at any course in the metro area. Mike was "in his pocket" before he rounded the bend to home that day and thus unable to appreciate the hole's merit, but he was "smiling!"

 

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Mountain Ridge's magnificent clubhouse appeared on the cover of the June 2005 issue of New Jersey State Golf magazine. Here is the accompanying story by Fred Behringer:

http://www.njstategolf.com/PGM/njsg/njsg_2005/June_2005/page_10.htm

[Mike Hendren]

Steve Lapper,

I have played neither, but found your comments to be among the best recent posts on this site.  Thanks for the insight.

Mike

[Matt_Ward]

Steve Lapper:

Thanks for the plug regarding the claim of someone's keys to any "list", but while I enjoyed your commentary I think you are passing by a few other Jersey clubs that merit more attention and examination than others frequently give. A couple of examples would include the likes of Essex County, Montclair (#2 & #4 nines), Forsgate / Banks and even the usually undernoticed and underappreciated likes of Canoe Brook / North and Baltusrol / Upper.

Slapper -- one other thing -- you are stretching a point a good ways to somehow demonstrate such a linkage between a joint comparison of Fenway / QR and Plainfield / MR. Fenway is a solid layout and one I would certainly rate much closer to QR than the duo in Jersey. Fenway is also a top 100 classic course -- MR is not.

I do agree with you that MR is ahead of such layouts as Metedeconk, Hamilton Farm and possibly ACCC. However, there are other Garden State layouts that I believe are ahead of MR and are often ignored by those who should know better -- that last statement was not directed at you though.

Pat Mucci:

You say you are not "pre-occupied" with ratings but you chatised redanman for his assessment of MR. I simply asked you a straightforward question -- which courses in NJ are better than MR?

You can either hit the pitch or let it pass -- simple.

Pat -- you inserted the names of four clubs Digest tabbed as among Jersey's best. I don't speak for Digest nor do I wish to elevate the clubs you mentioned to top ten status. Maybe you should forward your concerns directly to the folks at Digest or those who rate for it.

One last item -- the analysis of any of the par-groups falls to Plainfield's favor IMHO. In the par-3 side it's not even close and the par-5's have Plainfield again ahead considerably. The lone area of closeness is the par-4's. Frankly, Plainfield is a bonafide member of any top 100 -- IMHO it belongs among the nation's top 50. MR has improved considerably from past years and the club should indeed be contratulated.

We clearly agree on one point -- the finishing hole at MR is certainly one of Jersey's best.

[Geoffrey Childs]

OK - into the hornets nest I fly.

Steve Lapper - while I agree with your "little brother" comparison that in my opinion is where things end when mentioning Fenway and MR in the same sentence.

Memorible holes abound at Fenway - look at Rans course review- It could very well be argued that #3 is the greatest par 5 ever built by Tillinghast surpassing BB #4, those at five farms and baltusrol. Along with the 5 and dime hole at Ridgewood, #15 is perhaps his greatest short par 4. Memorable indeed. Mountain Ridge lacks such holes and by Ran's rules a course lacking great holes can not be itself great!

I liked Mountain RIdge a great deal but having seen Ross restorations at Aronomink, Beverly, Skokie and Mountain Ridge I am surprised the bunkers all look interchangable.  If they were originally like that then so be it but I doubt they were.  Prichard said as much to me when I asked him.  He said that without the detailed plans he tried to make them into "Ross' best work". Among those four Ross courses I frankly prefer Aronomink, Beverly and Skokie to Mountain Ridge.

Frankly, the best Ross restoration I've seen was Gil Hanse's work at Plainfield. Plainfield has memorable/great holes and is a great course.  Why do the bunkers at Plainfield look diifferent from those at the other four Ross courses I mentioned? I also rather play The Orchards on a regular basis before Mt. Ridge.

Let me finish by saying that I REALLY liked Mountain Ridge and think its a very good course that I could play regularly and be very happy but it in my very humble opinion can't be put in the same sentence as Plainfield or Fenway or Quaker Ridge.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Lapper,

Mountain Ridge has become far more than sporty if you play it from the back tees.  It's a genuine test of one's golf game.

Redanman,

Did you play Mountain Ridge PRIOR to Ron Prichard's work ?

If so, would you describe Ron's changes ?
If not, how would you know what Ron did versus what he left intact ?

Since when is homogenous turf conditions a negative ?
Noone seems to object to those conditions at Oakmont, NGLA, GCGC, ANGC, PV, Seminole and others.

Perhaps you have me and Steve Lapper confused with Matt Ward.  I never said that it's difficulty was its primary merit.

Geoff Childs,

Did you play Mountain Ridge prior to Ron Prichard's work ?

If not, how do you know what he worked on and what he left intact ?

If there's a similarity in the bunkers you observed, perhaps that's due to Ross's style on those golf courses.

If you prefer Aronomink to Mountain Ridge from a playability point of view, you're a masochist.  If it's from an architectural point of view, might I direct you to Tom MacWood's criticism of restoration versus interpretation regarding Aronomink.

As to the difference in the look of the bunkers at Plainfield versus Mountain Ridge, perhaps it's due to the terrain, Ross's designs or your particular opinion.

How are the bunkers at Plainfield different then the bunkers at Mountain Ridge, on similar terrain ?

Matt Ward,

I answered your original and unmodified question about the top 10 courses in New Jersey and Mountain Ridge.
I'm glad we agree that Atlantic City, Metedeconk and Hamilton Farms shouldn't be ahead of Mountain Ridge.

I chose Golf Digest because their ranking was a composite of many evaluators, whereas your ranking and opinion is the product of but a single evaluator, you.

With respect to the collection of holes, par 3's, par 4's and par 5's, I wouldn't be so quick to cede Plainfield the edge.

The 4th at Mountain Ridge is as good as any par 3 at Plainfield.  The 7th at Mountain Ridge is a punchbowl, which by its inherent nature has limited or defined contouring.
The 14th is a good par 3, with # 16 perhaps the weakest of the group.

The 6th and 11th at Plainfield could be considered twins, and the 14th isn't a Ross hole, and is long, rather than outstanding.

As to the par 5's, Mountain Ridge only has three, and the 6th and 17th holes are fabulous par 5's, with the 9th an interesting but not great hole.

The 12th at Plainfield is not a Ross hole, but rather a hybrid that combined a par 4 and a par 3 to make a par 5.
The 5th, 8th and 16th are all good par 5's.

On the par 4's I find Mountain Ridge's superior.

Both courses are great courses, with Plainfield getting the edge, but Mountain Ridge is original and pure Ross.   Plainfield's pedigree suffers in that department.

I happen to like holes # 13, 14 and 15.
They hold a special place in my heart, and for Ran, they are akin to the skier heading down the jump on ABC's Wide World of Sports, due to a beautiful lob wedge that I holed for birdie on # 13, a par on the 220 + 14th, and a nice 45 foot birdie putt on the 15th to go Dormie with Ran, after he was 5 up after 7 holes.

While I love # 17, many feel it's a gimmickie hole, with out of bounds along the right side, on a dog leg right.

Those that sell Mountain Ridge short, haven't played it enough.

Mike Sweeney,

Now that Steve Lapper has described your round in detail,
I understand your inability to observe the architecture.
It's like being surrounded by crocodiles, your focus is diverted and you forget that you're there to drain the swamp.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy,

If Mountain Ridge is anything like Hidden Creek in regards to it sneaking up on you and getting you to fall in love with the place, then well, I just have to see it next time I'm in Jersey!

I want you to see Mountain Ridge, The Knoll, Montclair, Essex County, Hackensack, Ridgewood and Canoe Brook, all great golf courses.

I guess the real test is to ask someone if they WOULDN"T want to be a member of any one of those courses.[/color]

[Kyle Harris]

Canoe Brook is indeed a treat, I played the sectional qualifying for the US Open there last year.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Pat

Why do you solicit opinions when you don't care what the opinion might be unless it matches yours?

You asked about GCGC and Greg Stebbins said the hazards affect a good player greatly- you dismissed the hazards at GCGC  

I played after Ron Prichards work.  I don't care what it looked like before and I never said anything about changes at MR.  What I said was that Aronimink, Skokie, Beverly and MR bunkers look identical in style to MY EYE.  Ron Prichard told me in front of 50 people that in the absence of detailed plans HE INTERPRETED the bunker style such that it represented what HE THOUGHT was Ross' "best work".  His words NOT MINE.  

I like the style of work at Plainfield better.  I don't know if that is an exact representation of Ross' style either but I know what I LIKE and Gil Hanse's work at Plainfield suits what I like better.

I do prefer Aronimink today after Prichards work to MR today after Prichards work.  No comparison in my opinion.  Call em what you will- maybe you're playing the wrong set of tees  

Pat- I respect your opinion about the par 4's at MR vs. Plainfield - that is certainly your right. Since you were the one soliciting opinions about Mountain Ridge why can't you do the same and respect mine?

you said " I guess the real test is to ask someone if they WOULDN"T want to be a member of any one of those courses."

I don't know if that is THE real test but on that point I agree- I would love to be a member of any of those fine courses. What does that have to do with PREFERENCES?

[Matt_Ward]

Pat Mucci:

You inserted Digest in order to bolster your contention on the merits of MR.

Frankly, I don't see how Digest really understands or knows the Jersey scene better than people who live here 365 days per year. I have played all of the key courses in Jersey multiple times and at different times of the year. It is my opinion but it comes from a basis beyond those who have only played the subject courses once at best.

I have played MR both prior and after the work of RP. I don't see it being comparable to the likes of Plainfield. Let me also hasten to add that the diversity and range of putting surfaces dwarfs what you see at MR. I also agree with other posters who have highlighted the merits of other Ross courses that RP has done (Skokie & Aronimink) both come quickly to mind. In both of those courses I see the totality of what is there beyond what you find at MR.

You chastised redanman but then moved into another line of questioning without first answering yourself.

I find it laughable that you tag the 9th at MR as an "interesting hole" -- I find it to be simply non descript and filler to get back to the clubhouse.

You also make issue with the par-5 12th as being just a hybrid. So what? It's one of the best par-5's in the nation and IMHO the best par-5 here in Jersey. The issue is the quality of the hole -- you seem hellbent on the Ross pedigree.

Let me also point out that the 6th and 11th at Plainfield are two entirely different holes -- they go in different directions and feature entirely different greens.

Let me also point out that the par-3 16th at MR is simply a vanilla hole that gets plenty of hype but lacks architectural depth.

Last item -- Pat I base a course more than just the difficulty degree -- that's a convenient stereotype people throw forward when faced with a different opinion. I guess Mr. Childs must be guilty as charged for another reason.

Take the time to see the likes of Essex County and Montclair #2 + #4, Forsgate / Banks, to name just three, again before trumpeting MR as being among the very elite courses in the state.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Why do you solicit opinions when you don't care what the opinion might be unless it matches yours?

Shouldn't an opinion be able to withstand questioning ?
Or, is an opinion an absolute ?[/color]

You asked about GCGC and Greg Stebbins said the hazards affect a good player greatly- you dismissed the hazards at GCGC  

With 50-60 yard wide fairways, with most hazards at their perimeter, I don't find that the hazards at GCGC are in play as much as the hazards at Mountain Ridge.

Go hole by hole at GCGC for the better player and tell me where hazards dramatically influence play ?

I don't consider long hitters who go from Driver to 3-wood or 2-iron at GCGC as a dramatic influence of play, especially since the "lay-up" leaves them with a short iron into the green with the possible exception of # 15.[/color]

I played after Ron Prichards work.  I don't care what it looked like before and I never said anything about changes at MR.  What I said was that Aronimink, Skokie, Beverly and MR bunkers look identical in style to MY EYE.  Ron Prichard told me in front of 50 people that in the absence of detailed plans HE INTERPRETED the bunker style such that it represented what HE THOUGHT was Ross' "best work".  His words NOT MINE.

Geoff, We were told that he worked DIRECTLY from Ross's plans at Aronomink, so which golf course are you refering to ?
And, did he not have early ground and aerial photos to reference ?[/color]  

I like the style of work at Plainfield better.  I don't know if that is an exact representation of Ross' style either but I know what I LIKE and Gil Hanse's work at Plainfield suits what I like better.

But, how can you say it was Gil's work when you don't know what was there in the first place ?
In order to evaluate a restoration shouldn't you make the judgement ONLY when you've seen the before and after ?

Ross's detailed plans, hole by hole, are in Plainfield's possession.[/color]

I do prefer Aronimink today after Prichards work to MR today after Prichards work.  No comparison in my opinion.  Call em what you will- maybe you're playing the wrong set of tees  
That's something else.  That's your personal taste.
You prefer Aronomink to Mountain Ridge, I accept that.
But, I would ask, had you played both courses before Ron's work began, and if so, what was your preference at that point in time ?
If you hadn't played them prior to the work I don't know how you can judge the work at either golf course.[/color]

Pat- I respect your opinion about the par 4's at MR vs. Plainfield - that is certainly your right. Since you were the one soliciting opinions about Mountain Ridge why can't you do the same and respect mine?

Geoff,  I don't want you or anyone else to blindly respect my opinion.  Question and challenge it.   See if it's fluff or substance.  Likewise, if I question your opinion you should relish the opportunity to elaborate on your conclusions.
Playing a golf course a dozen times usually affords one a better opportunity to observe and anaylze a golf course than a solo round.   Experience can't hurt.  

This post was about Mountain Ridge, as it exists today, not as it existed 70 years ago, or how it was restored, but, purely about how it plays today.  You and others inserted comparisons, I merely posed questions.[/color]

you said " I guess the real test is to ask someone if they WOULDN"T want to be a member of any one of those courses."

I don't know if that is THE real test but on that point I agree- I would love to be a member of any of those fine courses. What does that have to do with PREFERENCES?
I have no problem with your preference regarding which course you'd prefer to play.
I will question your conclusions regarding evaluations of restorations when you never saw the golf course pre-restoration.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

You inserted Digest in order to bolster your contention on the merits of MR.

Not at all.
Golf Digest is an independent source, with no agenda or axe to grind relative to golf courses in NJ.[/color]

Frankly, I don't see how Digest really understands or knows the Jersey scene better than people who live here 365 days per year. I have played all of the key courses in Jersey multiple times and at different times of the year. It is my opinion but it comes from a basis beyond those who have only played the subject courses once at best.

I'd say that there is a strength in numbers, a strength in diverse opinions that arrive at similar conclusions.

I take it that you're refering to Geoff Childs when you downplay a golfer who has only played the subject course once.

I too have a little familiarity with golf courses in NJ as do most of my contemporaries.[/color]

I have played MR both prior and after the work of RP. I don't see it being comparable to the likes of Plainfield. Let me also hasten to add that the diversity and range of putting surfaces dwarfs what you see at MR.

You must be kidding.  There's hardly a flat green at MR other than # 3.[/color]

I also agree with other posters who have highlighted the merits of other Ross courses that RP has done (Skokie & Aronimink) both come quickly to mind. In both of those courses I see the totality of what is there beyond what you find at MR.

Then perhaps you can elaborate on what was done at Aronomink and Skokie prior to RP and what RP did at those two courses versus Mountain Ridge, which was mostly INTACT
when RP arrived.  The beauty of Mourntain Ridge is that it's pure Ross, not some hybrid[/color]

You chastised redanman but then moved into another line of questioning without first answering yourself.

I have no idea of what you're refering to, please elaborate.[/color]

I find it laughable that you tag the 9th at MR as an "interesting hole" -- I find it to be simply non descript and filler to get back to the clubhouse.

If all of the bunkering on that hole was restored, it would be far more than just an interesting hole.  As to your classifying it as a "filler", perhaps you need to play it a few more times.[/color]

You also make issue with the par-5 12th as being just a hybrid. So what? It's one of the best par-5's in the nation and IMHO the best par-5 here in Jersey. The issue is the quality of the hole -- you seem hellbent on the Ross pedigree.

No, just that you can't rave about the restoration work when it wasn't all restoration work.
Mountain Ridge is pure Ross, Plainfield isn't.
I like # 12.  I played it with and without rough to the right of the creek.  But, it's not a Ross design, so let's not pretend it's got a 100 % Ross pedigree.
Holes # 13, !4 and 15 have been described by others as disappointing, or in your lingo, "filler" holes, with little or no character, and certainly NO ROSS character.[/color]

Let me also point out that the 6th and 11th at Plainfield are two entirely different holes -- they go in different directions and feature entirely different greens.

They're both short holes that require a similar shot.
Since wind isn't a big factor at Plainfield direction isn't important unless you want to state that # 11 and # 3 go in the same direction.[/color]

Let me also point out that the par-3 16th at MR is simply a vanilla hole that gets plenty of hype but lacks architectural depth.

I believe that I stated that earlier.[/color]

Last item -- Pat I base a course more than just the difficulty degree -- that's a convenient stereotype people throw forward when faced with a different opinion. I guess Mr. Childs must be guilty as charged for another reason.

Take the time to see the likes of Essex County and Montclair #2 + #4, Forsgate / Banks, to name just three, again before trumpeting MR as being among the very elite courses in the state.

Matt, I was playing those golf courses regularly before you were born.[/color]

[Steve Lapper]

Gentleman All...

   Thank you for praise (Mike H.)and critque(all others! ) of my post...I shall strive to never achieve less!

   Pat,

     I was remiss to add that MR does leave "sporty" behind and become considerably more difficult from its tips. Almost 400 yds are added on and the accompanying slope and rating jump up noticeably and are well earned. Hitting longer irons into those greens just makes winch and pray to appropriate gods. Like you, I do appreciate a course that possesses the ability/flexibility to morph daily from fun and elan-to-hard and determined. I really wish more courses were built with this in mind.

    Matt,
     You are the "Frodo" of our little kingdom and my comments were meant(as you no doubt know) with the good nature to pay respect to your love and dogged defense of the high-quality of NJ state golf. FWIW...I do think MR easily surpasses the likes of Due Process, Ridge at Back Brook and only maybe a few others (personal taste implied)

    My esteemed friend Geoffrey,

    I recognize and respect your earnest admiration, fondness and appreciation for the "little track that needs to be restored" (an old Westchester saying about Fenway, pre- Hanse). I do agree that Fenway's #3 and 15 are no doubt memorable and worthy, but as Pat pointed out, so are MR's #6 and #8. As well, I'd agree with you re: Fenway #3 being one of Tillie's finest (not better than the Black's #4, IMHO). Given that MR neither seeks publicity nor surrenders to it, I'd argue that those MR holes aforementioned are , equally, among Ross' finest examples of a par 4 and 5. Frankly, #15 at Fenway is no better (and perhaps no lesser?) than Tillie's great short 4 at WFW...#6. Might you not agree?

    I use the "little brother/sister" analogy simply to evidence the relationship of having "smaller" but excellent Golden-age architecture beautifully restored by great modern craftsmen so nearby to their "larger" brethren.
   
    Most importantly for all, courses like MR and Fenway, in addition to being absolutely GREAT MEMBERS COURSES (playable every day with no chance of boredom or complacency), are wonderful examples of what restorations done with integrity and homage to NOT-interfering with tradition and historical reference should achieve.

   The bunker work done by Mr. Prichard is both stylistically and practically quite adherent to Ross' original intent, yet it is impossible to avoid the inevitable intrepretation made by the contractor/shaper who is hired to produce the final result. No matter how faithful the restoring architect is to original plans and intent, it is the contractor who finishes the job.....just ask all those private courses that have tried to skimp on or change the final construction! In this case, Tony Pavelic did the work and did a pretty fine job, if you ask me.

    Finally, I agree with Pat's response to Tommy..."Why wouldn't you want to be a member of a Mtn. Ridge?" I know I would!

   

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Among those four Ross courses I frankly prefer Aronomink, Beverly and Skokie to Mountain Ridge."  

mega-dittos Rush, I mean Geoff, insert "vastly" for frankly for me.  

Redanman and Geoff,

So when you talk about Skokie as one of those four (4) Ross courses, are you talking about the 1919 Skokie done by Ross or the revision in 1938 done by Langford and Moreau ?

Have you ever studied the outstanding plan drafted by Langford and Moreau where you can clearly see the changes which were specified by this pair of rather talented architects, and the work of Ross (1919) which was respected and saved ?

Which Skokie are you talking about ?

And to what state was Skokie restored ?
[/color]

[JSlonis]

Thanks Pat.  I think I went from top 5 to 31st after that afternoon disaster...a combination of a horrific start(I think someone spiked my lemonade at lunch ), followed by a poor attitude after being out of contention, and finally not being able to get the ball in the clown's mouth on the 18th hole.

This was my first visit to Mountain Ridge.  I enjoyed the course immensely.  Much like the feel you get from playing Somerset Hills, Mountain Ridge is a tale of two nines.  I think the front nine at MR is fantastic.  The greensites are really something to behold.  While the par 4's on the front nine are all world class, the two par 5's are the weaker holes.  From an architectural standpoint they are very good, but with the way the ball travels today, for the longer hitter, they are easily reachable, usually with a long iron.  With a solid tee shot, the 6th and 9th holes are like 4 1/2 pars.  The par 3 4th hole is about as good a par 3 as you'll see anywhere.

While the front nine possesses a bigger, more open feel to it, the back nine feels and plays more tightly.  There are significantly more trees in play in the back nine holes.  The par 4 11th is the standout hole for me on the back nine.  The green is just diabolical.  

While many regard the 18th hole as a great finisher, I'm not as enthusiastic about it.  While it is a strong uphill par 4, there are a couple of things in my opinion that detract from the hole.  I'm sure most all of the members love the huge tree that sits in the right rough about 150 yards from the green, at the bend of the slight dogleg...BUT...if I were the "golf czar of the world", I'd cut it down tomorrow.  I think this tree detracts from a possible great hole.  Firstly it hangs well out over the fairway, and secondly, it comes into play, even for well played tee shots.  In the practice round we played the hole into the wind.  I hit a pretty solid tee shot 4 steps to the right of the middle of the fairway...I was left with an uphill approach shot of 180 yards that I had to play under the branches of the tree.  During the tournament I was able to hit it just barely past the point where the tree would affect me, but my playing partner who is just average in length had to contend with this tree in both the 3rd and 4th round.  Unless you are a very long hitter, you only have about 1/2 the fairway to work with on the left side, and there is OB about 10-15 yards from the edge of the fairway on the left.  Having to hit a very low shot uphill wouldn't be that bad, but there is a great cross bunker that sits about 30 yards short of the green in the right center of the fairway.  I love the position and look of this bunker, but the hole would be better served without either the tree or this bunker.  For me it's an easy call...bunker stays, tree says "t-i-m-b-e-r"!!  The 2nd part of the 18th hole that is a huge challenge is the green itself.  It is a large, wide, two tier green that slopes quite steeply from back to front.  With the green speeds and hole location on the last day, the hole became too goofy.  Players could barely keep the ball on the top tier and if a ball went off the top tier to the bottom, it continued clear off the green down the fairway another 5-10 yards.  My two scores on this hole during the final day were:  Birdie 3....and Quadruple bogey 8, after being just off the green to the left, pin high in two shots.
Unfortunately, my birdie was an anomoly, and the eight was closer to the norm for the day.

All in all, I found Mountain Ridge to be an excellent test of golf.  All facets of a players game are challenged...accuracy off the tee, yardage control, and perhaps most of all, the short game.  I don't really pay too much attention to the course rankings in our state(the last few lists I've seen have been laughable)but, I would place MR among the top echelon of courses in NJ. Only Baltusrol and Hollywood can be mentioned in the same category of courses that I've played that have hosted the NJ Am.  

[Jim Franklin]

Who won? Can someone post the results?

[Tags:]

Tags: