Geoffrey C,
It's amazing how one's bias affects their interpretation of a statement. They hear what they want, to the exclusion of everything else.
Bethpage's bunkers were NEVER intended to look LIKE Winged Foot's bunkers.
The SCALE of the golf courses is dramatically different.
The SCALE of their bunkers is dramatically different.
If one took Winged Foot's bunkers and placed them onto Bethpage, the result would not be positive, aesthetically, strategically, and from that most important perspective, playability.
IF Rees made the bunkers at Bethpage exactly like the bunkers at Winged Foot, the same people would be criticizing that ill conceived idea as well. Bunkers, according to this astute group, have to fit the land, and Geoffrey, since you've played Winged Foot and Bethpage, you know that Winged Foot's bunkers don't fit the land at Bethpage, but then again, you've only played Bethpage a zillion times, how can you know more than someone who has never been there and never played the golf course ?
The other part of the typically non-researched attack, is that they make the assumption that the golf club mandated a pure restoration, when nothing could be further from the truth.
But, they know more about the project, despite never having been to the course, never having played the course, and never having been privy to the membership meetings or plans regarding the course.
Geoffrey, don't you know that they speak for the membership, and know the exact intent of the golf course projects that Rees undertakes.
I also have to laugh at Tom MacWood's allegation about the dis-satisfaction of the Members at Baltusrol, Hollywood and other courses. He is so WRONG it's laughable, and it shows the extent he will go to in his attempt to disparage Rees.
Geoffrey, you will notice that his research in this area is non-existent, and based upon his personal, biased opinion, alone.
And, Geoffrey, you have to remember, Tom MacWood has never seen these courses, but makes his pronouncements, nonetheless. The hallmark of good, thorough research !
His credibility in speaking for the membership of golf courses he's never played is ZERO, so don't take it too seriously.
The other joke is that many were touting Burbeck, not Tillinghast for Bunker design and construction, and now the're saying Rees didn't duplicate Tillinghast's work. Hey, guys, get consistent in your position.
Then, Geoffrey, the photo experts first complained about the look of the crisp bunkers when pictures were posted a year or two ago, and now, that the bunkers have their prefered rough look around the edges, it's to camoflage the lack of handwork
Sounds like a hand job to me Geoffrey.
But, Geoffrey, I've come to a different conclusion.
I'm going to play and enjoy Baltusrol, Hollywood, Atlantic, The Country Club, Congressional, Bethpage Black and Quaker Ridge. If you care to join me, we can have some good laughs, and enjoy these terrible golf courses.
John Bernhardt,
You should be certain of your facts before making a critical remark.
The "CLUB", not the USGA determines the architect of choice.
You should not take Rees to task because a club chooses him Nor should you take him to task because he graciously accepts interviews from the media, and THEY choose to label him as the Open Doctor.