[Joel_Stewart]

Am I missing something about the Blacklist?  I know they try to keep a low profile mainly because of their membership limitations?

Was 18 that short they needed to add a back tee.  When I played there maybe 10 years ago, seems like it was about 165 yards???

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I love everything about club and course. However I felt the blind tee shots due to grass were too frequent and often hid the strategic aspects of the hole. I agree on a Members course this is not as big a deal but it still was my one issue that puzzled me.

[John Kirk]

Tiger,

I agree.  Not only is it a tough course to navigate around the first time.  In addition, you aren't given the opportunity to watch your tee shot land and finish too many times.

Our friend and prominent member will disagree with me, but I think the course would be much better if they cut all the rough down to 3 inches so you could see your ball finish more often.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Joel,

I prefer the hole at the 165 yardage as compared to the 190 yardage provided that the hole is cut in a challenging fashion, close by the onerous hazards.

John Kirk,

You're right, I do disagree.

Not having clearly defined bowling alley like fairways is what makes GCGC so unique, especially when the fairways are exceptionally generous.

IF the fairways were 24 yards wide, I'd agree, but, at 40-50 and wider on some holes, there's plenty of margin for error, AND, the caddies are great.  In addition, members playing with guests usually provide clearly defined aiming points for their benefit.

I know that Brad Klein didn't like the number of blind tee shots, but, upon reflecting upon them, I do.

It's extremely unique to American golf, and when you combine the blind to semi-blind (moderate might be a better term) with the deep, straight faced bunkers, the very wide fairways, a good breeze and the seemless transitions between fairways and greens, the unique personality of the course gets exponentially better.

[J_ Crisham]

Patrick, What is the slope rating and do guests have difficulty shooting their handicap the first few times they play at Garden City? If they have difficulty is it due to the perception of challenging tee shots?

[John Kirk]

Jack,

For your information, I am a pretty good all around player, with a handicap index that fluctuates from about 0.5 to 3.0.  I shot 78, on a day I was striking the ball well, especially off the tee, but putting poorly.  I didn't make a thing.  I made one 2 stroke mistake, by hitting out of bounds right on hole #3.  The greens had been aerated, and were not their usual selves that day.  If the greens were fast and smooth, it probably would have been an 81 or so, since I got down in two from above the hole a couple of times.

In summary, I thought the course was medium difficult for the first time player.  If I break 80 the first time I see a course, I am very happy.

My host was hot with the putter, either making or just missing all day long.  Six months later he opens a thread asking what people thought about carrying two putters.  That's the way it goes I guess.  Man he was hot that day.  I'd guess he shot about par.    

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

What is the slope rating

I don't have it handy, but, perhaps someone can obtain it off the MGA handicap site.[/color]

and do guests have difficulty shooting their handicap the first few times they play at Garden City?

Yes[/color]

If they have difficulty is it due to the perception of challenging tee shots ?

I don't believe it is.

It's very difficult to score at GCGC due to the sloping nature of the greens.  It's very rare for a golfer to have a straight putt, hence, reading the speed and break and executing same is a difficult task, and not because the slopes are extreme, which they aren't.  They tend to be subtle to slight with a few difficult slopes like holes # 4, and 10 and 15.

The rough also tends to be penal.
While the fairways are VERY wide, if you miss them, you will pay a price, even if you find your ball.

And, the bunkering is very difficult for many, especially in some bunkers when you can't see the putting surface.

GCGC tends to be straight forward, nothing gimmickie, but, the combination of the gently sloping fairways, canted greens, deep bunkers, penal rough and a nice breeze present a challenge that most golfers aren't used to.

I won't say it's like playing some courses in the UK, but, others might.

However, GCGC has been yielding MORE low scores than ever before, and I attribute that to the distance issue and the fact that some/many of the fairway bunkers no longer threaten the longer players.

Slower greens and rough that may be more benign than it was 10 or so years ago may have a hand in that as well.

Mother Nature and some inherited problems have made the new Superintendent's task more difficult, but, the course is coming around nicely.

There's a desire to return playing conditions to F&F.
Which is when the course is at its best.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

John,

With the regaining of 70+ pounds I've regained more of my length, which is welcome.

But, I've abandoned the two (2) putter concept for the time being.

I do however, reserve the right to reinstate the two (2) putter concept, without advance notice.

Most golfers, including good golfers and seasoned members have trouble with those greens.  There's something about their pitch that makes reading and executing very difficult.

Greens like # 7 with it's high left to low right pitch seem to confound experienced members and guests alike.

I don't know if it's because the green is in perfect harmony with the surrounding terrain and therefore the green is harder to read, or, if it's that difficult combination of break and speed.

Whatever it is, those seemingly simple, benign greens give most golfers fits.

In 2006 I birdied 7 out of the first 11 holes, and, I didn't birdie the par 5 7th.  I putted like a fiend.  I had another round like that a month later.  Ask me how many good putting rounds I've had since.  ZERO.  Hence, the introduction of the two (2) putter  theory ..... since abandoned.

The 4th and perhaps the 11th greens have some contour, the other greens tend to be flat or with subtle breaks, but, most are canted, and therein lies the secret to resisting scoring, in my mind.

What's very surprising to me is that in 108 years, noone in the greater MET area has attempted to duplicate GCGC's architectural style.

A friend of mine considered doing so at a course he was going to develope near Princeton 5 years ago, but, he was talked out of it, favoring the introduction of Jack Nicklaus, because of Nicklaus's impact on the bottom line.  The golf course never materialized.

I would think a course similar to GCGC in the MET area would be very popular, but, after 108 years, there's only one GCGC.

[George_Bahto]

Garden City Men's Club is one of the great courses in the country.

I can't think of a course I've played that showcases golf the way Garden City does.

Their Eden 18th is certainly one of the best Eden holes in the US as well.

[Mike Policano]

Pat, Merry Christmas

You mentioned that GCMC's architectural style has not been copied. How would you describe the style to someone who hasn't seen it?

Cheers

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Mike,

I'd call it a "no frills" style.

First, to duplicate that style you'd have to have sandy soil or soil that drains exceptionally well in order to create those deep, severe bunkers, which are a key element.

The land is gentle rolling land.

Creating WIDE fairways shouldn't be a problem.

Creating greens which transition seamlessly from the fairways wouldn't seem to be a problem either.

At a course I'm familiar with, they took a green out of play for a year or two and mowed a temporary green in the fronting fairway.  As the mowers got lower and lower, the green created from that fairway became terrific.  It had slope, undulations and was quite challenging.  And, the subsurface WASN'T specially prepared, it was just fairway mowed to green height.

The removal of trees might be a problem.
Some jurisdictions require remediation and/or restrictions on specimen tree removal, although, that's a relatively recent development.

Farmlands might be an ideal setting since they've already been cleared.

Allowing Fescues to grow to a good height shouldn't be a problem either.

The critical issue would be selecting a site with gently rolling terrain with a subsurface that drains well.  I would think that land like that could be found within a 50 mile radius of Manhattan.

[Mike Policano]

Pat,

So, given that the land features are not spectacular or hard to recreate and given the universal acclaim for the course, why do you think the course hasn't been copied in some meaningful way?

Is it the "no-frills"? is it too subtle for a marketing machine?  The blind shots?

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Pat,

So, given that the land features are not spectacular or hard to recreate and given the universal acclaim for the course, why do you think the course hasn't been copied in some meaningful way?

Is it the "no-frills"? is it too subtle for a marketing machine?  The blind shots?

My theory is as follows:

As golf became popular in America, the trend was away from penal golf courses, AND, the forces behind new courses tended to be democratic, instead of dictator oriented.

There were exceptions, such as Pine Valley, which was created, specifically, for the championship golfer, and NGLA where CBM was King, but, for the most part, as hundreds of clubs took root, the GCGC product was not the desired product, in form and governance.

Courses like GCGC were not for those being introduced to the game, nor were they for high to mid handicappers.

The carries off the tee and elsewhere at GCGC were heroic.
The rough was extremely difficult, the bunkers impossible and the greens stupifying.

I don't think that the GCGC model was user friendly for those new to the game, and as such, it wasn't a candidate for consideration when it came to forming and building a new club.

However, for the accomplished golfer, it would make an excellent club, and probably a second club.

It seems as though golf, as it was being introduced in the MET area was a more spartan test, more penal in nature on Long Island.

NGLA was developed as a difficult test.

I believe that CBM was proud of how NGLA stood up to the best players of the day.

GCGC is not a golf course for beginners or women, and I think that fact eliminated its style from consideration amongst new clubs.

It would seem that Philadelphia had its Pine Valley and New York had its GCGC and NGLA, and that all other clubs to come upon the scene, with a few exceptions, were intended to be far more user friendly to a broad spectrum of golfer.

If I had the land and the means, I'd create a GCGC/UK type golf course in close proximity to NYC today.

I believe that there's an adequate market for a club of this nature in the MET area.

Unfortunately, I have neither.

[Mike Policano]

Pat,

Thanks for the great reply. If I hear of a piece of land I will let you know. You never know when some government agency will need to sell some choice land to make up for lower revenues or too much debt.

[Sean_A]

Joel,

I prefer the hole at the 165 yardage as compared to the 190 yardage provided that the hole is cut in a challenging fashion, close by the onerous hazards.

John Kirk,

You're right, I do disagree.

Not having clearly defined bowling alley like fairways is what makes GCGC so unique, especially when the fairways are exceptionally generous.

IF the fairways were 24 yards wide, I'd agree, but, at 40-50 and wider on some holes, there's plenty of margin for error, AND, the caddies are great.  In addition, members playing with guests usually provide clearly defined aiming points for their benefit.

I know that Brad Klein didn't like the number of blind tee shots, but, upon reflecting upon them, I do.

It's extremely unique to American golf, and when you combine the blind to semi-blind (moderate might be a better term) with the deep, straight faced bunkers, the very wide fairways, a good breeze and the seemless transitions between fairways and greens, the unique personality of the course gets exponentially better.

Pat

Garden City sounds very interesting.  How many of the tee shots are blind and do the fairways on the blind tee shots angle or turn?  I have found on some older courses which haven't been updated with added length can be very difficult to drive on because the player runs out of room.  For guys like me it often hard to tell how far things are - especially when large bunkers are slapped in to discern distances - so it takes a few plays to get a grip on the correct play.  Is GCGC anything like this?

One of the things which really stands out in Ran's profile of the course is the variety of bunkering.  Its amazing all the different styles and where they seem to be placed.  

Ciao

[TEPaul]

"The removal of trees might be a problem.
Some jurisdictions require remediation and/or restrictions on specimen tree removal, although, that's a relatively recent development."

Pat:

That kind of thing probably is a relatively recent development in some jurisdications. It's true at The Creek and I feel at the very least some of these clubs ought to look at both from where and how these restrictions emanated. They just may find that this type of thing developed rather recently as simply some kind of supervisior precedent that really has no basis in law.

When I mentioned this to someone who probably knows the details he said that's probably true but it should be looked into in such a way that it would not completely piss off some jurisdiction or that might inspire them to actually try to pass some law on it.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Garden City sounds very interesting.  How many of the tee shots are blind and do the fairways on the blind tee shots angle or turn?  

The term "blind" as it applies to GCGC is misleading.

On a number of holes, you can see the fairway in the distance, but, when the fescue grows high, you can't see your ball land.

I don't consider # 1, # 3, #10 # 14 and # 15 to be blind, others might disagree.

# 4 is blind in the sense that you can't see the 60 yard wide fairway, but, you can see the green in the distance and almost every hole is straight.

# 17 is blind as is # 7, but, there are clearly defined aiming points, like a yellow house in the distant trees on # 7 and a church steeple on # 17.[/color]

I have found on some older courses which haven't been updated with added length can be very difficult to drive on because the player runs out of room.  For guys like me it often hard to tell how far things are - especially when large bunkers are slapped in to discern distances - so it takes a few plays to get a grip on the correct play.  Is GCGC anything like this?


NO,

Almost every hole is straight.
# 16 being the exception.
If you hit it straight, you're not going to run out of fairway.[/color]

One of the things which really stands out in Ran's profile of the course is the variety of bunkering.  Its amazing all the different styles and where they seem to be placed.  

The bunkering is quite varied and unique.[/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()