Matt,
Mike Davis issued a memorandum a number of months back that he sent out to all future U.S. Open & Amateur sites including Bethpage in which he specifically asked that the fairways be WIDENED!
You also noted that, "The course has been morphed into a far different beast --one that has completely abandoned anything close to finesse play and is nothing more than an overdosed legthened layout..."
Sorry Matt, but I disagree. The lengthening of the course is only "enjoyed" by those that play at the highest levels. The longest tees are not ever used other than for tournament play, if then. Again, the new 9th & the 15thh far back tees are not being used by the USGA for the Open. The course played from the back tees during normal use rarely even approaches 7,100 yards in length. If the paying public plays from that range rather than the 6,600-6,700-yard normal set-up they lose their ability to complain about the fairness of it... it is their choice.
You also noted that, "The issue I have with BB is that the course has made a complete and total move to being a US Open set-up for everyday play. The overall widths have been narrowed way too much and the density of the rough is simply along the lines of wedge out and continue on from that point..."
Again, please see what I wrote. This is NOT what the USGA recommended or wanted. It is a decision made by the Park itself. They have cited numerous examples of praise for it from the same public that others say feel it is unfair. I know this for a fact. In fact comments for it far exceed complaints against. Their desire is to simply give the public as true a U.S. Open experience as possible. Agree or not with their decision, but at least it is well-meant and they really do listen to their constituents on this point.
Mike,
Good guess but incorrect. Neither 1 nor 11. So as to not create a guessing game, they are 7 & 12. #1 could not have a new tee located down in th evalley and left side due to spectator flow and bunkers from 18. #11's green entrance is just simply too narrow and the pitch to the entire green too severe for "drivability."
#12 has a much wider entrance and several tiers, especially if a tee box was in the 320+ range. #7 has the best green of all for this. I am certain that few would consider this as they think of it as a par-5. In fact it was my suggestion that if a "drivable par-4" be mandatory that it be done on 7. I also suggested that the championship tee be used. I told them to imagine the architectural statement that could be made by playing the hole one day as a drivable par-4, one as a normal long par-4 and one day as a long par-5 with the choice for Sunday based upon the play from the other three days. I still strongly maintained that it would be against all architectural design intent to have a drivable par-4 on the Black, especially since Tilly designed one for Bethpage on the original Blue course.
Kyle, you asked, "While I understand the idea of restoring the back of 14 green, there is no way Tillinghast designed that green back to have such a straight edge and evenly graded slope down to the bottom. How come the original hillside wasn't preserved?"
The "original hillside" wasn't original. It was the product of now more than 75 years of wind, rain and erosion. It was in terrible shape and dangerous in a number of areas as can be seen from those who have fallen while trying to walk down it. It needed real cleaning up and yes, "straightening." As far as the green edge being straight, you are incorrect. I have many images of Tilly greens where the back, and other, edges are run straight across them. You forget that on this hole he simply followed the flow of the hill which gave and gives a straight edge to the crest.
Sam, you asked if the size of the bunkering on #8 has been increased significantly since "02. No, it hasn't. You've just been in them more often than most!
Seriously, though, the back left does seem a bit larger to me as well. This, though was not consciously done by anyone and may be the work of Craig who enjoys tinkering a bit on his own.
You also asked if the deep bunker left of #14 in place in '02? No, it wasn't. That was added when the front tongue was added. It actually makes the hole play easier. Which would you rather hit out of left of that green, sand or thick wiry rough? Especially if you have a front left hole location in the tongue. No, the bunker was needed to make that particular aspect of it play more fair. The bunker that is there now is a much better one than the one originally installed which was narrow and mostly devoid of shapes.
Jim, yes, Buffalo Jack would disagree!