I have pointed out (again, using your words) that the maintenance and pace of play of BP-Black was consistent from well before the econo-meltdown to now. There is no relationship between maintenance levels and the state's financial situation. As you admitted in Dec. 2008,
"I have commented several times on how the maintenance practices there need to be better planned in regard to the course's overall playability." http://tinyurl.com/y3jnpquIn fact, you were complaining about the rough there eight years ago:
"I can remember playing many a six-hour round at Bethpage Black and watching as player after player wandered into the hay and the death march began on nearly every hole." http://tinyurl.com/y5e9g2g Jan. 2002
You've been consistent in your complaints about BP-B's playability and pace. Fine, and btw a legitimate claim likely supported by everyone on this site. What has NOT been consistent is Albany's finances.
When Albany has money, the course is a difficult slog.
When Albany does not have money, the course is a difficult slog. So where's the correlation between BP-B's playability and funding?
These two items are not related just because you say so. Clearly there's a desire by BP mgmt to present the course in a certain fashion, which may be wise or not. That is, such an Open-type set-up may in fact be part of the overall appeal. Honestly, I don't know. (By the same token, you don't know either. You have an opinion, sure, but you do not
know.) I think your argument might be stronger if the state weren't raising all golf rates and planning to close a full quarter of all state parks and historic sites. But BP is surely not the only target (Jones Beach summer parking is going from $6 to $10), and the new rate for the Black is still an excellent value for residents.
Now, why do you keep changing the metric for NY vs. NJ? It rather resembles the way you switch from one Bethpage argument to another. If pricing doesn't work, try pace. If deficits don't work, try unfunded liabilities.
Just keep poking around, right, and at some point you'll stumble on to a good argument. Incidentally, I would guess that you are right (finally!) about migration patterns, even though I suspect NJ is also a net loser. I'll still ask you to provide some figures.
Finally, in your addendum you misrepresent my opinion. I have never claimed that there's any "improvement" in NYS, so expecting me to do so now is either sloppiness or willful misdirection on your part. In fact I specifically claimed the opposite (see my reply #63, postscript 'a'). I was hoping to preempt your use of a straw man, but no such luck I guess.
Well, enough of that. Answer the question I posed in #66 while avoiding your tedious clichés ("in case you missed it") and some specious claim that I'm now electing to run off (yes, I know you pull that one too), and you can have the last word. Otherwise, I am happy to discuss this further. Your call - you need to go another round?