[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

    I didn't say the challenge should be consistent. I said the uneven lies were consistent. The beauty of a great course is they challenge all grades of golfers but in different ways.

  Matt,

    I'm of the opinion that NY has the bias in these rankings.[/size]

Mike,

I think this reflects the core and/or foundation of your assessment of Fenway.

When you can overcome your bias against NY courses, perhaps your evaluations will be more objective

[mike_malone]

 My comment looks different enlarged and in red. Maybe it is only a Tillinghast bias

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mayday,

I can't speak for others, but, I find Fenway to be a very challenging golf course.
The equal or more of WFW, WFE, BPB and QR from the same distance

In the half a dozen times I've played it in recent years, I've never had an easy time scoring.
I confess to only playing it from the back tees, but, at par 70, 6,700 yards, with those highly contoured and sloped greens, it's all the challenge I can handle.

I've played it with mid-teen to low single digit handicaps and everyone always found the course challenging.

Other than the first hole, most of the fairways had undulations/slope, so, I don't know why you feel the fairways don't offer variety in lie and shots

I think you need to first see Dr Katz, then play Fenway next summer, then see Dr Katz for your outplacement visit before you write your critique

[mike_malone]

 Pat,

    I'm so used to judging "challenge" by playing Flynn courses that are ranked lower in Golfweek than Fenway. I can only tell you they all are more fun and challenging.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

Besides a few maintenance related issues - what holes or specific shots were lacking for you at Fenway ?

Specifics help clarify matters. I trust your feelings on the course are a bit more profound than a kick throw-away sentence or two.

[mike_malone]

 Matt,

    I can't seem to get a good view of the back nine holes from the club's website but on the front the interesting approaches were to #3 and #4. #7 could have been truly the best, uphill to a raised green which was angled behind a bunker , except for the fact of the strategy killing trees.  Otherwise, there were flanking bunkers versus slanted and more interesting bunkers like those Philly Flynns.

   When I think of challenge on a great course I think of the necessity to deal with green side bunkers to get to the pin. I rarely felt that early on.

   On the back was a short hole which appeared to have manufactured small hills which could have provided some nifty strategy but are now enveloped in trees. It would have been better to build up those hills and create a blind recovery shot in harmony with the original design.

    Maybe someone can inform us on the green complexes on the back.

   Usually after five or six holes I have formed my opinion and it rarely changes on the back.


     So, I believe angled approaches are more stimulating than open ones with flanking bunkers. This is a matter of taste that I readily admit .

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt,

    I can't seem to get a good view of the back nine holes from the club's website but on the front the interesting approaches were to #3 and #4. #7 could have been truly the best, uphill to a raised green which was angled behind a bunker , except for the fact of the strategy killing trees.  Otherwise, there were flanking bunkers versus slanted and more interesting bunkers like those Philly Flynns.

   When I think of challenge on a great course I think of the necessity to deal with green side bunkers to get to the pin. I rarely felt that early on.

   On the back was a short hole which appeared to have manufactured small hills which could have provided some nifty strategy but are now enveloped in trees. It would have been better to build up those hills and create a blind recovery shot in harmony with the original design.

Was it # 15 ?
It's the ONLY short hole on the back side.

    Maybe someone can inform us on the green complexes on the back.

   Usually after five or six holes I have formed my opinion and it rarely changes on the back.


     So, I believe angled approaches are more stimulating than open ones with flanking bunkers. This is a matter of taste that I readily admit .

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

Got to tell you this -- your specifics are really lacking.

How do you form a complete picture of a golf course if you can't remember all the key details -- and that means more than just the first six holes.

Mike, if I had to grade your report it would be incomplete at best.

You throw Fenway under the bus --plus the likes of Bethpage Black and WF/W -- and make a generalized comment on NYC metro area golf.

Mike, I am not suggesting you can't have an opinion but when someone goes to a course and then provides comments I am hoping to learn something from them. Thus far, you have been too general, vague and often times in doubt of what it is you did see or not see when playing there.

[mike_malone]

 Matt,

   There are those that form their opinions in detail from playing a course  and those that get a feel with a few specifics to support. Both are valid. I'm from the latter camp.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

The "feel" camp still needs to provide clearer details.

Just going with the gut doesn't cut it and frankly is not fair to the course.

More than a "few specifics" are needed to assure credibility.

thanks,

p.s. if you had to rank flynn courses -- using the ones you played in phila -- where would you place fenway -- in the middle, at the bottom, etc, etc.

[mike_malone]

 Matt,

   I believe I have plently of specifics. The bunker maintenance was a problem everywhere. The trees that impeded strategy was significant on a few holes and leads me to believe that if I had ended up in other parts of the course that I would have found more examples. The lack of angled approaches was throughout. These combined to make the course one where strategic thinking was secondary to avoiding the hazards.

    I would rate all the Flynns on Golfweek's 100 classic courses above Fenway because the golf is just more engaging and fun. Fenway is 61. Lancaster is 65, Huntington Valley is 72, Rolling Green is 76, Lehigh is 81, and Manufacturer's is likely just outside the list . All have more interesting grounds for golf and show more of a strategic eye for design .

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

Again, you don't go into detail on the holes at Fenway. You apply a general comment on bunker maintenance and less of angled approaches and the like -- but where do you discuss the specific holes / and shots faced ?

One other thing -- you throw Fenway under the bus -- and you also used the same approach with Bethpage Black and WF/W.

Without real details that go beyond the surface level -- I have to say that Pat's feeling about anti-NYC courses has some meaning.

Prove otherwise if you can.

thanks,

p.s. If you can provide the details requsted I am more than prepared to offer a counterpoint in no less equal detail.

[mike_malone]

 Matt,

   I'm sure you can into great detail but that's your style not mine.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

You need to check what Ran provides on his reviews.

I'm not suggesting that level of detail but "feel" comments without any substance are empty vessels.

You made it a point to say Fenway doesn't belong in GW's top 100 classic. I'd like to read more on how you came to that conclusion.

Here is what you concluded in a previous post ...

"All have more interesting grounds for golf and show more of a strategic eye for design."

Please define what that means with hole / shot specifics as to why Fenway fails in that regard.

Without that -- your analysis is nothing more than a passing shot of emptiness.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt, Matt, Matt,

You don't get it.

Once Mayday played a few holes and had developed a "feel" for the course, the play of subsequent holes was immaterial, he had made up his mind.

Fenway was undeserving of its ranking and inferior to Flynn courses near and dear to his heart.

Mayday,

Would you say that my analysis is fairly accurate

[mike_malone]

 Pat,

   You are very close. I would say it was 12 holes. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

   You are very close. I would say it was 12 holes. 

Mayday,

Granted that # 1 is a warm up hole, but, what did you think of holes 2 thru 12 ?

I'm especially curious about # 3, # 5, # 6, # 7, # 9, # 11.

It's unfortunate that you didn't get to play Fenway when the greens were fast.

Those greens are frightening at pace.
You can putt off of # 3 quite easily.

The slope and contours make them very challenging

What did you think of the collection of par 3's ?

[mike_malone]

 Pat,

   I already commented on #3 and #7. The par threes is where Flynn distances himself quite a bit from this course. #4 was nice; I asked whether more green was intended on the right side ridge that runs into the bunker. #6 falls short of a typical Flynn uphill long three; too easy to approach directly. #11 was the most fun and the closest to a Flynn par three. a nice hole. #17 I could have done without the left greenside bunker that took out the bailout area. The par threes were solid for a member's course.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()