Shinnecock vs Bethpage

[HamiltonBHearst]

Matt Ward


The open was there as a gift to public golfers.  Rees made the course better for all and I applaud him for that.  I have heard stories of people playing off of astro-turf for heavens sakes.

I do appreciate the fact that you stick to the facts and offer opinions though.

Richard Cabeza

That is a cheap shot.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

I don't consider it a dull or weak hole, or one lacking options any more then I do # 18 at Olympic or # 18 at Inverness.

Just out of curiosity, does anybody have the round by round scoring figures for # 18 during the US Open ?

Hamilton B Hearst,

Cheap shots and cowardice reside in the domain of the anonymous.

[scratch]

To the Mikes - thanks for the specifics, I have actually come across a panoramic photo of the 15th at Shinnecock from the tee and it basically gives a great indication of the land which appears somewhere between links and Melbourne sandbelt.

One of the reasons for my original curiosity of the comparison between the two was the fact that I had also read that the sandy nature of Bethpage could in fact be used to create a Pine Valley type look (and quality) if the grassed out rough was slashed and the native grasses and vegetation left to return, but it also appears that Shinnecock could included in that frame.  Thanks guys

[Matt_Ward]

Pat:

With all due respect you are wrong to equate the 18th at BB with the likes of the 18th at Olympic or Inverness. The greens at both the California and Ohio layouts are light years beyond the vanilla putting surface you find at BB.

The tee game strategy is also in the favor of the Olympic / Inverness in my opinion. It also points out that if the 18th at BB were more in line with the length and dimensions of the greens of the two courses you cite I believe it would be much more interesting and fun than what presently exists.

I salute Rees for doing a wonderful job, but his limitations at the 18th are there to see. I just personally believe another option could have made for a closer that simply takes BB to another level of greatness. In my mind -- there's room for improvement at the course and the 18th needs to be front and center in that disucssion -- for all types of players not just with the '09 Open in mind.

P.S. I have the scoring figures for the '02 Open and will post sometime later today.

[GeoffreyC]

I agree with Matt on this one.

Pat- those two bunkers WAY behind the old 18th were NEVER in play.  Rumor was that they were for a different greensite proposed to be way up the hill next to the clubhouse. They were vestigial remains of what never was built.

The old 18th was a total letdown after the stretch of holes from 15-17.  The new one is a bit improved due to the more interesting greensite.

Might a short hole with the angles, bunkering, and temtation of Riviera #10 work well here? Uphill about 310-315 yards with a greensite angled from front left to back right with the same green contours. There is certainly more then enough width in the landing area to accomodate a hole of that style.

[Phil_the_Author]

Pat,

I don't have the time at this moment to look up the figures, but I do know that at the 2002 Open, the 18th played as the 7th most difficult hole in relation to par for the entire championship.

As big a fan as I am of the Black, I found it a pleasant surprise that only 6 holes played more difficult.

[peter_mcknight]

Patrick...

Here are the following Hole 18 statistics from the 2002 US Open at Bethpage:

Round 1--4.28 (19 birdies), rank 10
Round 2--4.10 (24 birdies), rank 15
Round 3--4.19 (12 birdies), rank 7
Round 4--4.39 (7 birdies), rank 3

4 round average--4.22, rank 11

Pin positions on Hole 18, green depth 33

Round 1--Front 7, Right 4
Round 2--Front 18, Right 5
Round 3--Front 6, Left 4
Round 4--Front 24, Right 4

Hope this helps...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff Childs,

I did reference the visual the rear bunkers presented as one of the reasons I liked them.

Matt Ward,

It seems that the best players in the world, The PGA Tour players had an increasingly difficult time with # 18, which would seem to undermine your position that it was a dull or weak finishing hole.

# 18 played as the 7th[/color] hardest hole in round # 3, and the 3rd[/color] hardest hole in the final round.

Those numbers seem in conflict with your analysis.

I also submit, for the golfers who play it day in and day out, that it's not a dull or weak finishing hole.

Inverness requires an Lob Wedge for amateurs, let alone the best players in the world, and getting a Lob wedge under the hole isn't that demanding of a challenge for them.

I forget the exact shot most pros played into # 18 at Olympic, but I do recall that the hole was made difficult by an extreme pin position, that even Pete Dye might call unfair for those guys.

It would seem that appearances are deceptive and that # 18 at BPB has more challenge to it then most can imagine.

[Matt_Ward]

Pat:

What does degree of difficulty have to do with architectural merit? It's very possible that a hole can be demanding but clearly dull from an architectural perspective. I mean BB is simply a pro forma play for the top players. Where are the countless options that are usually at the heart of any great hole.

I mean do you really believe the 18th at BB is beyond the likes of the 18th at Inverness or The Olympic Club? I don't believe so. I can recall plenty of situations where those holes demonstrated their pedigree.

One last thing -- if you took a survey of the folks who played BB and asked them of the final holes you play there which one was the most disappointing I'd wager a few bucks that the 18th would be mentioned overwhelmingly.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

What does degree of difficulty have to do with architectural merit? It's very possible that a hole can be demanding but clearly dull from an architectural perspective. I mean BB is simply a pro forma play for the top players. Where are the countless options that are usually at the heart of any great hole.

I know of very few holes that have "countless" options for the greatest players in the world, the PGA Tour Pro.

I mean do you really believe the 18th at BB is beyond the likes of the 18th at Inverness or The Olympic Club?

Could you list the countless options that exist on both of these holes, off the tee and on the approach ?

I didn't say that it was beyond them, but it's certainly not substantively inferior to them either, I'd say that they're peer holes, and, the scoring statistics would seem to bear out that # 18 at Bethpage provided plenty of challenge, even as short as it is.

I don't believe so. I can recall plenty of situations where those holes demonstrated their pedigree.

One last thing -- if you took a survey of the folks who played BB and asked them of the final holes you play there which one was the most disappointing I'd wager a few bucks that the 18th would be mentioned overwhelmingly.

You could say the same thing about a good number of holes that fit into a grouping of exceptional finishing holes.
Plainfield amongst them.  That a hole is surrounded, or complimented by exceptional holes doesn't automaticaally categorize that the hole as a weak or dull hole, only that in comparison to the other exceptional holes that preceed it, it's not the best of the litter.  

[SPDB]

I tend to agree with Matt.

I think the flanking bunkers on BB 18 would be better arranged diagonally starting lower right and moving diagonally and forward across the fairway. This would make a shorter and safer play to the right side, a longer play and would have to play over the bunkers fronting the right side.

The longer more daring play down the left side into the throat created by the diagonal bunkering, would leave an easier shot into the green and would open a view of the green, and make an easier shot particularly on back right pin locations.

[Mike_Cirba]

The present 18th hole at Bethpage does not improve on the original.  

It is boring, one-dimensional, and excessively gawdy, like the woman who couldn't decide what piece of jewelry to wear so she threw on the whole box.  

[GeoffreyC]

Mike

The old green was one of the largest if not the largest on the course and flat as a pancake.  Playing the old 18th was a matter of knocking a drive down the hill and a thoughtless wedge or short iron (even in those days) up the hill to the green. The only way to screw up was if you were out of breath on your tee shot from the walk up the hill from 17 green to 18 tee through all the scrub brush and crap on the path.

[Mike_Cirba]

Geoffrey;

You'll notice I only said that the new 18th "does not improve" on the old.

The old one had a certain charm in its simplicity (much like the 18th at TOC or North Berwick), with the natural arena like setting, and it was almost as if Tillie was saying, "Ok, if you're still alive at this point, have at it fellas!".  

[GeoffreyC]

Mike

I agree with you about the symmetrical fairway bunkering.  However, teh new greenside bunkering is better as is the putting surface.

I'd still change the hole and I like the idea of a Riviera #10 type strategy.  Build two greens and alternate if the traffic will be too much.  There is room I believe.

[Matt_Ward]

SPDB:

You're suggestion is a good one for a much more improved 18th hole.

Geoff:

Just a correction -- the 18th green was not changed from a contour perspective. The only aspect Rees did was to allow for a portion of the front right side to be pushed back to allow for a tight pin placement to that side.

Overall, the green is still the plain jane vanilla type and one more reason why the closing hole needs a bit of an adjustment to cap an otherwise stellar design.

One last thing -- Geoff, your alternate green idea sounds nice but it's clearly not a workable option. Given the traffic patterns that took place during the '02 Open I don't see that happening. However, I do believe something along the lines of a Riviera #10 hole is indeed one filled with promise.

The last thing I would like to see done is to simply provide another monster like ending par-4 -- the Black provides plenty of these during different parts of the round and a closer with some variety is indeed a much better way to end a glorious round. We shall see what happens ...

Pat:

Scoring statistics are not the only measure of a hole's greatness. In fact -- sometimes the primary focus on difficulty simply obscures the fact that architectural heft is really lacking. I have played the Black enough times to have seen the 18th hole -- both prior and after -- for what it is. A drab conclusion to a course that deserves a far better fate.

FYI -- if the bunker cluster were patterned differently it is possible that the top players would have opted to hit driver and get even closer to the green. Given the extreme narrowness of that landing zone the only smart play is to do what I mentioned previously.

[GeoffreyC]

Matt

There is absolutely (as best my eye and putting stroke can tell) more contour in the new 18th green then the old.  

I'd like to hear if Phil (the author) knows any facts about this bit of Rees' work.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Are you guys being critical of A.W. Tillinghast's concept, design and construction of the 18th hole at BPB ?

Can you now produce better golf holes, including the ability to route golf courses over the terrain at BPB ?

SPDB,

For who, PGA Tour Pros that come there once every 7 years.
That would seem like a misdirected effort.
You have to remember, this is a public facility with the skill level of the thousands of average golf who play it, well, well below that of a PGA Tour pro.  And, pace of play remains a consideration for any changes made.

Besides, wouldn't diagonal cross bunkers on # 18 become too repetitive of a feature on this golf course in light of the previous holes with cross bunkering ?

Ask yourself, does the 18th at Bethpage provide an interesting challenge for the average golfer ?
I know it did for me.

Mike Cirba,

The 18th hole is anything but gawdy.
It's also tough to make a comparitive analysis between tow holes when you've never seen the previous golf hole.

This is a short, testing golf hole, with options.
Hit your driver, understanding the risk/reward factors associated with that club, and alternative selections, or select other clubs, leaving you a more difficult approach.

On most holes at BPB you have no options off the tee, and finally when you get one, all you guys can do is whine.
I don't understand it.

Matt Ward,

Is # 14 at BPB such a great hole ?
Is # 13 at BPB such a great hole ?

Is # 18 at Plainfield such a great hole ?
Is # 18 at Somerset such a great hole ?
Is # 18 at Olympic such a great hole ?
Is # 18 at Inverness such a great hole ?

# 18 is a nice change of pace, a drive from and elevated tee to the fairway filled with peril below, and a second shot from  a valley to a green perched high above, surrounded by deep bunkers.  Seems like an interesting hole to me.

It certainly provided all of the challenge I required, and, it appears from the statistics that this little, short hole provided the best players in the world with plenty of challenge.

If a short little hole can provide the best players in the world with challenge, it must be a credit to its inherent archectural merit.  Perhaps you fellows haven't yet discovered it.  

[GeoffreyC]

Pat

#14 at BPB is one of the steeply pitched greens on the course. The wet conditions in 2002 Open did not allow it to show its teeth. I 3 putt that green as much as any other on the course. Also, going over that green is a no no.

#13 is a wonderful 5 par. The drive is very awkward due to the angle to the fairway. The fairway bunker on the left will create a real problem with the layup especially if you miss the fairway (tendency is to go way too far right on the second to avod it).  Designing a good layup second shot to a par 5 is tough and this one does it VERY well.  Next, the bunkers short of the green create an additional strategic problem.  Its a really good hole.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Geoff Childs,

You, and especially others, can't keep altering the context of the discussion between the general public and the best golfers in the world.

I maintain that # 18 at BPB is a good golf hole, one that provides a golfer has options off the tee, a rare occurence at BPB.

# 14 is a short par 3, with a green pitched back to front.
Putting may not be the general public's forte, but it sure is for PGA Tour players.  Hitting that green isn't all that difficult for them, nor are there nooks and corners on that green.  
It's a rather plain par 3 with a pitched green.  If Matt Ward wants to call a hole weak or dull, perhaps he skipped this hole during his rounds.

I like # 13, although I don's see the difficulty with the tee shot that you do.

I object to the trees planted along the right side as one gets closer to the green.

For the PGA Tour pro I don't think the hole is overpowering or extremely challenging, but, I like the hole because of it's design and its position in the routing of the golf course.

Matt Ward has had a tendency to favor "muscle back" golf holes, and # 18 at BPB doesn't fit that mold.

Off the tee, most of the holes at BPB have directional options only , # 18 at BPB has the additional benefit of having a distance option as well, along with # 6, hence I view the hole, off the tee as having far more options then any of the other holes, with the exception of # 6.

Since Matt referenced "countless" options at the other holes at BPB, I'd like to know what they are off the tee, and which holes have the most options.  The answer is # 18 and # 6, and when you combine the scoring average for the best players in the world at # 18, it would seem that there must be more to the hole then meets the arm chair architect's eye.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba,

The 18th hole is anything but gawdy.

OK



It's also tough to make a comparitive analysis between tow holes when you've never seen the previous golf hole.

Patrick, I DID play the "previous golf hole" and had no issue with it.  There are 17 other monsters out there...I thought it was a neat final respite, similar to 18 at The Old Course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

You know that that angle is as misleading as can be.
Why not show a picture of the bunkers as they appear from a player's eye, standing on the tee, and from the players eye standing, not lying down in the fairway ?

I could take pictures of the bunkers at NGLA from similar angles that would provide the same illusion.  But, it's a far cry from what the golfer actually sees, and you know it.

[SPDB]

Pat -
I don't think about the PGA tour player, and remember toughening up the closer would be consistent with the warning that greets players before they tee off.

I dislike the 18th, because of its symmetrical fields of bunkers which are Smyers-esque in their extraneousness.

My offer of alteration is simply a musing, but I, nevertheless think it would create a more interesting hole for ALL PLAYERS.

And the cross bunker I suggest would not duplicate examples found earlier in the round. A diagonal bunker moving negatively along the x-axis and positively along a y axis would create some of the following choices off the tee. It could conceivably be carried on the shallower right side.

a. do i try and carry the bunker on the right side leaving the shortest possible shot in?
b. do i play safe and short of it on the right/right center side leaving a longer second shot and possibly a diminished view of the green?
c. do I play a longer shot into the throat created on the left side (higher side of the diagonal bunker), leaving a shorter shot, with a better view of the pin (particularly on back right pin positions).

Is #18 a lousy hole? no. I don't think anyone is saying that. Do people (including me) wish it was better? yes. How can you discredit our opinions?

[GeoffreyC]

Pat

Play the Black enough and you will come to realize the great angles so many tee shots present to the player.  #13 is one of those (unless you played the VERY forward tee   ). Others are 2, 5!!, 6!, 7!!, 9!!, 11!!!, 12, 13.

It is one of the GREAT driving courses ever built.

BTW- Hitting driver on #6 is an option but it is a bad choice.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

I don't think about the PGA tour player, and remember toughening up the closer would be consistent with the warning that greets players before they tee off.

Didn't it prove tough enough for the best players in the world ?  Why the need to toughen it up further ?

I dislike the 18th, because of its symmetrical fields of bunkers which are Smyers-esque in their extraneousness.

My offer of alteration is simply a musing, but I, nevertheless think it would create a more interesting hole for ALL PLAYERS.

And the cross bunker I suggest would not duplicate examples found earlier in the round. A diagonal bunker moving negatively along the x-axis and positively along a y axis would create some of the following choices off the tee.

It could conceivably be carried on the shallower right side.

a. do i try and carry the bunker on the right side leaving the shortest possible shot in?
b. do i play safe and short of it on the right/right center side leaving a longer second shot and possibly a diminished view of the green?
c. do I play a longer shot into the throat created on the left side (higher side of the diagonal bunker), leaving a shorter shot, with a better view of the pin (particularly on back right pin positions).

For what level of player do these items apply ?
Could you cite me just 10 holes in golf where this configuration exists ?

Is #18 a lousy hole? no. I don't think anyone is saying that.

Yes they are.  When people categorize it as a weak, dull hole, I don't think it takes a quantum leap to make the connection.

Do people (including me) wish it was better? yes.

Couldn't that be said about almost every hole in golf ??

How can you discredit our opinions?

I'm not discrediting your opinions, I'm disagreeing with them.
Are we now to accept your opinions as The Gospel ?
Are your opinions to be held as absolutes, above reproach ??

If you render an opinion, be prepared to support it in the face of questions, challenges or refutations