Let me try to answer some of your questions and comments.....
Patrick Mucci,
I don't blame RTJ Sr. for anything really. I certainly don't blame him for hitting any of my shots offline.
However, the design is so penal to a player that doesn't play the course by the architects ONE path. I had to make three decisions all week and they were on whether I wanted to go for a par 5 in two. What I mean by this is that I literally had no choice but to hit the ball down one line or angle or I would pay the price for misbehaving. RTJ Sr. reminds me of a nun that taught Catholic school and hit you with a ruler when you got caught looking at someone elses tests. I guess I always liked teachers that allowed their students to find their own way with key but minimal guidance. Don't get me wrong I actually liked Metedeconk for what it is, a beatiful beast.
Matt Ward,
My caddie told me about the 9th green and how it used to be. By the way, we played the Third Nine as our front nine and the First Nine as our back nine, so the 9th green you speak of was our 18th hole. They did this so there would be a finish up near the clubhouse.
The tee on the 9th hole of the third nine was back twice and up once. The last day it was back. The pin was front right the first day. What a great hole location. I made a great par there after having to chip out sideways from the right trees. I stuffed a wedge in there about 2 feet and made the putt.
As for your comments and questions about fairness and severity.....
Svoboda played some flawless golf. 7 under out there was off the charts awesome. He made everyone look like chumps. He was the aberration of the field. If you look, some very good players shot some very high scores. Now don't get me wrong, I like it when courses are set up for par to be a great score. However, I don't like it when they are one-dimensional in strategic terms. There was no risk/reward except for the once or twice a round you decided on whether to go for a par 5 in two. To be honest the risk/reward was more like..... hit the fairway with a long tee shot/or perish.
While there is a place for these kind of venues in competitive golf I personally don't enjoy them as much as the ones that make you think instead of the ones that dictate your play. It's just my personal opinion. I didn't play in the Met Open at Winged Foot (West) but I did play in the Pro-am there a day or two before the event and got to play the course under similar conditions and it had a tremendous amount more strategy and options to it. At least at Winged Foot or Bethpage if you hit it in the rough you can try to wedge the ball out of it towards the green to advance it closer to the hole. At Metedeconk you had to play sideways back into the fairway everytime you drove a ball offline. It would be like playing a golf course with thousands of pot bunkers down each side of the fairway on each hole that gave you a landing area about 30 yards wide or pitch the ball back out sideways to the fairway.
Overall, like I said to Patrick Mucci, I liked Metedeconk for what it is and enjoyed myself thoroughly at the tournament.
Jeff F.