Met Open

[Jeff Fortson]

I just finished playing in the Met Open at Metedeconk National GC in Jackson, NJ.  All I can say about golf is there is not a more humbling sport on this planet.  Especially when humans make it tougher than necessary.

I hate to be so blunt but what was RTJ Sr.'s problem?  Did he secretly loathe the good player?  As beautiful of a location and as wonderful as the asthetics were at Metedeconk the design is penal and one-dimensional.  Everything about the club was first class (the practice facility, clubhouse, accomodations, staff, etc.) yet the course dictated play in an absolute manner.  I think in 54 holes I had to make 3 or 4 decisions and those were deciding whether to go for par 5's in two.  There were absolutely no options on angles of play and the angles RTJ Sr. gives the player are lined with thick forests.  Oh, did I mention the course was playing 7300 yards with not one par 4 under 400 yards?  Every single tee shot demanded a nearly perfect shot or you were chipping out or blind to the green.  I think this is ok when used sparingly but not on every tee shot.  I never once breathed a sigh of relief on any tee because there wasn't one that you came to where you felt comfortable.

This may all seem like sour grapes and I can understand if you think it is.  However, for me this is just some good, clean venting on a frustrating, yet, fun week.  Anytime I get a chance to compete in a tournament without having to go to work it ends up being enjoyable.  

Anyway, my hat goes off to Andrew Svoboda, an ameteur from Winged Foot, on winning the event in a total blowout at -7 under.  If you look at the scores you'll understand just how awesome of a performance his was.  Even though this wasn't a tour event, there were many excellent players there and two people broke par and most that made the cut, like myself, were up in the double digits over par.  I finished at +14 over par 230 for 54-holes in a tie for 36th.  This was as tough of a tournament as I have ever played in terms of conditions and course design.

Oh well, there is always next year.

Jeff F.

[Will E]

Jeff,
Just playing in the Met Open is quite a feat, this was quite a field. You played well. I share your feelings that this was an exam where the questions didn't require blue book answers, more or less straight forward execution. Nice work, and also congrats to my buddy DeRuntz for a good week. I see that the Met PGA is at Atlantic. Get ready for another scan-tron test.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff Fortson,

Why do you blame RTJ Sr ?

Shooter,

Would you compare the options at Oakmont, in medal play,
to the options at Atlantic, using the MET PGA field as the basis for the comparison.

[JohnV]

Patrick, I don't know about options since I haven't seen Metedeconk, but the average score was 1 stroke lower (78.04) than Oakmont's and par is 2 higher.

I remember Buddy Marucci once saying that he thought that Metedeconk was the hardest course he had ever played.

[Matt_Ward]

Jeff F:

Congrats on playing in the Met Open this year. Just a few thoughts.

Metedeconk will likely not win positive comments from those who favor "the look" here on GCA. It's bare bones in-your-face design that says play the course this way or else. I agree with your take since I've played the course off an on since it's opening back in 1989.

Don't know if you were aware but the 9th hole on the 1st Nine used to feature a savage double tier that was ultimately softened considerably because of its severity. In addition, the club even toned down the wicked fescue grass that grew on the hillside leading up to the green.

Where was the tee on the 9th hole on the 3rd nine? Was the pin pushed all the way to the right and exposing the water threat that lurks on that side?

The key aspect with any tough course is the degree of fairness that it provides. Yes, I concur the "thinking" aspect has less of a role at Metedeconk but where there have been issues of fairness I believe the club has and will continue to address them.

Did you believe the course / set-up was unfair for such a prestigious event such as the Met Open? If so -- how does one explain the seven-under-par winning total without sounding as you say is "sour grapes." What's wrong with having certain venues from time to time for a Met Open be no less in terms of severity? If I recall correctly -- there were a few competitors who mouthed the same thoughts when the event was played at Winged Foot / West last year.

[Patrick_Mucci]

John V,

What do scores have to do with options ??  I don't understand your post.

I would agree with Buddy, from the BACK tees, Metedeconk is very difficult, almost unforgiving.

[JohnV]

I said I knew nothing about options and my post had nothing to do with them.  I was just pointing out the difference in scores.

[Jeff Fortson]

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.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff Fortson,

I believe that Roger Rulewich, rather then RTJ Sr,  did the design work for Metedeconk while he was working for RTJ Sr's firm.

It seems rather unforgiving should you miss a fairway by much.

I thought Andrew's scores were most impressive.

[Will E]

Pat,
Not sure if I'm qualified to make the comparison. I've played Oakmont a couple of times in the SWAT, with nowhere near the rough the guys got at the AM. I played in the Met Open at Atlantic in 95 or so. That said, the fairways are much wider at Atlantic than Oakmont and the greens at Oakmont much more severe. I'd venture that much more thought would have to go into each shot at Oakmont compared to Atlantic. I did enjoy Atlantic though, the conditioning was beyond compare and the "shot values" were very fair. Overall Atlantic didn't leave me with memories of individual holes, more or less just a blend of very demanding good holes. At Oakmont just about every shot scared the bejeebees out of me and I can remember every hole.
Shvias,
SA host the IPGA Senior match play. Gary Groh won this year and I doubt he complained that the course was too easy. My concern has nothing to do with the difficulty of SA, only the number of holes that I don't feel are worthy of being on a top course. Okay, I'd venture a guess of around -20 if the weather was okay and it wasn't too tricked up.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shooter,

If the fairways were much wider at Atlantic, as you say, then wouldn't you have to put more thought into your drives at Atlantic then at Oakmont ?

And, wouldn't the need for thought increase on the four par 5's with wide fairways compared to two par 5's with narrow fairways ?

Don't narrow fairways dictate play, and wide fairways dictate thought and options ??

[Will E]

Pat,
Wouldn't wide fairways invite blasting away with no regard for accuracy?
Couldn't narrow fairways provide a decision as to an iron or wood off the tee?
I don't think it's as simple as wide=thought and narrow=dictation of decision.
Oakmont and Atlantic both require some decision off of the tee for sure. I'm not sure how they compare.
What are your thoughts?

[Matt_Ward]

Jeff:

Thanks for the update and answers.

The issue I have with Metedeconk is one you touched upon --recovery possibilities. Golf involves misses and you can't simply have only one option (SW or PW sideways). That's rather silly stuff because it limits who can win an event only to those Cal Peete or Mike Reid types who hit it straight.

I only wish Metedeconk did cut down a number of trees in the drive zone. You still have to make a solid approach even if the trees were not so prevalent becaue of the contours on the greens and the manner by which quite a few of them are bunkered at the green sites.

One last thing -- I like the course -- particularly the 1st & 3rd nines and believe the 9th hole on the 3rd nine to be one of the 4-5 best long par-4's in all of NJ.

Quick question -- where would rate Metedeconk among all the NJ courses you have played? Thanks!

[Jeff Fortson]

Matt,

I couldn't agree more with most of what you said.  The 9th hole on the third nine is a fantastic hole.  The approach shot to the green test a mans fortitude and constitution.

As for where it ranks in courses I've played in New Jersey.....

hmmm.......

well, I'd guess it ranks first since it is the ONLY course I have played in NJ!

It is so sad that I have not had the time or access to play many of the greats over there, especially since I live just over the Verrazano Bridge in Brooklyn.  Hopefully, I'll get the chance to play some courses over there by the end of the season.

Jeff F.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

Does the 9th fairway, 3rd nine, cant in the opposite direction of the dogleg ?

Shooter,

I would question if 465 to 495 par 4's with narrow fairways provide a realistic option to choose between an iron or a driver.

Atlantic has wider fairways, but also has prefered angles to approach the green from.  I see them as:

# 1   far right side
# 2   far right side
# 3   far right side
# 4   far left side
# 5   straight away
# 6   far left side
# 7   straight away
# 8   far right side
# 9   far right side
# 10  far right side
# 11  straight away
# 12  far right side
# 13  far right side
# 14  far left side
# 15  straight away
# 16  far right side
# 17  far right side
# 18 far left side

In almost every case, there is a good risk associated with going near these sides, usually in the form of bunkers.

So, I don't see the "blast away"  that you speak of at Atlantic, especially with the tall and dense fescued rough.

Play is not dictated at Atlantic, but thought is.

Here is a course with wide fairways, firm and fast conditions, and plenty of wind, something that the cognoscente have been praising and clamoring for, for ages.  And now you get it, and suddenly, narrow fairways surrounded by penal rough is in.

Can't you guys ever make up your minds ?  
Are you guys ever happy ?  

[Matt_Ward]

Pat:

From my memory I don't believe the hole cants in an opposite direction to the way it turns.

Maybe others can say with some sense of certainty.