[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward:

I still don't understand your views on wind and judging golf courses.

But, let me simply say that with some of the venues I know 20-30 MPH is hardly top speed.  I recall playing Turnberry one day at 70 MPH.

At that rate, things get pretty crazy.  A friend mine blasted a three wood high in the air and despite how well he struck the ball, it wound up behind him!

But, that's the exception.  20-30 MPH seems pretty normal to me.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff Lewis,

I have a slightly different view of looking at courses, kinda like the Westminster Kennel Club, I break them into categories.
Some of the catergories are:

Sporty,
Competitive,
Championship.

Some courses can be on the cusp of two categories, straddlers if you will.*

Shinnecock would fall into the Championship, as would Meadow Brook.

Maidstone, The Creek, Deepdale, Inwood, Seawane, Fresh Meadow, Garden City Country club, Glen Head, Glen Oaks, North Shore, Sands Point, Woodmere, and NGLA would fall into Sporty,

Westhampton, Atlantic, GCGC and NGLA* would fall into competitive.

NGLA is my FAVORITE, but I recognize SHINNECOCK as the far more difficult test.  I can't see a U.S. OPEN on the competitive or sporty courses, but that doesn't mean that they aren't fun or don't present a challenge, it's just a matter of degrees, or perspective.

[Matt_Ward]

J Olsen:

Must have my eyes corrected -- is it true you forgot to include The Black in your top ten listing. You must have had a senior moment in forgetting it.

Also, have to question how Deepdale gets listed in such august company!

Tim W:

I don't believe anyone should rate courses when the wind is at 70 mph -- you should be inside and waiting until it blows over. I guess I should go rate courses when the wind is near hurricane force (75 mph would qualify).

Rate the holes / course as they are designed. Clearly, weather conditions play a role but I can imagine any "unique" weather conditions having an undue effect on someone's assessment of a golf course -- both good and bad. When people say "if" the wind blows this way and "if" the ground is hard and "if" this and "if" that -- before you know it you have plenty of guesses on what the course is really about.

Just analyze the holes as they are and how they are linked to one another. That's how I assess a golf course. You may do it another way.

Maidstone lives off the close proximity to SH and NGLA. It does have a few good holes in the middle of the course (the 9th is a classic one) that use the dunes setting quite well. But there are too many people who huff and puff about Maidstone and for some strange reason have amensia on a number of holes that are quite tame and simply pedestrian in their appeal.

It's a wonderful old time course and I'm sure many people are defending the course because of its "classic" pedigree. I just believe it's a clear notch below the powerhouses that exist on the east end and would not include it among my personal 100 best. That's just my opinion ...

Pat:

Give me your definition of these two words ...

*sporty (you used it to describe Maidstone)

*quirky

Thanks!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt,

Re: Sporty,

Like the Judge said about pornography, I can't define it, but,
I know what it is when I see it.

I think sporty my be a combination, a balance between fun and challenge.

Quirky, might be a combination of unique, eccentric and challenging.

[J_Olsen (Guest)]

Matt Ward

Senior moment indeed! Let's put the Black at 4.5.... or 4 if we should leave out courses we haven't played yet...

[Sebonac]

It is interesting that this became a forum on Maidstone....Coming from Southampton, and having many friends from Easthampton.....I have long had debates about whether Maidstone matches up with its Eastern End notables NGLA and Shinnecock....Aesthetically Maidstone is great....especially when you catch some fine topless bathing beauties down on the beach from #9 tee....But TePaul.....To call #'s 1, 2 and 18 great holes is a stretch....Where is the strategy....# 1 is a pasture...hit away...and you don't have the first tee satidfaction of seeing where that first drive ended up like NGLA and Shinny....#2 is like playing up someone lengthy lawn with an interesting but ulimatly poor imitiation of a Road Hole Green (ie #7 at NGLA).  I do agree #17 is a fun hole, especially is a match, and #18 has a fun green...but the real strength of Maidstone lies in the middle of the course....but if the entire golf course was not in such a great setting....we would not be talking about it....

[brad_miller]

To all, I have always felt that what one thinks about Maidstone tells alot about what they love about golf, Seminole also for that matter, but there does seem to be less volitility in what most "in the know" think about that course in Florida.

Maidstone may have the greatest SD of America's "great" courses! Yes great, sporty, fun, quirky, but yes, not a championship test for golf's very best, but for us common folk a true treasure.

Matt, we are in the same camp on most of Long Island other courses, we'll just have to wait on the jury to see how The Bridge and Friar's Head stack up, but from my one visit to and the pictures I've seen there sure is something special out at that Riverhead Sod Farm

[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward:

In fairness, I didn't suggest seaside courses should be judged with extreme 70 MPH winds.  Rather, I said that 20-30 MPH stuff is pretty common.  Clearly, such winds are not "unique".

If you want to judge seaside courses assuming no wind, be my guest.  I've just never met anyone who really does that and still can't imagine how it makes any sense.

[SPDB]

Jeff Lewis,

I have a slightly different view of looking at courses, kinda like the Westminster Kennel Club, I break them into categories.
Some of the catergories are:

Sporty,
Competitive,
Championship.

Some courses can be on the cusp of two categories, straddlers if you will.*

Shinnecock would fall into the Championship, as would Meadow Brook.

Maidstone, The Creek, Deepdale, Inwood, Seawane, Fresh Meadow, Garden City Country club, Glen Head, Glen Oaks, North Shore, Sands Point, Woodmere, and NGLA would fall into Sporty,

Westhampton, Atlantic, GCGC and NGLA* would fall into competitive.

NGLA is my FAVORITE, but I recognize SHINNECOCK as the far more difficult test.  I can't see a U.S. OPEN on the competitive or sporty courses, but that doesn't mean that they aren't fun or don't present a challenge, it's just a matter of degrees, or perspective.

Pat, since you cite a number of courses on LI, where do you see Piping fitting in? And how, if at all, does its place differ from that of Meadow Brook in the Champ category?

[Matt_Ward]

Brad:

I have not played Friar's Head or Easthampton so I cannot comment just yet. It will be interesting to assess Frair's Head against the mighty of the Island. I've heard some interesting comments from a range of people I greatly respect.

Brad, just curious -- what would your listing of the top ten be for LI?

Pat:

Great break down of sporty, competitive and championship. Don't know if I would include Meadow Brook in the championshiop category. Strong course but given what the seniors do on it I'm not sold. Any reason why you left out the Black from the championship category?

Also, how much credence should sporty courses get when rated up against the big boys as a great golf course? One last question -- if you had to choose between Maidstone, Somerset Hills, Fisher's Island and any other course you would define as sporty how you would rate them from best to least favorable and why?

Tim W:

I've stated my position quite clearly -- adding points for "outside agency" aspects is a dicey proposition. How well designed are the individual holes and how do they "connect" with each other. When people say "if" the wind blows "x" amount and the course therefore played a particular way you have a situation that can bump up / down the value of any course.

I'm not ignorant to the fact that seaside courses base their disposition upon the nature of changing weather patterns. But classic holes such as the Road Hole at TOC maintain their individual greatness IRRESPECTIVE of whether the wind blows or not.

Hope this helps your understanding ...

[George Pazin]

Matt -

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but, as Tim says, if 20-30 mph winds are normal for a course, shouldn't the design reflect that, and, as such, possibly be too "easy" when judged without wind. Wouldn't a very difficult course designed without prevailing wind in mind be potentially borderline unplayable under heavy winds?

[Guest#2]

Pat Mucci - No, that's not what I was referring to in terms of judging the architect's work versus judging the course.

I think you can make an evaluation of a golf course after seeing it or walking it without playing it.  It's just that your evaluation of the course or certain holes might certainly change after playing it.  And btw I would have even greater respect for the opinion of somebody who walked and studied the golf course for an entire day than if he had just played the golf course once in 4 hours - assuming that the person knows what he is looking at or for.

What I was referring to was Matt Ward's consideration of issues that are beyond the architect's control.  He said he didn't think you should compare to courses by 2 different architects when one was selective with sites when the other was not.  So what he seems to be saying is that you can't compare 2 courses if one had a great site and the other didn't.  And I disagree with that.  The architect with the bad site might have done a great job (judging the architect) and the architect with the great site might have only done an ok job (judging the architect), but if the great site course was better than the bad site course at the end of the day, then it's still a "better" golf course even if the architect's "grade" was lower.

[Matt_Ward]

Guest2:

Appreciate your ability to remain "under cover."

Let me just state this -- what type of site an architect gets is no different than how deep are the pockets of the owner(s). Do you actually expect ratings to take place in terms of total equality or does one factor that in an overall equation through some unknown / unstated formula?

I'm just curious Guest2 what modern built course (within the last 5-10 years) in the metro NYC area you do like and why? It would help me understand better -- also do you like any Rees Jones courses or do you believe that he follows a standard routine in all of his designs?

Not too long ago I mentioned that courses that mandate carts have to because sites being developed to day are not the same as the ones from yesteryear. Do you know the response I got from some on GCA. That's too bad because those courses mandating cart usage are not really golf courses. I tried to inject some sort of egalitarian elements and the response was they don't merit value. Your asking for the same thing when one has a "good site" versus one that is a "bad site." And, by whose terms do we know a site to be "good" or "bad." I have no concrete idea on the obstacles that were faced with the development of The Bridge. Do you know for sure?  

I know what I look for when PLAYING a course which, in my opinion, is the ultimate way in discerning the elements of a golf course. You think you can evaluate a course by simply walking the course. I disagree.

In my visit to The Bridge I did both elements -- play and go back to specific parts of the course to actually review again by eye what I just played. You seem to be saying that Rees wasted an opportunity with what he had in the site at The Bridge. I disagree with that conclusion. There are plenty of holes at the course where strategic elements are called for. Please help me learn from my ignorance the bad / weak holes at The Bridge. You seem to state that The Bridge is nothing more than a "view" and completely lacking any serious merit to be included among the big name courses on the Island. Give me some concrete examples and I'll be glad to respond in kind. Thanks.

[Tim Weiman]

George Pazin:

My point exactly.

For anyone to suggest wind is an "outside agency" on seaside courses is embarrassing, I think.  

As for the 17th at St Andrews, it may actually be better in more benign conditions.  The average guy is more likely to face a serious strategic decision about going for the green.  That's when the hole really shines, in my opinion.

[Matt_Ward]

George P:

I'll respond to you because it's "embarassing" that Tim doesn't get it.

Good architects build solid holes and clearly figure wind into the equation -- you often get them to design long par-4's in opposite directions as Doak did with the 4th and 13th holes at Pac Dunes to name just one example. However, a good hole is a good hole -- whether the wind blows or not -- that's my point. Whether the 4th or 13th hole plays into a headwind or favorable wind they are both dynamite holes. In a calm wind they are still stellar holes.

Does wind have an effect on play? Sure. But take a mediocre hole and play it in a headwind gale of 40-50 mph and everyone might say it's the most difficult hole of all time. Wind can distort the qualities of hole on that "particular day and time."

Good holes are solid whether the wind blows or not. In my mind when people talk about Maidstone the basic theory is the wind is necessary to spruce up the challenge. In my mind, that lends total credence to my viewpoint that the bulk of the holes at that course are really pedestrian in their challenge. The middle part of the course has quality holes such as the all-star par-4 9th that plays between the dunes. The rest of the fanfare is beyond me since I fail to understand how it deserves such a high ranking compared to others on the Island.

Hope this helps ...

[Guest#2]

Matt Ward

Perhaps you are confusing and inter-mingling the thoughts of Guest#1 and myself.  We are not the same person.  I never said that Rees wasted an opportunity at the Bridge.  I just said that it seemed like you tend to judge the architect as much as the golf course and I thought you should make a distinction.  So see if this helps.

Lets agree for arguments sake to rank Rees’ effort at the Bridge a 10.   But lets also agree for arguments sake that the site, while great for views or driving race cars, wasn’t particularly great for golf.  So lets agree again for arguments sake that the site was a 5.  Now Rees may have turned a 5 site into a 6, 7 or 8 golf course, depending on your perspective, but he didn’t turn it into a 10!  So I think people are going to be scratching their heads in wonderment when they finally play the Bridge, trying to understand your opinion that the Bridge should be ranked right up there with Shinnecock and NGLA.  That’s what I’m talking about.  And you then say but it’s not fair to compare Shinnecock to the Bridge, etc.  But why not?  The Bridge isn’t in the same league as Shinnecock and there isn’t anything wrong with admitting that.  Does that mean that Rees didn’t do a great job?  Of course not.  But he didn’t have the same goods to start with.  So rate the architect’s efforts a 10 if you choose, but don’t demean the definition of greatness by misleading people to think that the finished course is a 10!  That’s just not fair to the people that are relying on your opinion and it’s certainly not fair to the golf course, Rees and the owner when you raise expectations so high.

And I really don’t know why you are arguing with this position because it seems like you are admitting that this is accurate.  Just look at what you said:  “Do you actually expect ratings to take place in terms of total equality or does one factor that in an overall equation through some unknown / unstated formula?”

And btw, if you don’t like that I am “under cover”, then don’t respond to my questions and thoughts.  That’s your right, as it is mine to participate anonymously for whatever reasons I have!

[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward:

If you're not embarrassed to suggest wind is an "outside agency" on seaside courses, then I won't argue with you.

To my mind, you must be talking about a different game.

[George Pazin]

Matt -

Well, I certainly think a hole should ideally be stellar regardless of wind conditions, and I've never played Maidstone, so I can't comment on that course - in fact, I only made it out to the Hamptons once during my brief tenure in NYC, too much work, not enough play - but I would think that strong prevailing winds would necessitate design that is open & playable under all conditions. This might result in a course that appears bland under calm conditions, but if these wind conditions are not normal, I don't really see it as a problem, particularly if one's idea of a good hole is the enjoyment that it provides, rather than the difficulty. Did you happen to read the exerpt from The Dewsweepers in Golf Magazine a few issues back, where the author played Maidstone with Rees? He(Rees) seemed like a big fan of Maidstone.

[Matt_Ward]

Guest #2:

My assessment of The Bridge has it at #5 on Long Island. I have never made the claim that it's in the same class as NGLA and SH. But, at the same token I do have The Bridge ahead the other courses often cited because I don't believe they have the overall strengths that The Bridge possesses.

In the minds of some on GCA to support The Bridge is grounds for heresy because heaven forbid a modern course is capable in generating legitimate buzz about its overall quality, in my mind. I mean there are some people who simply genuflect at the mere mention of certain past architects and god forbid anyone not towing the line. To borrow a phrase from my late father -- that's poppycock!!!

To be clear, in my opinion -- I believe SH is the finest day-to-day course we have in America for world class competiton and daily member play. I concur completely with Tom Doak's last sentence about SH in his Confidential Guide book.

Please also point out to me specifically where I said The Bridge is a ten (10) course on the Doak scale. I have never stated such a figure so please be a bit more precise with your language. The only ten I see on Long Island is SH -- although NGLA is indeed a 9.5 in change in my mind. The Bridge to me is right on the level in being a 9. I also never said anything about comparisons between SH and The Bridge -- SH is clearly the superior course as it would be against any other course in America, in my mind.

What certain people on GCA won't admit is that there is plenty of quality that exists in The Bridge. What makes it laughable is that a number of people condemn The Bridge but have never really played the entire course.

When you talk about "expectations" let us also be clear that it is not fair for people to "diss" The Bridge when all they have examined is photographs and talk "out of their butt" without ever having played one single hole. Is that fair to downplay a course before you actually really examine it up close through the best means possible -- to wit -- playing a complete round? Does this not rob the owner, Rees Jones and all else connected to the site with receiving a complete and fair examination before "spinning" the debate without ever having played the course?

When you say the course is good for racing cars but not golf please identify with some sort of detail what holes are weak? I'd like to learn from your comments with a bit more detail.

Guest #2, I took the time to examine the course thoroughly during my visit and have played all of the top courses on the Island (exceptions being Friar's Head and Easthampton to date) and if people disagree that's great. I know what I saw and I stand by what I say. Case closed -- end of story in my opinion. Maybe someday you and I can tee it up and have a wonderful 19th hole discussion on this subject.

Tim W:

See the last thread posted by Sebonac -- I completely concur with his thoughts regarding Maidstone which you believe must be in the same caliber as SH and NGLA. If not please tell me where you would place it in your personal top 100 listing -- does it belong in the first 50 or what?

Please also re-read my last post concerning wind and how it relates to bolstering so many of the pedestrain holes at Maidstone. You seem to believe that seaside courses get a free pass because of the elements even when the holes they have are at best mediocre without the assist of Mother Nature. Wonderful opinion -- I just don't buy it.

George P:

Many people sometimes overrate courses near bodies of water because Mother Nature can play such a powerful role. But, if you really examine the individual holes you will see a number of these courses have plenty of ordinary holes. I can easily make a case that says it's absolutely nuts for GD to say PB is the #1 course in the USA. There are plenty of holes at PB that are just ordinary. Sure, when the wind howls like  it did in the final round of the '92 Open ANY hole will play immensely difficult.

Hope this helps ...

[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward,

The only comment I made about Maidstone was that I'd rather play it than Stanwich.  I said nothing about a comparison between Maidstone and either SH or NGLA.  Indeed, I don't recall anyone here ranking Maidstone that high.

I don't know where you got the idea I think seaside courses deserve a "free pass".  I simply questioned the idea that wind is an "outside agency" on such courses.  Why?  Because in all my experience, wind is central to what playing these courses is all about.  One shouldn't design courses in such locations without consideration of normal wind conditions.  Nor should one evaluate them as if wind were some "outside agency".

The ball doesn't just travel along the ground.  Sometimes it goes up in the air.  Even on links courses.

[brad_miller]

Matt, SH, NGLA,Fisher's, GCGC,Black?, Maidstone,Piping Rock, Creek.

Suspect FH will be in top 5, and Bridge will have to wait to see, only comment on FH because I've been on site.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

What the hell happened to Sebonac? He was warned this thread would get contensious, but his interest in hearing everyone's opinion of The Bridge was too great. Then he dispappeared, not very sporting of him. I'm still waiting for someone to explain the merits of the course, after a couple hundred posts I'm still not clear what we've got here. Variety, interesting hazards, difficulty, strategery, wonderful site, contours, natural advantages...? I do know the course has wonderful views. Sebonac?

[golf digest rater]

SHOT VALUES, and a long hard walk.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SPDB,

I've never played Piping Rock so I can't categorize it.

Matt Ward,

I've never played Bethpage Black so I can't categorize it.

To answer your sporty question, I would evaluate/rank sporty courses in an order that equals their progression toward the competitive category.

Guest # 2,

I've walked and studied Friar's Head for the better part of a day assisted by a fairly astute party, but I wouln't evaluate the GOLF course until after I've played it.

I think I might have been the one who posed the question of selectivity in the context of cherry picking sites/projects versus taking on all or most comers.  Certainly the cherry picking of sites should lead to a superior product in the great majority of cases.  Hence that architect's work should shine above those architects who take on all sites, and the comparitive evaluation of these architects should be adjusted, just like mortality for surgeons and hospitals is adjusted to include adverse risk factors with respect to patients

[TEPaul]

Matt:

You say this:

"....about Maidstone and for some strange reason have amnesia about some holes that are quite tame and simply pedestrian in their appeal."

That really isn't true--you just think it is, for some strange reason!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()