News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Noel Freeman

Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« on: May 15, 2006, 11:51:49 AM »
I was visiting my home club this weekend and stumbled upon the Jersey Golfer and Redanman's review of Trumpminster..

Bill-- First of all, someone on Matthew J. Ward's staff needs to learn how to spell your name or factcheck.. Vostinik just isnt cutting it!

I was surprised how much you loved the course---you and Miguel Cirba seem to have it in much higher affinity than I did.  Although I really loved the 2nd and 3rd (the 3rd especially looked straight out of Winged Foot) as well as the 6th some holes just didnt work for me--mainly the par 3s which I think were dull and for the most part used water as an attempt at giving them flavor.  

That said, giving it a 9 on the Jersey Golfer scale seems very generous.  No doubt it is a very solid design and Tommy Fazio should be credited (I understand he did the lion's share rather than his famous uncle of the work)  I'm hoping you or Matt can post it here.  I'm glad Matt is giving you an opportunity to publish.

BTW, I have DeQuervain's disease in the left wrist.. Ouch.

ForkaB

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2006, 12:12:01 PM »
So what is a "9" on the Jersey Golfer scale?  Something like top 3000 in the world?

cary lichtenstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2006, 12:33:09 PM »
Are we seeing the beginning of a partnership of Matthew Ward and Bill Vostinak?

Heaven forbid ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
« Last Edit: May 15, 2006, 12:33:45 PM by cary lichtenstein »
Live Jupiter, Fl, was  4 handicap, played top 100 US, top 75 World. Great memories, no longer play, 4 back surgeries. I don't miss a lot of things about golf, life is simpler with out it. I miss my 60 degree wedge shots, don't miss nasty weather, icing, back spasms. Last course I played was Augusta

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2006, 12:46:21 PM »
Are we seeing the beginning of a partnership of Matthew Ward and Bill Vostinak?

Heaven forbid ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


No...even worse....Redanman and The Hair (ball).

 I couldn't agree more with the Naffer. The course has some very, very solid holes, but it's par 3's are nothing special. #7 has such an awkward and oblique angle that it has statistically become one of the hardest holes (against par) for any of the members (high and LOW hcp'ers alike). To their credit, they've cleaned out the corner at 16, but it still comes up short with a green that rejects anything but the perfect shot. There are still too many tee shots that leave the golfer with uphill approaches to elevated greens(interesting when one notes that perhaps the best hole on the course, #6 is a wonderful downhill  approach shot.

As for Miguel Cirba's opinion, we all know that while he is immune to any preference attack (and apparently he does not seek to become Donald or Ashley's new best friend), his Trumpian visit was supposedly a very windy day and he was acutely aware of losing several last threads from la tete!   ;D ;D
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Mike_Cirba

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2006, 02:53:50 PM »
Noel,

Glad to hear you made it out to Trump National and I am interested in hearing more details from your evaluation.

On the face of it, I agree with you that the par threes are the weakest link on the course, especially since all four of them move in the same direction and at least three really require a forced carry.  

However, I did think the green on #4 was splendid and the elimination of the water hazard would be an improvement.  Unlike Steve, I also enjoyed the diagonal orientation of the green on #7, where one could use the front left slope to get back to a right hand hole location without trying to do the full-on water carry.  In that case, I think the use of the water hazard on both 6 and 7 is superb, and accentuates the options on both holes.

10 is sort of a 16 at Augusta type hole, except that a front right hole location has to flirt more with the water than the back left, where the bunker must be challenged.  Again, a pretty good hole.

I'm not a fan of 17 and believe it to be the weakest hole on the course, even from the way back tee which requires a long carry to a large green.
I think this hole was one of those the architect had to throw in at this point in the round for "challenge", and to cross the narrow wetland, but it's hardly a highlight.

If you want a Doak Scale Number from me, I'll stand by the "8", I gave it last summer.  I think it's as good as WW Pine Barrens (which Doak gave an 8) and better than Galloway National.

My comments from last year are below;

It was impossible to anticipate a day at Trump National without preconceived notions.  

Here was The Donald, Mr. Trump, building a course on the former estate of the late automotive kingpin and convicted felon John DeLorean, and asking Tom Fazio to build a course that could someday host the US Open or other major event.  Money would be no object and I imagined a course filled with bloated excess, conspicuous consumption, and showy, gaudy features focused more on the look than the golf.  The fact that I knew the course was tipped out at 7560 yards with a course rating of  77.3 and a slope of 147 did little but add to my sense of overkill.

Certainly, Mr. Trump’s preceding ventures into golf seemed to uphold that vision.  The course in Westchester county with the largest man-made waterfall in golf, the fields of bunkers at his course in Florida, the on the cliffs reclamation project in California, all of which were more conversation pieces than great golf courses.

So it was with a sense of bemusement that I drove through horse country of central New Jersey, and turned up the gate and onto the one mile long drive to the manor house which serves as the clubhouse.

What I found was stunning and surprising.  Instead of some paean to modern golf, Trump National is a sedate, low-keyed, understated, restrained golf course that lays light on the lovely land.  Even more surprising is that hole after hole I found myself captivated, inspired, challenged and reminded of what is much of the best things we appreciate in classic golf course architecture.  

Most of the fairways offered fairly broad expanses, and plenty of room to maneuver for position.  The greensites, splendidly selected, offered amazing variety and interest.  It was Tillinghast who believed that a great course should stringently test the approach shot and this is truly a “second shot” course, with greens perched in all sort of interesting angles and surroundings that demanded the best from the player attacking the pin, but generally offered bailouts and easier plays for the less accomplished golfer.  In some ways, the course reminded me of a mixture of both Augusta National and Winged Foot, and instead of a lot of concave, containing features, Trump National instead was filled with convex, edge of trouble, rolling features that would collect a slightly mishit ball into trouble if one took too aggressive a line.

The property itself is splendid, with lots of rolling countryside and some mature woodlands, and unlike many Tom Fazio courses I’ve played, the routing was superb and took full advantage of many of the natural landforms.  I learned that Tom Fazio spent a great deal of time onsite, eventually working through 22 different versions of the routing to arrive at the final product.  Earthmoving was generally kept to a minimum, with some fairways needing to be ledged into a steeper slope, but for the most part, the hand of man was well hidden and only some needless rolls to the sides of a few of the holes on the more bland part of the property, as well as some equally useless tree planting detracted from the natural views.

The greens themselves were wondrous and placed demands on both the approach shot and putting, as well as positioning of the drive.  Unlike many Tom Fazio courses I’ve seen, true classic strategy was employed, where a drive or approach successfully challenging a hazard were rewarded with optimum positioning or an easier putt.  They contained rolls both subtle and overt, and contained false fronts, back and side fadeaways, treacherous borrows, and lovely integration with their surrounds.  They ranged from precipitous top of the horizon, perched up greens to others that flowed right out of the fairway at grade, to others tucked into little hollows.  Their shapes ranged from Mackenzian boomerangs and kidneys to Rossian upturned bowls, to Flynn type greens flowing from the fairway, each with an original twist by the designer that made them both derivative and original and to me at least, evidence of time and attention spent during the building process.

Bunkering was similarly restrained, only 67 of them in total (although some were massive), but with each serving a purpose that contributed to the golf at hand.  Many of them had the look of a Tillinghast, but some of the holes built on more undulating land could have been lifted from Prairie Dunes, not so much in surrounds, but in playability.  There were bunkers that plunged 15 or more feet below green surface, with sharp ledging, that would have made Raynor or Banks proud.

The club itself is much more low-key and tasteful than I would have expected, with perhaps the only questionable features being the fountains that sit in front of and behind the clubhouse, the latter backing the 10th tee, flowing just off the patio in the fashion of a Merion.  

Water comes into play more than I mostly prefer, but those hazards are very natural looking and are well utilized, once again adding to the hole than being there as a showpiece, and almost always offering a way to navigate around them.  There are also some forced carries from the tee over native, broken ground, and wetlands, but the five sets of tees (we played the middle at 6770 yards) make this more of a challenge than a burden.  

All in all, I was wowed.  I will try to give a hole by hole breakout over the weekend, but for now, I would summarize by saying that I believe Trump National is a superb golf course that is one of the top five golf courses in the state of New Jersey.  The word great comes to mind.


Noel Freeman

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2006, 03:18:53 PM »
Miguel C.

Not sure how low key the club is, a bit nouveau riche of course if I recall with the valet parking etc.  But that isnt the merit of the golf course which of course was very good, just not elite in my opinion.

For me the wavy lays potato chip fairway of the 5th was really cool but the uphill nature of that and its length make it all but accessible to the low handicap marker.

A hole like the below is wonderful especially with the wavy green and the chance you can scull a shot into the water off a downhill or the nice option that Fazio gave that one can bounce their approach in..



The 8th was really weak to me.. A moribund tee shot over a forced carry then the forced carry again to an uphill landing area--sheesh.. I just don't feel the terrain was well utilized around 8 and 9.. That is a function of the routing.. It is obviously easy to be a critic b/c I didnt have to route it or build it once it was in the ground so I am not smart enough to know what difficulties they had.

I thought 13 had a very exacting diagonal approach and some of the best bunkering (shapes on the course).  But then 14 and 15 with their forced carries and the uphill nature started to resonate with repetitive notions in my mind.. And for me the shot values are intermixed with my feelings when playing.

I agree with Steve and my very cordial host about he 16th (my host wanted it cleared out) that taking out the trees makes it a very good golf hole that tempts and seduces you to cut the corner--has to be a hard shot for you lefties..

I just called my playing partner that day at Trump and I am rendering an opinion based upon 1 visit (which may be unfair and open to criticism)--

My playing partner said this:

"To me Trump Bedminster is nothing but a muni course on steroids with white sand bunkering and an unlimited maintenance budget. It is all about length and lacks all charm.  It is all about visuals and brawn."  Ouch, these are not my words.. This same person feels a similar way about Bethpage Black to give context but feels that course requires more thinking off the tee and options.

I wonder this: If I could quit Alpine and join Trump would the course grow on me as a member after 5, 10, 15, 25 rounds.. I'm not so sure.  To me the examination the course requires just isnt any fun and that is okay, variety is the spice of golf.

In any event, I'm not arguing that it doesnt deserve the accolades it has gotten, I just don't see it in rarefied air.  I do think Golf has it wrong in the top 100 in the World though.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2006, 03:19:49 PM by NAF »

Mike_Cirba

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2006, 04:29:24 PM »
Hey Noel,

Fair enough and I do think I'm starting to see where we might differ a bit.

First, I think the course is low-key in terms of features and the way it lays light on the land.  You can make your own determination of the club, although I must admit a fondness for the locker room.

I think the 5th is eminently playable for all levels, with plenty of room right of the green to leave it short and avoid the long, uphill carry.  The first time I played there I bailed short right and then putted from about 40 yards to 6 feet to make par.  I think GC might remember that one.  In any case, I think it's much more playable for an average hack than say, 15 at Bethpage.

I think the 8th needs to have the left-side of the green completed into a true horseshoe and I understand the club is considering this.  As a semi-reachable par five, one can always lay up on the second if the drive isn't good, leaving a long-uphill, but still reachable third.  It's not a particular favorite but I think with a little modification it might be something pretty cool.

The 9th to me is lovely, and probably the most ANGC hole on the course.  The greensite is just splendid with some terrific terrain falling off to the left side, and a very deep green creating all sorts of variety.  I also like the way a tee shot that successfully flirts with the right is left with a much more straightforward approach than the very diagonal approach you have with the safe play to the left.

I think 14 and 15 are simply the two best back to back Fazio holes I've ever played, with the former being my absolute favorite.  Similar to 16, where Steve HATES the green, what I particularly loved about all of them is that completely contrary to the type of stereotypical modern "concave" design I always bitch about on here, you instead have VERY convex target features, with sloping falloffs, and edge of the target excitement.  You also have ground game options on all 3 of those holes, if you think about it.  Very cool, very different for Fazio, and ultimately the type of touches that take this course to a level where it's legitimately, even to its detractors, a minimum Top 100 Modern course.  I think Steve would agree with this, as well.

As far as your playing partner, can you tell me what Muni's he plays, because I'm obviously living in the wrong neighborhood!  ;D

One last question...what set of tees did you fellows play?  I played the ones at around 6750 and you know my game.  I certainly didn't feel it was a slog or too emphasizing of length from those markers.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2006, 04:32:40 PM by Mike Cirba »

Paul Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2006, 05:12:51 PM »
Is the Jersey Golfer available online ?
Paul Jones
pauljones@live.com

redanman

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2006, 05:51:35 PM »
I write for the Jersey Golfer. Matt and I spar a bit, we don't always see eye to eye.  He likely mispelled my name on purpose. ;) That's the Jersey way.  I ain't about to get whacked, so I'm in hiding after that comment.  Matt would have written it I am sure but he hasn't played it yet, so I got to.

However, there is a lot that goes into assessing these kinds of evaluations for a regional magazine, and I wrote an honest review.

Reviews have target markets.  Jersey Golfer Magazine is lots of fun to work for, I cover NJ from eastern PA pretty easily.  I can get to most of NJ faster than most people in NJ can get there.  New Jersey is loaded with great golf courses.

I can tell you that what I wrote on Bedminster will be on line one of these days and youse guys can all read it.  I'm not typing it out on here.

I'll be the first to admit that I am not a big Fazio fan, if that isn't known around here, someone's not paying attention.  I wrote as you will eventually see about the dual character of the course given differences in conditions for daily play vs. member play.  In spite of my personal preferences I have to say that Trump National is (as I and Mike Cirba have both said before and Steve Lapper has said to the contrary, plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose) a very good modern golf course as I see it.  

I much prefer Pine Valley and Plainfield as #1 and #2 in New Jersey, absolutely nothing has come along to even begin to make me think otherwise (one thing Mr Ward and I agree upon), but  when you get below the valedictorianan and salutatorian, there is a little group of courses that are next (what they are, isn't the point here, but TN in Bedminster is in there.  If it's not your taste, I respect that, but Fazio is not my favorite by a long shot, but Galloway and TN are in the little "next" group.



A few points:

I like the par 3's, they are mostly hard, but I like them.  #7 is an impossible little hole that I suppose you could call a variant of #12 ANGC. #10 might be more appreciated architecturally without the signature look water. #17 is really hard to score on, and the green on #4 is real dicey in spots.  More water than my taste overall, but hey, that's modern golf.

#8 IS being changed and may be changed again, but it's a simple 3-shot par 5.  Or is it? I agree with Cirba that a left fairway needs to appear short of the water to make it even better.

#16 even Tommy Naccarato might like with its boomerang green.

I wrote in my review that the finish was strong although 18 (of 13-18) is the least attractive to me, I appreciate its nuances. Six good holes is quite a finish.

Agree 14-15 with Cirba, but 13-16 all par 4's is quite a stretch.

One last thing, I am one guy who writes about taking the water away from Pebble to separate rchitecture from experience, the experience for the members and guests is a pleasant one.  It did not, however, affect my evaluation of the architecture.

p.s. I hope that a bunch of you get to play it with an open mind some time, because it is really good. Not top 100 in the world, but I ain't goin' there - no way, pardner!

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2006, 06:38:50 PM »
 Miguel, Noel, et.al,

   Having just played there recently, this gives me the opportunity to both dull (and sharpen) my past critique. Albeit reluctantly, I am beginning to feel that the majortity of this course is indeed a very good one and perhaps (and only perhaps) it is worthy of some of it's Top 100 rankings (Certainly not the world kind!!!.....maybe the Metro area??).

My biggest regret is that so while so much of it might "lay well on the land," the general nature of nearly all the approach shots  (save for all the par 3's and #'4, 6 and 11) are distinctly uphill and sometimes even semi-blind. Mike thinks that was the "lay of the land" but I do beg to differ. I saw the extent of the earth movement while under construction and trust me, it was more extensive than those at the club would have you believe. While not "piled-to-the-sky" many greens were pushed up with the excavation soil from other areas.
                                     
Thus, using the Tillinghast premium on the 2nd shot philosophy, it does succeed and fares much better on those holes that naturally needed little elevation construction. Holes like 1 and 9 work very well with the natural rise to greenside. Playing from the tips, or into any real wind, will shift approaches needed on #2,5,8,12,14 &15 from already treacherous to near impossible. Your assessment of of the convex target features (and I like them as well) do add an unusual and non-Fazio-like touch that keeps them from being boring and repetitive (which is quite often a legitimate gripe of many of his detractors).  #16 has such features but they are set upon a green so improbably angled and seated that it serves to punish anything short of perfect and I think that just plain fails the grade for this hole. The fact that the routing obviously crams this turn in in order to get the path home would be best served by ripping out a few more trees (inc. the greenside oak) and giving the green a little more width. :(

Visually, the tee shot on 7 is definitely appealing but Mike suggests that is can act like a reverse redan(rewarding a front left shoulder target), when in fact, it rejects anything not stratospherically launched into that upper corner. When the wind is up (and this tee/green) is likely the most exposed, the shot is near ludicrous. My member friend (who is a 3hcp) deliberately seeks to airmail the green and chip back on when he feels the wind anywhere but in his face.....that's not a very good golf strategy IMHO. He tells me that very few get by here without a bogey or worse. :P :P

17 is just no better than a filler hole and it pockets itself in a very non-dramatic, spam-like fashion. 18 is superb and a hole I look forward to thinking through each time I approach the tee.  :)

The course has grown on me. This was the 8th time playing it and it's rhythms have revealed themselves. Smart play sets up earned rewards and a few shots stand out for memorable honor. I think the approach into 5 is tough, but fair, and the second shot into #6 may be the among the best of downhill 2nd's in NJ. (think of PVGC#4 has having a lake wrap around 2/3rds of it's green :o). Like Noel, I think the 8th is contrived and no better than mediocre. Mike, it will NEVER be really cool!

9 is truly a wonderful par 4, but unlike our confused and dazed Pennsylvania friend, it feels much more like another solid WFW long 4 (part #8, part #17 of WFW) than anything at Augusta. As for #10, I can't help but want to go up to the ladies tees, put three(or more) on the ground, turn around and drill the damn statue (and aim right for it's private parts!!! )Now that would be the definition of target golf!!! ;D ;D.

Mike, you are suffering from a case of extreme delusion to find anything ANGC-like about #10. It is acknowledged to be a semi-replica of #4 at Baltusrol and not a very convincing copy at that. The only thing it has in common with ANGC is the small pump station...period!

Finally, I'd like to think that Trump would recognize just how good a job Tom Fazio has done here, but my guess is that he'll tinker with it enough to try to tempt the PGA to think of it as a major venue. I'm sure the USGA will pay the "Hair" his homage in public all the while they snicker about how he'll never see one of their majors. If the "Hairster" were to apply the same spray to it (in it's present-form) that he does to his scalp, it'll be just fine and serve to belong in Jersey's top 10 (NO WAY IT RISES ABOVE  Hollywood, Somerset Hills, either Balty Upper or Ridgewood, PCC or PVGC to make the top 5. It's good and maybe on a par with Faz's other solid NJ layout at Galloway, but it sits well below several other, superior tracks.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2006, 06:51:02 PM by Steve Lapper »
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2006, 06:45:59 PM »
Bill,

   See....I can have an open mind...it's good (and maybe worthy of NJ top ten), but after that it's still attached to the PT Barnum of our time and that, according to the Japanese judge, is an automatic deduction for style points!
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Kevin Edwards

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2006, 08:09:27 PM »
I’ve played a number of Fazio courses as well as a good bit of the best NJ has to offer.

Trump Bedminster is a really excellent golf course.  It is always going to be a very difficult “tournament” type course without much of a fun factor associated with it.  I would like to play it a few times a year but never on a regular basis as a member. There is no charm or much fun factor to the golf course and the cuisine is fine but sterile and predictable as one would expect from THE Donald.  

I agree with some of the negative comments about the par 3’s.  These holes are clearly to me the weak link.  Among the Fazio courses I’ve played I think World Woods PB, Victoria National and Galloway all have superior architecture though Trump is better routed.  There are more thrills and more risks in the golf holes found on those other three.  Trump BM just might be better then Black Diamond Ranch and Jupiter Hills to name a couple that seem to crack some Top 100 lists.  

In NJ I agree totally with Steve Lapper on his preferences. Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Hollywood are slam dunks for courses I would play over and over before returning to Trump.  Add in arguably both Baltusrol courses, Mountain Ridge, Galloway and Hidden Creek and Trump Bedminster is out of the NJ Top 10.

Matt_Ward

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2006, 11:00:12 PM »
Gents:

Jersey Golfer is always interested in accepting contributions to the publication. It's something that Lowell Schmidt and I have always favored.

Credit to Bill for his write-up of the course and I hope he accepts my mea culpa for the mispell. I'd fall on my editorial sword if that would help ! ;D

I hope to play Trump sometime in June and given the comments made it will be interesting to see it first hand. Clearly, this is one of the rare times when others have played a layout in the Garden State before me.

Paul:

We will be online shortly and all reviews -- those current and most recent past will be posted. I'll share the address when everything is finalized. If you need a copy of the magazine send a short note to Lowell Schmidt via jerseygolfer@comcast.net and a mag can be sent. All I would ask is that postage be remitted for the cost in sending.

Mike_Cirba

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2006, 10:07:50 AM »
If I might commend all of you simultaneously, THIS is the type of intelligent, pointed, and yet civil and fun discussion about golf courses and architecture that this site should be all about.

Some really sharp analysis supporting some divergent opinions....great stuff.

Nice going fellows.  ;D

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2006, 10:55:01 AM »
If I might commend all of you simultaneously, THIS is the type of intelligent, pointed, and yet civil and fun discussion about golf courses and architecture that this site should be all about.

Some really sharp analysis supporting some divergent opinions....great stuff.

Nice going fellows.  ;D


Mike,

As restrained as I might be here, I still want to know how the hell you came up with the ANGC comparisons??? :-*
« Last Edit: May 16, 2006, 10:55:56 AM by Steve Lapper »
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2006, 11:13:30 AM »
No doubt it is a very solid design and Tommy Fazio should be credited (I understand he did the lion's share rather than his famous uncle of the work)

Can anyone expand on this? I have played one Tommy Fazio design in Florida, which I happen to like very much. I never hear any mention of him outside of that one course. To my knowledge, I am the only one on here that has ever mentioned him on this site before.
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2006, 11:26:50 AM »
No doubt it is a very solid design and Tommy Fazio should be credited (I understand he did the lion's share rather than his famous uncle of the work)

Can anyone expand on this? I have played one Tommy Fazio design in Florida, which I happen to like very much. I never hear any mention of him outside of that one course. To my knowledge, I am the only one on here that has ever mentioned him on this site before.


He did do more work there than he was credited for (and he ovrsaw the construction). He was also a major contributor to Trump Int'l in Fla.

He may yet be the most talented member of the Faz Family :o
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Kevin Edwards

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2006, 11:46:09 AM »
Even for me (playing near scratch) his design at Great River is an incredibly tough track.. I don't think it was well received, in fact I think they touched it up already.

So I wonder, does the Donald pay the Tommy Fazio freight for the Tom Fazio name or vice versa?

Geoffrey Childs

Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2006, 12:04:15 PM »
I liked the golf course quite a bit.

I guess my feelings are pretty close to Kevin Edwards.  It belongs within the Top 100 Modern golf courses but I think I also prefer each of the New Jersey courses he mentioned better.

Tommy Fazio I believe did Emerald Dunes in Florida which is a very nice if overshaped course.  

Kevin- Great River is an abomination of a course.  The land can adequitely fit a nice 6400 yard course but they stretched/shoehorned  a 7000+ yarder instead.  To do that he routed 16 or so of the holes side by side in the same direction. Yeah - its hard but its also not very good.

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Redanman's review of Trump Bedminster
« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2006, 01:43:57 PM »
Steve, I found Emerald Dunes to be a average to good and very overpriced course. You guys are going to make me take back all my if Trump's name is on it, I do not want to play there comments.