[Matt_Ward]

I'd like to know if anyone who posts on GCA has actually played the any or all of the following four Trump courses ...

Bedminster, NJ
Westchester area
Los Angeles area
Palm Beach, FL area

If any can provide comments / feelings on any or all of the courses that would be most helpful.

P.S. Can the phrase "compelling architecture" apply to any of the layouts ?

Thanks ...

[Dean Paolucci]

Matt - I have played the Bedminster site.  For new architecture it was very nice however, there were not any holes which I found so memorable that they would move to the top of my list.  Feels very much like Florida golf.

[Mike_Cirba]

Matt,

I did a detailed positive writeup here last year on the Bedminster course, which drew some controversy.  It should be pretty easy to find on a search.

Can you share your thoughts if you played it?

[Tommy Williamsen]

I played all except the one in California.  Bedminster is the best of the lot by a long shot.  Florida had some very good holes and the land was moved to make some interesting terrain and has an awesome par five.  New York was just adequate.  Bedminster is tough as nails.  I played it the day after I played Baltiusrol from the back tees and felt beat up as badly at Beminster as I did at Baltusrol.  The grounds at all three are all world.
Compelling may define Bedminster.

[cary lichtenstein]

I have played the Florida and LA courses.

The best analogy I can draw is Donald's hair: overdone, over the top, and overrated.

[HamiltonBHearst]

Wasn't there a review that i read in Jersey Golfer.  Could you link it?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt,

I've played three of them.

I haven't played L.A.

The were all well maintained.

[Ally Mcintosh]

not wishing to hark back to a previous concern but i will anyway... i am fairly pessimistic about the two links courses and hotel resort complex being built by trump just north of aberdeen... i can sense this development breaking my heart  

[Eric Franzen]

I played Trump National LA earlier this year. My main impression was that the property was way to small to host a decent 18 hole course. Some of the fairways feels quite tight to be on a course which is totally free from trees. The architects maybe had to make some sacrifices due the surrounding environmentally sensitive area, but it is still hard to ignore the cramped feeling that enters your mind before several of the tee shots. A couple of my tee shots that weren’t that far off the line bounced into oblivion (okay, the thick bushes that surrounds a bunch of the fairways) after making contact with the cart paths.

You all know about the waterfalls and the wacky green area on the 12th so I don’t think we need to dissect the general over the top factor closer.
I remember the 4th, 11th and 15th as enjoyable par 3’s with some wind in the air, but in general the par 4’s and 5’s failed to deliver anything out of the ordinary.

[Mike Policano]

Matt,
I have played NY, FL, and NJ.  I haven't played any of them in the past two years.

My recollection of NJ and NY is similiar to Redanman's view.  I would add to his post that NJ had a lot of movement in the greens with some interesting internal contours.  Picking the right tees at NJ is imperative.  There are some long carries off the tee.  

Redanman is right about the waterfall at NY.  It is deafening on the green and then you walk behind it to the next tee and you can't hear the waterfall.  Oh, the course, the front is ok.  The back is on a more severe part of the property and not as playable.

FL is Shadow Creek-like. Was a flat piece of land (next to a prison) made into a course from scratch, elevation changes and all.  Worth a visit if you are in the area and on an expense account.

[Matt_Ward]

Gents:

This statement was in an article in Met Golfer that featured Trump ...

"In a golf context, he has taken his place among master builders like Mike Keiser of Bandon Dunes, Lyle Anderson of Desert Highlands and Desert Mountain, Herb Kohler of The American Club and Chicago publinx patriarch Joe Jemsek."

Wow -- The Donald in such august company.

On the golf course at Bedminster a few comments ...

There's little doubt the terrain aspects of the Bedminster are quite good. The land is rolling but still walkable.

I do have an issue on a few of the forced carries -- because such an "all or nothing" aspect in the teeing game department can be a bit repetitive -- Bedminster features the same situation with the 2nd and 14th holes.

No doubt the forced carries can only cause significant strain when played from the wrong tees. However, as a rule I'd like to see more of an angled threat -- rather than the nature of what forced carries present.

The other aspect that concerns me about Bedminster is the lack of finesse play. There is only one hole -- the 11th -- that plays less than 400 yards from the tips. The 11th is a decent short par-4 but it would be a major league stretch to place it in the same realm as say the 7th at Ballyneal or the 6th at Dismal River.

On the flip side the bunkering patterns brought forward by TF at Bedminster are quite different and frankly refreshing. In some ways TF has used the Winged Foot / West approach in having bunker that are pushed hard to the edges of the putting surfaces and as a result they have deep fall-offs -- miss to the same side the pin is located and you will need a 70 degree lob wedge !

I wasn't enamored with the par-5's because frankly it seems architects intent on overall length simply pad the overall distance equation in this area. I don't find 600+ yard holes worthwhile if they simply come down to a par-3 like approach with the 3rd shot. A bit more on the daring-do side would be very interesting.

Nonetheless, Bedminster is clearly beyond the norm of what TF generally does. It's clearly muscular and with a second 18 on the way (by Tommy Fazio -- Jim's kid) the place is definitely making noise about being a future host site for key events (the USGA Boys and Girls arrives jointly in '09).

I give Trump credit for the Jersey layout because other muscular courses in the Garden State (Baltusrol Lower, Due Process Stables, Metedeconk National, etc, etc) are just not as detailed or unique from a design perspective IMHO even with the side comments I have added in this post.

[David Panzarasa]

I played the LA course last month.
 First, the course is hard! Way to many carries and vrey little room for error.....if you miss the fairway you are going to be dropping a ball more then half the time. It just seems like a course that was thrown together, squeezed in and hoping that the ocean view (not much either) will be the selling point.
 Most people in the LA area that I talked to will never play it again. For the price tag, you would expect something more like a Pebble Beach or even a Sandpiper, not this mess.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bedminster is a great Fazio course, if you care for the style in which it is done.  

That's some qualifier ![/color]

A few chances were taken and the routing is very well done (Not a Fazio strongpoint).  

How would you classify the green to tee walks ?

Great, good, mediocre or poor ?

How would you classify the par 3's, similar = cookie cutter, or varied ?[/color]

I would think it would not necessarily garner great love amongst the knowledgeable ones here, but for the style it is it is first-rate and I'll stand on that and what teh JG review says (HBH, you fat-heed ).

What do you mean by the words: "but for the style it is" ?

Is that akin to the "finest course of ITS KIND ?[/color]

The great majority of golfers would absolutely love it and good players would call it a fair test.  

That wasn't the impression or consensus I heard recently.

But, I think it's a difficult golf course.[/color]

It would be rated as very good to excellent by probably 99% of all golfers.  

The wide variety of golfers to whom I spoke, who played the golf course in the last week don't agree with your opinion.[/color]

Sometimes that is lost on this group; this course has to be considered a huge success.

In what context ?[/color]

Westchester has the best waterfall I've ever seen.  The course is an average one with some awkwardness to the property. Several orders of magnitude down architecturally, but a nice place to play, not my cup o' tea.

LA I've only seen on TV.

Should be able to report on FL pretty soon, from TV I doubt it comes close to Bedminster.

[Brian_Sleeman]

I ditto everything that was said about LA, though I played it in the pre-waterfall days.  It sounds like the work they've done in its transition from Ocean Trails to Trump LA hasn't done anything to change that cramped feeling and the tired tendency of having to take a drop after every other tee shot.

Nice views and that was about it.

[Jerry Kluger]

I've played Bedminster and I thought it was an outstanding modern design.  The routing is comfortable without any substantial walks from greens to tee, and it flows well through the property; it is much better than Galloway's routing.  It has some solid risk/reward short par 4s and the par 3s are solid and varied in length and type.  The par 3 10th is very cool the way the tee box is an extension of the patio and is a great 19th hole for settling up bets.  The course can be too much for a player if you select the wrong tees as some of the par 4s, mostly on the back, play really long with some very tough carries.  I thought the greens had some really good contours and the course overall had a great deal of substance without a great deal of flash.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mr Mucci - don't go pre-judging me and I'll stop doing it to you (I'm sure that you'll howl in green or blue when you read this

I didn't pre-judge you, I only asked you pertinent questions

easy walks and I am not a normal ambulator any longer

How would you describe the walk from # 2 green to # 3 tee ?
How about # 4 green to # 5 tee ?
# 5 green to # 6 tee ?

there is more water on the par 3's than I would like, but the greens are rather varied, so I suspect that you are proffering the idea that the holes are similar which they are not.

You didn't find the feature of water fronting every green
repetitive ?

You didn't find the yardages on the par 3's on the 6,716 Blue Course, of 170, 168, 165, and 167 similar ?

Or when playing from 7,560 or 7,113 did you fail to notice that ?

I would imagine that most members and guests would play from the Blue Course since the White Course drops down to
6,063 yards.

It is "of a certain style" not favored by this group. Imagine the possibilities The bunkers are smooth-edged, C & C or an old dead guy didn't build it but I will say that green contours do determine strategies.

I don't think smooth versus shaggy bunker lines determine the merits of a bunker or the strategies created by it.

It is a knock on the "preferences of the 1498" (today), not a Walter Hagen type comment.

Your "regular golf contacts" judging where you keep your handicaps are hardly "regular folks", sorry, they are an outlier group as much as "gca.com's 1498" are ...

The group of people whom I referenced, who you erroneously categorized, were comprised of a variety of handicaps, from 0 to the 20's, and were in no way connected to where I keep my handicaps.  They were golfers of all types.

And, why should someone's net worth or lack of net worth have any impact upon their handicap or their ability to assess a golf course ?

....... and ...... they are probably playing the wrong tees.  

No, they played the right tees.
The Blue Tees, which is some cases were ahead of the plates.

I find many golfers are stuck at the point of "I don't like it" when it's a case of wrong tee choice, bad breaks=bad golf design, you know the drill as well as I do.

True, but, this isn't one of those cases.

Given the choice of 6,063, 6,716, 7,113 or 7,560, 6,716 doesn't seem like a bad choice to me.

What do you think the carry over the water is on # 16 from the Black, Gold and Blue tees ?  Into a wind do you think anyone can get over it ?   And, there is NO option to land short of the water and play from that point forward.

It is a hard golf course, but a well-done one.

I'd agree, I think it's a very hard golf course.

Tree management is rather good.  

I'd disagree.
Someone planted trees too close to the bunkers.
It's only a matter of time before the roots are into the bunkers, breaking down the walls, causing maintainance problems and possibly injuring golfers.  In addition, leaves will collect in those bunkers causing lost balls and delays.

Whomever was responsible for planting them didn't know much about golf and trees.

They should all be moved far away from the bunkers.

A lot of golfers find water very pretty, I don't like it much, but I understand how it is used.

There's no disputing that water can be an attractive feature.

But, like everything else, redundancy can diminish its impact.
And, when you associate water with heroic carries, penalties, high scores and the desire to enjoy oneself while playing golf, you have to question its overabundant use.

Stop personally trying to attack me and just comment on the course if you like.

I didn't attack you, I questioned you about the golf course and your glowing assessment of it.
Certainly you shouldn't take offense to being asked how you arrived at your opinion or how you feel about certain architectural features.
But, if you're not comfortable with your assessment of the golf course I can understand your defensiveness.

The style is one I do like, but not "best" - personally I like more rolling terrain, more blindness, quirkier greens and a greater fun factor, but I appreciate other styles as well. I might call teh style "clean modern".  A style that I would say that Rees Jones often uses, BTW.

It's interesting that you mention that.
Some people drew a parallel to this course and some of Rees's courses.

I'd agree, there is a "style" associated with certain architects.

I personally like holes # 3, 5, 6 (great green and water works just fine here),

I also like # 5 and # 6 and thought the water usage on # 6 was terrific, but then, #7, a par 3, repeated the concept.

7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and most of 18, (the tee shot is droll).  

I don't want to go into detail, but, I thought that # 8 had great potential.  But, I wasn't enamored of its current configuration or orientation.

I like opening and closing on a par 5.

#11 is the least interesting to me. I'm not a designer, but I might have eliminated that practice area past it to provide more room for a longer hole.

This is what makes horse races.
I liked # 11.

And that's my opinion.

And mine too  

[John Kavanaugh]

Wasn't there a review that i read in Jersey Golfer.  Could you link it?

Has anyone else seen redanman's review.  How was it signed and was there a head shot of the author.  Where can we send money to get our own copy...priceless.

[Steve Lapper]

Guys,

   I've played NJ, Fla., and NY and have willingly given my opinion about them in the past. For the most part, little is "compelling" about their architectural qualities, unless you count excess as a redeeming quality   Briarcliff Manor is an assortment of mediocre holes sprinkled with 1-3 decent ones and accompanied by one gawdawful artificial waterfall. Trump Palm Beach isn't a bad course, but instead a creation from dirt that has a few lousy holes, a few mediocre holes, a few good ones, and 1-2 very good holes (#12 & 14)...and another gawdawful artificial waterfall. Bedminster is, as others have echoed, the best of the bunch (and no gawdawful waterfall...just a gawdawful fake italianate fountain!!

   Though I was not much of a fan in the very beginning, I'll be a bigger person and say that after playing it nearly a dozen times, it has imporved quite a bit and become a very worthy (although not Top 100 in any league IMHO) course. The forced carries, repetitive use of water on the par 3's and misdesign of 2-3 holes still leaves it woefully short of other, better Fazios (i.e. Galloway, Forest Creek, etc...) but they have figured out a few things. Opening up the width of those hazard carrys on 2, 8, 14, and 16 are  certain improvements. The par 3 7th is a joke as the green was designed with a reverse redan and was built in a fashion to repel 95% of shots hit to it. I'm sure Redanman and other Trump-lavished reviewing (read: Jersey Golfer, et.al.) shills didn't make too much out of this (after all they were promised Lobster & Filet at the turn), but the hole (and #16) are the constant target of complaints from those members with a GHIN # north of 5. #16 is another hole that is visually pretty and has Pat shrewdly notes has NO bailout zone anywhere for an older or lady golfer who lack 200+ carry distance. It's green was improperly designed and plays too tough as it commonly rejects anything other than a super high and soft cut shot. Anything else is repelled like a female at the gates of Garden City Men's. Pat is also right about his astute observation on tree planting as well...they will be problematic over time. Also, the groundwater issues over there, according to local authorities, are about to get very interesting and potentially explosive. Finally, I wouldn't bet on the USGA events being the "home-run" the club is telling people.

 Gotta run for now, but I'll add more later.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Lapper,

Agreed with one exception.
Wives and daughters of members can play GCGC.

One could make a case that 12 holes have carries over water.  That's a lot for a northern golf course without homes.  

I'm curious about the second golf course.
The current course basically inherited the routing from NF.

Who's designing and building the new golf course ?
And, is the routing available.

[Steve Lapper]

Pat,

   I knew they could...but they are most definitely "repelled" from GCMC  around the corner;D !

The routing and design of the new course is pure Tommy Fazio, the talented nephew. Much of the intitial phase of construction has been started and pending the outcome of the very, very important water issue, looks to be considerably more tempered than the present course. The routing is avilable and on file with the Bedminster Twp. (but not volunteered easily from the club).

The 12 water carries were, in large part, the hand of Trump himself, post-NF. Obviously, he is an architectual genius (sic)

[Matt_Ward]

There are certain flaws at Bedminster -- Bill has pointed out a few and I have opined on a few others as well -- the forced carries, the redundancy of the par-3 and the amount of H20 that's been thrown into the mixture.

Still, for a TF layout there are design elements I have not seen at too many of his layouts. The uphill par-4 15th is a stellar hole -- the close proximity of the greenside bunkers -- similar in fashion to what you see at WF / West is also apparent and quite challenging.

Frankly, I find Bedminster better than Baltusrol Lower but I don't know if that says more for Bedminster are less for the Springfield layout.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Does anyone else find it ironic that this thread is running at the same time another thread is entitled "golf for the people?"

[Steve Lapper]

The green complex on 7 isn't bad at all. It would work great with an angled or lower tee....just not for the tees it's situated to receive from....not a great design in it's totality.

Is that your best defense of those 5's??? #18 may well be the best long hole on the course.

[Steve Lapper]

Frankly, I find Bedminster better than Baltusrol Lower but I don't know if that says more for Bedminster are less for the Springfield layout.

Soooooo agree with you!!! Touche!

[Kevin Pallier]

I hate par 5's at 1, 9, 10 or 18, but I have to live with them because

"architects like to ease people into rounds and give them a chance for birdie on 18". YUCK!  

redanman

Can you please elaborate why you hate such numbered holes as P5's ?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()