[Andy Levett]

The collective votes of GCA members and lurkers have been tallied and Royal Portrush has just edged ahead of Pebble Beach into second place in the fledgling rankings.
At this stage of the process, courses are being chosen based on geographical diversity, the hope that a statistically meaningful number will have played/seen it, and some link to a course/s already polled upon.
Thus, we return across the pond but only as far as Bethpage Black - like Pebble, a public course hosting the US Open.
Register your mark for BB on the Doak scale by clicking here and justify your verdict, if you want to, on this thread. You don't have to be a highly-skilled golfer and it won't take you six hours. There's a link on the page for anyone wanting a reminder of the Doak scale.
 

[M. Shea Sweeney]

Andy-

I was just reading America's Linksland last night, and checking out the Bethpage photos. Almost made me start a thread.

I voted for a 10, but just because I'm a homer. However the course maybe in the 9 range, in my opinion. I wouldn't go as low as 8 but I can see if someone called it a 9.

How many courses would you sleep in your car consistently without even knowing you have a time on the course on that given day? I think the answer would probably be a good amount, but I also think those courses would fit the bill of a 9, or 10 on the Doak Scale.

There is just something about Bethpage that I can't really explain. It is not even my 'type' of golf course I favor Garden City, National Golf Links, Shinnecock, and Fishers Island. I would play Bethpage as many times as I would the others.

I have spoke with some golf professionals who have played most of the top 20, and a couple who played the top 10. All said Bethpage took the cake.

With that said I have also spoke with some other guys who said they really don't like the golf course. 'Hitting 5 Wood into par 5's just isn't fun.' So I will be interested to see others thoughts.

[wsmorrison]

I agree with Bill, 7-8 is about right.  As the championship course among a collection of courses, it falls short of ideal.  The bunkers are too big for formal and repetitive shapes--sandy waste areas would have been better.  The 18th is a letdown and the greens are simply plain vanilla.  The collection of par 3s is OK but the 17th is excellent.  Some great long holes, but not enough short interesting ones.  The scale and overall width is out of balance with the width of the fairways...Koyaanisqatsi  (now that was a weird movie).  

The NY hype will probably bring it up to a high 8 or 9 or so in the end.  

Maybe I'm too old and set in my ways but there's only one thing I would sleep in my car to wait for and it has nothing to do with golf.  

[M. Shea Sweeney]

Wayne-

Fair enough. I guess I was half joking with my 10 rating, but will stick with my opinion an call a 9.

I have heard people say that about the 18th, how come you feel it is a let down? When you have a good match going and you step to the back tee, thats a pretty good tee shot. Not an easy approach, obviously the green is not the most exciting. But all in all I think the 18th plays as a nice finishing hole.

[Jim Nugent]

Re the greens at BPB: I've heard several times on the forum here that tougher greens would make the course too hard, and that because of that the greens perfectly complement the rest of the course.  Any thoughts on this?  

[wsmorrison]

"I've heard several times on the forum here that tougher greens would make the course too hard, and that because of that the greens perfectly complement the rest of the course."  

Jim,

I don't think so, at least not with the original width of the fairways. Wouldn't there would be more interest?  If one is used to hitting decidedly uphill approach shots, the difficulty isn't as great.  Given the shapes of the greens, how much original green space, if any, has been lost?

[wsmorrison]

Bill,

When you are right, you're right.  It doesn't happen very often, but when it does, I'm right there to support you  

I'll give you my Shinnecock Hills vote:  10  and after all the greens are expanded back out, I'll give it an 11  

[wsmorrison]

Grace Kelly was an 11, before she hooked up with that quasi-French quasi-royal in that tiny little watchamacallit principality.  Jeez, Tom Paul's great-grandfather's stables were bigger than that whole country.  She should never have left Philadelphia and married into a good Quaker family.  Even better, Tom's family is half Catholic (with a saint to boot) and half Quaker.  That should've appealed to her father even more so than the Prince.  

[Mark Bourgeois]

Tom Doak on Royal Melbourne: "The West is a 10 on the Doak Scale and the Composite is slightly better."

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

As someone who has played BB for well over 30 years (200+ rounds) I list the strengths this way:

1). Great scale of property as Bill V already stated. The land is indeed something you never forget after walking the property. As a related item -- not having carts makes the time spent there even more so.

2). Tremendous pressure on the tee game. You cannot nickel'n dime BB at anytime. Failure to have your tee game in good working order will be quickly exposed and like a stern judge the punishment will be forthcoming.

3). Superb back nine -- although arguments can be made about the "new" 14th and the Michael Jackson plastic surgery attempts on the 18th which would be far better as a short par-4 closer IMHO.

4). The approach at the 15th is for me one of the most demanding one can play among all public courses in the United States - I would rate the 8th at PB a bit better (the scenery helps there) but there are few more demanding that I have personally played.

5). The par-5 4th is one of the best short par-5's in the nation that I have played. Just an absolute joy to play and it is where the real BB really starts off after the first three holes.

Now the flip side --

1). The emphasis is overly so on the power element. I am flabbergasted that the 9th was lengthened even more than what it was before. A quality short par-4 or two is needed to demonstrate that BB is more than just a power focused layout.

2). I can only hope the USGA will fairway cut the entire 6th fairway. Last time players could not reach the botton of the drive zone because a rough cut was allowed to be grown near the top of the hill.

3). The biggest shortcoming? Yes, it's still the greens. Compare WF / West and BB and the different maker for me is the nature of the greens. BB does have its share -- I'd say conservatively about 1/3 of them are worth praising. However, too many of the others are flat saucers with subtle breaks when at top speed. I'm sure others will opine that element would make them better than what I am claiming.

4). I'd also like to see BB be less groomed and more of the wild look that used to be present (not by design but often because of sheer neglect). The place has definitely morphed into an entirely different animal and while the better grooming is most welcomed - I'd like to see BB have a bit more of the look from years gone by.

In terms of rating numbers -- my personal favorite on the Island remains Shinnecock Hills -- but BB is still a layout I love and would dare say belongs in my top five in the immediate NY metro area.

[Phil Benedict]

Matt Ward,

Hypothetically speaking, if New York State decided to hire Tom Doak or Coore & Crenshaw to redo the greens, would you be a supporter?

[Phil_the_Author]

I think that most wouldn't consider any rating I would give to Bethpage Black as being objective, and I wouldn't blame them for feeling that way. I did though want to comment about the greens.

First, they are not as "flat' as most think. There are womderful subtle breaks that especially come out when the greens are running fast; just look at all of the comments made by the players in the 2002 Open.

Yet having said that, they could be more dynamic in undulations if only they were mown out to their original sizes. After a long study of old photographs, pre-renovation photos, and some from today, combined with a study of photos of Tilly greens from a number of his courses, I have concluded that the greens are, on average, close to 1/3 smaller than their original sizes. This is important and needs addressing, something that I am attempting to do.

For those who have played it, especially a number of times, how would you describe the greens if the putting surfaces were mown out to the crest of the undulations, as they ORIGINALLY were?

On a number of the greens, this would mean another  3 to 5 feet of putting surfaces all the way around. A good example of this is the 7th green. If the putting surfaces went out to the edges, then there would be a large number of hellacious pin positions where many would be crying unfair!

I think mmany would rate the course higher if the greens were simply cut to where they should be.

Secondly, the biggest complaint is the U.S. Open fairway width that has been maintained. There are two very diffetrent sides to this coin. The first is how the park management really wants to give the average player the one nearly true Open experience that they can have. who on here wouldn't do whatever they could to play an Open course the day after it ended just to see how they could do? That is why they have chosen to do it. I'm not saying I agree with it or that it is good or that I think it is a mistake; rather, just that I understand their reasoning.

There is one very LARGE and beneficial side-effect from doing this. It has enabled them to use the maintenance monies saved by doing this on the Red Course. In the last few years, who hasn't been singing its praises? The USGA has even offered Bethpage a US Amateur because of the quality of the Red as the second course.

A fickle government controling purse strings needs all the help it can get to spend the funds wisely. If having Open fairways on the Black enables the Red to get better (with the Blue soon to follow), then I'm all for it.

[Geoffrey Childs]

I've played BB over 70 times during the past 40 years and I am absolutely biased.  The place is magic and special. However, I choose not to contribute to any GCA ranking agenda so I woun't give any scores for ANY of the courses discussed.

Phil

I agree with you about the edges of the greens having some great potential for pin locations IF in fact they were designed as such.  I can't think of a single course where an architect uses the edges of greens to create interesting countouring while leaving the entire central green surface (2/3 of totaal area) flat as can be. It's an interesting concept but I have to get out there this spring and look at the greens from that perspective to finalize my opinion.  Flat greens include 2,3,5,6,7,9,10, 13.

Bill

Are you trying to say that Coore and Crenshaw would go into what one would hope to be a "sympathetic RENOVATION" of greens and impose what you call their own style on them?

As to the current US Open like setup as far as the mowing patterns go, I think its a travesty.  I want to play a Tillinghast course as he intended.  I think he did a much better job of it then the USGA.  I will gladly play a USGA setup when I hone my skills enough to qualify for a US Open (HA HA HA).

[Matt_Ward]

Phil Y:

You ask "if" the greens were cut to their edges. Frankly, I don't answer questions with an "if" bent. I simply opine on what is. If and more importantly when such changes are made I'll be happy to assess them as such.

The real issue Phil is the inane Michael Jackson plastic surgery attempts that have been made at the 18th. It is simply a major league let down -- in the same category as what one finds at the 18th at CP. Having a compelling short but driveable closer at the end of BB would make for a much better ending hole IMHO.

I do agree with you in regards to the extreme narrow fairway cuts. BB doesn't need to follow the route of say Dunluce at Portrush and seek to distort what the original widths provided.

Phil B:

I don't really have an opinion. I think a number of architects could do a superb job -- the idea that only Tom Doak or Crenshaw & Coore are capable is a bit of a preconceived bias on your part.

I also don't think the greens need to be made anywhere near as severe as what you find at WF / West. If that were to happen -- and given the sheer distance and elevated greens you would be playing -- the net result could easily be a course that is virtually unplayable save for the likes of only the limited elite golfers on the planet.

The real issue for me is the movement away from any type of finesse play at BB. Extending the tee at #2 and #9 -- and completely screwing up the 18th are three clear examples of holes that could be much better without the overdosing on the length equation.

[Jay Flemma]

I gave it an 8 too.

[Jason Blasberg]

Tee to green it could be the best golf course in America . . . however, it falls short at the green and while in incredible condition for a State run facility Redanman hit the nail on the head, I've said it before but 2 years ago (I didn't go back because of it) I paced off the 15h fairway at 280 yards off the tee and it was under 20 yards wide . . . that's beyond a joke . . .

I'd give it a 9.5 to walk and look at but a 6 to play as is.  If conditioning were proper it'd be a 9 to play.

[Geoffrey Childs]

Tee to green it could be the best golf course in America . . . however, it falls short at the green and while in incredible condition for a State run facility Redanman hit the nail on the head, I've said it before but 2 years ago (I didn't go back because of it) I paced off the 15h fairway at 280 yards off the tee and it was under 20 yards wide . . . that's beyond a joke . . .

I'd give it a 9.5 to walk and look at but a 6 to play as is.  If conditioning were proper it'd be a 9 to play.

Interesting Jason - I once a LONG time ago submitted a comment on BB for the Golf Digest booklet with course ratings and comments from all the courses in the country.  My quote was "Tillinghast's best tee to green.  If only all the crowds would go away".  They used it in the booklet.

I totally agree about fairway widths.  The travesty about #15 is they grow the rough in on the left side that is right in the preferred landing area that should be rewarded. From the left you have a look right up the gut of the green without having to carry directly over the huge and deep front bunker. There are several other equally poor places for rough on BB.

[Phil Benedict]

Phil Y:

Phil B:

I don't really have an opinion. I think a number of architects could do a superb job -- the idea that only Tom Doak or Crenshaw & Coore are capable is a bit of a preconceived bias on your part.

Matt,

Actually I was just using these guys for illustrative purposes.  My point is that whenever the Black comes up in discussion someone invariably says that the greens are not up to the standard of the rest of the course - you said so in your original comment on this thread as have others.  

I was raising the question of whether it's desirable to take a place with all the history, which is already great, and try to make it better but also possibly changing its character.

[Jim Nugent]

I've been told it's not feasible to change all the greens at once.  They'd have to shut down the course for a long time, was the reason given.  How about changing one or two greens at a time?  Could that work, if whoever runs BPB wanted to do that?  

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

I concur. A caution flag needs to be held up high and long because such situations can result in disasterous consequences -- see the Michael Jackson plastic surgery botch job that's been done to the 18th hole - and now you have same thing taking place on a slightly smaller scale with the 9th and 14th holes.

The thing about BB is that when so many people were falling over themselves and opined that the world's best would shoot a zillion under-par when playing the '02 Open I was simply laughing out loud. The tenacity of the course is that the tee game is under so much pressure -- you need sufficient distance clearly and you can't be that wild or the course will grab you and inflict some serious damge to your ego and score.

Jim N:

The thing about "changing" greens is that far too often you get someone who delivers a Frankenstein blow to the course and you get this bastardized result. The greens at BB only need the smallest of tweakings on certain holes (e.g. the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 9th, to name just a few).

What scares me is that if the course ever went the route of modifying the greens you would get something that might make the course simply too tough. What BB doesn't need is for a replica version of the kind of greens you see at WF / West.

[Phil_the_Author]

Jim Nugent commented, "I've been told it's not feasible to change all the greens at once.  They'd have to shut down the course for a long time, was the reason given.  How about changing one or two greens at a time?  Could that work, if whoever runs BPB wanted to do that?"

Jim, the reason that the greens aren't being redone now is not because of time and shutting down the course, but rather it is for the same two reasons that they weren't redone before the Open. The first is based upon the question, Do they need to be made more difficult? The answer is no.

Consider, the Black is, on almost any knowledgeable person's list, at least among the 10 toughest courses there are. The Open proved this beyond any doubt and the greens themselves were near-unanimously praised by the players as both eminently fair and tremendously challenging.

The second reason is a far more basic one... money. Who will pay for it? The state of New York will not spend money to redo the greens on the Black because from their perspective the course will get to host the Open many times in the coming years, so why put the money into it. They have already turned down the USGA's initial offer of a US Amateur because of financial reasons, though the USGA & Bethpage are hoping that something may be worked out.

Matt replied to Jim with, "The thing about "changing" greens is that far too often you get someone who delivers a Frankenstein blow to the course and you get this bastardized result. The greens at BB only need the smallest of tweakings on certain holes (e.g. the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 9th, to name just a few)... What scares me is that if the course ever went the route of modifying the greens you would get something that might make the course simply too tough. What BB doesn't need is for a replica version of the kind of greens you see at WF / West. '
   
Matt, you are so right! Consider the complaints about how hard Winged Foot played during the Open. Tee to green Bethpage Black is FAR more challenging and dificult than WF; if it had WF's greens the winning score may have been over 300 in 2002.

Can anything be done to make the greens just a bit more challenging and still remain true to Tilly's design and the realities of public course play? Yes! By returning the greens to their original sizes through the simple act of cutting the grass, areas of mild to severe undulations allowing for some incredibly challenging hole locations would instantly appear. That is why I believe that it is most important to push for a return to this.

It is simple to do, inexpensive and a good compromise to this very minor problem of the Black's.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil Y:

The issue I have with BB is the addiction to simply adding length to just about any hole at the course. I have no issue with changing certain greens in a modest way -- provided the length addiction is nipped in the bud.

The 18th could be a superb driveable par-4 to conclude the round and with such a hole you can have a green with all the elements that made Tillie so unique among all designers.

BB doesn't need to keep adding length because the criticism that the course doesn't possess anything close to a world renown short par-4 is quite true.

The 2002 US Open proved BB could handle the world's best -- but the broader issue is about overall architectural qualities and I see the former partially obscuring what the latter clearly presents IMHO.

[Phil_the_Author]

Matt,

You are very aware that I am in total disagreement with you on your suggestion for the 18th. A drivable par-4 finishing hole is definitely NOT what Tilly envisioned for it.

In fact, his original design for the hole wasn't adhered to. It called for a large drainage pond to be located starting at the base of the hill fronting the green with the opposite side  ending where the current fairway bunkers end. Having built the tee box in the place the design called for, it is quite obvious that Tilly always viewed the 18th as having a long-iron second shot into the green.

Also, as far as adding more length to holes, there was consideration to lengthening both the 4th and the 13th holes for the 2009 Open. This has since been dropped as an option primatrily when a number of major players (Tiger, Phil, Ernie & others I know of) were asked if they thought that they might be going at these greens in 2 in 2009. They each answered with a resounding NO for 4 & that even though many went for 13 in 2 in 2002, most ended up missing it and the risk was punished. By the way, there wasn't a single eagle made on either hole by a player reaching these par-fives in two in 2002.

Now I know that the 9th & 5th tees were lengthened about 2 years ago. The 9th was done because the park was offered a land swap by the the State University at Farmingdale and so by putting in the new back tee they were able to annex the property permananetly, whether the tee is ever used or not. The 5th is more controversial and was done by the park without USGA approval (not that it was necessary).

[Phil Benedict]

The 18th could be a superb driveable par-4 to conclude the round and with such a hole you can have a green with all the elements that made Tillie so unique among all designers.

Is the 18th at TOC the only finishing hole in championship golf that's a drivable par 4?  Making the 18th at BB play 325-350 (or whatever constitutes a drivable par 4 these days) would certainly make it distinctive.  The problem is the USGA wants the player to struggle for par on the 72nd hole rather than take risks to try to make birdie.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil Y:

You and I will part ways because once the plastic surgery commenced in earnest on the 18th at BB I find this desire to be authentic Tillie as less of a concern. Heaven forbid I said this to all the preservationists that exist in cyperspace.

There are MORE than enough long par-4's at the course. Phil, c'mon, a little bit of wiggle room -- BB doesn't have any short par-4's that are remotely in the same vein as the top tier layouts in the USA. Without that aspect the motif of BB remains the same -- a muscular bull of a course that has frankly no finesse holes of real distinction.

After one has played the long uphill 15th -- a fairway that's been made to play way tooooooo narrow as others have mentioned -- and then the long 16th and the maddening 17th -- I think concluding the course with a type of hole that's not been featured in the earlier 17 holes is quite appropriate and adds a sense of mystery / challenge that enliven any event played at the course.

Phil B:

The issue for the USGA is how to make the conclusion of the US Open a bit more problematic for the players to decide what to do. I am frankly getting tired of the pro forma 490+ yard finishing hole in which all the groups are barfing up over themselves. When I see such finishing holes at TOC, Olympic / Lake or Inverness, it strikes me that the ending hole can provide a winning birdie for those who dare.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()