[Matt_Ward]

I started a thread with the left coast in mind, e.g. PB v Riv. Someone asked me to provide a comparable brain teaser with the right coast in mind.

So here goes ...

Bethpage / Black v Winged Foot / West

I've had the opportunity to play both of them for well over 30 years and will opine after a few people have weighed in their thoughts.

For those who have played  both -- please state your case. It would help if you can state when was the last time you played both?

For those who have NOT played both -- your comments are welcomed provided you state upfront that missing dynamic.

When I ask for comments I'm looking for what people see as the better overall design -- one can throw in whatever categories / criteria you wish.

[Kyle Harris]

Never played Winged Foot West.

I'd be a bit disappointed in WFW if were not vastly superior to *today's* Bethpage Black. It is will known that I do not feel the course is even the best on the Bethpage property.

It would be hard for me to imagine a hole at Winged Foot West that is better than the 4th and 5th on Bethpage Black, however.

They would also seem to have complementary downsides? Bethpage on a severe site with flat greens and Winged Foot on a flatter site with more severe greens? If that's true, the more severe greens would win in my mind.

[Matt_Ward]

Kyle:

I always appreciate definitive comments from people who have NEVER played one course and then can weigh in with so much insight on what has to be the superior layout.

Just something to ponder -- this thread is NOT about toughness -- but design greatness.

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle:

I always appreciate definitive comments from people who have NEVER played one course and then can weigh in with so much insight on what has to be the superior layout.

Just something to ponder -- this thread is NOT about toughness -- but design greatness.

Not sure if that's made to be snide or not. If you will read a little closer - my statements were conditional - or does the "North Jersey" dialect fail to register the word "if."

I stated that WFW would be a disappointment if it weren't superior to Bethpage Black. That's an opinion, Matt, not definitive. However, I do know that the 4th and 5th at Bethpage are some of the best I've played - hence it being difficult for me to actually conceive any holes elsewhere to be better.

[Mike Sweeney]

Matt,

Let's first start with The East vs The West because you picked the wrong course at Winged Foot!

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

Thanks ... but usually those who favor the East can't hack playing the West. 

All kidding aside -- tell you another interesting thread -- the East wt WF versus the Red at Bethpage !

Kyle:

Just throwing the word "if" into the equation doesn't hide the fact your throwing weight behind a course you have not played. Comprende amigo.

Keep in mind, you definitively claimed in your first post that WFW was "vastly superior"

Of course, I detected a bit of back pedaling with your most recent post when you simply said WFW was "superior" to BB. Geeze, which one do you feel more comfortable with?

One other thing -- opinions are certainly that -- and when people make original claims of a layout being "vastly superior" that's definitive in the way I understand the english language.

Kyle, not trying to bust your chops -- but it helps if people keep their claims to a more narrow front for the purposes of comparisons and contrasts. If a person has only played one course and only seen another through the lens of a TV camera then candidly I have to say that such folks are limited in what they really say from a position of sure footing.

You state that you can't see any hole at WFW being beyond the qualities of the 4th and 5th at BB. Really? And your basing your comments just on the playing of one of the layouts here -- right?

Now, I get it.

[Kyle Harris]

Matt,

I said I'd be disappointed if the course weren't vastly superior. Meaning, when I play WFW, my expectation of the golf course is that it will be superior to Bethpage Black. Is that so difficult to understand? I never said one course was better than the other, at all. Imply all you want, I just expect WFW to be better.

[TX Golf]

Matt,

I think you a reading things into Kyle's comments that just don't exist. I don't see anywhere in which he claimed anything about WF.

[Matt_Ward]

Kyle:

Help me out -- OK ?

You say you'd be "disappointed in WFW if (it) were not vastly superior to 'today's' BB." That's your first post here.

If you claim something is "vastly superior" then ergo you think it's the better course -- again, no implying on my part -- your words here. I just don't know how you can a definitive conclusion without having played one course and only the other. Ditto your conclusion -- "hard for you to imagine" that no hole at WFW can be at or beyond the level of BB's 4th and 5th holes. Geeze, how you do magically make that statement without ever playing the layout in Mamaroneck. Just trying to find out.

 

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle:

Help me out -- OK ?

You say you'd be "disappointed in WFW if (it) were not vastly superior to 'today's' BB." That's your first post here.

If you claim something is "vastly superior" then ergo you think it's the better course -- again, no implying on my part -- your words here. I just don't know how you can a definitive conclusion without having played one course and only the other. Ditto your conclusion -- "hard for you to imagine" that no hole at WFW can be at or beyond the level of BB's 4th and 5th holes. Geeze, how you do magically make that statement without ever playing the layout in Mamaroneck. Just trying to find out.

 

Well, for starters Matt - I don't need to "imagine" a hole I've already played. Can we get on with it? I'd like to weigh on Bethpage when the time is right.

[Mike Wagner]

Kyle,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you simply stating that BB isn't all that great, and from what is well known about Winged Foot, that you'd be disappointed if it weren't much better?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Wait.....maybe I'll just...

1.  Start a thread
2.  NOT state my opinion about the subject
3.  Tell others to weigh in.....and.....
4.  Jump all over them once they do!

Sounds like fun!

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you simply stating that BB isn't all that great, and from what is well known about Winged Foot, that you'd be disappointed if it weren't much better?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Wait.....maybe I'll just...

1.  Start a thread
2.  NOT state my opinion about the subject
3.  Tell others to weigh in.....and.....
4.  Jump all over them once they do!

Sounds like fun!

Matt knows he can spar with me. I hope that doesn't detract from the conversation, though. I was hoping to provoke some discussion regarding any hole at WFW being superior to the 4th or 5th at Bethpage Black. Despite my rather lukewarm opinion of the course (it's still in my Top 20) I think 4 and 5 are in my Top 18.

[Mike Wagner]

Sorry to both of you - didn't seem like sparring to me.  Seemed like he really didn't understand what you were obviously saying.

I'm actually interested in this topic since I've played WF but not BB. 

[Matt_Ward]

Kyle:

Just try to realize this -- I'd like people who have played both to weigh in because they have had the actual experience in doing so.

Those who have not played either are encouraged to share their thoughts -- albeit from a more distant source -- likely TV coverage or third hand accounts.

You fall in the cracks because you've played one but not the other. All I said was for you to watch comments that make clear statements (the holes at 4 and 5 at BB being beyond anything one can find at WFW is just one example).

With that said -- the land area for BB is certainly more inspiring than what you see with the layouts in Mamaroneck - your observation on that account is quite accurate. What's ironic is that many of the top tier layouts you find in Westchester have superior land sites -- WF falls on a much lesser piec of quality land but still excels inspite of that clear limitation.

I think the main thing that holds back BB is not the design but the set-up you find there on a regular basis. That's quite unfortunate because excessively narrow fairways for such a layout only adds a penal dimension that's on the overkill side in my mind.

One of the main strengths of WFW is how greens are well protected from anything but the superior approach. BB gets little salutes from most on this category but frankly there are few courses that really test your distance and accuracy with the iron better than the Black. Many of the approaches are above you (e.g. 5th, 15th, to name just two) and often times hidden oartially or even totally.

The main weakness of WFW when held against BB is the par-5 front. WFW doesn't really have any par-5's of distinction -- the 12th is really the only one when you factor in that the 9th and 16th holes are converted when majors are played. BB counters with the superlative 4th -- the 7th was Tillie's copycat version of Hell's half acre and the 13th often flies considerably below the radar screen -- although I detest the idea in having the hole lengthened to the inane length it is now.

One other thought in regards to both courses -- generally you find little love from many here on GCA on both courses -- likely that ties itself to the self-interest aspect -- people hate to get beaten up and both courses can do that with ease. It's quite funny to see those who take the tact that WFE is better than WFW and that BR is the better when held against BB. The issue for BB for me is how they have turned a perfectly sensible demanding course into a monster frankenstein version more perverse love for excessive length and narrowing is the rule for the day.

[Matt_Ward]

I want to add that often times many people fail to recognize that WFW is a great driving course. So much attention often goes directly to the demands faced on the approach and with the greens themselves.

WFW requires sufficient distance but you absolutely NEED TO WORK THE BALL with varying shot shapes. Plenty of people can bang the ball a long ways -- getting to work it both ways is no easy propositio. One of the really great holes at WFW is the 8th. It plays roughly 460 yards and the trees down the right side work magically as the hole turns gently from
left-to-right. There's nothing magical about the hole but it won't budge if you don't execute flawlessly.

[Kyle Harris]

Matt,

I believe you're on record here stating a rather high fondness and respect for the finishing three holes at WFW. I think you've said that you held them in higher regard than those at Merion East.

With the relative weakness of the last three on the Black Course (ESPECIALLY the 18th, the poorness of which is something where we agree), couldn't that maybe throw the favor back to WFW?

As an aside, were any Par 5s made into Par 4s for the 2006 US Open? The 7th on the Black was a Par 4 in 2002.

[mike_malone]

 Both are overrated. WFW , which I played the October before the Open had rough that killed any chance of a recovery shot to those pushed up and over bunkered greens. The greens were fast that day which actually eased the putting challenge, imo. I have often stated that the terrain borders on boring there until you make it to the back nine.

  BB is probably better than WFW but who really cares? The course is spread out to take advantage of a few ridges running through the course. The stretch of 5-6-7 is great as is #15. But, there are too many ho-hum holes there.


  I don't see either of these courses at the level of  N.Berwick,Lahinch, County Sligo, Ballybunion, NGLA to name a few courses outside the top ten that I have played. I would say that Plainfield is better than either of them in that region.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

Overrated.

Really?

Mike, I agree with you that ho-hum does exist at BB -- for the first three holes. When you reach the 4th the show begins in EARNEST. Please specify for me -- beyond the 14th and 18th -- any of the other holes that are "ho-hum."

You also allude to the "spread out" of BB. That's one of the fascinating things about the course -- it provides such a massive scale -- there is no clutter or crampness -- you as a player are given this marvelous canvass to take in all the aspects the property provides.

Let's talk about WFW shall we. You arue against the greens because of the rough. Mike, candidly having the high rough allows balls to stay nearer to the greens than if they were cut lower. I also think Tillie did very well in testing the approach play to the targets at WFW. There are no cream puff plays when you stand out on the fairway and look into the targets.

One final thing -- there are people who play down both WFW and BB. Likely self interest and personal scoring has plenty to do with that but more often than not -- those who assert the overrated angle don't wish to concede that possibility in their presentation.

In regards to Plainfield -- I love the layout but for world class players only the likes of WFW and BB have the capacity to really test that caliber of player. I do admit the land and variety of holes from the Jersey course is vastly underrated by many.


Kyle:

Let's stay on point with this thread.  If you want to compare / contrast Merion that's a clearly different topic.

What I said about the closing holes at WFW -- starting from the 14th all the way to the house is that they are super demanding. I didn't opine on the variety aspect. All of the final five at WFW are par-4's but to Tillie's considerable credit they are quite creative and tenacious in highlighting anything less than stellar play. That doesn't detract from what you see with the final three at Merion East but if I had to post a score with the final five at WFW versus the final five at Merion East I'll take my chances on the Pennsy layout. That's just my opinion.

The 18th is not a weak hole at BB in that birdies were made easily -- it's just a poorly designed hole in which "more" could have been attained. I would like to see a short but driveable concluding hole because BB doesn't have anything remotely close to a vintage short par-4 hole. The issue with WFW is that Tillie had to conclude the round there with a series of par-4 holes. A bit more variety would have been a real plus although as a tandem the final five are quite good.

In regards to your questions -- the 9th and 16th at WFW were par-5's for the members and have always been par-4's in the majors there.

I personally believe -- and have said so to Mike Davis -- that BB should play the 7th from both tees and have it alternate as a par-4 and par-5 hole. That would make it more fascinating than simply adding another monster hole into the equation.

[mike_malone]

 Matt,

   I think "greatness" is found in courses that are playable by every level of player. My experience of WFW was that missing a fairway with a tee shot left no recovery shot because the elevated, firm and fast, fairly narrow greens with deep bunkers allowed no shots from off line out of deep rough. Laying up for a wedge is a sign of weakness in the course for me. I could be fifty yards off line at TOC and still have a shot!

  The holes that were ho-hum at BB were the flat ones at the far end of the property. I would guess around #9 or #10. #16  is nothing special either. I have played many better long par threes than #17 as well.

[JSlonis]

I've played both within the last few years.  For my taste, I prefer Winged Foot West.

While they are both very difficult from tee to green, I think the greensites at WFW are superior to those at BB.  I'd like to see more width put back into both courses.  With the current narrow fairways, a lot of the preferred angles of attack are taken away and hidden in rough.

Although both are big courses, I also prefer the more intimate feel and scale of WFW.

[Jaeger Kovich]

I have played Bethpage Black, Red, Blue (All 2008) and WF East (07), spent a week at the open on the west and caddied 9 holes on the east (08).

I think the West course is better then the black because of its par 3's. Both have incredible demanding par 4's and 5's from start to finish, take par 3's out its a toss-up but the Black has some poor par 3's. WFW's most famous hole is probably #10, a par 3. Tilly was all about par 3's, he said they provided the most excitement of any, but the shot holes out on LI, just aren't. Also the greens on the front 9 of BPB are very flat. The holes are so damn hard it wouldn't be fair to put huge contours on them! ... Don't get me wrong, I love BPB, but if I was given a choice of one round at either tomorrow, its Winged Foot West.

[Matt_Ward]

Jaeger K:

Your assessment is one I can agree with for the most part.

I too see WFW as the better overall design -- unfortunately, so much of what the Black is today has been transformed badly to be a US Open beast with so little in terms of playability and finesse.

You mention the qualities of the par-5 holes at WFW and it's that cartegory that I see lacking when the West is compared to the Black. WFW doesn't have a hole as stellar as BB's 4th- Ditto the qualities of the par-5 7th and even the 13th. Given the fact that WFW transforms two par-4's - the 9th and 16th from member par-5's, the real strength of WFW is the par-4's and par-3 side.

One other thing -- I have always believed that consumate driving of the ball is an absolute must when at the West. You need sufficient distance for sure -- but you need to work the ball constantly -- shaping shots to get the optimum position to the well-protected greensites.

Mike:

A few comments to your last post ...

The issue of "playability" is tied to what tees you played that day and how well / poorly you played. If you played from middle tees and you played well and the course still provided no positive feedback from the caliber of shots you played then I would agree with the proposition that it lacks playablity.

Just try to realize you do have people --  who will grouse about a course simply from the day / time they had when there.

In regards to the excessive rough around the greens -- Mike, I chalk that up to the pre-US Open set-up situation. You'd likely find the same set of circumstances with any US Open course prior to the championship being played.

I don't doubt the nature of the greens and the way they are protected. WFW is quite discerning on approach shot and what people get away with at other courses -- even superior ones -- is not easily transferred to what Tillinghast provided to both layouts in Mamaroneck. As you and others may note -- Tillie was quite keen to make players really step up big time with their approach play.

You say laying up is "sign of weakness" but often times that's the smarter play at WFW -- just ask Billy Casper who did that for four straight days in '59 at the par-3 3rd. Can't fault the strategy as he bagged the game's biggest prize !

You reference the openess at TOC but let's be clear there are numerous penal bunkers there where a sideways pitchout may be your best alternative.

I have no idea how many times you have played BB. The issue with #10 and #11 is getting your bearings from the tee. Yes, the land at #10 is not really impressive -- but you need to align yourself correctly so that the approach angle is one you can handle. The further right you go on #10 the more demanding the angle and distance needed to get there.

On #11 the issue is a blind landing area from the tee. Players need to favor one side of the fairway or the other in reference to where the pin is located that day. Keep in mind, the green at #11 is sloped appreciably and can make for a quick three-jack.

You diss #16 and I have to disagree with you again. The optimum angle on that hole is keeping the tee shot down the left side. Those who hang up on the right side have a very demanding approach as a solitary bunker protects the right side like a junk-yard dog. Coming over that bunker is no small feat and getting the ball to stop quickly from that spot can be extremely risky.

Let's talk about #17 because frankly the hole is a great one -- whether the pin is flush left forcing the longer carry from the tee or placed on the narrow far right side which requires pinpoint accuracy. Given the number of different courses I've had the opportunity to play in the metro NYC area I would not place the one in my first quartet of top par-3 holes but I would most certainly include it on the short list of superior long par-3 holes (200+ yards).

In summary, Mike, people who downplay WFW and BB usualyl have an aversion to hitting a steady diet of long shots to tough targets. Those who favor gentler kinder versions of Tillie type layouts usually fawn over such places as Quaker Ridge, Fenway or Somerset Hills. To each his own.

[Matt_Ward]

Part of the issue for both BB and WFW is the LOVE factor.

Consciously or even subconsciously there are people who will opine on a course simply as it relates to their game. Oh, I know there is often thrown into the mixture a very skillful rationalization of what may be the deficiencies but for certain people the element of how the course fits their game is clearly an issue.

The love factor is really one of how does the course reward / penalize one's personal game and often times it's very difficult for people to rise above the self interest and see what general interest there well may be.

WFW and BB are muscle oriented courses - BB is the 21st century version of Barry Bonds -- been injected with design steroids and has been prepared on a daily basis to be overly penal. It's sad that that has happened and I don't diminish or put down those who feel the Black is lacking in the finesse area because I agree that the obsession with maxed out length is truly overkill.

I've grown to really respect WFW -- it's not a course that immediately wows you when you step on to the grounds. But, if you take the time to examine the detailing of the architectue that's been provided you can understand how Tillie fulfilled his charge in making a man-sized course as per his instructions from those who hired him.

WFW is not without issue -- the par-5 side is really non-existent -- the 5th is a weak hole and the expanded 12th hole should have been left as is without the silly extension to the inane back tee length it plays now. Still, when you add up the totality of WFW you find a layout that requires steady driving of the ball followed by pinpoint approaches and a putting talent that can handle a myriad of challenges throughout the round.

In so many ways WFW and BB provide the modern equivalent of tough love and for those who want a completely different style it pays to understand what you will face when going to either of the two courses.

Final word -- sad to say but BB in its original form / preparation (not the clearly improved turf quality) was a better course. 

[David Stamm]

I have not played either, but have a question. From what I can tell, BPB seems to be on more varied topography. Is this correct?

[Matt_Ward]

David:

The land BB is located is quite rolling -- there are flatter sections for certain stretches of holes but the sheer elements of BB that often gets little attention is the grand scale of the place. Unlike so many other public courses that are bordered by homes and other clutter the time at BB is a real journey as you walk from the 1st hole to the concluding 18th.

WF is on more sedate property -- there is a bit of roll but likely you get more terrain diversity with the East than with the West. What's ironic is that often time courses found in Westchester County have some stellar property -- take the site of Westchester County Club for example. WF doesn't have that element but it still demands a consumate game to succeed.

Last item -- I have always opined that superior land is at least 60% of the equation in finding high caliber golf courses. WF proves to be the exception to that belief.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()