Re: Fenway

[Matt_Ward]

Brad:

I do believe there is a clear place for short par-4's, but the 1st at Fenway just simply lays there and says blah to me.

I do like what Geoffrey mentioned regarding the rerouting that Fenway does for special events with the 7th serving as the starting hole. Obviously, someone at Fenway feels the same as I do if they use this routing on important occasions.

Forgive me for this pipe dream, but it's too bad the 1st hole at Fenway wasn't situated nearer to where the championship tee is in the 2nd hole. Yes, I know such a scenario would involve jumping over the entrance road and abutting the driving range. Would really be interesting to see.

Among great short par-4's that play 300 yards or less that I have seen include the following:

7th at Olympic (288 yards)
2nd at Desert Mountain (Chirichua Course)
16th at Weschester CC (West) plays as 7th during Buick Classic
17th at Oakmont CC (especially when it played at 296 yards)

There are a host of others I could also add. I also really like the 15th at Fenway because it requires plenty of decisionmaking from the tee to the green.

Brad, keep in mind, I'm not saying the 1st hole is bad. It's just a complete downer / yawn for what's to come. In some ways, Fenway mimicks Cypress Point, which as you know, concludes with a turkey of hole.

The green at the 1st is good with the front third being really challenging, however, the tee shot is simply pro forma stuff and although I badly hooked it when we played my chops are licking as a long hitter to simply "grip it and rip it" all the time.

Hope this helps ...

P.S. Can either you or Geofffeey e-mail me privately the names of the President of the Club and Greens Cmte Chair. E-mail to mattwardgolf@hotmail.com -- I'll be sending them a thank you note for a grand time at a grand course.

Thanks!

[Mark_Fine]

Finally made it to Fenway.  What a wonderful golf course.  Can't think of a better set of Tillinghast greens and green surrounds that I've seen from him anywhere!  Course must have been built at the height of Tillinghast's drinking period!!  Unfortunately a number of the greens like #11 are too severe for today's green speeds.  Many have very limited pin positions.  #8 and #15 are very interesting as they show Pine Valley similarities.  Green sizes range from 1800 - 10000+ square feet.  Gil did a fantastic restoration job here using a 1930 aerial of the course and the Tillinghast plan.  Only real downside to the course are the over encroaching trees.  A number of the holes are claustrophobic and key playing angles have been lost.  Remove a bunch of the trees and this course is clearly in the Top 100 in the country!  

For what it’s worth, here is a quick hole by hole review.

#1 – Thank goodness the greensite is outstanding, otherwise this is a dull get away opener.
#2 – Sorry, but the back tee on the other side of the road behind the grass mounds looks out of place – evidently an after thought to add yardage to an otherwise wonderful golf hole.  It doesn’t make the hole better, it just makes it longer and takes the fairway bunkers on the right pretty much out of play.  Great green and bunker complex.  Would love to see the three trees behind the green taken out!  Heard Gil almost doubled the green in size from what it had shrunken down to.
#3 – About as good as it gets for a 520 yard golf hole.  How wild is that green!!  Love the bunker complex 120 yards short and right of the green.  Two trees need to go left side of fairway short of green.
#4 – Wow is this a neat little par three!  Greensite doesn’t get much wilder than this one.  Too bad there are very limited pin positions.
#5 – Lower tee behind #4 green offers best playing angle for the tee shot.  Right side tee is claustrophobic due to all the trees right.  Neat little pot bunkers running along left side.  Another wild rolling green flared in back.  This green was also nearly doubled in size during the restoration.
#6 – Loved the mirage bunker 50 yards short right of green.  Flattest green to this point on the front but it should be at 245 yards from the tips.
#7 – Need to take out the willow tree in the center of the fairway bunker complex.  At least one or two trees need to come down left as well opening up the playing angles to the relatively tiny (narrow green).  

By the way, the steady line of pine trees between #7 and #10 is pretty bad.  Obviously Gil had little latitude in dealing with the trees!  I heard the Master Plan calls for removal of some 400 trees but the club has opted not to take them down!  Too bad!

#8 – Visually awkward tee shot.  Just too many trees clamping down the landing area.  Landscaping behind #7 green doesn’t help either.  Great Pine Valley type green requiring aerial approach.  
#9 – Huge tree on right side of fairway chokes off tee shot.  Trees again up left side.  Loved the false front narrow green cut up into hillside with gaping deep bunker on front right side.  

#10 – Neat cross bunkers cut off half the fairway but well out from the tee.  Pretty cool greensite that is visually deceptive due to open space behind it!!  
#11- Demanding uphill par three to the most severe green on the course.  Must be 5-7% slope if not more in places.  One of those greens with limited pin positions when the green has any kind of speed.  I dropped a ball on the back part of the green and it rolled off the front.
#12 – Dogleg left that has limited driving options due to trees.  Angles of play have been mostly cut off.  Another narrow rolling green that flanks the #8 green.  Pretty cool complex!
#13 – Good par four with three deep fairway bunkers strung along the right side up to the 100yd marker.  Open green calling for a run up shot.
#14 – Very tight tree-lined driving area.  Wild deceptive bunkering short and right of green.
#15 – Open driving area on this 300 yard hole.  The closer you can get on your tee shot to this tiny (1800 square foot) and narrow (front to back) Pine Valley type green, the better.  Your approach shot better be perfect or you’ll roll off into one of the side bunkers.  Really interesting little golf hole.
#16 – Dogleg right par four with landing area pinched in by trees.  Wonderful downhill second shot that needs to be played short and run on the green.  
#17 – Downhill par three with pond short and right of green.  Water feature was a surprise to me when I saw it and just doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the design.  It is the main defense of the golf hole and the caddy I had said members aren’t too fond of it either.  Least favorite par three of the group.
#18 – No width, no options, as trees run down right and left.  Hit it straight, find it, and hit it straight again.  Largest green on the course (over 10000 square feet) with a big ridge running through it.  I made a nice birdie on the hole but still thought is was a weak finish (design-wise).

As I said, Fenway is a really special golf course and with removal of trees, would be up there in that elite group.  Classic courses were designed to play away from the middle of the fairways and more along the edges.  I’d love to see those options/playing angles restored to complement what Gil has done with the greens and bunkers.    

Mark

[neighbor]

Mark

Best, most accurate description yet seen of Fenway.  The only thing you left out was the ridiculous field goal you have to kick off 17 tee.

[Mark_Fine]

Thanks.  It's tough given that was my first time playing the course.  

[Kurt Everett]

If I could be so bold to reheat a very old thread, does anyone know a Fenway member that might able to host an out of towner?
I've been enamored with Fenway from afar, and would love the opportunity to play it.  Will be in the are end of next week.


Kurt Everett
kurteverett@gmail.com

[Mark_Fine]

Kurt,
Sorry can’t help you out but thanks for bringing back a thread from 20+ years ago.  How time flies.  Good luck getting access.  I need to go back up again myself.  I love the golf course and it would be nice to see how it has evolved since my last visit (probably ten years ago). 

[mike_malone]

We played it this year in the Member Monday event which includes many courses in the mid Atlantic area. I wanted to update my thoughts from years ago when I thought it was a nice members course not at the level of exceptional.


  I still feel that way. Yes the greens are nice but QR is much stronger in every way to me. It has a better routing, more interesting angles and terrain.


Fenway provided little stress off the tee in my group’s estimation.


Nice course; not that a strong a ranking.

[Connor Dougherty]

Fenway provided little stress off the tee in my group’s estimation.

They had the rough around 4-5" long during the US Mid Am this year, and with all of the rain they got over the course of the weekend, there was plenty to worry about off the tee.


You certainly have room to miss sideways, but it really goes to show how presentation can change a golf course. Fenway averaged almost 2 strokes harder this year than Sleepy Hollow during stroke play.


The greens there are pretty darn special, even if a few of them (really, 11 is the only obvious one in my mind) are too severe for modern green speeds.

[Steve Lapper]

"Nice course; not that a strong a ranking."

Much like Rolling Green??

[mike_malone]

"Nice course; not that a strong a ranking."

Much like Rolling Green??

Steve,


I chose to compare it to a neighboring Tillinghast. It doesn’t compare to Rolling Green.

[mike_malone]

"Nice course; not that a strong a ranking."

Much like Rolling Green??

I hope to compare it to Somerset Hills after someone honors their Super Bowl bet from a few years ago.

[V. Kmetz]

For perhaps different reasons, I have to agree with the tone of ambivalence in MM's post. Whenever Fenway is mentioned (and usually praised) I see it ignored that the middle 6 of this course is like a routing donut hole.


1-6 make for one of the most lively, amusing, starts in all of the Met, certainly Westchester and the equal of Tillie's nearby WFs and QR..


7-12 are poor holes as much in their character as in their play, their "fitted" route, their unfriendly ground...everything is wrong...7 and 10 are the same hole, laying side by side, over the same flatlands ground... 8 and 12 are the same hole over the same doglegging left reverse camber ground...12 a bit longer, laying side by side, they share a greenside bunker for godsakes. Alone, one of them might be interesting... but twice in 5 holes is more than meh...9 is the least in character of any Fenway hole - good or bad - with a dumb stream cutting across the fairway landing spot, which if navigated leaves the same rote blind shot to a fast but overall "meh" green....And 11 is the worst par 3 in the Tillinghast canon that I've seen or read about; I've stated the reasons enough over the years to not repeat here.


The course improves (but not to the pitch of the first third) from 13...but only that hole and of course the sui generus 15th are really of the standard of its better holes.


I just don't see how the intelligent players/praisers here can overlook such a void in the center of Fenway's experience...it also is on the worst walking ground the course offers, flat and soggy 7 and 10...scrawling up and back sharp up and sidehills the other 4.

[Eric LeFante]

For perhaps different reasons, I have to agree with the tone of ambivalence in MM's post. Whenever Fenway is mentioned (and usually praised) I see it ignored that the middle 6 of this course is like a routing donut hole.


1-6 make for one of the most lively, amusing, starts in all of the Met, certainly Westchester and the equal of Tillie's nearby WFs and QR..


7-12 are poor holes as much in their character as in their play, their "fitted" route, their unfriendly ground...everything is wrong...7 and 10 are the same hole, laying side by side, over the same flatlands ground... 8 and 12 are the same hole over the same doglegging left reverse camber ground...12 a bit longer, laying side by side, they share a greenside bunker for godsakes. Alone, one of them might be interesting... but twice in 5 holes is more than meh...9 is the least in character of any Fenway hole - good or bad - with a dumb stream cutting across the fairway landing spot, which if navigated leaves the same rote blind shot to a fast but overall "meh" green....And 11 is the worst par 3 in the Tillinghast canon that I've seen or read about; I've stated the reasons enough over the years to not repeat here.


The course improves (but not to the pitch of the first third) from 13...but only that hole and of course the sui generus 15th are really of the standard of its better holes.


I just don't see how the intelligent players/praisers here can overlook such a void in the center of Fenway's experience...it also is on the worst walking ground the course offers, flat and soggy 7 and 10...scrawling up and back sharp up and sidehills the other 4.

Maybe not everyone thinks there is a void


I've played the course more than 20 times and never once have I thought 7/10 and 8/12 are the same holes. 7 is a 390 yard sharp dogleg that is heavenly bunkered with a small severely sloping perched green. 10 is a 440 yard gentle dogleg with no bunkering but a hazard/OB left and a large green that is receptive for a long iron approach. 8 is 350 with trees right and mounds left to a green that has a bunker in front and is angled to best receive shots from the right. 12 is 450 with bunkers right and trees left and the green is best approached from the left and is open in front. On 9 the creek is 270 out so only in play for very long players, the green is set on top of a hill with beautiful bunkering cut into the hill. If the green were placed at the bottom of the hill I think that would have been a total miss and a hole that lacks character. I remember arguing with you about 11 so I won't go there again but I like the hole.


Architects don't have unlimited land and parallel holes are unavoidable sometimes. Tillinghast varied the length, angles, and greens to make the holes distinct.

[V. Kmetz]

never once have I thought 7/10 and 8/12 are the same holes. 7 is a 390 yard sharp dogleg that is heavenly bunkered with a small severely sloping perched green. 10 is a 440 yard gentle dogleg with no bunkering but a hazard/OB left and a large green that is receptive for a long iron approach. 8 is 350 with trees right and mounds left to a green that has a bunker in front and is angled to best receive shots from the right. 12 is 450 with bunkers right and trees left and the green is best approached from the left and is open in front...

I too have played the course about 20x and looped it 8-12x.


We'll maintain simple disagreement about 9 and 11 (I think a consensus would side with me about their flagging status in the main) but your citing of details in these others obscures the more important experiential point of weakness I've cited... they are BOTH parallel 2 shot hole sets within a tight route in the middle of the course, they both feature the identical downhill tee shot in land form and character...(irrespective of the yardage of the hole)... And...again not that its a meaningful support point to the strength or weakness of our observations, but I think if we took 100 GCAers who've had multiple plays at Fenway, not one of them would cite any of 7-12 as one of the best 3 or 4 holes on the course, and if we asked them to pick the worst/least interesting hole of the course, a supra-majority would indeed cite one of these six...


Your "give him a break/parcel confines" final comment is well-taken, but then, isn't that -- and fairly so -- a legitimate factor in evaluating one GCA's work to another of that GCA works...and to that of other architects on other uncomfortable/unique parcels? And it is on that score, the comparative one, that I find this central portion of Fenway lacking (if not a donut hole of hyperbole) that it irritates me to see it mentioned/praised twice before WFE gets a singleton... annoys and offends my sense of these things when Siwanoy is never spoken of while a course of this (to me, glaring) deficiency is resurrected in a thread.

[Eric LeFante]

I would pick 4, 16, 17 as more mundane holes than 7 - 12. I don't think it matters that there are two dogleg lefts next to each other if there are different hazards on each side of the hole, the clubs you are approaching the green with are different, and the greens are different.


I don't think Fenway better than WFE but I think it's more interesting and enjoyable to play than Quaker Ridge. Fenway deserves a lot of praise because it has one of the best sets of greens in the Met area, the topography is better than its famous neighbors, and there is a very good mix of holes.

[V. Kmetz]

I agree with the plainer evaluation of 4...as the least special of that excellent opening six...and I also agree with the tepid assignment of 17 from the final third. In my first visits to the course 30-35 years ago, I shared your flat opinion of 16 too, but lately I've warmed to it more...I like the land right there, and I think it makes a nice counterpoint to the 15th.  Fenway is a sturdy course and I think it has four "world class/unique/ought be enjoyed, memorable Doak 9" holes (1,2,6,15) a few very strong Doak 6-7 holes (3, 5, 13,) and some standard average fare holes, plus one unfriendly unfun hole imo (11)


While again, God has blessed me with many visits, I'm a closer critic of Quaker myself, but perhaps the items that edge it past Fenway for me are:  the walk is a little gentler, the ending is more interesting and the one shot holes much more unique.