[Phil Benedict]

These bunkers are huge.  Does this give the course it's character or would it be just as good with more understated bunkering?

http://www.golf.com/golf/gallery/article/0,28242,1903872,00.html

[Joe Bausch]

My issue is the bunkers that have been added recently. 

I give you exhibit A, from the left FW bunker on No 9:



And exhibit B, from the left FW bunkers on No 13:

[Emil Weber]

It does give the course a certain character but I'm not overly keen. The Jones bunkering is very repetetive and overdone.

[Gary Slatter]

Bethpage's bunkers are not overdone - they are big, bold, brash and locally authentic, they represent the neighbourhood well.

Personally I really dislike the aerial look, from golfer level they are not too bad.  Certainly don't look natural, and they are hard not to notice.

Overdone?  Isn't Joan Rivers from NY?

 

[Phil Benedict]

Gary,

I'm  not sure you are helping Bethpage with the Joan Rivers analogy.

[Gary Slatter]

Gary,

I'm  not sure you are helping Bethpage with the Joan Rivers analogy.

I don't think Bethpage needs my help - in fact I doubt they'll take anyone's help.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil B:

The bunkers (the original ones) fit the scale of the property -- bitesize bunkers would not work well with the overall size of the property. Few courses I have played can match the scale and immense nature of what the Black provides.

I do agree w Joe that some of the new ones -- the 9th and 13th holes ome quickly to mind are just too new to look like they fit in naturaly.

[Joe Bausch]

Perhaps it is worth to re-post the graphics I put up yesterday and earlier today on the "Phil Young's Nuts" thread comparing the greenside bunker shapes (and additions) from an early aerial to now:

[Jim_Kennedy]

Overwrought.

[tlavin]

They certainly are Brobdingnagian, but they do seem to fit the massive size and feel of the property on which the golf course sits.  I don't know enough about other Tilly courses to compare these to others done by him, but if they've grown in size and number, I'm sure it was purposely done in an effort to add drama and difficulty.  Methinks they succeeded.  I think they look fabulous.  I especially love the look of the bunkering on the 4th hole.  That just might be one of the best looking three shotters around.

[Sean_A]

They certainly aren't my bag, but what I notice more than anything from Joe's post is that the new bunkering has on several occasions compromised what was meant to be happening at the green.  Look carefully and you will see several bunkers which are meant to eat into the green or create optimum angles of approach.  Instead what we have now are loads of saucer greens in which the bunkering doesn't have the penal or strategic impact they should have.  Either way, way too many bunkers especially considering the land is meant to be quite hilly and the course is part of a state park system.   The more I see of this place the less interested I am in it.

Ciao

[Paul Carey]

Joe,

Do you know what year the "early" pictures were from?

The new bunker on #9 does not look good....

Paul

[Joe Bausch]

Do you know what year the "early" pictures were from?

The new bunker on #9 does not look good....

The aerial of the entire park is framed and in the clubhouse.  But I just can't remember the year and I'm having trouble tracking down my original non-cropped photo where I think the date may be visible.  But I'm fairly confident it is from around 1940.

[Mike_Cirba]

Yikes...what is it with Rees and his artistic sensibilities?   

I daresay they look horrendous from the air, but in fairness, they do look quite a bit less offensive visually from the terra firma.

In any case, I think Jim Kennedy's "overwrought" is as accurate a description as can be made.

[Cristian]

I notice the bunker style being totally different; never mind that there are a few new ones. They are all semi Mackenzie-ish semifree-formish, like it if you want, but they do not resembele what used to be there at all; fairly rounded modest shapes of sand.

I can't imagine the course looking anything but totally different from its original. The original designer, if alive would hardly recognize the course. My only question: WHY? I understand lengthening and toughening up for pro tournament play, but I cannot understand totally changing the style, the look and feel of a course. (Unless it looked like this in the first place, but I doubt that.)

[Anthony_Nysse]

The new #14 green looks completely out of place with the other 17 greens.

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Pine Tree GC
Boynton Beach, FL

[Mike Sweeney]

http://www.reesjonesinc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=97

Here is a link to before and after of Rees. Down towards the bottom are three holes from BB>

[David Stamm]

They certainly aren't my bag, but what I notice more than anything from Joe's post is that the new bunkering has on several occasions compromised what was meant to be happening at the green.  Look carefully and you will see several bunkers which are meant to eat into the green or create optimum angles of approach.  Instead what we have now are loads of saucer greens in which the bunkering doesn't have the penal or strategic impact they should have.  Either way, way too many bunkers especially considering the land is meant to be quite hilly and the course is part of a state park system.   The more I see of this place the less interested I am in it.

Ciao

For once, there is something Sean & I agree w/ about bunkers.


One day, I would like to see the course, but the more and more I see, the more of a chore it looks like to play. I'm sure it's a worthy US Open venue and very challenging test of golf, but it doesn't look fun to me. In addition, Rees looks like he went overboard when I compare these aerials.

[Matt_Ward]

David, et al:

The situation with BB goes beyond the bunker style / configuration / placement, etc, etc.

When BB was "updated" prior to the '02 US Open the course was narrowed way too much in my mind. This effected angles of play into the greens. In addition, the course was already long enough - what people don't realize that when you see BB on TV or through aerials alone you don't get the full sense of the scale of the place and how the players have to hit so many approaches to targets that sit high above them -- this lone element has a way in adding to the "effective" playing yardage -- case in point the demanding 15th with its green high above the fairway, to name just one example. Few muni's offer this type of situation to the degree found at BB.

Rees Jones did clearn-up plenty of the bunkers but at the same time their actual look and presence became less and less of what a Tillinghast style is and more of what Rees and his team believe they should be viewed.

I also have issue with the additional bunkers added at #9 and #13. In both cases -- they clearly don't look like they work with the pre-existing others. On the flip side I like a few bunkers Rees did add - the rear one at the par-3 8th is a fine one to note when viewing the telecast and when the pin is placed in the rearest position this weekend.

BB is a fine course -- unfortunately the muscle-oriented dimension has gone into a super-sized portiions and for anyone to play it well you do need a long game of significant depth to have a fighting chance. I'd like to see the course widened a bit more to encourage the kind of drives one needs to play the course and for the layout to revamp the 18th so that the closiing hole can be the kind of fantastic short par-4 that the course is missing.

[Joe Bausch]

http://www.reesjonesinc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=97

Here is a link to before and after of Rees. Down towards the bottom are three holes from BB>

Wow, Mike, that web site is simply amazing.  Those 'before' and 'after' photos remind of those commercials late night on cable where you get before and after weight loss photos. 

[Mike_Cirba]

http://www.reesjonesinc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=97

Here is a link to before and after of Rees. Down towards the bottom are three holes from BB>

It's amazing how he's able to make all of those different courses in all of those different locales from all of those different architects look just like Rees Jones courses!   

[Mike Sweeney]

http://www.reesjonesinc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=97

Here is a link to before and after of Rees. Down towards the bottom are three holes from BB>

It's amazing how he's able to make all of those different courses in all of those different locales from all of those different architects look just like Rees Jones courses!   

Mike,

I just finished dinner with Phil Young, and you give the same amount of credit to Rees Jones at Bethpage as Moriarity gives to CB Mac at Merion. I will let Phil put in the pieces, but Rees is just a piece of the Bethpage puzzle:





For the Philly guys!

[Mike_Cirba]

Mr. Sweeney,

Please tell Mr. "Far and Sure" Young  hello and have a great week for me and please let him know that I don't give Rees Jones "original design" credit for anything at Bethpage Black except the over-the-top look of bunkers that were already at the edge of Tillinghast's stylistics, as well as credit for adding whole new bunkers, bunker shapings, tees, green extensions, and angles with no historical relevance to anything ever designed by Tillinghast.

Other than that, I'm sure it's a pure and pristine restoration....no matter how many new changes and additions to the course Rees Jones implements each go round.    

I love Phil and his heart is in the right place, but I swear at some point he really needs to see that some of these changes are not consistent with Tillinghast or his design philosophies and/or artistic sensibilities.

Other than that, I'm sure Rees has done more good than harm to the site, although I sure do miss the old rugged, blended look of the place and I'm sure that's part of why Phil is erring on the side of Rees as savior of the course.

I think I take a more nuanced view.   While giving him credit for his help in getting some much needed changes and upgrades accomplished, it's also ok to sometimes say something sucks when it does.

[Phil_the_Author]

What Mike is refering to, besides a wonderful fun and lively dinner and discussion by one and all, is that a number of the changes including the bunkers WERE NOT DONE BY REES! Yet he is "blamed" for everything that someone sees that they simply don't like. Examples of bunkers that Rees did not design or inspire are the new one on 5 (most haven't noticed a new far front left side bunker since 2002), 9 (though Rees would do the design it was suggested and decided by others as needed) & 13 the new left fairway bunker.

The point is that make sure that one places proper blame where it may belong... that is if there is blame to be assigned!

[Mike Sweeney]

The point is that make sure that one places proper blame where it may belong... that is if there is blame to be assigned!

Tom Doak said in his interview:

When you do things our way, there is just no way to do the credits “properly.”  I believe it was the same way back in the Golden Age, which is why I have so little patience for those Golf Club Atlas threads which try to rewrite the history of who was primarily responsible for certain classic courses.  Even the guys who did the work would disagree about that.

Mike,

The modern day Bethpage seems to work similar to the historical Merion - that is by Committee.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()