[Patrick_Mucci]

Mr Hurricane,

I found the par 3's at TN repetitive in distance and feel from the back tees, although, I did like # 6.

I thought #8 and # 15 were clones of each other, and # 13 just a terrible looking hole with all of the stonework in front and to the sides of the hole.  Had they just provided the waterfall behind the green, and let a stream meander in front of the hole, it would have been more attractive.  Your entire view on that hole is of masonry.

Did you find that the par 5's also had a redundant fronting feature, water ?  I liked # 2 and # 5, but # 12 and # 16 left me with deja vu all over again.  I wish they had taken all the reeds and rocks out of the streams, it would have looked better.

With respect to WFW, other than # 6 and # 11 where did you hit 3-wood from the tips ?

Did you play the new, seperate, back tee on # 2 ?
What did you think of the new tee on # 12 and how do you think the hole will play in 2004 and 2006 ?

What did you think of the open look at WFW, without all the trees.

[Jim Franklin]

Patrick -

First, we'll start on TN. I thought #8 and #15 played completely different as I hit a cut 3iron to 8 and drew a 7iron to #15. The holes may look similar, but I felt they called for different shots. I agree that a stream would have made 13 superior, but I still like the masonry work that they did. I thought #12 was a great long tight hole while #16 provided more room to drive the ball. As for the reeds and rocks, I thought it was visually appealing. Different strokes for different folks.

As for WFW, I hit 3wood on #s 1, 2, 4, 8, 11, 14, 15, and 18. I hit 3iron on 6 and my caddie said hit 3wood on 16, but the other caddie said driver and I blasted it through the fairway so should have hit 3wood there too. Not to toot my horn, and DCarroll can attest(although I am not as long as he is), I can hit the ball fairly long. We did not play the new tee on #2 and the new tee on 12 will be a brute. Some short hitters may not reach the fairway. I do like the look with fewer trees. I can't wait to play it again when it is done.

[david h. carroll]

I can certainly attest to Mr. Hurricane's length and his candor re: my own length

[Matt_Ward]

Just reading the last few posts makes me wonder how Winged Foot / West does not get even MORE respect than it does. The tree removal program was done quite well and the upgrades that are being made / carried out for the '06 Open will once again keep the West in the forefront as a premier championship venue.

Like I said before -- people concede WF/ West's greatness but it's more of nod than a joyful embrace. The course gets more respect nationally from the raters / reviewers I talk to than it gets from the locals in the Met area. Interesting dynamic!

[Jim Franklin]

I'm not a local so maybe that's why I liked it so much. You never know when you'll be invited back so you better enjoy the first time!

[Matt_Ward]

Mr. Hurricane:

I'm glad you spoke with candor.

Winged Foot / West gets the respect of many but few are really overjoyed in playing it. I'm guessing the sheer demands and intensity are simply too much for too many players. Yet, if yo take these players to a Fenway you get a much more positive reaction because the sheer demands are not as rigorous (although Fenway is not a slouch layout by any means).

The East, on the other hand, is a fine course but gets big boost by being the little brother that benefits from having big brother next door. The demands are certainly present but someone will have to explain to me how the East at Winged Foot merits a top 50 billing by GD but Fenway is no where to be found in their top 100. Very interesting indeed.

[Bob_Farrell]

If I remember right Wykagyl is the one with the 19th hole

BF

[Jim Franklin]

Bump for Mr Mucci

[Scott_Burroughs]

Larry,

Don't forget Bethpage (Black) on that list for LI.

[david h. carroll]

Scott--I assume you were on vaca. last week!!

[Jim Franklin]

Larry -

Atlantic too for the LI team.

[Scott_Burroughs]

DCarroll,

Yes and Earthlink wasn't letting me post to my web site last night, so no AOTD until they let me on.

[Nigel_Walton]

Mr Sebonac and Mr Ward,
I must respectfully dissent from your view of Anglebrook, which I had the opportunity to play recently. It is a one dimensional, target golf course on unsuitable terrain. Truly, no one would be the worse had it never been built. Golf Digest must be mad to have it in the top 20 in the state.

[Matt_Ward]

Nigel:

With due respect -- you need to re-read what I actually wrote -- not what you t-h-i-n-k I wrote concerning Anglebrook.

Where did I say it most certainly belongs in the top ten in Westchester? I said I'd like to look at the course again but I would think it would likely be in a second ten of courses.

You say the terrain is unsuitable for golf -- have you checked the terrain of a good many courses in Westchester? Plenty of them are quite hilly and I don't view Anglebrook being that much severe -- if at all. I don't doubt the course has plenty of matter-of-fact holes and that the competition in the county is quite intense. For that reason I said it would behoove me to play it again to pass on a final judgement.
 

[Jeff Fortson]

Long Island cleans Westchester's clock.

Don't get me wrong, Westchester has some keepers, but "Strong Island" is the most power packed area of great golf courses in this country.

Jeff F.

[Scratch_Nathan]

Wow!  I just can't get over how Trump National can be considered among the best (Top 1, 5 or 10) in Westchester.  Nomatter the fine conditioning and how many times Trump says it's the best course in NY STATE, I just dont buy it.  It's a nice $40 million course, no doubt.

I'll admit, #'s 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18 are all good golf holes

A solid front nine...  I'll downplay the loss of continuity from crossing the road twice, not to mention the O.B., road and homes to the right of #4 which I think is a little abrasive.  Also don't love the downhill dogleg #7 with a green complex that I think is quite a bit tricked up.

The back nine is another story.  In my opinion, there are three very poorly designed holes on the back (let's take the limited acreage out of the mix as an excuse)...and that doesn't even include the casino-esque Waterfall hole!  The par 5 12th and 16th holes offer no shotmaking options (save "go" or "no-go") and both have big sink or swim carries that are far too demanding for bogey golfers to negotiate fairly.  No bailout on the green side of the carries, either.  I think the par 4 14th is a joke with the tall trees repelling even well struck shots into the left side of this green.  Just don't see the appeal in a hole that eliminates shot values from more than half the green.  The waterfall hole is truly spectacular (in an Atlantic City kind of way) but the design of the hole itself doesn't do much for me without the manufactured scenery.

Anyway...enough with my rant.  Just my opinion.  I grew up in Westchester, and here's my Top 10.  I've only included courses I've played:

WFW
WFE
Quaker Ridge
Westchester West
Hudson National
Fenway
Century
Brae Burn
Sleepy Hollow
Whipporwill

[Patrick_Mucci]

Scatch Nathan,

I had basically the same reaction, although I am surprised by the lofty position you gave # 11.

Did you play it from the back tees, through the eye of the needle ?

I liked the front nine, but thought the back nine was lacking.

[Jim Franklin]

Boy, you guys are tough! I liked #7 and thought the green, while difficult if you are on the wrong side, was fine. I have only played there once so I have not had the fortune of being on the wrong side of the green. I thought #10 was a decent downhill par 4 to ease you into your back 9, but I do see your point on #14. I happened to nut a drive down the right side and had a good view of the green whereas my playing partners did struggle down the left.

Patrick -

You never commented on my reply to your question of how many 3woods I hit at WFW. And by the way, since I am new to this site, I do enjoy your posts.

[corey miller]

Scratch and Hurricane- Somewhere on this site Pat gave a pretty comprehensive critique of his round at Trump National.  it is well worth reading.  

Scratch- I give Hudson a Doak 5.5.  I have been questioned on this  ranking in the past.  It is a tough walk and a difficult course but nothing truly unique.  What is the best hole?  I question a ranking above Fenway and Sleepy. I have not seen the others.  Since I am most familiar with Sleepy,as they are nearby, which of the pars threes at Hudson 2,8,11,13,16 are better than any of the four at Sleepy 3,7,10,16 all which play through some rather exciting terrain?  

I think Sleepy has a lot of "solid holes" is a better walk in the park and has better views than the hudson ones everyone raves about.  It beats hudson pretty handily hole by hole.  Fenway is even more of a knockout.  

[Scratch_Nathan]

Love discussing Westchester golf (except that my home club is undoubtedly the best course in Rockland County and I can't rank it with these).  Only wish I'd played Puchase (ever) and Fenway (more recently) to complete my Westchester ranking.

Corey Miller - I have very particular plus/minus opinions about Hudson which I'm sure will have dissenters.  Generally, I think Hudson is an amazing "environment for golf."  It has a priceless intangible feel that brings so much to a round of golf.  I think it has a remote and almost "creepy" up on that hill.  You can't buy that.  Anyway, GCA is a forum for discussing golf course architecture and HN certainly has it's achievements and failures.  Generally, I think the par-3s are mediocre.  Except for #16, I'm unimpressed with what Fazio accomplished. #s 2, 11 and 13 are huge underachievers but not necessarily bad holes.  #8 is aesthetically striking but I think it could have been so much better.  For me, it's only a good hole from the way-backs.  Sleepy's par 3s absolutely crush HN's, no doubt. On the other hand, I've got to hand it to Fazio on how well he created some excellent 4 and 5 par holes on this billy-goat property.  My favorites, in order are #10, 14, 6, 18, 4, 15, 12.  Hudson is a uniquely soul satisfying experience and perhaps I'm giving that aspect more credit than I should.  It's not a good walking course which I also feel is very important.  Sleepy gets the edge there as well.  I guess I prefer the hairy and rugged natural feel of HN to Sleepy Hollow. I also prefer the way the routing at HN traverses the steepest hills vs the way Sleepy does it. They are both excellent and I certainly enjoy teeing it up at either place.  Purely on the clinical merits of golf hole quality, Hudson might move a few spots down my list.  I acknowledge this my "environment for golf" credit is a tad hypocritical with my comments on Trump #13.  Sue me.

Fenway is an entirely different story.  Admittedly, I haven't played it since the renovation, however, I always felt the property a little ill-defined for my taste.  Too many long views of other holes (and other golfers) that distract from the task at hand.  I definitely need a fresh look since it's been at least 8-10 years since I set foot on the place.

Pat Mucci -
Trump National #11.  Hmmm.  I do like it quite a bit.  Think it might be the single most unique hole on the property (save the waterfall).  The string of bunkers up the right are pretty striking (and help keep stray slices from falling off the earth) and I like the challenge of that exacting second shot onto the vicious narrow back to front green.  Tough hole.

Mr. Hurricane -
Really dont like the green complex on TN #7 because of the way the steep, canted fairway connects to the green.  It seems to be designed to allow a run up, however I think it's not angled in such a way to bounce an accurate low ball onto the surface.  Why waste time designing what looks like an alternate avenue, if it won't play that way?  If you need the air game, don't mislead the golfer. As it is now, the slope would punish a low ball and the high ball that lands in the front by bouncing it over the back.

How about choices for the best closer in Westchester?  Is it Knollwood, WFW, Hudson, Anglebrook?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Greg,

I've never played Manhattan Woods, but what are your thoughts on another Rockland Co. course, Spook Rock?  Once was on the GD affordable public lists and isn't bad.

[Scratch_Nathan]

Scott -

I'm a big fan of Spook Rock.  RTJ Sr. protege Frank Duane designed it (also Brae Burn in Purchase, NY) and it's very strategically solid.  A good piece of property with some moderate elevation change.  Standout holes for me are #s 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16.  

Only negative about the place is that they're not particularly welcoming to folks who aren't from Suffern.

Let me know if you're going to be in the area and we can tee it up at MWGC.  I'd love to meet Mr. AOTD.

Scratch

[Scott_Burroughs]

Yes, they did jack up the price for out of towners, just like Torrey Pines has always done (and now Bethpage), but it wasn't unreasonable, especially for a Metro-area course, and I didn't feel unwelcome, except for the cash-only rule.  I think it was $41 for non-residents and $17 for residents in summer of 1997.

#3 and #12 were good short par 4's.  Needed to take out sapling trees right of #3 tee shot.  Drive on #5, trying to cut corner over bunkers was fun, too.

[Scratch_Nathan]

I always liked #3 but not a big fan of #12 because it is so dead-straight and absent of much interest in the fairway.  Very difficult green, though, similar to the steep back-to-front slope on #18.

[DTaylor18]

Spook Rock is a good value, but it is hard to get a decent tee time, especially on the weekdays, unless you live in the town, or if you're Lawrence Taylor (seen by almost anyone who's ever played there).  Definitely some tight holes.  #11 was always annoying to me because the tee shot was blind down the hill ,so there was always a back up waiting for people to ring the all clear bell, which of course never happened half the time.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()