[Steve Lapper]

Just finished my stint as 1/2 of the oldest player/caddy combo in the MGA Am at Somerset Hills.

The course was set up from the tips(6659), par 71 and the pins were tight and tough. The rough was very stiff 10 feet either side of the fairways and the greens running an average 9.5-10.5. The field was as good as it gets back East with both youth and maturity abundant. What do you think the cutoff from 70 to 16 was?

146! Only three players broke par over 36. The field had rarely seen this track, but near unanimously loved it! The only gripe I heard was from a young caddy unaware of anything Tillinghast and he thought the greens were "gimmicky." Needless to say, he was no student of the game.

Most importantly, the course defended itself against par and technology by constantly confounding the best local players with strategic fairway turns, undulating greens and greenside bunkering. Would the pro's have eaten this up? Surely, but all sorts of US Mid-Am, US Am, et.al players found their entire games tested at this Tillinghast gem. At least a dozen remarked that this course was vastly superior to and more fun than nearby Baltusrol.

I, for one, have never seen SHCC shine so well and play so tough without slicking down the greens...This course really stood up and easily takes the 3rd best in NJ, no matter what Matt Ward thinks.


PS...We aged souls both retired after 54 to go lick our wounds!

[Matt_Ward]

slapper:

You need to come out of the 19th hole because you've had too many brews to see Somerset Hills as #3 in the Garden State.

I've played the course plenty of times when the greens are extremely quick but the course has a number of inferior holes -- how bout that dynamo of a closer?   Also -- the 17th is really a major league downer of a hole!

Yes, the course did well, but the field for the MGA Amateur has really never seen the course that much and course knowledge (where to miss your approaches) can come in handy on a few holes because of the sharp contours that exist.

If you want to talk about courses of relatively equal distance that are easily the equals of Somerset Hills try Montclair's #2 & #4 Nines, Forsgate / Banks, Hollywood or even ACCC.

Somerset Hills is a fine course but the trio of NJ's best starts with the troika of PV, Plainfield and the Lower at Baltusrol IMHO.

P.S. I'd be curious as where the pin was set on #2? I will say this though -- the 11th hole -- entitled "perfection." is one of the best mid-length par-4's not only in NJ but the entire metro region.

[Steve Lapper]

Matt,

   Already I'm done washing away my sorrows !! No question in my mind that NJ's first two are undisputed, but Baltusrol's Lower is just nothing more than a snoring long walk with little to prod the golfer's imagination. Most cognescenti like the Upper better anyway, but let's just say there's no accounting for taste...or lack of it!

    I strongly disagree with your description of 18(I disagree less on 17) as that closer has a blind uphill tee shot coupled with a tough green surrounded by well-hidden pot-like bunkers that ensure no better than par/bogey. Most of the field had a rough go of it. If you miss the fairway to the left...any left pin is near unaccessible.

    Most all the field had a practice session or two and Jeff Putnam, the club's reigning champ didn't even make the cut.  

Both days the pin on #2 Redan was left middle (1st day +4.5 and in that little hollow, making any putt from the front near impossible)(today, the pin was -0.5 and just slightly closer to the middle edge and slightly higher up). Each day the scoring average was 3.5.

11 is indeed great, but 13 is awesome with that green channel.

[Matt_Ward]

slapper:

With all accounting for tastes -- sorry I don't sip Merlot but prefer a cold brew -- you need to see what is happening with Baltusrol / Lower today.

Also -- if you miss left on #17 you're not the kind of player who will stick around long in the Met Amateur. A simple iron shot off the tee right and you have a tiny wedge into the green.

The 13th you mentioned does have a wonderful green but the intensity of the tee shot pales against what you have to do at #11.

One other thing there should be a contest for most lame ending hole -- CP's or SH's!

[ChipOat]

Have to go with Matt on this one:

SHCC is a truly wonderful golf course but:

1) Top 5-10 in the state but behind B'rol Lower AND Upper IMO (plus the others mentioned).

2) Partly because #18 is just not good finishing hole quality - shares this distinction with Inverness, Olympic, TOC, Prestwick, Cypress and Machrihanish so it's not alone.

[T_MacWood]

Slapper is entitled to his opinion...I know he is not alone in his appreciation of Somerset Hills. This illustrates the problem with 'rating' golf courses...Matt often lambasts SH after someone place it in the upper echelon of NJ golf, he does the same with Maidstone in NY...after he gets through bitch slapping these courses--along with Tillie and Willie Park--the unsuspecting might think we are talking about a couple of dog tracks.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chipoat,

I'd have to disagree with you regarding Inverness's finishing hole.

While it short, the green and surrounding area can be ferocious, especially under firm and fast conditions.

Slapper,

Sometimes the freshness of our experience taints or weights our views.

# 17 and # 18 are benign finishing holes.

I've always felt that the nines should be reversed, which would have you holding on for dear life with that last three hole stretch.

As a test, Ridgewood is far more stern.
The problem with Ridgewood is that golfers seldom, if ever play from the real back tees.  Many golfers never observe the real back tees, like on # 3 West, where it's left of the 2nd green, not right and 50 yards shorter.  The same with # 7 west and many other holes.

When a club is exclusive, and play minimal, I wonder how much scrutiny and critical analysis it actually receives.

I know many people who think that the 11th hole is one of the worst holes in golf.  An exageration I'm sure, to support their dislike of the hole.  Others are critical of the stretch from
#3 to # 6.

# 3 in the State seems a little lofty.

Tom MacWood,

Have you seen and played Somerset Hills ?

Have you seen or played Baltusrol lower ?

Do you have any comments to make on SH's position amongst other NJ courses, or, are you just making a personal attack on Matt Ward in an attempt to start another barroom brawl ?

Matt has his opinion, Slapper his.  They'll debate or argue it based on their perspectives of the various courses.
Let them speak on the issues and merits of the courses without you accussing anyone of impropriety.

Both individuals are knowledgeable and capable, they just might have a difference of opinion on SH.  No big deal.

[Matt_Ward]

Just need to say that I salute Somerset Hills in hosting the Met Amateur because so few competitors in the NY metro area have EVER played the course. I do agree with Tom Doak's assessment in "Confidential Guide" when he commends Tillie for getting the most out of small parcel of land.

Somerset Hills does have a number of fine holes but take the "Dolomites" hole. Here you have clearly artificial mounds that come out of the ground like teepees. If Rees Jones or some other modern architect (whose not on the most favored list) created such a thing they would be ridiculed for going beyond what the land provided.

Among the top draw holes at SH include the following:

1st hole -- demanding opening hole
2nd hole -- the classic redan -- speaks for itself
7th hole -- solid long par-4
8th hole -- demanding long par-3 to interesting green
9th hole -- I like it but don't see it as being one of Tillie's best par-5's

10th hole -- Might be better as a long par-4 than short par-5 but that's just my opinion
11th hole -- They don't call it "perfection" for nothing -- could be one of the finest mid-length par-4's we have in the USA. The tee shot is a major consideration and the approach / green complex is well done.
12th hole -- fine hole but I believe it's a tad overrated
13th hole -- good green but the tee shot element is a bit behind the approach part.
15th hole -- gets plenty of ink because of the green setting and still a solid hole but the 11th is more comprehensive in the challenge presented.
16th hole -- good par-3 don't miss to the left if pin cut tight to that side.

Overall -- I see about 11 holes at SH as being quite god and few as being excellent Tillie designs. However, and this is where many people often for get to list is the remaining holes. They are simply OK -- at best. The finishing two holes are also a major league letdown IMHO. I'm not advocating by any stretch that they need to be some back-to-back combo of 470 yards par-4's but it's a weak finish to a back nine that has plenty of character in so many spots. The 17th does have a good green but the tee shot element is purely pedestrian in its challenge. If you miss right you give yourself plenty of options. The 18th may be a "fun" hole for some but can someone please tell me how it rises anywhere near the level of other short par-4's that Tillie created -- try the famed 6th hole at Ridgewood's Center Course as just one better example. I'll say this again you can put the 18th at CP and SH together and the same result would be forthcoming -- a disappointing ending that could / should have been better.

NJ is very competitive landscape regarding courses and when I see such layouts comparable "short" layouts as Montclair (#2 & #4), Hollywood, Forsgate / Banks Course and Atlantic City CC somehow flying below the radar screen. I have to wonder if people are really studying these layouts with any intensity when compared to the ones that garner plenty of ink like Somerset Hills. In my own mind -- I see Somerset Hills being among the state's top 15 courses -- if I had to pick a number I'd say closer to #15 than #10.

Tom MacWood:

I never said Maidstone / Somerset Hills were dogtracks. I appreciate if I can put my own words in my mouth.

What I did say about these two courses is that they should not be rated as high as many others believe they should be. I have also stated reasons, as well as other courses, that merit closer examination and IMHO should be rated ahead of them for a host of reasons.

[T_MacWood]

I rate Matt's last post as far superior to his first two posts....although it appears he missed my point. Then again maybe he did understand it. Question: how do inanimate objects compete?  

I rate Pat's last post as tired, predictable and an irrelevant response to my post.  

If I were to rate the rating game, I'd give it 5.5, IMO it is highly overrated. And as raters go I rate Matt a 5.5, maybe a generous 6.0. I give Pat a 4.5.  

As a duo I give the NJ attack dogs a strong 7.0.  

[Matt_Ward]

Tom MacWood:

Where did I say that I don't "appreciate" Somerset Hills? Where did I say that SH and Maidstone are "dogtracks." I read English fairly well and I do "appreciate" when people quote me correctly. What I did say is that both courses are not as "great" as many believe IMHO. I did state reasons and other courses that often get little fanfare / attention (see listing provided).

I assess / rate courses and like many people who compare / contrast things (golf courses being among them) I like to see how they stack up against each other. As someone who follows the Jersey golf scene quite closely I have had the opportunity to play all of the key courses int he state a bunch of times and believe that while Somerse Hills is a fine course -- it's not #3 as slapper suggested.

Tom -- I am somewhat offended that Pat and I can only get a 7 on the "hounds of baskerville" rating you awarded.  

[T_MacWood]

Matt
My obseravtion: when there is an over-emphasis on the weaknesses of a SH or Maidstone or other like courses (to justify a ranking), one might get the impression that these courses are not damn fine despite their supposed weakness. The rating game often obscures the qualities of golf courses that may not be in a mythical top 100 or best in state.

Why is Baltusrol-Lower more interesting than Somerset Hills?

I may have under estimated Pat and your ranking, although a '7' is pretty damn good.

[Steve Lapper]

Matt & Pat...

  (Kinda like the way that sounds )


      Granted, the freshness of experience might elicit a shining review, but it also refreshes and can vaildate prior perceptions. SH remains one of Tillie's quirkiest, a marvelous use of small property (and thus should only face comparison to similarly sized courses. It would be blatantly unfair to make a straight up comparison of SH to Baltusrol Lower or Winged Foot West.
       SH is also a prime example of what historically weathered layouts evolve into as they defend against today's technological onslaught. It isn't long, not excessively hazardous, nor so penal that it rattles nerves over every shot. Instead, it is wonderfully shaped, contoured and formed 18 holes that never lacks architectual character. My argument for where it places in the state simply hinges on this character issue; B Lower, Ridgewood and Upper Montclair all lack the "C" factor for movement and hole differential. I will conced that Hollywood shines as well as Forsgate/Banks, but neither lacks a few "mediocre" holes and none have a perfect 18.

    17 & 18 are not the best fours, by any stretch, on the card. #5 is a better short four par and belongs in the same league as Matt's other picks. The green contours on 18 make it a worthy, NOT GREAT, finishing hole and the leaderboard of our areas best amateurs attests to that. The features, like the "dolomites" are indeed guilty of a slight double standard, but the fact is that at least they have been there for near 90 years and were not touched by the membership, thus staying true to Tillie's designs. We all know thats more than can be said of the tinkering done to other "Golden Agers."

    Matt's point about #11 is one that is equally supported or despised. It is just that unique a hole! His notes about playing #10 are accurate as is Pat's notion to flop the nines( many local blue-bloods might roll over in their graves) but it may well make for a better routing/finish.

     The bottom line, IMHO is that we have too few of these aged gems left to enjoy and marvel at their ability to resist the modern hitter. SH is indeed a course that is FUN to play every day, and while I love PVGC and respect the Baltusrols both, I would love to play SH (or a Plainfield or Hollywood)every day in all different conditions.

[Bruce Katona]

Jusyt my two cents in having played SH & Baltusrol Lower.; different feel for different courses given different site conditions.  Both are excellent in their own right. Which would I choose toplay on aregular basis. Somerset Hills. Why ?
Because as good of a test of golf Baltusrol is, Somerset is fun to play. It is a course thta is challenging and interesting on a small piece of land. The green contours and it's classic holes make it a gem to enjoy. Sometimes we tend to forget why we play nad enjoy the game; to walk and smell the roses while we play. Score does not always matter.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

You missed several key points.

Slapper declared that SH was # 3 in the State, not Matt or myself.

You jumped in on Matt Ward, like the attack dog you accuse others of being.

You've never played Baltusrol Lower or Upper.

You never answered the question with regard to whether you had played Somerset Hills.  Have you played Somerset Hills ?

Slapper,

I find that I give weight, intentional or otherwise to recent or fresh golf experiences.  Brad Klein and I had a serious disagreement about the rating process a few years ago over this same subject.  I felt that raters, like people who apply to buy a gun, should have a buffer period before they can render their opinion, letting the freshness of the recent experience time to percolate through their analytical process before rendering a final and complete verdict.

SH falls into my sporty category, BL falls into my championship category, but it could be sporty from from forward tees.  SH can never be in my championship category.
I'm sure that you are aware that a charity event is held every year and that the pros shoot 61, 62, 63.

I also feel that Ridgewood is a stronger golf course.

Somerset Hills is a wonderful golf course, fun to play, in a marvelous setting, but ranking it # 3 in NJ seems lofty.
Play Ridgewood, Mountain Ridge, Hollywood and some other courses, and then tell me, fresh off of those experiences,
if you still feel that SH is # 3.

Bkatona,

I might choose SH because it's less crowded and I could look at and try to execute a variety of shots without interfering with any other golfers.

I also used to like the spring water on the 12th hole, it was a neat convenience.

I'd rather hit the ball well and not score well rather than hit the ball poorly and score well.......
except if the round counts for something.

Score only matters if I'm not practicing.

[T_MacWood]

You missed several key points. I did?

Slapper declared that SH was # 3 in the State, not Matt or myself. is that a crime in NJ

You jumped in on Matt Ward, like the attack dog you accuse others of being. I was simply making an observation on the ills of rating....please re-read

You've never played Baltusrol Lower or Upper. as far as you know

You never answered the question with regard to whether you had played Somerset Hills.  Have you played Somerset Hills ? what is the relevance to my post on the evils of the rating game...try to stay on point....please don't revert to tired old tactics?

I give your last past a 3...I rate you the 11th best contributor on GCA from NJ.

Ranked 3 or 23, how does SH ranking alter the course as a 'wondeful golf course, fun to play, in a marvelous setting'?

[Steve Lapper]

Pat,

     I really would, for the most part, agree with your theory of letting time pass as a buffer to recent imprintation. However, in this case, my last experience at Somerset was the the seventh time I've been there (and first when the conditions were immaculate!) so I hardly feel it valid to paint my impression with the taint of freshness. I'd liken it to seeing a great work of art (i.e a Jasper Johns Flag or the Mona Lisa) again and really finding a fresh angle to appreciate it from.

    I did call SH the third best in the state. I have played Ridgewood and Mountain Ridge, (and Hollywood, although years ago). I do agree Ridgewood is indeed a stronger golf course, but not a more enjoyable or architectually complete one. Metedeconk is another stronger test as are both the Baltusrols. None of these, including Mountain Ridge possess the charm, elegance and artistic design that SH has. Hollywood may be the only true peer for these traits, but as I said, I'd like to see it again.

    Certainly, SH is limited to the sporty or lower grade championship quality. Against the pros, it is indeed defenseless, but so is Merion, NGLA, Sand Hills, Pine Valley, etc.. Any course that does not stretch past 7,100 yds these days is vulnerable to the pro's going out and ripping it up. It is for that exact reason that I feel SH earns its mettle and deserves its lofty rank. I simply can't think that a round at Ridgewood, Baltusrol Lower, Mountain Ridge, Due Process,  Canoe Brook, or anywhere other than PVGC or Plainfield ,(or maybe Hollywood) comes close.

      Both you and Matt are certainly the doyens of NJ golf, and both of you don't lack for an opinion about your styles and favorites....I have only been a NJ voter for 9 months, but grew up just across the Hudson, on a pair of  wonderful Tillinghasts, and feel equally qualified to review SH's qualities relative to the other tracks I've toured.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Noone ever said that SH wasn't a very good golf course and a fun experience.

Matt chose to disagree with Slapper's ranking of the golf course.  It was Slapper who inserted rankings into the discussion, not Matt, and Matt took issue with Slapper's ranking.

If you don't like rankings, address Slapper, who initiated ranking SH, PV and Plainfield.

If you've never played SH & BL or any other courses in New Jersey other than PV and Plainfield, then you have ZERO frame of reference for the discussion between Slapper, Matt, myself, or anyone else discussing the issue that Slapper brought up, rankings.

Shivas,

It's not that the finishing hole is an underachiever, it's that one could say that the last two or even three holes are underachievers.

If the nines were reversed, the last three holes would be great finishers.

I had thought, at one time, that the nines were reversed.
Can anyone shed light on the original play of the golf course.

Slapper,

I think the terrain and the dual personality of the front and back nines rather than all of the individual holes is what makes SH fun to play, while offering a reasonable challenge.

You should visit Mountain Ridge as Ron Prichard did and continues to do a wonderful job there.

Hollywood and Ridgewood have also benefited from recent work and will improve as additional work is completed.

But, I have figured out why you really rated SH # 3.

It's five minutes away from where you live  

[Matt_Ward]

I have found over the years that when people insert the word "fun layout" into the equation it's usage closely relates to how that person played that particular course and how "their" game handled the layout in question. Golf evokes plenty of these "self interest" situations IMHO.

Give you an example --

Many people enjoy the "fun" aspect of Fenway but you rarely hear them use the same word about Winged Foot / West because the demands and intensity are far greater and it's likely they didn't have as much "fun" as it relates to their own game and what they likely scored that day.

I see "fun" in all types of courses -- the sporty types like Somerset Hills and the more intense types like Bethpage Black, Winged Foot West and Baltusrol Lower.

Pat is 100% on target -- flip the nines at Somerset Hills and the ending three holes more than make up for the lame two holes you now have as the closing duo. I've yet to hear an argument on how the existing two closing holes, 17th and 18th, have ANY real characteristics that stand them on equal terms to the rest of the fine holes you play at SH. It's woefully apparent that they don't have the character and detailing you see with the others at the layout.

However, I still believe that SH will still lack the kind of "totality" you see with other courses of relatively the same length that have a much more comprehensive challenge and routing. Among them I have already cited:

Montclair GC (#2 & #4 nines) / West Orange -- superb Banks & Ross combination of holes and has greens no less the equal to SH.

Hollywood / Deal -- how does GolfWeek rate the course #57 two years ago and then drops it off it's Classic list entirely?

Forsgate (Banks Course) / Jamesburg -- underappreciated Banks gem in central Jersey. The green designs are first rate stuff and the combination of holes from start to finish rivals SH -- in my mind it's a tad better.

Atlantic City CC / Northfield -- solid restoration effort by Tom Doak. A layout that still packs a wonderful array of holes down by the Shore.

The issue for many is that too few have really seen / played Montclair and Forsgate. I know Pat has played all of them but because Somerset Hills has received enough visits over the years it often gets the limelight when other courses (see above) are no less capable in terms of their designs.

Tom MacWood:

Baltusrol / Lower has gone through significant modifications over the last few years -- especially with the upcoming '05 PGA Championship. You also have to understand that when you have a layout that is nearly 7,300 yards from the tips and has the qualities that Tillinghast imbuded it becomes a tough challenge for a course like Somerset Hills which maxes out to no more than 6,600 yards. Clearly, though courses with lesser distances can be better than longer courses but whereas SH has a number of inferior, or to say it in PC terms holes that are at best fair -- Baltusrol Lower has a scant few.

Let me say that for the purpose of ratings I would have Baltusrol Lower in my personal top 100 but more towards 100 than near the 75 mark. The course unfortunately suffered a great deal when in back-to-back Opens ('80 and '93) the four-round Open mark was either broken or tied. Having the Open record set by Nicklaus in '80 wasn't bad but having it tied by Lee Janzen I believe hurt the standing of the club in the minds of many.

The Lower has a fine starting hole converted from a weak par-5 to a long par-4 and the next six holes (right through to the 7th) are a wonderful mixture of long and short. The uphill 2nd often gets little fanfare and is a very interesting hole. The downhill 3rd is clearly one of the finest holes at the Lower and has been strenghthened to ensure the approach doesn't become too easy for the world's best.

I agree with Tom Doak that the 4th is a tad overrated but it's still a fine hole. The 5th is another mid-length par-4's that Tillie excelled in creating. The approach must be gauged perfectly because of the sweep in the green. The 6th and 7th are both top shelf long par-4's and they each demand different tee strategies. At the 6th you must be sure to hit the crown in the fairway or the ball will move towards trouble on either side. The 7th is also a fine dog-leg right that gives you plenty of options.

The low aspect of the Lower (no pun intended) is the holes in the rear portion of the property. I see the 8th and 9th as being fairly routine and pedestrian. The 10th is a stout long par-4 but the 11th and 12th are a bit less in terms of architectural heft. Once you step on the 13th tee -- through to the conclusion of the round the holes require a broad scale level of golf skill. How can one better the one-two punch you get with the 17th and 18th holes? The 17th is one of the USA's best long par-5's even with today's technology -- the chain reaction fairway bunker is simply dynamic in terms of what it does (FYI -- the hole will be increased for the '05 PGA I believe by about 20-30 yards). The 18th is also a good risk'n reward type hole because any number from 3 to 7 is in play.

I have never believed Baltusrol Lower to be on par with Winged Foot / West or Bethpage Black but the layout is not lacking for serious challenge and architectural qualities. I do believe that when the golfing universe sees the Lower again in full view during the '05 PGA there will be a changing of opinion regarding it's overall standing.

slapper sees SH as the 3rd best course in NJ and I respect his opinion but disagree with it because the sporty nature of SH is not comparable to the championship designed Baltusrol Lower. Think of it this way in boxing terms -- SH is a great middleweight fighter -- but the Lower is in the heavyweight division.

Slapper:

You make a fine case about course's that don't have the added aspect of length and how that perception is often used against courses of the type that are SH. However, I have mentioned a few courses that are equal to what SH plays in terms of distance and if you size them up against SH I believe each of them is no less equal to SH -- in fact, I believe at least three of them are better (Montclair, Forsgate & Hollywood).

Slapper this has been a good discussion minus the noise making and ill-informed chatter you see on a number of other posts. Suffice to say -- we agree to disagree. I enjoy Somerset Hills and like I said before I'm glad the club chose to host the MGA Amateur. But the appreciation of Jersey golf is often lost on many people who fail to acknowledge the architectural dynamics of a number of other courses. In my mind SH is in Jersey's 15 without doubt, however, to get into the top ten it would be pushing up against some wonderful layouts that are no less -- in fact -- better designs.

P.S. -- As an FYI -- Jersey Golfer in our latest poll conducted in 2002 of 50 raters had Somerset Hills as #10 in the Garden State.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

I'm sure you're aware that many greens at Montclair were softened due to increased putting speeds.  Four other holes were ruined, in my estimation, by the addition of tennis courts on the 1st nine.

If one visits Montclair today, they will not see the original, undulating or sloped greens on many holes, which is unfortunate.

I've always liked the 2nd & 4th nines, and felt they provided all the challenge you can handle.  I believe that Bobby Jones called it the longest short course in America.

[Steve Lapper]

Pat & Matt,

   Okay...I will publically plead to an affinity for short motoring distances and intact Tillinghast layouts. I will also agree, AGAIN, that Pat's idea of flipping the nines makes great sense! There, I've said it and I'm now free to go back to slandering everyone

   Sporty golf is rarely grinding golf, yet reserves the right to act difficult on occasion and that is exactly how this thread began. Watching the best of the local amateurs struggle to break par on a "sporty" track that wasn't tricked up was special. Being part of it was even more special. Nearly everyone had to go through multiple hole grinding stretches and that is usually reserved for and observed f-t at places like B-Lower, WFW and the Black course. To witness this on a "short & sporty" set-up was unique. Neither Forsgate (although a few holes certainly qualify) nor Montclair, and certainly not Mountain Ridge possess that same very steady degree of charm and sport. Hollywood likely does, but Ridgewood falls much closer to a "grinders" special.

    Now I am going to something unique here and again admit that I really do respect both Pat & Matt for their opinions and vast trove of experience, but I'll flip the coin on both and suggest that my relative rookie status as an informal NJ quasi-rater allows me to see past longstanding bias or favor and evaluate these courses with clarity and neutrality. I agree with both guys that Plainfield is undenialbly the 2nd best in the state...but third is at least wide open and I, for one, see it as SH.

    Matt's analogy to boxing is an acutely interesting one. I, and millions others, loved the era of Leonard, Hager & Hearns...all far more than the silly mug fests of the heavyweights. Boxing actually increased its national exposure during those days. Only the best parts of the Ali v. Liston, Ali v.Frazer, and Ali v. Foreman were worth getting excited for....Give me a Sugar Ray flurry of speed, agility and cunning any day!

Pat,

 PS...No matter that I live within minutes, they still won't let me join (for another few centuries) or play it enough!

   

[T_MacWood]

Matt
I appreciate your description, but I must say your description sounds like hundreds of other good golf courses. Certain at 7300 Baltusrol-L is no doubt a stiff test, but the question was why is it a more interesting golf course than Somerset Hills. Does it possess more natural advantages? more interesting hazards? more interesting putting surfaces? more interesting contours and undulations of the ground? a better set of short holes? more variety? Why is it more interesting?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward & Tom MacWood,

Baltusrol lower doesn't have to be played from 7,300, nor does one have to play it at par 70, choosing instead to play it as the members do at par 72.

From 7,300 it is a stern test, but from shorter yardages it can be sporty and fun.

The greens at Baltusrol aren't as benign as some would suggest.  There is plenty of pitch and contour on them.

The upper is also a very good golf course.
Again, you can choose your tees, from championship to the shorter, sportier course.  The greens on the upper will give you putting and approaching fits.

[GeoffreyC]

Matt

I think you misunderstand when some of us talk about sporty or fun courses and you made the comparison of Fenway vs. WFW.  

To my mind fun and sporty include variety with brutal testing holes that wear you down but give great satisfaction to yielding a par and downright joy at a birdie.  At the same time they include holes that can yield a great spread of scores from eagle to triple bogey.  At Fenway for instance the first and fifteenth are short par 4's of this category where walking away with anything but a par or better can nearly ruin the next hole or several holes that you play due to being pissed offf at the lost opportunity.  Take a double of triple and your round can be ruined.  I recall that your efforts on those two "sporty" short par 4's that you could drive pretty easily yielded high numbers on both!   THe next time you might make a two.  Isn't that part of the great fun )and frustration) of golf?

I love Bethpage Black as much as you or anyone else but it beats me up most days and isn't much fun except for the few great shots each round.  By the same token I appreciate WFW and Baltusrol Lower but they do not give me my love for the game. Maybe this speaks to my game and I hope I objectively rate all courses but I love sporty fun courses.  Maybe that's also why I love all the thrilling shots at Yale.

[Bruce Katona]

Pat Mucci: Score matters to a degree. If we all could shoot the scopes we would like, we all would have a diffeent profession. I have also played Ridgewood, which is a stiffer test of golf than Somerset and enjoyed it just as much. Scope was secondary, but more than respectable (82 from the blue tees). What I didn't like about Ridgewood is the encroachment of tree canopies into the playing corridors. this isn't the way Tillie designed the course, but the members like/want it that way. Pine Valley is an experience all to itself. Again, score is secondary, regardless of the day's negotiated stakes. Soaking in what Crump did on that piece of South Jersey was wonderful.

If Somerset were not a special course, The Boys and Girls Club of Newark would have a tough time filling the Pro spots in thei annual outing held there. The pro's who come to play enjoy the day. In fact more than a few have asked to be invited back because of the course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bkatona,

I'm not so sure that many of those trees weren't incorporated by AWT into his design.
If Cdisher could find an early aerial it might clear up the matter.
When was the last time you played Ridgewood ?

Do you feel that trees had become invasive to the lines of play at PV over the last 50 years ?

Do you feel that the trees on the 11th hole at SH are invasive to the lines of play ?  How about # 15 ?
 
Were you aware that AWT didn't create the 10th hole at SH with the green in its current position ?

Lastly, the pro's come to SH for one or two reasons and I don't believe that the golf course is one of them.

Somerset Hills is a wonderful golf course, but ranking it # 3 in NJ may be a little lofty.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()