[Mark Fedeli]

Not in its current iteration, at least. I'd say it's merely very very good, which is certainly worth something.


The movement of the land is exceptional, and does quite a bit of the heavy lifting. The bunkers are bold and make for a dramatic round, for sure. The playing corridors are massive, and it's hard not to be impressed by the scale. But otherwise, almost all strategy has been removed from the course with the current renovation.


It's hard to think of a single hole where even a single digit handicap has any options. Every single hole calls for a drive as long and straight as possible, and an approach as high and straight as possible. Any optionality that was originally offered has been removed. Any feature that allowed mere mortals to make a strategic decision is gone. The only real strategy left is, at best, trying to hit a certain half of a narrow fairway.


Leaving the par 3s out of it, holes #1, #4, #5, #6, #7, #10, #11, #12, #13, #15 and #16 are bastardized versions of the originals. Holes #2 and #18 were never very good to begin with. Only #9 seems to still play for amateurs like it was intended.


TGIF.

[Brian Finn]

So, would you say the vast majority of the issue boils down to grassing lines? 

If yes, do you think the upcoming Ryder Cup offers any hope that fairways might be widened substantially?

On Derek Duncan's podcast, Rees Jones implied that this was possible, as the venues have been set up (more so than ever) to benefit the home team's strengths.  With wide fairways and the rough cut relatively short, that course becomes highly scoreable for top players, particularly when taking into account that the greens are mostly relatively flat. 

Perhaps I took away too much from a brief comment from Rees Jones, but I am very hopeful that they begin preparing the course for 2024 as soon as this year's PGA is completed.  It would make so much sense for everyday play, and allow for tweaks over the next 4 years by the grounds crew and US side. 

[Mark Fedeli]

So, would you say the vast majority of the issue boils down to grassing lines? 

If yes, do you think the upcoming Ryder Cup offers any hope that fairways might be widened substantially?

On Derek Duncan's podcast, Rees Jones implied that this was possible, as the US venues have been set up (more so than ever) to benefit the home team's strengths.  With wide fairways and the rough cut relatively short, that course becomes highly scoreable for top players, particularly when taking into account that the greens are mostly relatively flat. 

Perhaps I took away too much from a brief comment from Rees Jones, but I am very hopeful that they begin preparing the course for 2024 as soon as this year's PGA is completed.  It would make so much sense for everyday play, and allow for tweaks over the next 4 years by the grounds crew and US side.

That would be fantastic, but I'd be shocked. Let's hope they come to their senses. Black could have zero rough and it would still be a serious challenge for 99% of golfers. Except at least it'd be fun and thoughtful.


It does come down to mowing lines and rough height, which are kept year-round in basically the same set-up as the pros will see next week. Hole after hole you are being brutally forced to make only one decision and play only one way. If that isn't enough to knock a course down from great to good, I don't know what else would.


There are also some misplaced, newer bunkers. On 13, the first bunker on the left of the fairway is new. That used to be fairway and was basically a bailout for anyone who didn't want to challenge the huge tree that overhangs on the right. From that left bailout area, though, the placement of your second shot amongst the second set of bunkers up ahead (and the corresponding depression) was infinitely more difficult.


#10 also has newer bunkers extended further down the right side, where there used to be fairway. What might've been the widest fairway on the course, in fact. It appears players were encouraged to try to fly the right side bunkers and have a better angle to the green from the right side. Now it's just more long and straight down the middle.

[PCCraig]

So, would you say the vast majority of the issue boils down to grassing lines? 

If yes, do you think the upcoming Ryder Cup offers any hope that fairways might be widened substantially?

On Derek Duncan's podcast, Rees Jones implied that this was possible, as the venues have been set up (more so than ever) to benefit the home team's strengths.  With wide fairways and the rough cut relatively short, that course becomes highly scoreable for top players, particularly when taking into account that the greens are mostly relatively flat. 

Perhaps I took away too much from a brief comment from Rees Jones, but I am very hopeful that they begin preparing the course for 2024 as soon as this year's PGA is completed.  It would make so much sense for everyday play, and allow for tweaks over the next 4 years by the grounds crew and US side.

Hazeltine cut all of its rough down for the Ryder Cup. It was very short, maybe an inch and half or two inches. Apparently the membership loved it and wanted them to keep the rough short going forward. However the golf committee or whomever decided to grow the rough back up. Not sure if that is due to maintenance costs or wanting the course to be difficult.

[Thomas Dai]

What are the other Bethpage courses like?
atb

[Mark Fedeli]

What are the other Bethpage courses like?
atb

Very solid to varying degrees. A lot of interesting holes out there on all of the 4 other courses. In fact, I think each of the other 4 courses has more purely "interesting" holes than Black. Black has the big, beautiful, brawny holes that all of the others lack, and is full of huge challenges and heroic carries — but the other courses have more holes that make better direct use of intimate, human-scale features. The kind of features that force you to make a decision and actually pull off a unique or specific kind of shot. They are just good, fun, public golf courses in decent shape.


The only hole on Black that I would consider fun or interesting in the way I just described is #6 — especially the original version, which allowed for a bailout drive to the right that was countered by having a totally blind approach to a well-protected green located far down a steep hill. Not a ton of blind downhill approaches out there.

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks Mark.
Atb

[Kalen Braley]

So i'm looking at the aerial on Google Maps.

I count 15 of 18 greens that are pinched in with bunkers on the approach, both left and right.
And 11 of 18 greens which requires an aerial approach.

I can understand why its difficult, but is this how the course was originally designed?

[Mark Fedeli]

So i'm looking at the aerial on Google Maps.

I count 15 of 18 greens that are pinched in with bunkers on the approach, both left and right.
And 11 of 18 greens which requires an aerial approach.

I can understand why its difficult, but is this how the course was originally designed?

For the most part, yes. I think 11 and 18 are the only two greens where bunkers were added to a side of the green that previously did not have them, on the right and left, respectively. But for sure many greens appear to have been shrunken and the bunkers that were there made larger.

[Wayne_Kozun]

@Mark - If Phil Young was still around he would bite your head off!

[Nick Ribeiro]

I played it last year. Was AWESOME! As described above VERY hard. The course, like many of the others in the top 100, is not what it was in 1936. It is a championship course for the modern day tour pro constantly tweaked to assure we get the right champion when hosting a major. That player must hit heroic shots and execute all day. I'm not sure why its such a bad thing?


What top ranked classic today is anywhere remotely close to original design? Maybe Newport CC? That is the only one I can think of? The rest have been expanded in every direction and lengthened 1,000 plus yards. I think it's great to have the black course at bethpage as an option for us regulars to see how far our games are from the pros. The vision for the course is very clear, printed on the sign on the steps before you step on to the first tee box. There was a previous thread about how long the signs been there. Decades....


I am pretty sure the PGA or the decision makers at Bethpage are not going to direct Rees to widen the fairways because you want room for stray tee shots. There is nothing wrong with variety in courses, people flock to Bethpage because its hard and requires shot making. It's nice to have a course that is unique like that. You can go to a million other courses that will give you fairways forever wide with a narrow strip of rough and another fairway from another hole next to that because they've removed all the trees...

[Mark Fedeli]

Nick, to each his own. But other than being very hard, and full of thick rough and narrow fairways (something any asshole on a lawn mower could accomplish), what do you think makes it great? Surely forcing the same shot over and over isn’t a desirable trait?


I’ll let others comment on your assertion that no classic top-ranked course resembles its original form.

[Nick Ribeiro]

Not in its current iteration, at least. I'd say it's merely very very good, which is certainly worth something.


The movement of the land is exceptional, and does quite a bit of the heavy lifting. The bunkers are bold and make for a dramatic round, for sure. The playing corridors are massive, and it's hard not to be impressed by the scale. But otherwise, almost all strategy has been removed from the course with the current renovation.

[/quote

The playing corridors are massive, impressed by scale, then next post narrow fairways. Which is it? The course is not a great course but the land is exceptional...I would say your a bit confused but understandably so. In my experience last year I would agree the fairways are really not that narrow but the holes (especially the long par 4s) are daunting from the tee. The scale of the property do make the holes look narrow even though they are fair. The rough we can agree on is brutal, by design. Tons of heroic shots all over the course. The original intent was a hard course, inspiration came from Pine Valley. There are many similarities there as well, but Pine Valley is another course you would most likely not consider great if you don't like hard, narrow holes, lots of heroic shots, forced carries everywhere, and tree lined private holes.

Bethpage ranked 37th by golf digest for a reason. Resistance to Scoring is an obvious strong category for the course. Some pros, particularly Tiger, have praised the design. I haven't heard him elaborate but I assume because he wants players to go against him and have to hit the shots. No 60 yard wide fairways and "options" to hide errant tee shots... The bunkers are cut in close to the greens and designed for the ball to roll toward the middle. Some of the bunkers are really large which could leave you with 30/40/ even 50 yard bunker shots.

The course is hard, by design, like the sign says. It was intended to be hard from the beginning according to Ron Whitten and I trust he knows what hes talking about. What was hard back then simply isn't hard for the best in the world now. Changes are required to keep the original intent and in my opinion the changes have been great. I guess we will have to see what the final scores are but if they are way low then the course will have to be made even harder... Blame technology, not the owners and not the designer who are constantly trying to keep the pros near par.

[Nick Ribeiro]

I’ll let others comment on your assertion that no classic top-ranked course resembles its original form.

Which classic top-ranked courses resemble their original form? I didn't say none, I said maybe Newport CC because it's one of the ones I have been to that pride themselves on maintaining the original design. Not redesign with a renovation / restoration sales pitch. The game has changed drastically over the last century, and so have the courses. Most top ranked courses are now well over 7,000 yards and growing, not sure which ones were that long 100 years ago? Same goes with size and scale of holes and greens.


There are a few classic designs left that have been untouched mostly because they are small clubs in small towns and have never had the money or resources to redesign / renovate/ claim restore. These courses are still the same length with tees, fairways, greens, and bunkers in all the same locations they were 100 years ago. Their greens also don't roll 12.... ever... because there would be no fair pin locations on the green which was designed to roll at 5.


There is nothing wrong with courses today modernizing to accommodate the tour / modern game. But that doesn't mean any of us should fool ourselves into believing they are the same as they were when created....

[Mark Fedeli]

Nick, my comment about the playing corridors refers to the amount of acreage dedicated to each hole. It's massive. That is different from the fairway width, which has been narrowed to 24-26 yards in many landing spots. Having an ocean of rough with a tiny little ribbon fairway running down the middle is completely arbitrary and has nothing to do with the lay of the land surrounding it or the architect who designed it. I'm not confused in the least. The land is exceptional and the golf course, as currently maintained, is not.


Tailoring the course for the current pro game is a fool's errand that sets a horrendous example for the casual fans watching from home who then go on to equate narrow and hard with good. The PGA Tour has already done enough damage to golf course architecture in this country, they simply should not be encouraged to go further down their path — not if strategic design matters to us.


Frankly, I don't know how to respond to some of your comments. Pine Valley has narrow fairways? Untrue, especially compared to Black. Then you go on to, essentially, mock the desire for "options" while also talking about the "original intent."But the original intent included quite a few options that were then systematically destroyed by Rees Jones and whoever currently rides on the lawn mowers. As to your last post: obviously, every top-ranked course has been altered to some degree. But this is not just adding a few new back tees. Bethpage has been bastardized solely for the pro game.


I couldn't care less about the PGA Tour. What I do care about is the design and development of my home course that I play nearly every weekend and whose history I've tried my best to study. Isn't that why we're all on this site, to care about our personal feelings as they relate to GCA?


And again, I said that as it stands now it is still a very very good golf course. But you can't strip away all of the original strategic ideas and turn the whole thing into a uni-dimensional slog and expect everyone to constantly sing its praises just because Lucas Glover won an event there. Very specific decisions were made about how the course should now be presented both on a daily basis, and for the odd pro tournament every half-decade or so. Those decisions deserves major criticism.

[Mark Fedeli]

@Mark - If Phil Young was still around he would bite your head off!

Haha. I actually corresponded a bit with Phil a few years back on this very subject, and he was largely in agreement I believe. He promised then a future book that would detail the history and evolution of the course — a resource I was very excited to have. His existing book about Bethpage wasn't quite up to snuff, sadly.

[Mike Sweeney]

This site has seen many like this over the years but most make a much better case than "Rees took away my wide fairways at Bethpage" ...

Bethpage needs a GCA Super with support from NY State Parks. I don't disagree that the current "maintenance meld" is one dimensional. My guess is the current Super would love to bring back width after the PGA, but it now has MECCA status from golfers around the world with single handicaps. Assuming it is one grass out there for rough and fairway, a big assumption, it would take the Super two weeks to bring in the width and firmness around the greens that the course cries out for. It is just a fabulous routing, on fabulous land. I am never a fan of "updating greens", but with a little more interest in the greens, it would easily be Top 10 for me. Love the place but I am 60 yards behind son #1, so it is a White Tee only era for me now:




Looking forward to the PGA regardless of setup.

[Greg Smith]

I don't think it's correct to say the Black requires shotmaking.   To me, "shotmaking" is the finesse part of full shots, being able to curve the ball both ways at will, trajectory high, low, anything in between, etc -- all customized to create the best situation for the ball coming to rest in optimal positions.

What the Black requires for success is (a) power: long drives/towering irons that drop and stop; (b) accuracy, as in keeping it consistently down the middle of narrow fairways; and (c) scrambling ability to hack it out of the rough around those greens and still save par.

Those three things are not "shotmaking" by my definition (though they ARE part of golf).  Is my definition wrong?

Another thing the Black does not ask for is great putting skill.

[David McIntosh]

Are the fairways always around 25 yards wide on the Black? Or have they been narrowed from their daily play width purely for the PGA?

I was under the impression that the slim fairways and thick rough was a USGA thing when the US Open was played there (haven't played at Bethpage and didn’t catch the Playoff events in recent years) and that it wasn’t quite as penal at other times. Or is this off the mark?

I’m looking forward to seeing the course on TV next week and I’m sure it’ll be a great venue. Certainly seems like it will be a bit more of a penal set up than we’re used to seeing at the PGA - which is by no means a bad thing.

[Nick Ribeiro]

This site has seen many like this over the years but most make a much better case than "Rees took away my wide fairways at Bethpage" ...

Bethpage needs a GCA Super with support from NY State Parks. I don't disagree that the current "maintenance meld" is one dimensional. My guess is the current Super would love to bring back width after the PGA, but it now has MECCA status from golfers around the world with single handicaps.

Agreed on MECCA status from single digits across the world. The trends of easier golf have taken the game away from single digits all over the world. Bethpage has multiple courses, why can't the better players have the black? People sleep in their cars to play it, where else does that happen??

[MCirba]

Bethpage Black is a great golf course, or at least was a great golf course when I played it back in the early 1990s.

I haven't been back since Rees Jones did the past twenty years of tightening and tweaking but from the conversation it sounds like it may still be a great golf course with a poor presentation that is one-dimensional.

It's only a few hours drive from my house but I've not gone back because I really liked it the way it was, scruffy and raw, and didn't want to be disappointed.   

[Mark Fedeli]

Nick, for the life of me I can’t figure out why you keep making personal comments and assumptions about me. I intended to ignore them but then you went and did it again in reply to someone else. What gives?


As I said, I play the course nearly every weekend. I am a single digit handicap. I’m not a “newb” there or on this site. So not sure where that designation came from. My first question to you was to explain what you loved about the course. Given we are on GCA, I assumed you’d talk about the course design specifically. Not just how hard it is or whether Tiger likes it.


To answer the fairway width question, they are kept the same narrowness all the time. Go on Google Earth to see its common presentation and use the ruler to measure the width of fairways like 15.  You will see 24 yards at the landing area. That hole is a serious challenge with 34 yard fairways.


In other fun news, Phil Young just reached out to me via email with a wonderful commentary on this thread. When I have a chance I will present some of his thoughts.

[Nick Ribeiro]

Mark, You started a thread about why a golf course that's so widely praised is not great. Then when questioned the only thing you can come up with is the fairways are not wide enough for you. You immediately press me to tell you why I like the golf course which indicates you have no real clue why you don't, besides the narrow fairways. You are the one who doesn't think a golf course considered in the top 1% in the world is any good, you my friend are the one who has explaining to do. NOT the 99% of the rest of us.


I proceed by trying to explain the similarities between Bethpage Black and PV (In resistance to scoring category specifically, long / penal / forced carries, narrowing landing areas, strategic & heroic shot making requirements, limited bailouts, etc) and it goes right over your head and you retreat right back to the width of the fairways at Bethpage Black. Naively enough considering your passion for Black I assumed you at least attended the Crump Cup at some point in time and would see the light, instead your comments are based on research done on google maps.


When called out you throw the typical tantrum of a newb by claiming Rees Jones "bastardized" the course. But still no substance, just narrow fairways. The same course you then claim in your last post you play every weekend, as a single digit handicap, who doesn't maintain a valid handicap through GHIN.


And here I go again trying to help you. Bethpage Black is long and is hard but the options off the tee come by club selection. Today some of the pros hit driving irons 280-300+ yards off the tee. Tee shots require precision and club selection. The typical amateur who hits the driver 250 yards off every single tee box doesn't get the luxury of "options" aka never ending wide fairways because he decided to play "thoughtless golf" from the tee and take out the big dog all day.


There are typically 2 types of modern golf haters on here:
1) The guys who just like Golden Age Architecture and seek courses that have not been touched. Some of them are into hickory clubs and desire the experience that course gave the player a century ago. Nothing wrong with this at all. There are some great options out there for these guys, Sweetens Cove and the Ringer being the mecca for them. But none of them are dumb enough to start a thread about how Bethpage Black is a bad course.
2) The guys who have no clue what they are talking about but quickly look for praise by bashing Rees Jones or Tom Fazio. They usually mimic one or sometimes 2 things someone else told them they don't like about a specific design, like narrow fairways. You fit perfectly into this category.


Every designer has a bad design. No one hits a home run every time at bat. There are other designs Rees Jones has done you could have criticized and at least looked like you knew what you were talking about but you chose Bethpage Black... SMH... you should be ashamed of yourself...

[Mark Fedeli]

Nick, you just keep making incorrect assumptions about me, my motives, my experience, my knowledge, and my history. I’ve said nothing about you personally and gave clear insight about my feelings toward Black.


I explained in detail why I was disappointed with the current set up of the course and how it ruined much of the strategy of the original design, including its natural use of some terrific land. I gave specific examples and I planned to provide more before we got side-tracked. Hosting pro events doesn’t give a golf course a full and total excuse from criticism about the design decisions made.


Further, I never said I hated Rees Jones. Never said a critical word about him personally at all. And my first comment in the thread was about how Black is currently a very very good course that is abdicating its potential to be exceptional because it is catering to Tour pros. I very much love Bethpage. But I simply don’t think the current situation is unimpeachable. I was obviously a bit hyperbolic with my thread title, but that’s hardly breaking news. I provided plenty of nuance within.


And lastly, I grew up 5 minutes from Pine Valley and have been there multiple times, including for the Crump Cup. PV has specifically not narrowed its fairways and grown out its rough to make it a sterner test for the PGA Tour, thereby removing much of the strategy, options, and angles for non plus handicaps.


Really don’t understand why you’re making this so personal. I have opinions about my home course. And I think your opinions about it are interesting as well. Wish we could stay on topic and discuss the words and thoughts actually put to page.

[Mark Fedeli]

As mentioned earlier, Phil Young caught wind of this thread and emailed me some comments. It’s truly great to hear from him and to hear that his comprehensive book about Bethpage is still in the offing.


One comment he provided me that I thought was most interesting was this:


“Brian Finn stated, "On Derek Duncan's podcast, Rees Jones implied that this was possible, as the venues have been set up (more so than ever) to benefit the home team's strengths." This irks me, not because of anything Brian or even Rees said, but because I've been doing everything from suggesting to outright screaming to the powers-that-be at Bethpage since about 2006 that the fairways be brought back to their original widths. In fact, in 2007, Mike Davis sent me a copy of a letter that he sent out to "all current and future U.S. Open sites" in which he strongly recommended that after they hosted their Open that the restore their fairways back to what they were pre-U.S. Open member play. He stressed that how keeping U.S. Open widths for the members or public who played the courses was a nice concept, but that it was also eminent unfair for those who played the courses that way as they were set-up to challenge the greatest golfers in the world, but that not doing so might also prove detrimental to the overall condition of the courses. Bethpage still insists that the public should have the opportunity to play a true U.S. Open course and so the fairways remain at major championship widths.”

I’m sure that story is no surprise to some of you, but I found it quite illuminating. Phil said I could quote any and all of his comments to me so I’m sure I’ll have more from him to add as we dig deeper into the changes made at BP.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()