News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Pat Burke

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2019, 02:54:01 PM »
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.




..Bethpage is obviously important to you.  Growing up  and playing junior tournaments in New Jersey in the 70s, we all new BB was a bear of a course, and we heard a lot about the difficulty of it.  We also never played it since tournaments rarely, if never went there.  The notoriety of its difficulty was only exceeded by the infamy of its poor conditions.
One of the consequences of the influx of money into this facility, which was long neglected, is hosting and preparing for these events.  It may be contrary to the ideals of what many believe the course should be, but so was the weed patch it had become for a long time.

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2019, 04:51:27 PM »

If someone wants to suggest Bethpage should be ranked #100 instead of top 50 I can understand that. The margin between 37 and 100 is very small. You lose me when you put it outside of 1000. I'd like to learn of just a few of the courses between 500-1000 that are clearly better than Bethpage.
I never said I'd rate it outside the top 1000. I said I'd rather play a thousand other courses given the chance before I'd play Bethpage again. Factored in to that is that I've already played Bethpage a number of times… I haven't played Pasatiempo.

So consider that a course rated #500 or #700 that I haven't played… all that I said is that I'd probably choose to play that once or twice or thrice before playing BPB for the tenth time.

"Given the choice I'd play a thousand courses before I ever play BPB again." <--- That doesn't mean I'd rank BPB outside my top 1000. So, it appears a big part of your shock at my opinion is because you misunderstood what I said.

Pasatiempo pretty much makes all the lists. Golf Digest has it at 106, decimal points outside of the top 100. I have not played Pasatiempo but from what I have seen and read I would never argue it not being a top 100. Listing this course as better than Bethpage would be a good fair discussion, unless of course this is your example of a course you have ranked somewhere in the 500-1000 range? If that's the case I would also like to know what 500-1000 courses you put in front of Pasatiempo as well.
I am not entirely sure I've even played 500 courses, which is part of why I'd play a thousand courses before I'd play BPB again given a choice on equal terms between them.



Let me just quote this little piece: https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/bethpage-black/

"The Black relentlessly asks the golfer to hit high long irons.  The option of a run-up shot is regrettably absent for a course that is both long and exposed to the wind."

Snore. That and "scale" are all it has to offer. It's a boring golf course IMO. I don't care about the "scale" - hell, Caledonia impresses me for the scale more the other way - how 18 generally good+ holes fit on a property that small.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Nick Ribeiro

Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #52 on: May 12, 2019, 05:10:08 PM »

If someone wants to suggest Bethpage should be ranked #100 instead of top 50 I can understand that. The margin between 37 and 100 is very small. You lose me when you put it outside of 1000. I'd like to learn of just a few of the courses between 500-1000 that are clearly better than Bethpage.
I never said I'd rate it outside the top 1000. I said I'd rather play a thousand other courses given the chance before I'd play Bethpage again. Factored in to that is that I've already played Bethpage a number of times… I haven't played Pasatiempo.

So consider that a course rated #500 or #700 that I haven't played… all that I said is that I'd probably choose to play that once or twice or thrice before playing BPB for the tenth time.

"Given the choice I'd play a thousand courses before I ever play BPB again." <--- That doesn't mean I'd rank BPB outside my top 1000. So, it appears a big part of your shock at my opinion is because you misunderstood what I said.

Pasatiempo pretty much makes all the lists. Golf Digest has it at 106, decimal points outside of the top 100. I have not played Pasatiempo but from what I have seen and read I would never argue it not being a top 100. Listing this course as better than Bethpage would be a good fair discussion, unless of course this is your example of a course you have ranked somewhere in the 500-1000 range? If that's the case I would also like to know what 500-1000 courses you put in front of Pasatiempo as well.
I am not entirely sure I've even played 500 courses, which is part of why I'd play a thousand courses before I'd play BPB again given a choice on equal terms between them.



Let me just quote this little piece: https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/bethpage-black/

"The Black relentlessly asks the golfer to hit high long irons.  The option of a run-up shot is regrettably absent for a course that is both long and exposed to the wind."

Snore. That and "scale" are all it has to offer. It's a boring golf course IMO. I don't care about the "scale" - hell, Caledonia impresses me for the scale more the other way - how 18 generally good+ holes fit on a property that small.


That little piece of yours praises the course. Specifically in the 6th paragraph 1st sentence ~ As an examination in driving, this course is Tillinghast's masterpiece. We agree! I knew you'd come to your senses...

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #53 on: May 12, 2019, 05:25:48 PM »
That little piece of yours praises the course. Specifically in the 6th paragraph 1st sentence ~ As an examination in driving, this course is Tillinghast's masterpiece. We agree! I knew you'd come to your senses...
First, that article gives a ton of credit to Tillinghast, reinforcing my earlier point that the course rating is partially based on an association with Tillinghast which isn't really fully deserved given his role there.

And obviously the overall tone is positive, but even the driving quote isn't really all that great - it basically says you must drive the ball exceptionally well or you're toast. That's part of what makes it boring. The fairways are narrow given the corridors. And then the quote I used highlights how there are no options - no thinking - to be done in hitting lofted long iron approaches. Again, boring.

I disagree with you that BPB is a great course. It's a good course, but IMO, it's also a boring course.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2019, 06:01:34 PM »
The beginning of a turn... keep back peddling, you'll get there...
This is at least the second time you've grossly misread something I've typed here. I disagree with you about the quality of the architecture at BPB.

I don't think BPB is a great course. It probably wouldn't be in my top 500. And the bit about the playing a thousand courses before BPB again… still true for me.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Nick Ribeiro

Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2019, 06:05:24 PM »
The beginning of a turn... keep back peddling, you'll get there...
This is at least the second time you've grossly misread something I've typed here. I disagree with you about the quality of the architecture at BPB.

I don't think BPB is a great course. It probably wouldn't be in my top 500. And the bit about the playing a thousand courses before BPB again… still true for me.


Keep coming back... from not in your top 1000 to not in your top 500. Name a few in your 400-500 range so we can compare.
Or just back peddle further and bring Bethpage closer to where it belongs, your call.

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2019, 06:08:34 PM »
Keep coming back... from not in your top 1000
I never said that.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Michael Felton

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2019, 06:14:04 PM »
Here are my thoughts on BPB. I think it's a course that asks you to hit plenty of different shots. I also think it offers plenty of options on the way round. There is also quite a lot of penal golf out there too. I don't think that's to its detriment though. It's definitely hard. But it's also playable. So here we go.


1, depending on how far you hit it is either a driver or a 3 wood. For me it's always driver because hitting it through the fairway is not something I need to worry about. It's a hard dogleg right (despite apparent claims to the contrary). You have to favor the left of the fairway if you're not long enough to get by the corner.


2 asks you to hit a draw off the tee and then you play a shortish iron up the hill to a semi-blind green. You can miss the fairway on this one and still get there, but if you do you need to hit a really good shot for your 2nd.


3 I like quite a bit. It changes a lot depending on where the pin is. The green is huge and the run off at the back right is something I don't recall seeing very often anywhere else. You can always hit to the fat part at the front, but try to hit it close to a back pin and it's very exacting.


4 is a great hole. If you're playing the right tees, the fairway plays very wide. You have to decide whether to take on the bunkers. If you do, you're presented with an opportunity to go for the green. If you bail out to the right, you have a tough lay up shot to clear the huge fairway bunker. If you miss the fairway, you have a tough decision about whether to go for the carry or not. Then, if you're in prime position, you have an uphill shot to a green that slopes away from you. It's challenging yes, but it gives you the chance to hit it in 2. The more sensible shot is to play out to the right and then pitch up the green.


5 is another good one. It asks you to hit a fade with your tee shot and a draw with your approach. You pretty much have to hit the fairway here if you want to reach the green.


6 you have a decision to make. You can take on the left bunker and try get it down the hill and leave yourself 100 yards or so. Or you can play out to the right with a long iron or fairway wood (depending on the wind) and leave yourself about 170 in down the hill.


7 is another fairway that plays very wide. You can take on the shot near the trees on the right and if you succeed you can reach it. If you fail, you can be in one of the worst spots on the island. Or you can play safe off the tee and leave yourself too far back to reach the green.


8 is an exacting par three
 
9 is another hole where you can choose to take on the bunker or not. If you do you're level with the green and 100-130 yards away. If you play safe out to the right, you're miles away and likely won't have a look at the flag. Another sharp dogleg too.


10 is pretty exacting. Have to hit the fairway pretty much. You're probably better off in the bunkers than the rough if you miss it.


11 the fairway isn't that tight (at least it wasn't the last time I played it). It's hard because you can't see it from the tee. Good green and I am intrigued to see if they make use of the new back left ledge here.


12 I think again offers you options. You can hit a hard draw over the bunker and give yourself a mid iron to the green or if you hit a feeble one you're leaving yourself a long way back.


13 is beyond me to reach from where the blue tees normally are. I think this fairway plays fairly wide and it gives you a devilish decision on what to do with your second. The fronting bunker is a sneaky one that looks greenside, but is actually about 20 yards short of the green. Often makes you leave your approach shot short.


14 is a really good par three IMO. It asks you to be very precise depending on where the flag is. You have to be very brave to hit it to a back pin and if you're not, you have a shelf to putt up that's hard.


15 is possibly the hardest par 4 I've ever played. Another must hit the fairway or you're struggling big time. Blind approach up a hill with a long iron. Just tough all the way. I birdied it once and then the next three times I played it I took two 6s and a 7. It definitely got its own back on me.


16 is another long par four. This one has an elevated tee and I love the tee shot. It plays tricks on you and looks further to the left than it really is. If you miss the fairway and get a reasonable lie, this one gives you a chance. You can hit a running shot onto this hole as the front is open. You can do that from the fairway too and often that's the best way to get it up there.


17 is a very exacting par three. 200ish yards with a very shallow green and enormous bunkers all around it. It's hard to believe there's any actual green there on the tee.


18 gives you the chance to clear the bunkers if you hit a good one and it'll leave you with a flick up the hill. Hit it in the bunkers and you're struggling. Lay it up and you have a much tougher shot in.


I think the course offers plenty of choices. You're probably going to have to hit good shots a lot to keep yourself in the game. Yes it's hard, but if you take your medicine and play not to break par, but to shoot somewhere around your handicap, it's quite doable. I've never found it boring.


I was talking to Mark earlier about this and I think there are places where it may be more interesting if the fairways were widened. I think the 5th would be interesting if they cut down the left rough and had it be fairway all the way out to the tree line. It would entice a lot more people over there and leave them with either a shot over or around the trees to make the green. As it is you have to hit the right half of the fairway to have a straight shot in. There are others too. But in some ways, I think wide fairways that give you choices in how to play the holes really just mean that you can open your shoulders and pick based on the shot that you happen to hit. After all, if you think of it as you have a choice whether to take the difficulty off the tee or on your approach, you can just aim for in between them and let your shot decide which way to do it. If you could actually pick whether you were going to play the hole one way or the other and do it, then you'd be good enough to play Black as it is laid out. If you can't, then I think to some extent you just want it to be easier. I don't think every golf course should be like this. I've had more fun on wider courses that offer those options (not many of them), but I definitely think there is room in the golfing pantheon for a course like this one. There are also harder courses than Black around. WFW would be a good example. That's as challenging tee to green, but then throws a near impossible set of greens on the end. Black's greens aren't wild, but they're still challenging. There are plenty of them with tiering and putts that break (1, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17) and some that are devilishly flat (2 springs to mind) where subtle breaks can be very hard to spot.

James Brown

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2019, 08:35:03 PM »
What’s wrong with a course that demands long and straight driving and long high shots into greens?  I don’t think many of us would choose to play the Black everyday, but it is a very nice walk on a nice piece of land and it uses the land well for a very challenging course for the pros while being fun from the right tees for amateurs.  Maybe this doesn’t make it a “great” course by architecture standards, but very many of the “custodians” courses don’t have anything near the challenge to host the pros.  It’s all about trade offs. 

corey miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2019, 08:54:52 PM »



Not sure I agree with the notion that there are a "right set of tees" that will make the course fun for amateurs but do they still not have ladies tees?  6200 up tees with heavy rough on carries very discriminating. I expect better from NY State. ;D

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #60 on: May 12, 2019, 09:10:30 PM »
Off the top of my head....Pine Valley and Oakmont are the only difficult/tough golf courses on my bucket list, (Haven't played Pebble either, but i suspect its not bad for everyday setup)

This thread is a fine cat fight otherwise...do carry on!


Nick Ribeiro

Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #61 on: May 13, 2019, 12:25:25 AM »
Kalen -

It's a typical post started by someone who has no clue what they are talking about. They've come to a community where a designer has been criticized (sometimes fairly and sometimes not) and they say to themselves, hey this week is the PGA Championship at a Rees Jones course so now would be a great opportunity to show the community I know something about Architecture. Hey everyone! Bethpage is NOT a great course. Then he gets asked to elaborate and goes into full blown defense mode. He claims Rees "bastardized" the course with by narrowing the fairways but can not give any further explanation as to how the course was destroyed. He starts to back peddle but realizes hes quickly in over his head when the topic of intent comes up. Hes faced with a fair discussion on equipment technology and whether the course plays (with current equipment technology) as it did a century ago with technology available at the time. Original poster exit stage left in complete despair, never to return to the thread again, and NO he will not get his wide fairways. As Tillie insisted 100 years ago he will have to learn how to execute straight shots, fades, and draws in order to hit fairways.

Incoming driving range pro Chubbs Peterson ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zswD_2r3TQw
Gets right into the mix claiming the corridors are wide open and the fairways are too narrow for him also. He acknowledges there are dog legs (like the GENTLE first) but he hits driver off every tee and thinks his landing spots are unfairly small as he tries to cut those gentle doglegs. Clearly unfair, but unlike original poster, this one doesn't demand wider fairways, he just takes his ball and goes home. That's right, Bethpage Black isn't in his top 1000 therefore he never wants to go back. Further discussion reveals Bethpage Black is in every publications top 50 and he quickly reminds the community Golf Digest does not count because they are so uncredible they listed him as a top instructor in his state. Finally, some substance, but it doesn't last long. After further discussion to try to gauge the thousand courses ahead of Bethpage Black he brings Pasatiempo into the mix. He then, like original poster starts to back peddle. He tries to regain credibility and save face by moving Bethpage Black up to right outside his top 500. He's asked to list a few courses in the 300-500 range but he's played his Pasatiempo card and he's got nothing left.

There is nothing wrong with having an opinion, or liking one course and not liking another, or even liking a particular designer or not liking another, but I am sick of these newbs who seek every opportunity to say a Rees Jones or Tom Fazio design is bad simply because their name is on the scorecard. All the big names have worked on hundreds of properties. They are human, none of them get every design right. No one hits a home run at bat every time. But to come on a site like this and act like we are all dumb enough to believe they know what they are talking about by bashing Bethpage Black is an insult to the entire community. Pick a design where the club went under and blame bad architecture if you want, not a widely recognized top 50 course in the country.

« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 03:04:39 AM by Nick Ribeiro »

Mike Sweeney

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #62 on: May 13, 2019, 06:55:04 AM »
but I am sick of these newbs who seek every opportunity to say a Rees Jones or Tom Fazio design is bad simply because their name is on the scorecard. All the big names have worked on hundreds of properties. They are human, none of them get every design right. No one hits a home run at bat every time. But to come on a site like this and act like we are all dumb enough to believe they know what they are talking about by bashing Bethpage Black is an insult to the entire community. Pick a design where the club went under and blame bad architecture if you want, not a widely recognized top 50 course in the country.


1) Mark is not a newb.

2) Mark never mentioned "Rees Jones", he simply stated in his opening post - almost all strategy has been removed from the course with the current renovation."

3) As someone who spends a good part of his life trying to figure out an $8 billion New York State agency (OPWDD), I am very comfortable is saying that Rees Jones probably has very little influence in any decisions at NY State Parks. Did he have some influence back in the David Fay days of the re-design? Of course, but that was a long long time ago. My educated guess is it is a mutual convenience to have him still involved, and I am sure they listen to his opinion. Then they do what they do.

4) As someone who has said in this post that BB could go up to Top 10 on my personal list (with green work that I would not want in reality because NY State Parks would probably make it worse), I think Mark made very valid points about the maintenance meld at BB. I think we in general over credit Architects on this site, when the real champions of our day to day golf life are Supers and their influencers in how courses are set up.

44 degrees and drizzly in NYC, bring on some sun!

"One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us."

Dr. Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #63 on: May 13, 2019, 07:47:50 AM »
Incoming driving range pro Chubbs Peterson ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zswD_2r3TQw
So much for no more insults.

Gets right into the mix claiming the corridors are wide open and the fairways are too narrow for him also.
They are. 1 is 25 yards wide. 2 is barely 20. 4 is 25. 5 is 25. 6 < 25. 7 and 9 are about 35 or so, wow! 10 and 11 get right back to the 25 train. 12 is 26. 13 is 25. 15 is just under 25. 16 is 26. 18 is under 25.



He acknowledges there are dog legs (like the GENTLE first) but he hits driver off every tee and thinks his landing spots are unfairly small as he tries to cut those gentle doglegs.
1 is a dogleg if you hit driver, but the dogleg starts at 275, so it doesn't play as a dogleg if you hit a 3W. Two is a dogleg with a 3W or hybrid as I noted.

In sayings there are no "doglegs" talking about holes that bend in such a way that you have to shape your tee shot, and there simply aren't many. There are gentle doglegs at BPB - nine bends slightly left - but the bends are all at about the landing zone of the tee shot, so you can play a straight tee shot and then play a straight second shot. Very little forces a tee shot turning one way or the other.


Either way, the doglegs mean very little to my point. The course could move tees to have 10 doglegs and my feelings would essentially be the same: it's a boring course with few options or architectural interest.

Clearly unfair, but unlike original poster, this one doesn't demand wider fairways, he just takes his ball and goes home.
I neversaid "unfair."

That's right, Bethpage Black isn't in his top 1000 therefore he never wants to go back.
I never said that, either, and I've pointed this one out to you several times already.

Further discussion reveals Bethpage Black is in every publications top 50 and he quickly reminds the community Golf Digest does not count because they are so uncredible they listed him as a top instructor in his state.
Didn't happen.

Finally, some substance, but it doesn't last long. After further discussion to try to gauge the thousand courses ahead of Bethpage Black he brings Pasatiempo into the mix.
For about the fifth time, I never said I'd rate a thousand courses as better than BPB.

He then, like original poster starts to back peddle. He tries to regain credibility and save face by moving Bethpage Black up to right outside his top 500. He's asked to list a few courses in the 300-500 range but he's played his Pasatiempo card and he's got nothing left.
I haven't backpedaled at all. I'd play a thousand courses before I'd play BPB again given equal terms.

I'd play Bedford Springssix times before Ii'd play BPB again. I'd play Kahkwa or a multitude of Pittsburgh area courses repeatedly before playing BPB again. I'd play courses like Winter Park or Sweetens Cove before I'd play BPB. I'd even play the Ross nine at Delray Beach Golf Club a few times before I'd play BPB.

My reasons for playing some of these courses are personal, but it doesn't change what I said. I'm simply not a fan of BPB. It's a boring test devoid of strategy and options. You have one option off the tee - hit it far and within about 25 yards. And one option into the green - hit a long iron high to carry the bunkers.

Oh, but the "scale" is impressive. Whoopty doo. If I want "scale" I'll kayak on the oceans or hike through the Grand Canyon.

There is nothing wrong with having an opinion, or liking one course and not liking another, or even liking a particular designer or not liking another, but I am sick of these newbs who seek every opportunity to say a Rees Jones or Tom Fazio design is bad simply because their name is on the scorecard.

That's got nothing to do with me.


But to come on a site like this and act like we are all dumb enough to believe they know what they are talking about by bashing Bethpage Black is an insult to the entire community.
The only one insulting anyone here is you, repeatedly.

And, again, it's "backpedal."
« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 07:50:30 AM by Erik J. Barzeski »
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #64 on: May 13, 2019, 08:15:07 AM »
Looking at the overhead photos I wonder how the course would play if the fairways were much wider but there was no fairway irrigation so balls not going straight would run further off-line and what that would then mean in terms of the playing angles into the greens, especially if the greens were really firm? But then again these guys are crazy good and some of them are going to have a week when their game is on so maybe it doesn’t matter. The lower down the field scores might be interesting to analyse though.
Atb

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #65 on: May 13, 2019, 08:23:39 AM »
Looking at the overhead photos I wonder how the course would play if the fairways were much wider but there was no fairway irrigation so balls not going straight would run further off-line and what that would then mean in terms of the playing angles into the greens, especially if the greens were really firm? But then again these guys are crazy good and some of them are going to have a week when their game is on so maybe it doesn’t matter. The lower down the field scores might be interesting to analyse though.
An interesting proposition. With even PGA Tour rough it generally costs guys 50-60 yards worth of scoring potential (i.e. 180 out in the fairway ~= 125 yards out in the rough), so with U.S. Open rough its would be even greater.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Kyle Harris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #66 on: May 13, 2019, 08:28:13 AM »
I'd rather play Bethpage Red, Green, and Yellow 333 times each before I play Black again.
http://kylewharris.com

Constantly blamed by 8-handicaps for their 7 missed 12-footers each round.

Thank you for changing the font of your posts. It makes them easier to scroll past.

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #67 on: May 13, 2019, 08:36:06 AM »
Off the top of my head....Pine Valley and Oakmont are the only difficult/tough golf courses on my bucket list, (Haven't played Pebble either, but i suspect its not bad for everyday setup)

This thread is a fine cat fight otherwise...do carry on!




Kalen, you owe me for a coffee spilt whilst laughing. I’ll PM you my Venmo address.
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #68 on: May 13, 2019, 08:38:54 AM »
 I do have a neutral inquiry. What or whom is the governing body of BPB? Is it the state golf association or is there a local committee or office of golf?


Carry on.
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #69 on: May 13, 2019, 08:42:54 AM »
I do have a neutral inquiry. What or whom is the governing body of BPB? Is it the state golf association or is there a local committee or office of golf?


Carry on.


V-I believe it’s the Metropolitan Golf Association.

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #70 on: May 13, 2019, 09:16:12 AM »
I do have a neutral inquiry. What or whom is the governing body of BPB? Is it the state golf association or is there a local committee or office of golf?


Carry on.


V-I believe it’s the Metropolitan Golf Association.


Thanks Tim. Would be interesting to know their mission. Seems like it is to make bank from the PGA (not a bad model for a public entity.)
I hope this pays for outstanding conditions across other color courses.
Would it be fair to assume that part of the mission is to deliver a real-life PGA simulator thrill ride for low handicappers?
The closest parallel that I can think of would be the XX black diamond extreme ski warnings in side country-backcountry skiing:
“If you ski through this gate, you’re on your own and may die alone.”

It seems to serve a specific architectural purpose.  Could the current iteration re-engage a little more of the existing architectural and strategic creativity?
Probably.  There would still be a million ways for a round to die.
That said, it delivers a thrill ride number of rounds, and sadomasochistic joy for 1000s.
To them, it’s a great course... and guessing a sold out tee sheet and people in aromatic cars (When we went, ours smelled like a homeless shelter ) this verifies the financial greatness.
A bit of the Torrey Pines sentiment here...
To paraphrase San Diego… “thanks for you concern, based on our revenues, we really don’t G-A-F About your architectural concerns…”


 
« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 09:58:25 AM by V_Halyard »
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

Brian Finn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #71 on: May 13, 2019, 09:57:08 AM »
I do have a neutral inquiry. What or whom is the governing body of BPB? Is it the state golf association or is there a local committee or office of golf?

Carry on.

V-I believe it’s the Metropolitan Golf Association.

Thanks Tim. Would be interesting to know their mission. Seems like it is to make bank from the PGA (not a bad model for a public entity.)
I hope this pays for outstanding conditions across other color courses.
Would it be fair to assume that part of the mission is to deliver a real-life PGA simulator thrill ride for low handicappers?
The closest parallel that I can think of would be the XX black diamond extreme ski warnings in side country-backcountry skiing:
“If you ski through this gate, you’re on your own and may die alone.”

It seems to serve a specific architectural purpose.  Could the current iteration re-engage a little more of the existing architectural and strategic creativity?
Probably.  There would still be a million ways for a round to die.
That said, it delivers a thrill ride number of rounds and sadomasochistic joy for 1000s,
to them, it’s a great course... and guessing a sold out tee sheet and people in aromatic cars (When we went, ours smelled like a homeless shelter ) this verifies the financial greatness.
A bit of the Torrey Pines sentiment here...
To paraphrase San Diego… “Based on our revenues, we really don’t care About your architectural concerns…”
In regards to the items you mention above, the primary decision maker here is the NY State Parks Department.  the MGA is their governing body, in terms of tournament golf, etc, but the parks department makes decisions on the courses, negotiations with the PGA of America, PGA Tour, USGA, et al. 
New for '24: Monifieth x2, Montrose x2, Panmure, Carnoustie x3, Scotscraig, Kingsbarns, Elie, Dumbarnie, Lundin, Belvedere, The Loop x2, Forest Dunes, Arcadia Bluffs x2, Kapalua Plantation, Windsong Farm, Minikahda...

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #72 on: May 13, 2019, 10:00:51 AM »
I do have a neutral inquiry. What or whom is the governing body of BPB? Is it the state golf association or is there a local committee or office of golf?

Carry on.

V-I believe it’s the Metropolitan Golf Association.

Thanks Tim. Would be interesting to know their mission. Seems like it is to make bank from the PGA (not a bad model for a public entity.)
I hope this pays for outstanding conditions across other color courses.
Would it be fair to assume that part of the mission is to deliver a real-life PGA simulator thrill ride for low handicappers?
The closest parallel that I can think of would be the XX black diamond extreme ski warnings in side country-backcountry skiing:
“If you ski through this gate, you’re on your own and may die alone.”

It seems to serve a specific architectural purpose.  Could the current iteration re-engage a little more of the existing architectural and strategic creativity?
Probably.  There would still be a million ways for a round to die.
That said, it delivers a thrill ride number of rounds and sadomasochistic joy for 1000s,
to them, it’s a great course... and guessing a sold out tee sheet and people in aromatic cars (When we went, ours smelled like a homeless shelter ) this verifies the financial greatness.
A bit of the Torrey Pines sentiment here...
To paraphrase San Diego… “Based on our revenues, we really don’t care About your architectural concerns…”
In regards to the items you mention above, the primary decision maker here is the NY State Parks Department.  the MGA is their governing body, in terms of tournament golf, etc, but the parks department makes decisions on the courses, negotiations with the PGA of America, PGA Tour, USGA, et al.


Thanks. Spitballing here...
“Money talks... GCA walks”
Here's to Hoping the money gets to the other courses.
Lol
« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 12:49:23 PM by V_Halyard »
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

Mark Fedeli

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #73 on: May 13, 2019, 10:13:32 AM »
Nick, I hope you had a lovely weekend.


I didn't exit the thread. I'm fine backing off and letting other people have their say for a bit while I reflect on their thoughts and probably learn a little something myself. Me reacting to every single post as they come in, as if I own the thread, would not make for good discussion. Also, this weekend was my wife's birthday and Mother's Day, so I was a little busy.


I gave a few examples of where interesting and specific strategic decisions were largely eliminated by rough or new bunkers (to the right of 6, the right of 10, the left of 13). You can add to that the left of 5, as Mike Felton mentioned. On many other holes, the general ability to choose something resembling a "safer" shot off the tee but be presented with a longer or more challenging approach, has been eliminated or made as challenging as the aggressive play (to the left of 1, to the left of 7, to the left of 12, to the right of 15).


And as I mentioned, BB could lose most of the rough and the course would still be among the most difficult that most amateurs ever play — regardless of their skill level. All the rough adds is a boring, unnecessary, one-dimensional hazard. And worse, sends the message that rough is the way to make a course great and hard. But you still need to hit it 275 to pass the trees on 1. You still need to hit it high and soft up the hill on 2. You still need three well-executed shots on 4. You still need a huge drive and a long, high approach on 5 and 10 and 11 and 15 and on and on and on.


What gave me most pause, though, are posters who are fine with the course existing always as that kind of examination of professional major golf, and a way for amateurs to experience what it's like. Or the belief that one side of a 20-24 yard fairway having a slightly better angle counts as options. 


When I started the thread I intended to spur a conversation about how many of the original options for everyday play were lost to the set-up for modern pro events. I had no intention of debating with people who like it the way it currently is. If they're happy, I'm happy. Hell, I still elect to play it every time I can, so clearly I enjoy it immensely, maybe even for similar reasons. If anything, this thread shows just how difficult it is to discuss human-size features and strategies when a course also needs to be presented for the very best in the world.





South Jersey to Brooklyn. @marrrkfedeli

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bethpage Black is not a great course
« Reply #74 on: May 13, 2019, 10:30:36 AM »
What gave me most pause, though, are posters who are fine with the course existing always as that kind of examination of professional major golf, and a way for amateurs to experience what it's like. Or the belief that one side of a 20-24 yard fairway having a slightly better angle counts as options. 

Mark

I too struggle with the idea of golfers aiming for halves of 25 yard fairways...assuming the miss on either side is equivalent.  Maybe the touring pros are good enough to consistently bomb it 300+ at a 12-13 yard wide target with thick rough either side.  However, the Ryder Cup should have dispelled those fanciful thoughts  8)

That said, the complex has many courses so its eases the burden of playablity for the Black (I assume the other courses offer far wider fairways and less penal rough).  I look at the Black as a course for other folks, not me and thats ok. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing