Rees Jones and Tom Fazio have both messed up too many classic courses. But there are lots of original Tom Fazio designs that I like. I can't think of a single Rees Jones original design that I even remotely like.

I just played 15 (and the rest of the course) for the first time about a month ago. The green is just awesome as it is; obviously Rees can only make it worse.

Move the first leg of the Fed Ex cup permanently to Bethpage. The course deserves to be on the tour and seen by everyone annually.

As much as I loath defending Rees and agree that he leaves more damage in his wake than not, his designs at Olde Kinderhook and Atlantic are enjoyable, well-designed course for the property. He must have been diligent in taking his meds for the days spent working on those sites.

Messing with 15 (probably ONLY to get a few more pins) is dumb. That hole was designed (brilliantly) to terrorize most golfers and clearly succeeds. To imagine the "heavy" hand (and small-brain) of Rees to mess with it is heresy IMO.

BTW......good news is that Hollywood Golf Club, a wonderful Travis design in Deal, NJ will be replacing their super and eventually ridding themselves of Ree's iditoic containment mounds and poor bunker designs. This will allow the club to accelerate up the charts of NJ gems.

The 15th green needs to be softened. It is far too undulating when the green speeds get to 11 no less the 14-15 during the Open.

DA, "That hole was designed (brilliantly) to terrorize most golfers and clearly succeeds." is an interesting comment. First of all, it wasn't more "terrifying" in Tilly's mind than any other holes on the course. In fact, Tilly SPECIFICALLY wrote that when he looked back down the 4th hole from the green that he was "terrified."

The 15th may be the toughest par-4 on the planet duringh US Open conditions to make par; that is what many players said during both Opens. Yet from TEE to green it is not the most daunting or challenging of holes on the Black. As an example, consider the 12th. A MUCH tougher tee shot followed by an equally challenging approach to the green followed by a putting surface that is almost as severe as 15...

What sets 15 apart is the extreme severity of its green that goes way over the edge and is almost unfair for many professionals, let alone we mere mortals, when green speeds get going. It needs softening...

When is their next Open? Are they doing this for US Opens or for the public???

The NY state and park system bank accounts must be in good shape...

Phil - Your defense of Rees Jones and all the work he did subsequent to the initial restoration is pretty shamefull for one who pits himself as a Tillinghast expert and biographer. The 15th hole has been fine for 75 years now and it has occupied a niche as one of the truly great long par 4's in golf.

I defended the work Rees did at Bethpage long enough. The 14th hole is a messed up surgery with the patient deformed and less playable. The 9th hole bunkering in the fairway is abismal. The current maintenance takes away all too much strategic interest and there is all too much emphasis on being a US Open venue and not enough a great public muni golf course for people to ENJOY PLAYING. As you know I have loved BB since my first play in 1969 and it started my interest in golf course architecture. To use your phrase Phil, its NO LONGER golf for the people baby :-( .

Hello Geoff!

Far too long since we chatted! I think you need to give me credit for making my own decision and having my own opinions about the work done at BB over the years.

Too often Rees has been the object of criticism for work done at BB that is not based on anything other than a pre-conceived bias rather than knowledge of who is actually responsible for the change. A good example is your reference to the 9th hole bunker. What is your problem with the bunker? Is it that one doesn't belong there? Don't blame Rees for he wasn't the driving force behind putting the bunker there.

Is it the look of the bunker? He, in fact, designed it after being asked by others to do so, yet it was others that built it. That doesn't take away from his being the one who gets blamed for the finished product if it is a poor one, nor should it stop him from receiving praise if it was done well. The answer to which one it is, is subjective to one's taste. The fact remains that a bunker that was poorly constructed is NOT one that is poorly placed nor does it take away from the architectural aspect of why it was put there.

There are other changes that occurred for which Rees gets blame/credit for which he deserves neither.

Now, I have taken a VERY strong stance on the every change made to the course so far and, in fact, have been personally involved in some of them. I was there in 2004 when the changes were discussed for 13 & 14 and was asked my input. You speak to the history of the 15th hole as being important yet take umbrage when the green expansion on 14 is done, yet the entire back portion that was "added" was actually RECOVERED putting surface that was originally part of it and was lost due to poor maintenance. The only new area is the front left tongue, and before you ask, I am definitely a fan of it and was so when it was first discussed. As to how "Tilly" this addition is, consider that fabulous 15th (?) hole on the course you so love, Fenway. That front "tongue" guarded by the two bunkers before the upsweep onto the main plateau of the green is very similar to what was created on Black 14, especially with the new left bunker. It requires the same shot; a short-iron (if one doesn't foolishly try to drive it) into a tiny landing area where a bit wide to either side puts one in the sand. That is exactly what the front tongue portion to 14 now does.

At the same time, I have taken a VERY strong stand on what I consider to be the major mistake made during the original restoration; that is, NOT restoring the putting surfaces to their original sizes and dimensions.

Some of this has already been addressed now; the 8th green for example with the putting surface extended to the crest of the hill by the pond. The back of 11 has been brought back and several others, and there have been discussions about taking a hard look at what can be done on many of the other holes. The reason for doing this is because the chief complaint about the Black has been its "flat" greens when the reality is that when they were originally built, much of what is seen today as rough the outer areas leading up to the defining mounding was actually putting surface. These areas rival many of the great green surfaces world-wide in undulations and tilt and would, if brought back, eliminate the word "flat" from any discussion of the Black's greens.

Why weren't these surfaces recovered at that time? Before one blames Rees, one needs to understand that it was the USGA's dime that was being spent and THEY specifically mandated that little to no work was to be done on the greens for budgetary reasons. And so, the front right putting surface on 17, one that you & I and many others remember is no longer there, as is the case of other holes.

Finally, you make a very good point, "The current maintenance takes away all too much strategic interest and there is all too much emphasis on being a US Open venue and not enough a great public muni golf course for people to ENJOY PLAYING." I completely agree and have made that very well-known to both the powers that be at Bethpage. Even though I disagree with their reasoning, I can accept that the staying with narrow fairways has been done with the best of intentions. I am very hopeful that next year will see a change to this.

Email me, we need to catch up! (philwritesbooks@aol.com)

Whoa. philalsowritesbooks@geoffshackelford.com

Phil

The problem I have with #9 is not just an unnecessary bunker that looks out of place on/in a natural landform that by itself created decisions and problems off the tee. That landform containing the ill advised bunker is in an area where a properly placed tee allowed a good drive to find the upper level were you had a view and a flat lie with shorter club. It was a reward and an infrequent birdie opportunity. However, many a time trying for that area resulted in either a blind shot from the woods on the right or high grass and poor angle from the left or blind in the hillside itself where the bunker was placed. Now that hole is a microcosm of much of what is wrong at Bethpage Black. New tees combined with that bunker force a shot short of the bunker or safely in the hollow to the right which is blind and longer. This is not what was intended and more of the conversion from a strategic masterpiece to a thoughtless slog.

Please don’t compare 14 greensite at BB with 4 at Fenway. The fenway green is a devilish monster yet natural in look. There is no comparison IMHO. The new green at BB if restored in back has something wrong in the way it plays. In addition, that small finger front left was a silly pin that suckered almost no one in the US Open.

I can see no reason to alter 15 green and the poor results on 14 give me little reason for optimism. I did not bother to visit Bethpage this year. I had no desire to play The Black and certainly did not wish to endure a 5.5 hr round on the Red. I find that sad. I thought about it and I realized that in spite of the conditioning I would rather play the 1969 version of BB with its footprint infested beach sand bunkers and crabgrass fairways then the immaculate conditioned current one.

Given your post I can't blame Rees Jones for all of these bad decisions but he is the one out in front of the cameras claiming credit.

I agree about that bunker added to 9. And forget about 15. A very bad hole. Too bad #5 on Red cannot replace 15 black. A much better hole and a fantastic par 4 for the pros. And the green on #6 Red should be given a award for best green at Bethpage.

Vwgolfer

IMHO #15 and especially the second shot into that green is one of the most thrilling you will have into a hole on any golf course anywhere. Current maintenance ruins the strategy as the preferred left side of what was fairway and now deep rough allowed a shot into the green without the need to carry the deep greenside bunker. You could hit short and run back into the green. No longer as its all aerial. I can recall many a 3-wood (when they were WOOD), 5-wood or if I hit a particularly good drive (for me) long iron trying that shot and walking up wondering where my ball had finished. Alas the USGA must make that green FAIR for those poor PGA tour players who heaven forbid might get a bad break for what they thought was a great shot.

Give me back Bethpage Black 1969 - PLEASE