in·ter·est·ing (in-t(ə-)rəs-tiŋ) : holding the attention : arousing interest
It's hard to interpret the early reviews of Liberty National, but it seems like most of the players are trying their best not to blast the design. Shoot, Norman Vincent Ogilvy is tweeting about how great it is that players are actually discussing design. Granted, it took a Cupp-Kite nightmare, but he's finding the positive in that. Impressive restraint!
In case you want the backstory in print form before CBS drums it into us, Michael Buteau does a nice job explaining how the place came about and how much it all cost.
Adam Schupak sums up Tiger's not so subliminal description of the design in today's presser.
“It's interesting,” Woods said.
In a good way?
“It's interesting,” Woods repeated.
Hank Gola writes this...
One prominent Tour player was saying earlier this year it would be the worst course his fellow golfers would play in 2009. Another quipped it will be the best course he'll play this week.
Vijay Singh thinks the course has "its own character" and "will grow on people."
But his answer to what style of player the course favors was telling.
"One who doesn't worry about what the golf course is and just plays one shot at a time," he said. "You go out there and start criticizing the golf course, then you might as well not show up."
Jonathan Wade says this is probably Liberty's only shot...
It's clear the tour is considering the idea of making Liberty National a regular part of a rotation in the New York metropolitan area. A press release by the PGA Tour on Monday announced that Ridgewood Country Club in Paramus, N.J., and Plainfield Country Club in Edison, N.J., will host the event in 2010 and 2011 respectively, but the event's future is unclear after that. The tour also has a contract with Westchester to bring the event back there once before 2012, but there was no mention of Westchester in the release.
The press conferences revealed one player who likes the place and one who artfully avoided the question.
Q. What do you think of your golf course since you're a member here?
PHIL MICKELSON: Well, I love it. I love it because I think the shots around the greens have been very well thought out. I think the greens have movement to them, but it's subtle movement. It's not these big humps and hollows that modern architecture seems to have. The rough doesn't go right up to the edge of the green. There's a lot of shaved areas that extends out. There's a lot of movement, so you get different lies, and I think around the greens it's within very well thought out. I think it's hard, though. It's a hard golf course. Tee-to-green it's very demanding.
Q. How many times have you played this before?
PHIL MICKELSON: Just a handful, just five or six.
And the artist...
Q. Your thoughts on the course in general?
LUCAS GLOVER: It's in perfect shape. Kind of intimidating scenery. But it's in great shape.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM 26 Comments | in 2009 PGA Tour, Architecture, Phil Mickelson, Tiger Woods 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (26)
The fairways are deceptively narrow because visual cues like trees are notably absent.
It will be very interesting to see what happens with strong wind combined with non-practice round attendance levels, esp. at the north and south ends of the course.
It's an odd course to navigate as a spectator.
The views are spectacular and a bit surreal. Besides the view, the greens are the course's strength.
Given the genesis of the course, I find a few of the magazine aesthetic judgments a bit contradictory. If a publication rates Shadow Creek high on a "best" list, for instance, then it should not dismiss LN right out of the gate.
The "cake and eat it too" line that the ownership tried to sell on the CBS infomercial this past weekend bugged me a bit. The course is there for everyone to enjoy for years to come (subtext: if you put us on the rota?). In fact, Liberty National is so special, membership is by invitation only, even if you have the half mil to join.
And hate to say it, but the touted environmental benefits of the course build are negated by so many other daily maintenance factors. Too many hand waves over the top hat.
Still, I'll try to keep an open mind while in attendance through Sunday.
I second that thought. Most Tour Pros don't know the first thing about what makes a golf course good. I usually assume if the players are complaining about the course it must be decent. (Afterall, they all love firestone)
Mr. Glover is starting to rival Azinger in the eloquence department.
I can't imagine having that kind of cash and then spending it on a course that seems to be worth maybe a $100 green fee.
Dimple - how are your Post Toasties?
jb
vw: Right with you, comrade.
the majority of non-lefties in GSLand: Why would anyone want to join a club that let in Rudy Giuliani?
I had to give up my $1200 membership this year (sadly, my $200 initiation fee/ share was lost in the process). So...it seems that I'm not likely to be rubbing elbows with the Green Jackets any time soon.
TOUR players love Firestone and Warwick Hills... so I can assume whatever the course is, it isn't that ? Which isn't exactly bad?
The 500G is to join is just stupid sick... but taking that out of the equation, how good of a course is it?
The problems with the course, I'm told among others, are ridiculous greens and non-existent landing areas. Aside from that it looks een-ter-est-ing.
that's an oldie I obviously 'borrowed' from someone else. Help yourself, big guy...
Staying on theme, the course looks like someone's first design on Links 2003.
I'd say that's not quite fair to Cupp. I play Pumpkin Ridge pretty regularly (~2x/mo) and Langdon Farms on occasion. Ghost Creek has some truly excellent holes that do not feel manufactured at all 2, 3, 4, 7, 13, 15. I don't think Cupp got the most out of either property so I'm not going to defend him any more than that but I'll just say his stuff is "better than most."