Is USGA unfair with setup of Open courses?

[TheRake]

Tiger Woods thinks so (http://sports.yahoo.golfserv.com/gdc/news/article.asp?Source=YAHOO&id=24188)

I tend to agree with Tiger on this one. The USGA for some reason has this belief that the winning score should be even par. In order to keep the best players in the world in check they "trick" up the course until it is almost unplayable. Here are some numbers from yesterday.

Best Score: Even Par 70 (Robert Allenby)
Worst Score: 19 over par 89 (Billy Mayfair)
Average Score: 10 over par 80
Winners Score: 1 over par 71 (Retief Goosen)

Allenby shot even par and moved up several places on the leader board. I shutter to think how bad it could have been if the weather had been worse.

TheRake

[superleeds]

It's not unfair. All players play the same course.

Is it good for golf to watch the best in the world scramble around?
I don't think so but at least it's not the normal pitch and putt we see week after week.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
The USGA for some reason has this belief that the winning score should be even par.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't see any problem with this. The course was super hard but not impossible and the pros that don't have a good rounds cry. Happens every year.

B.T.W. wasn't the winning score -4?

[TheRake]

[ QUOTE ]
B.T.W. wasn't the winning score -4?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes for the tournament. I was giving sunday scores. Sorry if this wasn't clear.

TheRake

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not unfair. All players play the same course.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good point, but it also could be that some players are luckier than others. For example, you hit your ball on one part of the green, someone else hits their's 6 inches away, and their ball winds up off the green with an impossible chip. And not everyone did play the same course, because the USGA realized the greens were not fair after the first two groups, so they watered one of the greens down to make it more playable. I like the idea of thicker roughs, but more reasonable greens.

It really doesn't matter what the final score is, there is still only one winner.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
you hit your ball on one part of the green, someone else hits their's 6 inches away, and their ball winds up off the green with an impossible chip.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

[ QUOTE ]
because the USGA realized the greens were not fair after the first two groups, so they watered one of the greens down to make it more playable. I like the idea of thicker roughs, but more reasonable greens.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree totally. Personally I think the golf powers that be should be careful that they don't kill the golden goose. Golf is a boring enough sport to watch but yesterdays action was golf boredom raised to the 5th power. Perhaps a lot more people enjoyed than I believe.

[JTrout]

at least it's not the normal pitch and putt we see week after week.

You're right. It was pitch, pitch, putt, putt, putt.

The USGA are idiots.
When you watch what happened to Phil's putt on #7 on SATURDAY, see the forecast for high winds through the night, see the high winds through the night, and declare that you are not going to water that green, well.....idiots.

[Ray Zee]

most of the tourny courses are reasonably easy for todays golfers. so whats wrong with having a few couses that are really tough.
the reason these particular pros are winning is that they happen to play well on the courses that are presented. put a whole new set of problems out there and a new breed will emerge, with the best adapting.

[JTrout]

the reason these particular pros are winning is that they happen to play well on the courses that are presented

they just "happen" to?



put a whole new set of problems out there and a new breed will emerge, with the best adapting.

Every year, the courses are longer, the rough is thicker, the greens are faster, and much firmer.
Two years ago, they never put the pins 3 from the edge (4 or 5 yes), today it is routine.

The quality of golf keeps getting better.

put a whole new set of problems out there

What do you suggest?

[Six_of_One]

[ QUOTE ]
Golf is a boring enough sport to watch but yesterdays action was golf boredom raised to the 5th power.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Boring is wide fairways, easy shots into soft greens, and putts for birdie. Yesterday was exciting, especially down the stretch. As far as I'm concerned, the more difficult, the better. That's why the U.S. Open is my favorite tournament to watch.

[MaxPower]

The problem the USGA has is that they try to set up the course to be fair but very difficult. However, they sometimes do not realize the effect that extreme weather will have on their set-up.

This happened 2 years ago on the 10th hole at Bethpage. They set it up so that the players had to carry their drive 250-260 just to reach the fairway. This was tough enough for the shorter hitters, but in the 2nd round there was a very strong wind and even the long hitters were having trouble reaching the fairway.

Also, this year the 7th green and a few others were crazy. It is not fair if a player who hits his tee shot on the green has to hole a long put or his ball will roll off the green (I saw this happen to Maryama). Once again it was the unexpected weather that caused the problem.

I like they way they set it up, because it always brings the best players to the top (with the exception of Jeff Maggert who always does well in The Open). It takes real talent to win the open. Goosen had to hit some incredible short game shots to win it.

[TheRake]

The problem is when it becomes impossible to hit good shots. When players are unable to hit a green because it is too firm and they can't run it on due to obstacles in front of the green it becomes too much. When players cannot make putts because the greens are so fast that they cannot hit the ball hard enough to get a breaking putt on the right line it becomes too much. I don't disagree that the courses should be set up to be more difficult than the average tour stop, but you have to give these guys some realistic chance to play the holes. Should the margin of error really be 1 or 2 feet when you're hitting an approach shot from 180 yards away?

TheRake

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
most of the tourny courses are reasonably easy for todays golfers. so whats wrong with having a few couses that are really tough.
the reason these particular pros are winning is that they happen to play well on the courses that are presented. put a whole new set of problems out there and a new breed will emerge, with the best adapting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Make it tough in a reasonable way. Tighten the fairways, thicken the rough. Don't make people putt on marble. That's just ridiculous.

[Six_of_One]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is when it becomes impossible to hit good shots.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it wasn't impossible. I saw Goosen and Mickelson hit a lot of good shots, and they both made birdies. Difficult, yes, but not impossible.

[M2d]

If you really want to hear the players bitch and moan, set up the course to "muni" conditions:

fairways as long as most rough with bald patches spaced intermittantly. rough with mud holes, thick spots and bald patches (and periodic "lost" balls placed here and there for fun). tee boxes without a flat area to be found. Greens that are mowed to two different heights: fairway length and bald. Greens as bumpy as a teenager's face.
And, in between each pro group, a foursome of senior citizens who are too proud to move up to the whites and are playing a $2 nassau and $.25 skins.

what do you think Tiger would say to that?

[TimTimSalabim]

Watching the tournament yesterday on TV, those putting greens reminded me of when I was a kid and played miniature golf, and sometimes you would putt it and if you didn't hit it just right it would come right back down a slope and wind up rolling all the way back to where you started. It just doesn't seem like professional golf to me. The next logical step will be to put one of those windmill holes where the blade covers up the opening to the hole and you have to time your shot just right or it will hit the blade and bounce back.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Watching the tournament yesterday on TV, those putting greens reminded me of when I was a kid and played miniature golf, and sometimes you would putt it and if you didn't hit it just right it would come right back down a slope and wind up rolling all the way back to where you started.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had exactly the same thoughts.

[paland]

Tiger Woods, meet Annie Duke. Ya whining bitch.

[andyfox]

The scores are irrelevant. The course plays the same for Tiger Woods as for everyone else. Somebody is going to shoot the lowest score, regardless of whether it's -18 or +18.

Tiger didn't think Pebble Beach was unplayable when nobody else could break par and he won by 15 strokes.

Stop crying.

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
The scores are irrelevant. The course plays the same for Tiger Woods as for everyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but they've moved the luck/skill slider more towards the luck side, especially with the crazy putting greens. Basically, what they've done is the equivalent of making the blinds and antes increase quickly in a poker tournament. So even though it's the same for everyone, it increases the chance that there will be a few more lucky players and a few less skilled players in the top positions.

[HDPM]

Well a Nationwide Buy.Com Nike Hogan Tour player had a friend in our town and played our muni course which has a lot of those conditions. He was around 10-11 under for his round I heard. I would guess for 72 holes at that course under normal conditions that the winner would shoot 36-40 under par on the Nationwide Tour. 2 par 4's are tough par 3's on tour tho. One par 5 is a decent par 4 and one par 5 is a tough par 4. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[HDPM]

I enjoyed watching, but did think the greens got out of hand. The first 2 days I thought the course was fair, if anything a little easy. The problem with links courses is that they don't go with fast greens. If the wind gets nasty, you cant have Augusta greens because the ball won't stay on them to putt. This is why Scottish courses don't go nuts over green speed. You also need fairways that can be hit in the wind. I would have liked to see the greens a little slower and the rough nastier in spots. Like the first hole, if you miss the fairway with an iron, the rough should be penal and cost you a half shot at least. You should not be able to reach the green from most lies IMO. However, Shinnecock is a cool course and provided a nice test.

In a couple of years the Open goes back to Oakmont. They have lengthened the couse some. But I'd like to see it traditional and see what the players would do. I'd just like to see Oakmont and the USGA bring back the furrowed rake Oakmont intended to use in the bunkers. I would like to see nasty Oakmont rough, not the rough they had last year in Chicago. Let the guys bomb it 325 with no spin balls, but woe unto them if they hit it in the rough or a bunker. I'd love to see pitch outs from fairway bunkers and difficulty getting it out of greenside bunkers. Get the greens fast and firm, but fair. They won't do it, but I'd love to see modern pros deal with the old furrowed bunkers. The USGA did a nice job making the bunkers a little dicey this week with soft sand and some rocks. I don't like rocks in the bunkers, but inconsistent and soft sand is fine w/ me.

[M2d]

with all due respect, you don't have the sheer mass of golfers that we do in the bay area. just playing before, after and around them is sure to add a couple of strokes to even tiger's round via sheer frustration, if not osmosis. I once heard a senior player comment after a round "hey, we finished under six (hours). we must have been flying through."

[HDPM]

That's true. Pace of play here is OK. I have played my share of slow muni golf and it is miserable. I just think pros are used to it. They play rounds where players go off of both tees and there is a big field. Q School rounds take forever with a lot of pressure. They can deal with the guy in cutoffs with a pull cart playing green hockey.


Let them play a round at a muni course with a convicted felon they tried to put in prison. BTDT. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif (I went out as a single and didn't recognize the guy. We were on the second or third hole before I placed him. D'oh.)

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Golf is a boring enough sport to watch but yesterdays action was golf boredom raised to the 5th power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Say what you will about the fairness of the course, but if you're any kind of a golf fan to begin with then to say that yesterday was boring is ludacris.

You have Phil 0-for-43 in his first 43 majors going for 2 in a row rattle off 3 birdies in 4 holes (should have been 4 in a row but one putt defied gravity and stayed out) on the back 9 of a course where they all said a birdie run was impossible. And Goosen dropping putt after putt after gut wrenching putt on the toughest greens possibly ever played in the history of the sport. 11 one-putts from Goosen after some real stumbling on the back 9 and he and Mickelson are tied going into the 17th hole of the US Open.

Its a shame Phil yipped it up as he's prone to do on important short putts but yesterdays golf was awesome. If you found watching the back 9 boring yesterday then you should probably stop watching golf altogether. The last 2 majors have been amazing.

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but they've moved the luck/skill slider more towards the luck side, especially with the crazy putting greens. Basically, what they've done is the equivalent of making the blinds and antes increase quickly in a poker tournament. So even though it's the same for everyone, it increases the chance that there will be a few more lucky players and a few less skilled players in the top positions

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent comparison. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Ray Zee]

yes the luckier players have more of a chance. but it also adds different skills to win. many players dont have those skills in golf or poker. its not necesarily right or wrong it is just a little different. whats wrong with that.

[adios]

As far as the luck factor goes, I think the top players in the Open this year demonstrated superior skill. It was different and as far as determining the winner I don't have a gripe. As far as being boring, for me it was. I knew that the chances of someone coming from behind were small and that chipping, putting, driving accuracy, and course management would be the determining factors. Really it didn't pay to take any risks to try and move up the scoreboard was my take. Hope the guys ahead of you blow up on a couple of holes. Boring for me but ok as a test of golf. Fairly soon players will start leaving their drivers out of the bag /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

[Sundevils21]

Most tournaments I watch to see super low scores and lots of birdies down the stretch. Not the US Open. In the US Open I want to see players struggling to make par. I want to see players chipping into the fairway because they drove it into the rough and it's soooo thick they can't hit a full swing. I want to see lots of cursing. I want to hear all the players screaming bloody murder after the round because of the firmness of the greens. US Open's are meant to be tough. Everyone is playing the same course, so shut up and put the ball in the hole, NOW!!! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[andyfox]

I'd agree if guys who couldn't win anywhere else were winning or even contending. But Goosen can play: he's won twice. Tiger can play: he won by 15 shots: was he lucky? Els can play: he's won twice. Usually the guy who plays best wins on a tough course.

[Bill Murphy]

..Former Open champ 1st at -4, current Masters champ 2nd at -2, plodder-grinder w/yea prior top tens in Opens 3rd at +1. Looks fine to me. Sure, the rest of the board was a train wreck, but who cares? Happens at every major, more or less.

Players know what to expect at an Open. Tiger played lousy and now Butch is in his dome. Els hit the wall because of his stupid schedule. Serge still ain't ready. Mayfair obviously found a baggie of dope in the fescue that someone dropped, alongside one of Daly's old flasks from '95 that was still half full.

Now, granted, somebody gotta die for rolling 7 green Friday night, and the boys are right that the USGA was stupid to let the greens die. 11 on the stimpmeters fine, fellas. Rest of the course is plenty tough, no need to bring the windmills into play.

But the leader board wouldn't have changed no matter what. Of course everybody but the winner is going to be tired and upset. Whining about "unfair" setups at majors is as old as golf, or at least as old as DL3's professional career. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[andyfox]

I agree with you.

My all-time favorite moment from a U.S.Open was at Pebble the year Tiger won by forty strokes. Olazabal is trying to figure out what club to hit in the wind on one of the par fours. He pulls one out, hesitates, puts it back, consults his caddie, takes out another club, hesitates some more. He throws some grass in the air three or four times, then he finally hits the ball. He watches its flight and gets a disgusted look on his face and then just yells out, "Jesus Christ!"

[slavic]

Have any of you played one of Hogan's designed courses? They aren't long but they make you think about what the heck your doing around the course. If you don't that easy par 4 will eat you up. Frankly I'm sick of weekly extend the country club course 1K yards so we can see the big dog drivers.

[M2d]

[ QUOTE ]
Let them play a round at a muni course with a convicted felon they tried to put in prison. BTDT. (I went out as a single and didn't recognize the guy. We were on the second or third hole before I placed him. D'oh.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, you got me there. How about...let them play behind the group that waits until the green on the par five is clear before hitting their second shots (all of them). Then the four collectively put two in the water and two in the deep rough on the other side of the fairway. Let's see Retief keep his focus though that (not that I can...that's why I don't play stud). /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Phat Mack]

I loved the US Open this year. It was the most interesting, and only interesting, golf match I've seen on TV in a long long time. As mentioned above, the course played the same for all players (with the exception of two groups who missed the watering on one hole).

The problem isn't with the USGA and the problem isn't with the course. The problem is with the equipment. The clubs and balls they can make now turn golf course into drive and pitches. Boring. They have tried moving the tees back, but so what, they just make longer equipment. The new equipment is good for golf: it lets the duffers hit the ball a mile, but it shouldn't be allowed in tournaments. They could make all players use an identical "dead" ball that would limit drives to 230 yds., or some other arbitrary number. The equipment has been killing golf courses for years, and what we saw in the US Open was the course fighting back. The course won. The pros should quit their whining or go to the rail.

[TheRake]

[ QUOTE ]
...only interesting golf match I've seen on TV in a long long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

For my money this year's Masters topped them all. I think the '99 US Open that Payne Stewart won was also one of the great ones.

[ QUOTE ]
The problem isn't with the USGA and the problem isn't with the course. The problem is with the equipment. The clubs and balls they can make now turn golf course into drive and pitches. Boring. They have tried moving the tees back, but so what, they just make longer equipment. The new equipment is good for golf: it lets the duffers hit the ball a mile, but it shouldn't be allowed in tournaments. They could make all players use an identical "dead" ball that would limit drives to 230 yds., or some other arbitrary number

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt there will ever be any kind of standardization of equipment for the professionals. There is so much money involved with endorsements and advertising. With all the logos these guys wear they are Nascar for the upper class.

TheRake

[JTrout]

In an effort to identify the best players in the world (not embarass them), and to protect the sanctity of par, the USGA has announced that the 2005 US Open will be played in the parking lot of Wal-Mart Supercenter in Detroit, MI.

Adding to the controversy is the decision by the USGA to put overturned shopping carts over 3 of the holes. This brought much criticism from the world's best players.

"They should quit their crying,"
"Everyone has to play it, it will play the same for everybody," said one official.

When asked who would likely win, the overwhelming favorite answer was, "the course."

One thing's for sure, it will bring a new breed of faces to the top of the leader board, as a whole different set of skills will be needed to survive this test.

[J.A.Sucker]

It all depends on the greens. I know a guy of this caliber and he can basically shoot 68 out on these courses all day, but the greens usually make it impossible to make a put over 6 feet. There are some munis with good greens, and these guys will blister them; easily shooting 65. This course didn't have any drivable par 4's, though.

The Nike/Hogan/Buy.com/whatever Tour guys are probably better suited to killing the munis than the PGA guys according to my buddy, mainly because they set up the courses to reward gambling more. That's why these guys can go so low, but they also can blow up. PGA guys usually don't gamble as much, since the checks are good for just making the cut every week and shooting OK (see Justin Leornard). On the AAA tour, you want to win an event, so gamble gamble! Plus, most munis don't have any tricky pitch shots around the greens, since they are flat and slow, which is a huge separator for the AAA/major leaguers.

[Phat Mack]

I doubt there will ever be any kind of standardization of equipment for the professionals. There is so much money involved with endorsements and advertising.

This is a good point. Money's involved. What brought the idea to mind was a magazine article I read years ago about Jack Niclaus and a course he was designing in Bermuda. The limited space allocated for the course required it to be short, so they had developed a special ball. It was larger than a regular ball, about as bigger than an American ball as the Amreican is to the British, and was about a 70 or 80. It seemed like it might be a neat solution to the problem. Otherwise, the life span for a championship couse would be about 3-5 years.

[Phat Mack]

the USGA has announced that the 2005 US Open will be played in the parking lot of Wal-Mart Supercenter

Heh. In the early 60's I was a junior publinks player. A lot of the RK's would come from their country clubs to play publinks tourneys. They were unfamiliar with the concept of unwatered greens. The action of a ball hitting an unwatered green is similar to, if not identical with, a ball hitting a Wal-Mart parking lot. They'd stare in disbelief at their 7-iron going another 30 yards. I stare in disbelief at their inability to run a ball onto the green. You're right, it's a different set of skills.

[HDPM]

When I was a kid I did a little caddying at a nice country club. Snotty club, but it had a beautifully maintained course. Wonderful greens, perfect fairways. You couldn't get a bad lie in the fairway and the greens were perfectly true. (They had a lawn bowling green to the standard of the other greens too.) Anyway, I was looping for a total jackass one fine morning who hit a good opening drive. As we were walking down the fairway he noticed a few grass clippings from the freshly mown fairway. So he started bitching about the maintenance saying they should play winter rules under such abominable and oppressive conditions. I couldn't believe it. Not only was there grass, there was perfect grass. He needed a dose of muni golf. What a wad he was.

[BadBoyBenny]

[ QUOTE ]
As mentioned above, the course played the same for all players (with the exception of two groups who missed the watering on one hole).

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't buy this for one second. The rough at this course was weak enough that someone could drive their ball 3 yards from someone else and one would have a pretty little fluff lie and the other would have it buried. Also it seemed to me like putts from very close positions would break very differently. I think it was the most inconsistent professional course I have ever seen.

I think the inconsistency did have some influence on who was around at the end, I think Funk got pretty lucky the first 2 days, and shouldn't have been as close as he was. The top 3 guys though, its hard to argue that they didn't play the best golf of anyone and I still think the best man won. His recovery game was the best I've ever seen at any tournament (however, I've only been watching golf for about 5 years)

I don't disagree with your opinion on the equipment, how can anyone compare today's guys to Jack, or a Sam Snead when they're almost playing a different game? I think a better than killing the ball way would just be to shrink the maximum clubhead size and lower the allowed COR a little, it would go a long way in separating the great from the good.

It's always been my opinion that Par should be about the median score for each round of the course, and if someone can take a course that an average US Open qualifier pars and beat the crap out of it... great for them.

[M2d]

JAS,
have you ever played Lincoln in SF or harding park pre remodel? those are the types of greens I was talking about. Where the green is cut so high (or not cut at all) that you'd have a rebound coming off the stimp, resulting in a negative stimp meter reading. where you not only have to read the break, but also the bumps to tell where your ball will hop. mix standard muni type course maintenance with the foggy not quite rain, not quite fog weather of the sunset (what a misnomer) district in SF, and you have a wonderful putting day ahead of you.

I once played Lincoln and there was a temp green on the fourth or fifth hole. I honestly couldn;t tell the difference.