OT: U.S. Open

[Obliviax]

I never liked the "hack it out" rough of the U.S. Open. That takes away too much of the shot making. I like to see players need to deal with flyer lies, and go for it when they shouldn't thinking they might get lucky and pull it off.

The aspect of the U.S. Open that I really like and that I think is missing here would be quality greens. I think Oakmont provides the standard -- very fast and smooth. "Fast" isn't possible this year due to the undulation, but I do think they missed the "smooth" part. The West Coast grasses are problematic, and Fescue is perhaps the worst. I'm not sure I understand why Bent would not work at Chambers Bay. But, it is a public course, and they probably wanted to preserve the "native grasses" aspect, though "natural" certainly doesn't fit the terrain. That said, I do love how they carved out most of the holes. I would play it for sure, and enjoy it.

Appreciate your point but to me, the US Open wouldn't be any different from the Colonial, Memorial or Players Championship game. What made the US Open different for me was the penalty for not keeping it on the fairway while having to navigate some very long holes (forcing players to take chances). I used to go to Firestone a lot and the problem is that players started playing "off course". In other words, they'd play down the neighboring fairway, skip balls off the water and off the crowd, and dump balls into the sand to mitigate the risk of rolling off the back of the fairway (up and down from the sand has to be ~ 80% from greenside bunkers).

Regardless, watching the US Open yesterday, I just couldn't get into it. It just seemed like another tourney.

 

[mlv5000]

But, it is a public course, and they probably wanted to preserve the "native grasses" aspect, though "natural" certainly doesn't fit the terrain.

You're on to it. "West Coast sensibilities" come into play here too. From a WaPo article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...c6ab34-1602-11e5-9518-f9e0a8959f32_story.html

"However, the sustainability of the course, its low cost to maintain and its low water usage were all appropriate to the 21st century. “H.L. Mencken said, ‘The West begins where the rainfall ends,’ ” Jones said. “To me, this all-fescue course is beautiful."

West Coast, municipal course owned by the County, aided in part with public funding, can't imagine that didn't come into consideration during design.

 

[KnightWhoSaysNit]

Appreciate your point but to me, the US Open wouldn't be any different from the Colonial, Memorial or Players Championship game. What made the US Open different for me was the penalty for not keeping it on the fairway while having to navigate some very long holes (forcing players to take chances). I used to go to Firestone a lot and the problem is that players started playing "off course". In other words, they'd play down the neighboring fairway, skip balls off the water and off the crowd, and dump balls into the sand to mitigate the risk of rolling off the back of the fairway (up and down from the sand has to be ~ 80% from greenside bunkers).

Regardless, watching the US Open yesterday, I just couldn't get into it. It just seemed like another tourney.

If they want to keep the U.S. Open unique and with an identity relative to other majors they could just stay with the public course idea. That would fit with "open." The old venues like Marion, Oakmont, Baltrusol, etc. could do the PGA. I do think they could find a happy median on the rough. It should not be so long that a player is forced to use a sand wedge. On the other hand, it should be difficult to get the club on the ball, and the first cut should bring in the flyer problem.

 

[Bushwood CC]

I never liked the "hack it out" rough of the U.S. Open. That takes away too much of the shot making. I like to see players need to deal with flyer lies, and go for it when they shouldn't thinking they might get lucky and pull it off.

The aspect of the U.S. Open that I really like and that I think is missing here would be quality greens. I think Oakmont provides the standard -- very fast and smooth. "Fast" isn't possible this year due to the undulation, but I do think they missed the "smooth" part. The West Coast grasses are problematic, and Fescue is perhaps the worst. I'm not sure I understand why Bent would not work at Chambers Bay. But, it is a public course, and they probably wanted to preserve the "native grasses" aspect, though "natural" certainly doesn't fit the terrain. That said, I do love how they carved out most of the holes. I would play it for sure, and enjoy it.

Huh? The "two cut" rough of th Open courses is "traditional" and a carry-over from the Scotish links course - the course you mentioned, Oakmont, is in fact a design style referred to as an "inland links" and was designed by a Scottish designer...designed to mimick a traditional Scottish links course with penal 2nd cut rough, penal fairway bunkers (the "church pews"), etc... All of those design elements, including the heavy 2nd cut rough, are traditional and taken directly from the Scottish "old style" courses with the specific intent of "rewarding" accuracy and shots in the fairway where you can play any shot you choose and get your club directly on the ball...in other words, design elements - including the heavy 2nd cut rough - are intended to be penal and severely limit the shot choices the errant player has at his disposal. They certainly are not design elements that later generation US designers developed (e.g., "target golf") - the big non-traditional element you see on those course is the use of man-made ponds, forced-carries over water hazards, island greens, etc... - you almost never see any of these design elements on the traditional British Isles course designs. Again, you do see narrow fairways and heavy heavy 2nd cut rough which is very traditional and not something innovated in the U.S. by latter generation US designers.

 

[delcoLion]

I really couldn't care less who televises or announces the golf matches. They really add nothing to the game. I don't see how Buck is any worse than Nance.

What is alarming to me is that this golf course is a cow pasture. Somebody at a very senior level of the USGA has to be saying "WTF?"

If I recall correctly, the USGA has been touting a more "natural look" over the last few years. Instead of a lush, spare-no-water golf course, they have been encouraging reduced water usage and letting courses go brown.

I don't mind that too much but the greens seem to be awfully bumpy. That's bad, IMO.

 

[CDLionFL]

I agree CBS is hands down the best. I enjoy all of the coverage that FOX is showing, but Joe Buck? C'mon, they could find somebody better than that. Corey Pavin sounds like he's at a funeral. All in all, it's still better than hearing Berman hack it up for two days on ESpin.

Those of you who think CBS is best, do me a favor the rest of this golf season: Watch CBS at the PGA Championship (and that includes the TNT broadcasts on Thursday/Friday because they produce those) and then watch NBC's coverage of the FedExCup Playoffs and tell me how much golf each one shows in a broadcast. I GUARANTEE you that NBC will show you more golfers than CBS will (of note, during 3rd round of Masters, CBS showed less than 20% of the players who made the cut). NBC will try their best to get a shot of as many golfers as possible during a broadcast. CBS also has the incredibly annoying trait of showing a live golf shot hit into the green and another ball will be sitting on the green. They will then go back and show you how it got there. I already know how it got there, why show it? And with the exception of Feherty, CBS commentators are a total snore to listen to. If you do me that favor and check back in late September and you still have the same opinion, then I guess we'll just have to have differing opinions.

As for Fox, they were brutal in the 1st round. Only showed about a 1/3 of the entire field yesterday. NBC (they produced ESPN's coverage on first 2 days) would have gotten in at least 70% of the field.

 

[bmw199]

 

[joewp]

I don't have an automatic anti Fox bias as some of the negative posters appear to have. Think that the first day was not the greatest golf broadcasting but am tuned in to the second day and the banter and comments appear to be smoother and more polished. Am actually warming up to Norman. Will save my final assessment for after the fourth day. No comment on the course, but some less than positive comments are slipping out from the players.

 

[Obliviax]

If I recall correctly, the USGA has been touting a more "natural look" over the last few years. Instead of a lush, spare-no-water golf course, they have been encouraging reduced water usage and letting courses go brown.

I don't mind that too much but the greens seem to be awfully bumpy. That's bad, IMO.

There is a local guy that does golf shows and he said, this morning, that the west coast is going totally links for new courses due to the lower water requirements. he said the USGA is trying to be very sensitive to the drought conditions and over population in arid areas. It was his contention that the entire issue is being driven by water requirements.

 

[Relayer]

Fox hasn't shown a live golf shot in the last 20 minutes. Do I need need to see Curt Menefee and Tom Weiskopf babble on about Tiger. Charles Davis has been a train wreck with the interviews. I thought for sure they would have given Holly Saunders that job. At least she knows the game and is easy on the eyes.

 

[GregInPitt]

Course l

It's a combo of the British Open and Cedar Point.

The course layout has a golfer walking close to 10 miles instead of maybe 5-6 miles and has elevation changes totaling over 600 feet up and down.

Have grandstands for 18,000 of the 30,000 daily cap.

Slow play is again an issue. Luckily Sun is the longest day (daylight-wise) of the year.

WOW - Tiger just hit a great sand shot from a buried lie, even he was laughing at it. Sank the putt for par, still +4 after 10. A LONG time since Tiger smiled on a golf course.

Well summarized. I would have just said that the course is a pathetic imitation of a british course, and I just don't see why the U.S. Open would be played on such an excuse of a beach cow pasture.

 

[lionlurker]

It's just a bizarre selection. If it's not a classic US Open type course, it should at least look like a classic US Open type course. That is what the US Open is.

 

[Bushwood CC]

If I recall correctly, the USGA has been touting a more "natural look" over the last few years. Instead of a lush, spare-no-water golf course, they have been encouraging reduced water usage and letting courses go brown.

I don't mind that too much but the greens seem to be awfully bumpy. That's bad, IMO.

The courses that have hosted the U.S. Open the most (Oakmont has hosted more U.S. Opens than any other single course - Baltasrol has two courses both of which have hosted Opens) are not set up to use a lot of water, be watered constantly or be "lush" -- they play most difficult when they are dried out, hard and the fairways and greens are "rolling" (and the greens will only hold full shots hit from tight-lies - e.g., the fairway - with spin). I know of none of the traditional U.S. Open courses that the USGA is not looking to play under natural conditions - not only that, but they actually HOPE it does not rain, let alone even think about watering, in the days immediately preceding the tournament.

None of the courses you would think of as the traditional U.S. Open courses - Oakmont, Baltasrol, Merion, Pinehurst, etc... - are watered or designed to play "lush". They are designed to be played under natural conditions and play the absolute hardest when it has not rained in a long time and the course is hard and rolling. You are thinking of many resort courses that get watered all the time but that is largely because they get so much play which requires the course be watered (especially the greens) to keep from being damaged and burned out due to the number of people that play them in a single day. Private courses like Oakmont see a fraction of the play that a resort course does and they are not watered constantly, nor are they designed to be watered constantly when played.

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

Obama approves of the British Open being moved to the Eco-friendly U.S.A.

More evidence that his "vision" is working...perhaps

 

[Relayer]

Corey Pavin and Juli Inkster are useless. I don't like that Fox never shows the player's facial reactions after a shot. This is amateur hour at its finest.

 

[lilromeo]

NBC recently won the British Open rights beginning in 2017 which is great... FOX outbid NBC with a ridiculous bid and won the rights to all USGA sanctioned events including men's and women's U.S. open along with US Open Amatuer.

Unfortunately... If you like golf... And you like watching the open... You stuck with golf.

Joe Buck ? Awful...

day 3 and the coverage is still lousy.

 

[bxle]

day 3 and the coverage is still lousy.

In so many ways.

 

[Blueblood4eva]

First thing is, if you have a brand new course with zero tradition, it better be spectacular. The pro's hate this dog track.We also have all of the personalities and favorite players out of contention. It is left to the monotone drones. It is like a ski vacation. If it snows like hell and conditions are excellent Aspen is no better than Copper mountain. Everybody has a great time. Nothing about this venue is refined, like placement of the TV towers, the grandstands, the facilities, studio, hell, even the patrons are 150 yards away from the action! Where are the roars? The FOX digital coverage of preferred pairings was actually not bad on the first two days. The network coverage as well as the tournament is terrible. It took Jason Day fainting to have any excitement at all. They will milk that to death on Sunday and find ways to raise Tiger from the dead.

 

[KnightWhoSaysNit]

Course l





Well summarized. I would have just said that the course is a pathetic imitation of a british course, and I just don't see why the U.S. Open would be played on such an excuse of a beach cow pasture.

I think this course would be fine if it were not for the Poa

Course l





Well summarized. I would have just said that the course is a pathetic imitation of a british course, and I just don't see why the U.S. Open would be played on such an excuse of a beach cow pasture.

I think the course would be fine if it were not for the patchy Poa Annua grass mixed in on the greens. This was a fixable problem. They just needed to rebuild the greens a few years ago. Courses need to do this periodically, perhaps more often on the West Coast.

I don't think there is a rule book for the U.S. Open, i.e., that states rough must be 6+ inches and that fairways cannot be wider than 20 yards. Chambers Bay is a beautiful venue that is obviously quite unique. It does demand accurate shot-making.

The shocker to me is that the USGA went with this track even though the greens would be substandard to your average weekend hacker. There had to be some strong political magnet to bring the open to western Washington. FOX is clearly being politically correct with some of their ("smooth green") comments. Only Sergio came out and said it like it is.

 

[Mister Magoo]

Love to watch someone hit a golf ball and land. Then, watch it roll for another 30 seconds!! Not!! Truly awful way to decide a U.S. Open. Hit the ball. And, HOPE it stops where you want it.

 

[psu1969a]

I really couldn't care less who televises or announces the golf matches. They really add nothing to the game. I don't see how Buck is any worse than Nance.

What is alarming to me is that this golf course is a cow pasture. Somebody at a very senior level of the USGA has to be saying "WTF?"

anyone is better than Nance and Faldo is too me. Like job that Buck and the Shark are doing. Very refreshing and the Shark is much better than Faldo and/or Miller.

 

[bxle]

Love to watch someone hit a golf ball and land. Then, watch it roll for another 30 seconds!! Not!! Truly awful way to decide a U.S. Open. Hit the ball. And, HOPE it stops where you want it.

I could see how frustrated Speith was getting yesterday while putting. At one point he hit it a little harder, and it still went off line. The poa is a problem, especially later in the day.

 

[royboy]

Back to Oakmont for 2016; good news.
(and my original home town).

 

[lionlurker]

It's crazy how expensive US Open tickets have gotten. I think the 4 day pass is now $450.

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

Back to Oakmont for 2016; good news.
(and my original home town).

If they were to play at Oakmont every year it would be fine with me. The greatest tournament deserves the greatest golf course.

That said, Merion was spectacular. Congressional was awesome. There are a lot of worthy courses out there - this not being one of them. But the players need to STFU and play. Conditions are the same for everybody.

 

[Heftyhhh]

If they were to play at Oakmont every year it would be fine with me. The greatest tournament deserves the greatest golf course.

That said, Merion was spectacular. Congressional was awesome. There are a lot of worthy courses out there - this not being one of them. But the players need to STFU and play. Conditions are the same for everybody.

Who picked the course? Davis or USGA?

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

It's crazy how expensive US Open tickets have gotten. I think the 4 day pass is now $450.

Very true. And no trouble moving them, either. People snap them up. You're limited to about 40k or so daily even on a big track like Oakmont, so supply is restricted.

 

[Blueblood4eva]

It's crazy how expensive US Open tickets have gotten. I think the 4 day pass is now $450.

No doubt. You now have to pay, just to volunteer to help! USGA will not have to trick up Oakmont. Quite the opposite:

"How difficult is Oakmont Country Club? In 2007, the USGA confirmed what had long been rumored: for the U.S. Open, Oakmont's greens have to be slowed down from the speeds members play them.

Oakmont's list of past champions includes Sarazen, Snead, Hogan, Nicklaus, Jones, Armour and Miller, among others - another part of the course's pedigree. And Oakmont has been the site of eight U.S. Opens, five U.S. Amateurs, three PGA Championships and one U.S. Women's Open, 17 majors (including the Amateur) total - more than any other golf course in America."

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

Who picked the course? Davis or USGA?

Mike Davis is USGA VP and Chair of the Championship Committee. He does not pick the venue all by himself, he certainly has influence.

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

No doubt. You now have to pay, just to volunteer to help! USGA will not have to trick up Oakmont. Quite the opposite:

"How difficult is Oakmont Country Club? In 2007, the USGA confirmed what had long been rumored: for the U.S. Open, Oakmont's greens have to be slowed down from the speeds members play them.

Oakmont's list of past champions includes Sarazen, Snead, Hogan, Nicklaus, Jones, Armour and Miller, among others - another part of the course's pedigree. And Oakmont has been the site of eight U.S. Opens, five U.S. Amateurs, three PGA Championships and one U.S. Women's Open, 17 majors (including the Amateur) total - more than any other golf course in America."

Two US Women's Opens at Oakmont (1992 - Patty Sheehan and 2010 Paula Creamer, two more all-timers). The Oakmont members take perverse pride in having the most brutal course out there. They WANT it tough!

I am marshalling next month at the US Women's Open at Lancaster CC. Also last year at the Senior PGA Players Championship at Fox Chapel GC. Yes, you have to pay, but it's pretty modest. Your fee covers your uniform shirt, hat, and other little trinkets. You get in free all week, free chow, air conditioned tent to take a break, free water and soft drinks, you're inside the ropes, it is actually a very nice deal.

 

[Bushwood CC]

If they were to play at Oakmont every year it would be fine with me. The greatest tournament deserves the greatest golf course.

That said, Merion was spectacular. Congressional was awesome. There are a lot of worthy courses out there - this not being one of them. But the players need to STFU and play. Conditions are the same for everybody.

Oakmont is the toughest and fairest "Championship Course" on a consistent basis in America (courses such as Shinnecock Hills or Pebble Beach can play harder when the weather conditions are really bad - especially wind). The course is fair in setup and does not need to be "tricked out" to be brutally demanding - it is designed in the traditional fashion and has stood the test of time in terms of how demanding it is despite not being constantly redesigned. The only time Oakmont is crippled a bit is if rain softens the fairways and greens, but it still demands very good accuracy via tight fairways and penal rough and bunkers just like the "old style" Scottish Links where the game was birthed.

Winged-Foot another awesome course out of this same mold.

 

[Bushwood CC]

If they were to play at Oakmont every year it would be fine with me. The greatest tournament deserves the greatest golf course.

That said, Merion was spectacular. Congressional was awesome. There are a lot of worthy courses out there - this not being one of them. But the players need to STFU and play. Conditions are the same for everybody.

Here is how the following link ranks the courses that should be considered for US Open Rotation:

Golf Courses ranked for the US Open Rotation

1. Oakmont (2016 host, 2007, 1994, 1983, 1973, 1962, 1953, 1935, 1927)
2. Pebble Beach (2019 host, 2010, 2000, 1992, 1982, 1972)
3. Bethpage Black (2009, 2002)
4. Pinehurst #2 (2005, 1999)
5. Whistling Straits (never hosted US Open)
6. Shinnecock Hills (2018 host, 2005, 1995, 1986, 1896)
7. Winged Foot (2020 host, 2006, 1984, 1974, 1959, 1929)
8. Torey Pines (2021 host, 2008)

This article was written several years ago by Golf Magazine and it looks like a pretty accurate as they included the courses that were selected for 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 US Opens (article was written before these selections). The upcoming venue they didn't have on their list is the 2017 Open at Erin Hills in Erin, Wisconsin - like Chambers Bay, Erin Hills is a brand new addition to the Open Rotation and has never hosted a Professional Major Championship of any kind, let alone a US Open Championship.

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

Here is how the following link ranks the courses that should be considered for US Open Rotation:

Golf Courses ranked for the US Open Rotation

1. Oakmont (2016 host, 2007, 1994, 1983, 1973, 1962, 1953, 1935, 1927)
2. Pebble Beach (2019 host, 2010, 2000, 1992, 1982, 1972)
3. Bethpage Black (2009, 2002)
4. Pinehurst #2 (2005, 1999)
5. Whistling Straits (never hosted US Open)
6. Shinnecock Hills (2018 host, 2005, 1995, 1986, 1896)
7. Winged Foot (2020 host, 2006, 1984, 1974, 1959, 1929)
8. Torey Pines (2021 host, 2008)

This article was written several years ago by Golf Magazine and it looks like a pretty accurate as they included the courses that were selected for 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 US Opens (article was written before these selections). The upcoming venue they didn't have on their list is the 2017 Open at Erin Hills in Erin, Wisconsin - like Chambers Bay, Erin Hills is a brand new addition to the Open Rotation and has never hosted a Professional Major Championship of any kind, let alone a US Open Championship.

Until I looked at your list I did not realize that 5 out of the 8 are public courses. That is OK I suppose but where is Olympic Club, Congo, Baltusrol, Oak Hill, Oakland Hills, etc? Erin Hills has no business hosting an Open. You need to make your bones with something like the US Amateur or something first.

The geographic distribution does not thrill me either. Three New Yorks, 2 California, 1 North Carolina and a Wisconsin. You have to spread the National Championship around better than that.

 

[LafayetteBear]

I did not have a rooting favorite at the beginning of the week, but I'm really pulling for Jason Day at this point. Poor kid is really hurting, but he's hanging tough...

 

[psu1969a]

It's just a bizarre selection. If it's not a classic US Open type course, it should at least look like a classic US Open type course. That is what the US Open is.

what is a typical US Open course? I'm enjoying watching some overpaid golfers look like i do on one of our local courses.

 

[Bushwood CC]

Until I looked at your list I did not realize that 5 out of the 8 are public courses. That is OK I suppose but where is Olympic Club, Congo, Baltusrol, Oak Hill, Oakland Hills, etc? Erin Hills has no business hosting an Open. You need to make your bones with something like the US Amateur or something first.

The geographic distribution does not thrill me either. Three New Yorks, 2 California, 1 North Carolina and a Wisconsin. You have to spread the National Championship around better than that.

I was only referring to the raw ranking of the best courses in America in terms of both difficulty and fairness (e.g., no need to create gimmicky, unfair holes....all of the holes are just demanding, but still fair). IMO, tracks like Oakmont, Winged Foot, Shinnecock Hills, Pinehurst, and Pebble Beach are the "classic" tests of golf that REWARDS great shot-making, but EQUALLY PENALIZE poor shots. These are not the only ones, but I would say Oakmont stands alone in this category in that it has consistently stood the test of time across time without radical change (courses like Marion, Cherry Hills, The Country Club, Baltusrol Lower Course, Medina, etc... are all Open-worthy tracks, but none of them are in the league of Oakmont in my opinion - it is one of the world's truly great courses in terms of being fair, but brutally demanding - the perfect Golf Course that has stood the test of time with little change).

 

[LafayetteBear]

Oakmont "stands alone." LOL, this thread is starting to appear pretty parochial.

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

Oakmont "stands alone." LOL, this thread is starting to appear pretty parochial.

Well you ARE talking to a Pittsburgh guy here. But for you as a Bay Area guy, I already said that any rotation that does not regularly feature Olympic Club is a BAD rotation. I'll just give one more plug for Oakmont standing alone and then I'll shut up. 7 of the 8 US Open Champions were multiple major winners. And just as a little kidding shot (not really, you win the US Open and you're in the pantheon of greatness for all time), the one guy who didn't win another major, Sam Parks Jr., was a Pitt guy!

 

[ILLINOISLION]

Two US Women's Opens at Oakmont (1992 - Patty Sheehan and 2010 Paula Creamer, two more all-timers). The Oakmont members take perverse pride in having the most brutal course out there. They WANT it tough!

I am marshalling next month at the US Women's Open at Lancaster CC. Also last year at the Senior PGA Players Championship at Fox Chapel GC. Yes, you have to pay, but it's pretty modest. Your fee covers your uniform shirt, hat, and other little trinkets. You get in free all week, free chow, air conditioned tent to take a break, free water and soft drinks, you're inside the ropes, it is actually a very nice deal.

I will be volunteering again at the BMW at Conway Farms in Sept. The volunteer package two years ago was I think $75. You got a Peter Millar package of a golf shirt, windbreaker and visor.....the windbreaker's price tag alone was $149.99. Plus free admission and parking all week long, plus meals on the days you were working and two free any day passes for friends. A pretty good deal for being inside the ropes and seeing some good golf up close and personal.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Well you ARE talking to a Pittsburgh guy here. But for you as a Bay Area guy, I already said that any rotation that does not regularly feature Olympic Club is a BAD rotation. I'll just give one more plug for Oakmont standing alone and then I'll shut up. 7 of the 8 US Open Champions were multiple major winners. And just as a little kidding shot (not really, you win the US Open and you're in the pantheon of greatness for all time), the one guy who didn't win another major, Sam Parks Jr., was a Pitt guy!

Fox: Hey, I certainly would not deny that Oakmont is a great track. Olympic is fine, but it takes a backseat to Oakmont, IMO. Not sure I'd say the same thing about Pebble, Cypress Point or Augusta, however.

Lastly, I don't put too much into the number of Opens played at a given course. If that was the measure, then the rankings would skew HEAVILY in favor of about five east coast courses, because the USGA was, for decades, run by east coast folks. It still may be, for all I know. Also, new courses pop up from time to time that deserve to get in the rotation. Not sure that Chambers Bay is deserving, but Bandan Dunes clearly is. Would love to see an Open there.