Winning this Open will be rough stuff

[mainuh]

Checking out some golf blogs this morning I found this -


Winning this Open will be rough stuff
Larry Bohannan • The Desert Sun • May 18, 2008


 Given the conditions and the layout the United States Golf Association showed off this week to the media, it's easy to see a similar winning score for the 2008 Open at the South Course at Torrey Pines Golf Course in San Diego.

The reason for expecting a high score next month is simple: Driving will be the key to playing the par-71 South Course, and driving also will be incredibly difficult.

The USGA unveiled graduated rough at Torrey Pines for the media this week. That means close to the fairway will be rough of 2 inches of a mixture of rye and kikuya grass. A ball will likely sink into the rough, leaving only about the top half of the ball visible. A player can control that kind of shot, but there will still be surprises when the ball will squirt out with little control.

Miss that cut of rough and the players will be faced with four inches, and in some spots more like five or six inches, of kikuya. Just finding the ball would be a near-impossibility, except that some of the 6,000 volunteers for the tournament will be in charge of racing to the ball to mark the position.

Stay in the fairway
Once in the gnarly grass, even Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson might be reduced to grabbing a pitching wedge and just chopping the ball back into the short grass. More than likely the ball will be in a bird's-nest lie, where just getting the club face on the ball will be impossible.

And then there is the wind off the ocean, something the USGA is expecting to blow shots into the rough.

What you learn from playing such a course is how the USGA perceives its national championship. Officials deny that they have a target score in mind for the tournament, but they certainly aren't setting Torrey Pines up to let someone shoot 12 under. If someone did shoot 12 under, the USGA might have a collective heart attack.

But the USGA is also saying that they put a premium on driving. And that isn't a bad thing. The PGA Tour has turned into a bash-fest, with golfer after golfer hammering 300-yard-plus drives with only passing care for hitting the fairway. With technologically advanced balls and clubs, the pros can pretty much gouge a shot out of the toughest rough the PGA Tour offers and still find themselves with at least a long birdie putt.

That's not true at the Open. Hit it off line at the Open, and it will likely cost you a stroke, or at least make you shake over an 8-footer for par on glassy greens.

USGA officials impressed that they want the Torrey Pines course the pros play in the Open to be different than the course they play in the Buick Invitational. The best way to do that is make the pros care about finding the middle of the fairway.

The rough the USGA showed off at Torrey Pines this week is sure to get the pros' respect.

[BigLeftyinAZ]

Very good read,thanks

[jsfain]

I usually think that the USGA tricks up it's Open courses, but put like this it is to a plan.
Thanks for the read.

[davro]

I absolutely cannot wait! It gets boring watching them play courses every week where they hit it as far as they can and go find it in a pretty good lie. I wouldnt want to watch it every week, but I love that the U. S. Open is the toughest week of golf all year. I just hope the dont screw up the greens and have them running at 15.

[Wheeler_WackG2]

This is why I love the US Open. Its no mercy. They dont kiss anyone's ass. Survival of the fittist. If a amateur makes the cut over a top pro they dont care. Also I love it how they dont care how tough the course is and they make it hard on purpose (as they should). Its a TRUE challenge and test of golf for the elite. Something it should be more often.

[SBR67]

Wow! A premium on accuracy!

Nice post. I didn't know that they were going with the graduated rough there.

[jc2bg]

Except that a lot of the big bashers--and we know who they are--don't miss fairways by 5 or 10 feet. They miss under the pine trees where they have essentially a clean lie, so long as they aren't directly behind a tree. Or they hit it directly into the gallery, where the grass is so trampled that the ground looks nearly bare. Not saying that the rough won't make a difference, but if a player hits half the fairways and misses the other half far enough, he may not lose a shot thereby. 

[golfware]

I LOVE the US Open.  It's the BEST major of the year.  It's awesome to see the Champion just flat out play GREAT golf.  All 72 holes has to be on.  It's awesome!!

[CalleW]

Wonder how that guy Gold Digest has selected to try to play a round under 100 on the US Open course is going to fare? Like they said in their article in the latest issue... it can get ugly... I'm rooting for him, but it'll be one hell of a round for a guy with 10 handicap... 

[rp]

I have no problem with the tougher set up. What I do have a problem with is when the USGA changes the par of the golf course in order to artificially get their score closer to even. When they play a par 5 as a 519 yd par 4, it is just effing stupid. The guys are going to shoot the same aggregate. But instead of them shooting 285 to be -3 as the course was designed, that 285 is +5 and the USGA is beating their chest like King Kong.

[SBR67]

I have no problem with the tougher set up. What I do have a problem with is when the USGA changes the par of the golf course in order to artificially get their score closer to even. When they play a par 5 as a 519 yd par 4, it is just effing stupid. The guys are going to shoot the same aggregate. But instead of them shooting 285 to be -3 as the course was designed, that 285 is +5 and the USGA is beating their chest like King Kong.

Very true. At the end of the day, the lowest aggregate is all that matters. Par is really not relavant, regardless of what the USGA says.

[jsfain]

Very true. At the end of the day, the lowest aggregate is all that matters. Par is really not relavant, regardless of what the USGA says.

wait, I've been there in a thread where I stated that I didn't think anyone cared about whether a hole is 5-par or a 4-par or whatever and got slammed because apparently the pros DO care; they look at the 5's as a way to get a stroke back. So the USGA is messing with them by taking away 5-pars, they cannot recover.

[SBR67]

Par the newly created 4-pars (birdie the original 5) and they won't have to worry about it.  What if a course is designed as a par 71? Will the pros not play it because it takes away a par 5 and a chance to take off a stroke? 

I would have gotten slammed in that thread with you.

[DaveT319]

I have no problem with the tougher set up. What I do have a problem with is when the USGA changes the par of the golf course in order to artificially get their score closer to even. When they play a par 5 as a 519 yd par 4, it is just effing stupid. The guys are going to shoot the same aggregate. But instead of them shooting 285 to be -3 as the course was designed, that 285 is +5 and the USGA is beating their chest like King Kong.

I think this is a very important point.

Dave

[NewJerichoMan]

Except that a lot of the big bashers--and we know who they are--don't miss fairways by 5 or 10 feet. They miss under the pine trees where they have essentially a clean lie, so long as they aren't directly behind a tree. Or they hit it directly into the gallery, where the grass is so trampled that the ground looks nearly bare. Not saying that the rough won't make a difference, but if a player hits half the fairways and misses the other half far enough, he may not lose a shot thereby. 

The flip side of that argument is that when the fairways are 15 yards wide and slick, as well as in a windy environment, everyone is gonna miss fairways.  If everyone is in the rough, the one who has the best chance is the one closest to the green.  This plays directly into the hands of the bombers.  Case in point, 2007 at Oakmont. 

Angel Cabrera hit 27 of 56 fairways or 48.2%.  He ranked T48 of the 63 players that made the cut. 
He averaged over 310 yards per drive and ranked 2 in this category (George McNeill led).
He hit 47 of 72 greens or just over 65%.  He ranked T3 in this category.
He ranked T28 in putts.   

2nd longest average driving distance, less than 50% FIR, and T3 in GIR???  A premium on accuracy my a$$.  If that ain't bomb & gouge, I don't know what is.   

To add, the main changes from the Buick Open is graduated rough and slicker greens.  18 will be a par 4, 10 will likely be a drivable par 4, and I forget which par 3 will be 142 yards two days - much like 7 on Pebble.  The fairway widths aren't changing for the most part.

First time around, the field average ~58.9% FIR (PGA average is around 63%).  It is one of 5 tourneys (out of 20) wherein the field has averaged under 60% FIR.  Per ranking, it is the 5th toughest course to put it in the FIR thus far this year.  Sony Open at ~52% is the hardest thus far. 

Tiger won the first time around at -19 (or -15 by US Open scoring standards) and hit a whopping 27 of 56 FIR (ranked 57th of those that made the cut).  Exactly the same number of FIR Angel hit last year in route to winning the US Open.  I believe Tiger won by 8 strokes?  His putter was hot but as one can seen, FIR% had nothing to do with his victory. 

If the wind ain't horrendous, I don't think significantly under par is out of the question. 

Later,
David

[jc2bg]

That's exactly it, David. We talk about whether we'd rather be in the rough and 150 out or in the fairway and 180 out. How about both shots in the rough at 150 and 180? Pretty easy to choose then.

We've seen holes in the U.S. Opens for several years now where the fairways were so slick, narrow, and dog-legged that almost no one was hitting the fairway. In those cases, those with the shortest club in hand for the second shot had more options--and did better. Growing the rough higher and thicker also penalizes shorter hitters in another way, because they typically are not as strong when it comes to getting out of the deep stuff. Sergio can muscle up from the rough where Justin Leonard cannot (although Sergio will probably miss the putt anyway). 

JC

[rp]

I think this is a very important point.

Dave

Thank you. I cannot tell you how much respect I lose for the USGA when they do this. The last time the US Open was played at Pebble, it was a par 72. How much you want to bet that the par will be changed to 70 next time? Anyone want to lay odds on that? But compare the aggregate and they will be similar. I mean damn it, If these guys can step on a course like Pinehurst or Oakmont and shoot 280, let them get the full credit for what they have done. Or Winged Foot? Come on people! The USGA does things on emotion. They rant and they rave about how much easier the game is with today's equipment. Where is the study on the correlation of driver size and distance? Oh that's right, there was not one even though they limit the driver size and hide behind distance. Where is the study that shows that .830 is the right COR? There isn't one. They just tested a couple of current drivers and set a number. They even flip flopped on that issue going from .830 to .860 back to .830. That one cost the OEM millions for no reason at all, but who cares.

You have a small group of people that make up the rules for 27 million golfers based on nothing more than the latest whim of the leader of their little group. They did a study recently on grooves. Why did they do this study? Because the game is too easy for the pros. Who gets penalized? We do. The grooves that are on wedges now are WITHIN THE RULES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET BY THE USGA! Is the game really that easy that we have to do this? Look at the winning scores on the PGA Tour in the past couple years. On average, they are higher. KJ won at an "easy course" with a score of -14. That is not all that low. FBR it took -14 to get in a playoff, again, at an easy stadium setup. Pebble was won at -10 on courses set up for pro ams. LA was -12. The Mexican vacation for the players that did not make the Match Play was -16. Ernie won Honda at -6. PODS was -4, Bay Hill -10. Puerto Rico was -10, New Orleans was -13. Houston was -16. THESE ARE ALL TOURNAMENTS WON WITH THE CHAMPION AVERAGING -4 OR WORSE FOR THE WEEK. THIS GROUPING ALL OCCURRED BEFORE THE MASTERS.

Is this not enough for the USGA? I mean I did the case study for you. No need to punish 27 million hacks, most of whom have a life long dream of breaking 85, based on some knee jerk reaction because Tiger or Vijay had a couple good years. I guess the NBA should change the height of the rim because too many players can dunk. Or perhaps they should lengthen the field in the NFL because the Patriots scored too many touchdowns last year? Get real people. NEWSFLASH: PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE THE PLAYERS ON TV MAKE BIRDIES!! Leave the course par at what the designer set it at. Unless I am wrong, not one course architect is on the USGA Board of Directors. Let's let the people who know what the flip they are doing do it and quit meddling in their business.

I feel so much better now. 

[EasyEd]

Hey All,

To be honest I'm not sure what to think.

One the one hand you might say let the players of today play the course as designed and absolutely slam par into oblivion and all of us can say the players today are the greatest ever and I was there to see them. Well in my opinion that is an absolute croc of (you know what). I and not a few others believe the vast majority of improvement has come from equipment not the individual. That said how do you ever prove it?

On the other hand let em play something tough. Everybody is equal they are all playing the same holes why does it even matter? Maybe it's good to teach em some humility - lest they start thinking they are better than they are and start talking things like oh say calendar year slams (Go Lorena!).

That said I do believe we've lost the ideal balance between course, golfer and equipment and I don't know what can be done to get it back. The Master's had that balance better than any other tournament for years. We the spectators are the big losers as a result of this.

With respect to the upcoming Open - it's been 32 years since I played that course so I'm sure it's changed alot. That said I really hate it when a partially wild shot is severely penal while a really wild shot gives you a good lie and a clean shot at the green. Tiger has made a living doing this and hopefully the USGA has taken this into account in their setup - we'll see. I do agree with NJM that pretty much no matter what long bombers have a better shot at winning on a course set up this way - but we'll see.

-Ed-

[davro]

Thank you. I cannot tell you how much respect I lose for the USGA when they do this. The last time the US Open was played at Pebble, it was a par 72. How much you want to bet that the par will be changed to 70 next time? Anyone want to lay odds on that? But compare the aggregate and they will be similar. I mean damn it, If these guys can step on a course like Pinehurst or Oakmont and shoot 280, let them get the full credit for what they have done. Or Winged Foot? Come on people! The USGA does things on emotion. They rant and they rave about how much easier the game is with today's equipment. Where is the study on the correlation of driver size and distance? Oh that's right, there was not one even though they limit the driver size and hide behind distance. Where is the study that shows that .830 is the right COR? There isn't one. They just tested a couple of current drivers and set a number. They even flip flopped on that issue going from .830 to .860 back to .830. That one cost the OEM millions for no reason at all, but who cares.

You have a small group of people that make up the rules for 27 million golfers based on nothing more than the latest whim of the leader of their little group. They did a study recently on grooves. Why did they do this study? Because the game is too easy for the pros. Who gets penalized? We do. The grooves that are on wedges now are WITHIN THE RULES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET BY THE USGA! Is the game really that easy that we have to do this? Look at the winning scores on the PGA Tour in the past couple years. On average, they are higher. KJ won at an "easy course" with a score of -14. That is not all that low. FBR it took -14 to get in a playoff, again, at an easy stadium setup. Pebble was won at -10 on courses set up for pro ams. LA was -12. The Mexican vacation for the players that did not make the Match Play was -16. Ernie won Honda at -6. PODS was -4, Bay Hill -10. Puerto Rico was -10, New Orleans was -13. Houston was -16. THESE ARE ALL TOURNAMENTS WON WITH THE CHAMPION AVERAGING -4 OR WORSE FOR THE WEEK. THIS GROUPING ALL OCCURRED BEFORE THE MASTERS.

Is this not enough for the USGA? I mean I did the case study for you. No need to punish 27 million hacks, most of whom have a life long dream of breaking 85, based on some knee jerk reaction because Tiger or Vijay had a couple good years. I guess the NBA should change the height of the rim because too many players can dunk. Or perhaps they should lengthen the field in the NFL because the Patriots scored too many touchdowns last year? Get real people. NEWSFLASH: PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE THE PLAYERS ON TV MAKE BIRDIES!! Leave the course par at what the designer set it at. Unless I am wrong, not one course architect is on the USGA Board of Directors. Let's let the people who know what the flip they are doing do it and quit meddling in their business.

I feel so much better now. 

Not to pick a fight, but I like to see them work hard and struggle every now and again. I love that the US Open is an out and out test that punishes the pros more than any other tournament. I dont want to see it every week, but I do like to see it in the open. Just goes to show that people like different things.

[rp]

Davro,

I don't mind seeing them struggle either. What really grinds my gears is when they change the par of the hole from it's intended state just in an effort to get their winning score closer to Even. If they make a 4 on a hole that is intended to play to 5, then let's call it a birdie!

RP

[davro]

Davro,

I don't mind seeing them struggle either. What really grinds my gears is when they change the par of the hole from it's intended state just in an effort to get their winning score closer to Even. If they make a 4 on a hole that is intended to play to 5, then let's call it a birdie!

RP

I guess I dont really think about score in those terms. I like to see people earn the open and that means they have to work hard and have the lowest score, whatever that may be. The closer to par the winning score is typically the more players have a chance. That to me brings drama and excitement and thats the kind of US Open I like to see. That being said, I dont care what the score ends up at, so long as its been a hard fought victory.

[Jack from Canada]

Staying in the fairways is never really as critical because of made for tv golf tournaments where birdies and eagles equal ratings.

I really enjoyed the Players and seeing the difficulty of a course made for the prevailing winds. The greatest had troubles holding greend the size of half football fields and the success of this event should be given to Beman and the picking the right updates to test the effects of both technology and nerves.

Living on the prairies I am used to what the effects of wind and cold can have on the playing of a golf course. And if a "test" is required to be given then it should start with the finding of the fairway. It should be difficult to hold greens coming out of the rough and I would like to see that greenside bunkers removed all together for major championships instead of being lifeboats in a sea of over long grass which minimizes the effects of spin.

It has been proven from time to time that long hitters are favoured over short hitters, but accurate drives and approaches should still have a place to be rewarded even in today highly technological era.

So lets see what the rough plays like at 330 plus and see who has the ability to control their nerves and hands when holding the flat stick because some more Open weather like the weather that hit the |Players will even the field somewhat and give us the excitement of 86 when Jack won the Masters but without the big names but as entertaining in many ways.

The best to a good US Open and we will all see what comes.

Jack

[Wheeler_WackG2]

I have no problem with the tougher set up. What I do have a problem with is when the USGA changes the par of the golf course in order to artificially get their score closer to even. When they play a par 5 as a 519 yd par 4, it is just effing stupid. The guys are going to shoot the same aggregate. But instead of them shooting 285 to be -3 as the course was designed, that 285 is +5 and the USGA is beating their chest like King Kong.

I agree. Lets make it tough but not fantasy golf. Thats just wrong.

[Wheeler_WackG2]

Whoops.