Is the ground game not an option at #2?

[Mike Benham]

With the difficulty of holding an approach shot on the putting surfaces of #2, why don't we see more lower flighted shots hitting short and running up to the hole locations?

Does the elevation of the greens make it more difficult to judge the bounce of the ball?

Does the turf conditions not warrant this type of play?

[Brent Hutto]

Maybe I just saw the guys who were playing best but it did not seem impossible to hold the greens as long as they successfully hit the flat areas, which may or may not be by the hole.

I think the difficulty (so far) has not been from the ball bouncing too hard or kicking forward but rather that the ball has to arrive without forward momentum on a very small area in between the rolloffs. By that I mean a normal iron shot from the fairway will stay in the flat area if it lands there and a running shot would have to arrive in that same flat area, perfectly judged.

I'd expect to see runups out of the rough and I did notice a few of those yesterday.

[Ken Bramlett]

I agree with Brent.

I was over yesterday and, except for the green on number 2, well placed iron shots were holding pretty well.

At the second, we watched four groups go through and didn't see a single shot hold.  Interestingly, some tried to play left and short, some tried to go right at it (that seemed to be an obvious mistake because of the middle front hump that guarded yesterday's pin position) and a couple hitting shorter irons tried for the right hand side just below the hole.  Ironically, Matt Kuchar laid up with his second out of the rough and tried to fly a wedge third shot to the right just below the hole.  The ball landed twenty feet, took a short hop towards the flag and then spun backwards off the right front of the green.

Diabolical.  

[Ted Kramer]

Mickelson just hit a good little runner from the rough on #7.

-Ted

[Mike Benham]

They did mention that in the early rounds yesterday, that the balls were holding very well, even spinning back a considerable way.

I agree with Brent, that landing the ball in the right spot will keep it on the green, however, how many front hole locations have there been?

To answer my own question, I believe that the elevation of the greens makes it difficult to run up an approach shot.  With a front hole location, getting the ball close may be an impossibility unless the greens become softer.

[A_Clay_Man]

Furyk just bounced one in.

Mike, The issue breaks down to the creativity of shot maker, and their awareness to gauge the firmness of the palying surface.

It's really interesting that the "best Test of Golf" that the USGA can come up with, is foreign to most users of the equiptment available, TV watchers, and even, many of the participants.  

p.s. Jimy Roberts just mentioned how "Hog Tied" Adam Scott was with a chip shot that required some imagination and touch.
That's how foreign this game truely is to a majority of it's participants (mainstream)

[JSlonis]

Mike,

For the level of player that is competing in the US Open, the ground game approach shot would only be an option of a player was trying an approach shot from the rough, and expected the ball to release alot after landing.  Good players will try to eliminate as many variables as possible, therefore if they know they can fly the ball to a certain area and stop it, that is the option they'll choose.  There is no need to run the ball onto these surfaces, and introduce other variables.  If the approaches become very firm, you may see a few players land the ball short of the greens to some front hole locations.

You are correct in that given the raised surfaces of #2's greens is a much more difficult to judge an approach shot that would run up.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Will the ground game be played this year at St Andrews?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

I think the original greens at # 2 were sand greens.

I don't think Ross ever contemplated greens putting at about
12 on the stimp, or being rock hard.

Picture hitting into an umbrell like surface and you'll get a better understanding of why the ground game brings more risk than reward to an approach shot.

[JSlonis]

Will the ground game be played this year at St Andrews?

It should to a certain extent.  Depending on the firmness of the links, and the wind, you'll see far more balls along the ground than you would see at any other tourney this year.

[Pete Buczkowski]

It is clearly an option - though the greens are elevated, many of the fronts are open.  Just watch some shots hit from the rough, see Mickelson at #1 and 7 yesterday, to name two.  Its not the most desireable option of the professionals - it is just so much more unpredictable than the aerial route.  At least they have to think about where to land their approaches on the greens...that's the American ground game.  Let's face it, if the aerial approach was an option at St. Andrews, the majority of the pros wouldn't use the ground game there either.