Driving #1 at Oakmont

[Tim_Weiman]

This thread is the result of an unconfirmed rumor....................................but, I happened to run across someone today who claimed that Oakmont was seriously thinking about growing rough some 50-100 yards short of the green on #1.

By growing rough, this fellow meant "across the entire fairway".

The reason?

He claimed that the green had recently been driven - from the back tees - and that the USGA had decided they didn't want that during the U.S. Open.

I'm by no means looking to start a rumor that may have no credibility. But, I was wondering whether anyone had heard anything about this???

If there is any truth to this, I hope the USGA will finally come to recognize the corrupting influence of technology on the game.

P.S. I case you are wondering who was reported to have driven the green, I was told it was Hank Kuene.

[TEPaul]

So what? Growing rough on that hole because of something like that's ridiculous. Kuehne's length is a freak of nature and if he hit ten drives on that hole that hard he'd probably end up with some birdies, pars and bogies anyway. If some of these courses are firm and fast as they should be some of these guys are going to get it out there 400 yards and more. But they have to keep it on the fairway in a US Open.

[Kyle Harris]

I see the ability to drive #1 green at Oakmont as a viable risk/reward for the hole.

If you miss or leave the ball short of the green... you are treated with an awkard half wedge shot to a green sloping away from you from a downhill lie in the rough or fairway.

Under Open conditions, I can see that being quite hard.

[Tom_Doak]

I would agree with Kyle there.  If you're strong enough to drive the green, that's an advantage you should use.  But if you keep missing it short or in the rough while you're trying to drive the green, you're not going to have a low scoring average on the hole.

[Jonathan Cummings]

What's the next step?  Intentionally driving OVER the green?  Then you'll have a rather easy chip back to the green sloped towards you!  Definite length advantage there!

JC

[Bill_McBride]

The hole is 461 yds long.  What am I missing here?  

I know, it's hard fairway, downhill, maybe downwind.  But it's 461 freaking yards.

Everybody was thrilled when Tiger drove #14 at Warwick Hills Saturday and Sunday and made eagle.  #14 is 341 yards long.

Tour-level golf is getting very boring.  Maybe the PGA will wake up but I doubt it.  The USGA is sound asleep.

[Kyle Harris]

Bill, et al...

At a course like Oakmont, I don't see this being a problem. Gaining a shot on the course early is a VERY strategic play. And there is substantial risk involved with the play.

Didn't cause too much trouble at Cherry Hills in '61... unless your name wasn't Palmer.  

[Bill_McBride]

Of course #1 at Cherry Hills was 346 yds downhill, but 115 yds shorter.  Driving #1 at Oakmont is not merely incredible but implausible!

[Tim_Weiman]

I guess I shouldn't have confused the thread with commenting what I thought about golfers trying to drive a 460 yard hole.

My real purpose was simply to inquire whether anyone else had heard of the plan to grow rough across the fairway about 50-100 yards short of the green.

Has anyone heard anything about this?

As for the subject that seemed to generate more attention, I'm amazed.

A while back a few folks here thought I was exaggerating by suggesting we are headed to 8,000 yard golf courses.

Now we seem casual, even approving of attempts to drive 460 yard holes!

One thing it does put in perspective:

When I last visited Oakmont, Mark Studer stood on the new 4th tee and told me the changes being made to the golf course were really for the 2017 U.S. Open.

I can see that now.


Kyle: if I'm not mistaken, the 1st hole at Oakmont is more than 100 yards longer than the 1st at Cherry Hills.

Is that really progress? How long before we get people to sensibly distinquish between relative and absolute length?

[Kyle Harris]

It is much longer, but I feel that in the context of Oakmont's course... driving that green would fit for many of the same reasons.

Is #2 similarly vulnerable?

[TEPaul]

The thing that's far worse than a guy like Kuehne actually driving something like the first green at Oakmont is the results of the hysterical reaction to something like that.

Back in the 1950s they say long hitting George Bayer hit a drive well over 400 yards. Is that why America went through a massive redesign phase?

One thing I might mention I thought was sort of interesting about this super long driving thing we seem to be seeing so much of on tour these days was when Woods hit that drive onto the par 4 14th green at Warwick Hills (the one Olin Browne in front of him comically marked on the green and tossed over his shoulder).

Did any of you notice how long Woods was looking at that drive in the air while sort of motioning to it with his head to move right and onto the green? It seemed like Woods looked at that drive in the air for over 10-11 seconds. THAT'S LONG!! It doesn't seem like one of my drives stays in the air much more than 3-4 seconds.  

[Jim Nugent]

Of course #1 at Cherry Hills was 346 yds downhill, but 115 yds shorter.  Driving #1 at Oakmont is not merely incredible but implausible!

I doubt too many 460 yard holes are in danger of getting driven yet, unless they have at least 150 yards of roll.  What conditions allowed Kuehne to get within 100 yards of the green?

[Philippe Binette]

Distance wise it might be possible with superfast fairways and some wind...

I remember Trip Keuhne being 100 yards from the green at 2003 US Amateur...

But:

1)It's the first tee of the Open (added pressure)
2)If I remember it well, there's also a left to right slope on this fairway, so you'll have to land the ball on the left side  of a 22 yard-wide fairway (very small target)
3) if you missed that target and you are in the rough 60 or 70 yards from the green, you're not putting on your next shot

With 20 balls on that tee, you might hit the green once, at the Open you have only one shot.

Plus drive the green 50 feet from the hole and then 4-putt... Nice work genius

[ForkaB]

Tim

Since nobody else seems to want to (or be able to) respond to your question, I will!

Putting rough at 350 or whatever, is a STUPID idea!  Seve tried this at Valderamma #17 and it screwed up a potenitally interesting hole.

As long as the USGA/R&A want to "just lie back and enjoy" the new technology, the way to deal with the Kuehne's of the world is to narrow the landing area/increase the penalty of straying.  If the USGA's best shot for Oakmont is growing  a chastity belt of rough, well, those old boys need to get out more often...........

[Tom_Doak]

Rich:

Your "chastity belt" term is hilarious!  Did you just make that up or have you heard it used for a strip of rough somewhere before?

Just want to know from whom I am stealing it.

I agree with your sentiments completely.  Installing a strip of rough so that guys can't hit driver off the tee is arbitrary and unfair.  If they want to restrict drives, they should put in a blind bunker or a natural-looking waterfall or something!  

[Cory Lewis]

One of the strangest things I've ever heard from a caddie took place on the first hole at Oakmont.  I hit a pretty lousy drive into the first cut of rough.  When we get to the ball my caddie says to me "220 to the hole, going to play like 170"  My exact reaction was huh?  When you land the ball on that downslope you have no idea where it's going to stop.  I played with three guys and we all pretty much landed the same place and I was the only one that ended up on the green.  If somebody wants to try and drive the green more power to them, it takes a lot of luck to get the right bounce, otherwise your in thick rough trying to pitch to a green where you can't stop it if your on the wrong side.  

[ForkaB]

Rich:

Your "chastity belt" term is hilarious!  Did you just make that up or have you heard it used for a strip of rough somewhere before?

Just want to know from whom I am stealing it.

I agree with your sentiments completely.  Installing a strip of rough so that guys can't hit driver off the tee is arbitrary and unfair.  If they want to restrict drives, they should put in a blind bunker or a natural-looking waterfall or something!  

Tom

I made it up as I wrote the post and I liked it too!  That being said I'm sure Huckaby will claim it was his idea someday.....

Regardless, steal away!

All the best

Rich

[TEPaul]

A "Chastity Belt of rough"!

Fantastic term. Good going Rich. We'll redouble all our efforts to see that it becomes extant with the goal of at least the 5th definition in OED by the end of the decade!

What would you call that ridiculous narrowing the R&A did with rough on the Road Hole in "THE OPEN"? Perhaps something like a "partial condum" of rough.

[Doug Sobieski]

For what it's worth, I was just speaking with one of the guys in the golf shop at Oakmont, and they have heard nothing of this rumor.

A few years ago I had played there the day after Hank Kuehne had played and Bob Ford was telling me some of the ridiculous places that Hank had hit it, so they certainly weren't ashamed of anything!!! The shot that amazed me the most was that he had driven it to the top of the hill on #3!!!

[JohnV]

A few years ago I had played there the day after Hank Kuehne had played and Bob Ford was telling me some of the ridiculous places that Hank had hit it, so they certainly weren't ashamed of anything!!! The shot that amazed me the most was that he had driven it to the top of the hill on #3!!!

Are you sure it was Hank?  I always heard it was Trip that drove the top of the hill on #3.  There is a new tee there that will make that a little more difficult.

[Doug Sobieski]

John:

It was definitely Hank that Bob had mentioned. I just asked a buddy of mine to confirm his recollection of the same conversation, and he vividly remembers it as Hank.

Regards,

Doug

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Sometimes I am glad that I am a short straight hitter, the shear thought of having my desire for sexual encounters harnessed by the aforementioned chatity belt just makes me limp........
I cannot imagine the need for that "strip"..it certainly would not affect the way I play..I just cannot fathom the prospect of driving that green...I am getting too old..too fast

[michael_j_fay]

461 down hill on a slick fairway. Seems impossible.

I wonder if he made birdie. I've played there three times and have four putted twice.

[TEPaul]

I can tell you that Kuehne did drive the ball green high into a green side bunker on Seminole's #16. The guy who's the president of my club and a Seminole member was playing with him.

And I just heard another rumor out of Pittsburgh that on #9 Oakmont Kuehne had a wedge to that green but for some unknown reason decided to take out a 5 iron which he hit his approach shot clear over the clubhouse into the parking lot on the other side. When asked why he did that and what his strategy was he just flippantly said it seemed like an interesting thing to try because this rinky-dink pitch and putt Oakmont was starting to bore his ass off.

[George Pazin]

Is the chastity belt a good idea? Not to me. Sounds silly.

Do you get the feeling that if today's thinkers were in charge of ANGC back in the 30s that they would have reacted to Sarazen's albatross by moving the tee back 50 yards?

Is the story believable? From Hammerin' Hank or Trip, yeah, I'd believe it, or at least I'd say it doesn't sound impossible. Wind, ultra firm and fast conditions and the right player can make a crazy combination. Couple that with today's technology, it could be done.

As for Hank and #3, there were stories circulating the week of the US Am that older brother Trip hit it over the top of the hill, down into the little dip/valley. That seems almost less believable, as it is uphill and a very long way, but almost nothing seems unbelievable anymore.