The fallacy of graduated rough

[Tom_Doak]

I know this is not the conventional wisdom of this board, but thank God they left a few trees at Winged Foot West for the Open.

Because graduated rough just doesn't work.  Hit it 10 feet out of the fairway and you've got a flyer; hit it 10 yards offline and you can barely dislodge the ball; but hit it off a tent or into the gallery and you've got a clean lie.  If there aren't any trees out there, you're in position A.

Montgomerie's choke on the 18th hole today was tragic because he had played gutty golf tee to green all day, the kind of round they design U.S. Open set-ups for.  But Mickelson was one tree away from winning the Open with the worst ball-striking round in Open history.

And congratulations to Geoff Ogilvy who is a great ball-striker, a very nice and thoughtful young professional, and a deserving champion in the end.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Graduated rough would work much better if they didn't allow galleries, or at least didn't allow them to walk in the rough.

[DMoriarty]

It seems like most of the most interesting shots I saw this week (good and bad) were from the trampled hard-pan in the trees where the crowd had been walking.  

Certainly doesnt fit into the USGA's "more fair" approach of using graduated rough.  Next year they will likely change the rules as follows . . .

A ball coming to rest in any roped off spectator area must be dropped no closer to the hole outside the roped-off spectator area and in the secondary rough.  In addition the player must then stand on the dropped ball, with his full weight on the ball for at least 10 seconds. After this the ball will be deemed in play.

The new rule will make golf "more fair" because the worse drive  will never get the better lie, and wont even be as well off as the bad but slightly better drive.  

And we wont have to worry about any more of those pesky miracle recovery attempts from the deep trees.  

[James Bennett]

I wonder whether people prefer the scoring of darts or archery?  In darts, the target of the triple 20 is right next to some very low scores.  Go for the best and miss it, and get a low score.  Whereas archery has a graduated scoring range as you move away from the bulls eye.  Much more equitable and fair.  I expect many on this board would accept the strategic nature of the darts board.

I also wonder with the big equity push for fairness and the concept of fair, graduated rough compares with the challenges thrown at players on the last few holes - Mickelson's two plugged lies, Ogilvy's sanded divot lie, then his second that comes up agonisingly short on 18 and backs off the false front.  There are many of these where the results weren't 'graduated'.

I guess the other thing that struck me this week when looking at the courses and the game is the interaction of technology and tee to green architecture.  If a miss from an off-centre hit was 35 yards difference (apparently) with persimmon and is now 10 yards (or was it 7) for the same miss with a titanium driver, then the effectiveness of a fairway bunker must be greatly reduced.   In my mind, it isn't so much the distance that is the issue as the consistency which is reducing the effect of fairway bunkers.

And what does this push for equity encourage in the minds of some - more equitable hazards (these are generally filled with water ).  No issues of corporate tents, spectator area rough, good or bad lies.  Just an immediate and known result.  No recovery, just an immediate on-the-spot fine.  I wish it were not so.  I am pleased that water hazards (to date) are not a big part of US Opens.

James B

[Tom_Doak]

David and Wayne:

My point is, if the rough is going to be trampled down, then the deeper rough inside of it is the unfair part.

[Anthony Butler]

I know this is not the conventional wisdom of this board, but thank God they left a few trees at Winged Foot West for the Open.

Because graduated rough just doesn't work.  Hit it 10 feet out of the fairway and you've got a flyer; hit it 10 yards offline and you can barely dislodge the ball; but hit it off a tent or into the gallery and you've got a clean lie.  If there aren't any trees out there, you're in position A.

Montgomerie's choke on the 18th hole today was tragic because he had played gutty golf tee to green all day, the kind of round they design U.S. Open set-ups for.  But Mickelson was one tree away from winning the Open with the worst ball-striking round in Open history.

And congratulations to Geoff Ogilvy who is a great ball-striker, a very nice and thoughtful young professional, and a deserving champion in the end.

Tom, since this not the first time there has been a gallery at a golf tournament, you obviously know that one of the benefits of hitting it really offline is that you can get these kind of lies... but I'm not sure how this invalidates the concept of graduated rough closer to the fairway. You seem to be arguing that the presence of large galleries at a golf tournament invalidates the purpose of rough, period,  because there is a chance that an even worse shot can get a better lie.

As it turns out, it caught up with Phil in the end anyway.

[Phil Benedict]

I am a fairly long and very wild player who regularly ends up in another fairway.  Trees are the only defense against players like me, and evidently against another player named Phil.

[Anthony Butler]

I guess the other thing that struck me this week when looking at the courses and the game is the interaction of technology and tee to green architecture.  If a miss from an off-centre hit was 35 yards difference (apparently) with persimmon and is now 10 yards (or was it 7) for the same miss with a titanium driver, then the effectiveness of a fairway bunker must be greatly reduced.

Maybe Phil's Callaway driver is made out of Persimmon....

[Jonathan McCord]

Phil, you bring up a great point about us, long and crooked bombers.  It is clear that if Phil could have cleared just one more tree, he would have just FLOGGED his way to a U.S. Open.

Just imagine how thick the rough would have been next year at Oakmont, had Phil won the Open by only hitting two fairways on the final day!

[Phil Benedict]

Phil should love Oakmont, where there are no trees.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Phil,
I think there is another defense, especially with great greens like those at WF. Just imagine if there was some short grass around the greens. How many balls did you see come in from the wrong angles that ran off into the long stuff a yard off the green? Some of those balls would have ended up a lot farther away had some close cut turf been used around some greens. I doubt we'll ever see it at WF, but did Tillie really want long rough right up against the green?

[rboyce]

Geoff played the best, was the most composed, and handled adversity like a pro. He has more oil in his swing than just about anyone I can think of. It's not syrupy, but it's a well oiled machine.

When Monty switched clubs he must have taken one less - maybe he was worried that he was so amped up he would hit it too far.

[Neil_Crafter]

Tom
I can see what you are getting at, but what's the alternative? Does a tee shot that just misses the fairway 'deserve' a better lie than one 5 yards off, or ten yards or twenty? Obviously the system fails at the gallery rope beyond where the grass is most likely trampled, but there are generally trees out here to complicate recoveries. From someone who's played in a few Australian Opens I would say the graded set-up is the lesser of two evils. I just hated missing a fairway by a yard and having to chop it out. Seems the course would have been plenty hard enough with less really deep rough.
cheers Neil

[JohnV]

I guess we'll find out next year at Oakmont where there are no trees that will come into play for an offline shot.  Well, maybe a big slice (or hook in lefty's case) on #1.  I'm going to be interested in how they get the crowds around Oakmont anyway.  Holes 1, 9, 10 and 11 are very close together.  Does anyone know if they allowed  spectators between them during the 1994 Open?

Congrats to Geoff Ogilvy.  A great up and down on 18 where nobody else could make par.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Graduated rough is an experiment by an organization that has lost complete control of the Sport, and is swiftly losing their grasp on reality of the situation at hand. We either need a rollback or burfication or something to stop the bleeding. Make some history by doing the right thing for once.

Frankly, I think it's too late.

[Jonathan McCord]

Don, your suggestion most certainly has some validity, but WFW is not Pinehurst #2.  Phil M. knew that and could take advantage of the greens the way they were presented, because he didn't have to be spot on with ALL of his shots from the rough.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I can only hope my dear friend John VanderBorght gets to lead the officiating at Open just once before it does happen.
Who knows, maybe the next organization will really want to learn how to protect the Sport. (After all, they actually think it's a Game. How wrong is that?!?!?!?)

[Tom_Doak]

Neil:

You said it yourself there at the end -- seems the course would have been plenty hard enough with less really deep rough.

If I was setting up a course for a championship, there would be a 35-yard wide fairway, no rumble strip on the sides, and then one cut of rough.  Three or four inches is plenty.  Putting some bad drives in six-inch rough and then other bad drives in the hardpan is just too much of a difference, and it's the setup that creates that.

[Phil Benedict]

It's interesting to think about the way way the last 3 Opens have played out.  At Shinny, the firmness of the course was the key factor, the rough didn't seem to be that big a deal.  The guy who made the putts won.  Same last year although firm conditions were a less obvious influence.  In neither case were trees a factor.  This year the rough was a big factor for sure but the trees saved the day as far as preventing a wild ass lefty from hoisting the trophy.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

But Tom, this would have meant that the winning score would have been 5 or 6 under and the players would have actually been making birdies....

[Anthony Butler]

Neil:

You said it yourself there at the end -- seems the course would have been plenty hard enough with less really deep rough.

If I was setting up a course for a championship, there would be a 35-yard wide fairway, no rumble strip on the sides, and then one cut of rough.  Three or four inches is plenty.  Putting some bad drives in six-inch rough and then other bad drives in the hardpan is just too much of a difference, and it's the setup that creates that.

Tom that sounds like the set-up for Doral. Seriously though, you'd have to have some crazy-ass green complexes to protect USGA's par with that set-up.

The only championship courses that come to mind where you can control the impact of the galleries on play are St Andrews (No internal galleries) and Augusta (not enough rough to trample down in the areas where the 'patrons' are allowed to walk.)

[JohnV]

Tommy, the winning score was 285.  Not X Under Par or  Y Over Par.  If the USGA doesn't change the par on two holes from 5 to 4, the winning score would be -3, not +5.  Par (and changing it) is a mind game that is played on the players and a crutch for TV so that it is easier to see how the various players on the course stand in relation to each other.

[DMoriarty]

David and Wayne:

My point is, if the rough is going to be trampled down, then the deeper rough inside of it is the unfair part.

I think I got your point and agree with it.  The USGA, however, sees it differently.  Leave the rough and fix the unfairness by eliminating the lucky break of the guy who hit it more offline.  After all that was the goal of their graduated rough theory wasnt it?  

[JohnV]

While you're at it, move all the fairways away from each other.  Tom, is Stone Eagle is unfair because I can hit a shot that is a little off line and end up in rocks with no shot or hit it 50 yards off line and get in another fairway and have an easy shot?

Golf isn't fair sometimes, get over it.  Or perhaps we can just get rid of all the spectators and just watch it on TV.

[DMoriarty]

Golf isn't fair sometimes, get over it.

I hope this is meant for the USGA and not the posters here.  After all they are the ones who gave us the graduated rough.  And isnt it the USGA that wants to level the breaks further by leveling WF's first green?