Maybe to bring this back to some architecture and away from the Jordan Wall homage
, I am curious as to what some thought of the pace of play at Chambers Bay, and whether anyone thinks that the architecture may be playing a role in this...
For all the weeping and moaning and bleating on we do here about the pace of play, it should be noted that 24 or so more or less healthy-bodied men and young men played Chambers Bay yesterday, and no one finished in less than 4.30 minutes. The tail end of the outing drifted right up to the 5 hr mark...This was on a course that very few balls were lost, scoring should have been secondary to the experience, and the greens were Stimping in the 6-7 range, so putting was a hammer and hope affair anyway...
Also, everyone had a caddy, or was a caddy!
We should have been the poster children for getting around that place in 3.45 or so max--no one out there except for us...
Given recent threads, where we were more than willing to assign blame for slow play to everyone else but ourselves, what do we think about yesterday? Was the problem us, or was it the course itself?--there were no other outside influences to pin this on...
Very interesting experiment! Perhaps if we ourselves don't feel the need to keep up when given a blank slate, then perhaps we might be hypocritical in criticizing others, who often have paid a lot more for the privilege of relaxing or "stopping to smell the flowers" than we did yesterday.
on the other hand, is the routing plan/architecture inherently flawed in a way to perpetuate slow play at Chambers Bay?
Your thoughts, participants...