News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
NCAA's
« on: May 28, 2008, 07:54:13 PM »
First round today. Scoring average was 78.9 with the 30 best teams in the country and good weather. When will setups like this "jump the shark," if ever?

http://www.golfstatresults.com//public/stats/static/index_1186.html

John Moore II

Re: NCAA's
« Reply #1 on: May 28, 2008, 08:09:22 PM »
I don't think this scoring is too out of line. I mean, yes, these are the best players in college golf, but isn't it reasonable to set a course up to be difficult enough to challenge these players and force them to hit good shots? These scores are not all that out of line with two of the regional championships I saw, the other one was very low. Is the course really that hard or are these players used to playing somewhat easy courses??

Mark Smolens

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2008, 08:26:57 PM »
take a look at Seitz's post on the condition of the course on Shackelford's site. . .  it's very tough.

K. Krahenbuhl

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #3 on: May 28, 2008, 08:27:10 PM »
Say what you will about the set up...


but Go Illini!  Great playing on day one out of the boys from Champaign.

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2008, 10:39:20 PM »
I don't think this scoring is too out of line. I mean, yes, these are the best players in college golf, but isn't it reasonable to set a course up to be difficult enough to challenge these players and force them to hit good shots? These scores are not all that out of line with two of the regional championships I saw, the other one was very low. Is the course really that hard or are these players used to playing somewhat easy courses??

Regionals feature a number of teams who qualified as champions of weaker conferences - think of the first round of March Madness. You'd expect high scores there.

But when the median college player in the national championship is bogeying almost half the holes - average score almost +7, and certainly they make a birdie or two each round - then yes, I think it's probably set up inappropriately hard.

Dan Chapman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2008, 10:52:25 PM »
Go Deacs

Jim Nugent

Re: NCAA's
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2008, 12:08:53 AM »
Matt, I'm pretty sure the medal rounds at Merion during the 2005 U.S. Amateur averaged 78 to 79 as well.  Do you think they set up that course too hard? 

This year they hold the am at Pinehurst.  Interesting to see how the players score there. 

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2008, 01:23:27 AM »
Jim,

You think I'd dare to answer a question about Merion on this board?!    ;D

Peter Wagner

Re: NCAA's
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2008, 01:27:59 AM »
Trojans tied for 1st with their #1 player Lovemark having an off day!

Fight On SC!

« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 09:32:44 AM by Peter Wagner »

Chris_Clouser

Re: NCAA's
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2008, 10:22:16 AM »
Matt,

I'm hoping to get up and see some of the tournament this weekend. 

After seeing the course last year, I am not surprised by the scores.  The Kampen Course is one of the toughest I've ever seen.  The rough is extremely thick and deep.  They maintain the course so that there is almost no roll in the fairways.  Plus the Dye greens are his typical work.  Also, if the conditions were similar on the course to what we had in Indy it was a little cool with a solid breeze from the East-NE.  That would mean every hole but three or four would have cross winds.  That would make it difficult off of the tee to keep in in the fairway, especially if they narrowed them like they discussed when I was there.  The other thing is that many of those greens are longish and narrower than what you normally see, making approaches in a cross-breeze difficult and you don't want to be in the bunkers at Purdue either.  You could be in junk up to your knees or if you're lucky on some awful sand.  Add to that, the toughest hole would have been into the wind yesterday (the 8th). 

I'm not a big fan of the course, but Purdue could be so much better than it is today.  I hope after the tournament, some calmer heads prevail and actually make the course playable for the public like it was supposed to be instead of some tournament torture chamber.  Then it might be worthy of some of the praise that it gets.  There really are some solid to really nice hole designs there when looked at individually, but the maintainance and conditioning practices bury all of that under a foot of grass.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 10:24:42 AM by Chris_Clouser »

Chris_Clouser

Re: NCAA's
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2008, 10:30:36 AM »
I just looked at your link and noticed the 8th was only playing just over 400 yards.  They must not be using all of the back tees on the course.  The 2nd and 17th are also capable of both playing to that 200 yard mark but they aren't.  At least they are willing to provide some flexibility to the lengths of the holes.  Well, except for the three 600 yard par 5s.  They all played over par.  My guess is that the players are not making birdies on those three-shot holes and that is what is killing their score in relation to par.

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2008, 12:13:24 PM »
Nice belt buckles ... and  a 1-2-3 finish for Pac-10 schools ...


"... and I liked the guy ..."

Matt_Cohn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #12 on: June 02, 2008, 01:35:20 PM »
Why does it look like there are 6 players in the picture? Or is one of them an assistant coach?

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: NCAA's
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2008, 04:46:11 PM »
Yes, far left ...
"... and I liked the guy ..."

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back