The U.S Open at Shinnecock

[John Moore II]

Pat--I watched that Open as it took place. The guys that did not hit the green on 7 missed no matter how they hit the ball. Run-up shots would not hold, balls landing on the green didn't hold, chips rolled back off the green and putts rolled off the green. I am not certain I consider the whole set-up bad, I do however consider that hole a very poor set-up and Tom Meeks even admitted that it was a poor set-up. The way that hole was played was as poor a set-up as Olympic in 1998 on Friday. Now, that doesn't equate to the whole course being poor, however, I have heard that many people, including players felt the greens were nearly dead with wilt showing on most. Perhaps this is what Walt equated to a fiasco. I personally would not have used that strong a word, but I do feel the set-up, #7 in particular, was very, VERY close to being over the top.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JKM,

I don't think one hole in one round merits condemnation of the entire tournament.

71 holes seemed pretty good to me.

I wonder how many players attempted a high fade into # 7 on Sunday ?

Didn't the hole play downwind that day, making it more difficult to hold ?

[John Moore II]

Pat--I did not condemn the whole tournament. I just know that the commentators on that day were talking about how the course was set-up and that the greens were basically on the edge of being dead. There seemed on TV to be significant wilt in all the greens. And again, I had heard the same thing about the greens nearly dying after the tournament.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat--I did not condemn the whole tournament.


I didn't say that you did, Walt C did when he described it as a fiasco.[/color]

I just know that the commentators on that day were talking about how the course was set-up and that the greens were basically on the edge of being dead.

I guess it depends on how much credence you give the announcers.[/color]

There seemed on TV to be significant wilt in all the greens.
And again, I had heard the same thing about the greens nearly dying after the tournament.

Unlike Craig Disher I'm not qualified to draw agronomic conclusions from watching a course on TV.

Is "nearly dying" similar to "mostly dead" as in "The Princess" Bride ? [/color]

[John Moore II]

Pat--I am not familiar with the Princess Bride analogy, so I can't answer that one.

[Sean_A]

I'm sure almost everyone remembers the course setup fiasco at Shinnecock during the 2004 U.S. Open. The greens in particular were allowed to dry out to a point where several of them looked dead. Does anyone have firsthand information about what happened to the greens after the Open? Did any of them actually die? How long was it before the course was back to normal (i.e. healthy condition)?

Jeepers Pat

You do have a way of making mountains out of molehills.  I see a lot of questions asked above with the exception of the first two sentences.  While I enjoyed the Shinny Open there is no question that the USGA stepped over the line with 7th hole.  Many would call this a fiasco and since the 7th is a part of the course,  using the phrase "course setup fiasco" is not out of line.  There would have been no harm in answering the questions presented without the long winded bullshit - save that nonsense for your kids. 

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

I was at Shinnecock all 7 days in 2004.


the setup WAS a fiasco
they cut the tall rough 40 yards off line(that the members deal with every day), they planted squirrelly, weird silly green rough one yard off line.

the last day was a fiasco-the first 3 were OK

A great course the rest of the year, too bad they didn't use it for the 2004 Open.

[John Moore II]

jeff--in regards to Shinny, how much different do you think it may have been set-up with Mike Davis instead of Tom Meeks?

[jkinney]

I was there all 4 days and with high-ups in the USGA (who shall remain anonymous) most of the time. I was also the club photographer for Shinney and inside the ropes during the action Saturday and Sunday. Here's what happened as I saw it from close in.

For the first 2 1/2 days the weather was humid and basically windless - highly anomalous for June in Southampton. The golf course was defenseless under those conditions (you may remember that Tiger holed out a lob wedge on 18 for eagle Friday afternoon ! ). The leaders were 6 under going into the weekend. Saturday at about 1 or 2 PM a northwest front started to come through w/o rain. It was from the beginning a dry wind as these normally are. The leaders started giving back strokes as it freshened steadily through the afternoon. As I walked across the course at the close of play Saturday, I noticed that the greens were not being watered in spite of the fact that they were obviously drying out considerably at that point. I remember finding that strange at the time.

Saturday night the wind continued to freshen and the humidity continued to drop. Sunday morning at around 7 AM the USGA went out to cut the holes, the greens still not having been watered. The original hole position planned for 7 was scrapped, and the hole was cut in a place where putts held at 7 AM, I'm told. Still no watering took place, and as the sun rose in the sky and continured the drying process, by 10 AM as the first groups came through, balls no longer held. The rest is history.

I'm told there was a miscommunication between the USGA and Shinney's grounds crew - who were not told (or told not) to water the greens. Why did this happen ? I suspect that the USGA
wanted Shinney to play hard, it having been defenseless w/o wind the first 2 1/2 days. I also suspect that they simply failed to consider the drying out power of the low humidity nor'wester. It's not the standard, humid smokey sou'wester that is the normal trade wind for which Shiiney was routed and which had shown up on schedule during the '86 and '95 Opens. However one explains it, it was still a major screwup. The fairways were cut to tightly also, IMO, and the primary rough was cut in a blotchly manner, which I've never understood. Neither conditions were present in '86 or '95.

Still, Goosen and Michelson waged a battle royal throughout the last ten holes and had no problems putting untlil Phil lost concentration on 17 with 3 putts from 5 feet. Since they were in adjacent groups, I took in most of the action by running a series of 400 yd. sprints back and forth. Thrilling it was. Goosen had ice in his veins that afternoon. His was the greatest putting exhibition I've ever seen.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Arble,

Had Walt C singled out the 7th hole on Sunday instead of blanketly condemning the entire Open my response would have been different.

If you equate pointed questions with long winded bullshit, then, like my children, you don't know much about the Open at Shinnecock either.

Mother Nature's influence on course set-up and playing conditions almost universally trumps man's hand.

Try preparing a golf course so that it peaks on Sunday afternoon.

Mistakes were made, but, how many of you are perfect when it comes to the performance of your jobs ?

Jeff Warne,

The first three days were fine.
Things got away from them Saturday night and Sunday morning.

[Sean_A]

Sean Arble,

Had Walt C singled out the 7th hole on Sunday instead of blanketly condemning the entire Open my response would have been different.

If you equate pointed questions with long winded bullshit, then, like my children, you don't know much about the Open at Shinnecock either.

Mother Nature's influence on course set-up and playing conditions almost universally trumps man's hand.

Try preparing a golf course so that it peaks on Sunday afternoon.

Mistakes were made, but, how many of you are perfect when it comes to the performance of your jobs ?

Jeff Warne,

The first three days were fine.
Things got away from them Saturday night and Sunday morning.

Pat

What?  By not signaling out one hole Walt condemed the entire Open? If you stepped back, took a deep breath and reflected for few moments, you might have come to the understanding that Walt was asking questions (as he later confirmed) - not making pronouncements other than to state things got out of hand - which of course they did. 

As for the USGA and Shinny.  It was a monumental cockup and rightfully embarrasing.  BECAUSE the weather is unpredictable a bit of leeway in course setup should be allowed.  Its a fine line between a keeping the course right on the edge and going ott.  Perhaps the USGA should have made that line a bit thicker. 

Ciao

[Jim Nugent]

Frank Hannigan thought the USGA screwed up big-time at Shinnecock.  On June 28 2004, he said:

"Bad as the US Open was at Shinnecock Hills, and it was very bad, I still found it compelling compared with the renewal of the PGA Tour season last week. The latter featured kids without waist lines hitting 2 iron tee shots 275 yards followed by wedges into pudding greens.

"The US Open, however, had the same allure as a public execution in l7th century England. I wonder if Cromwell sold hospitality tents for the beheading of Charles I?

"The Women's Open happens this week. With it the USGA has its first opportunity since Shinnecock to begin the long, slow process of wiping clean the stain."

And Hannigan again, in the Scotsman.com, July 18, 2004…"At the recent US Open there was a world-class foul-up followed by what in high political circles is called the "cover-up."

Here is a quote from Geoff Shackelford about how the USGA blew it:

"Anthony Cotton of the Denver Post interviews Tom Meeks who was in town to see how he could mess up Cherry Hills. The infamous USGA rules official speaks about how, after 30 years on the job, he’s still learning. He admits mistakes were made at Shinnecock, but it’s not clear who made them.

"Meeks also acknowledges that watering the greens after Saturday’s third round of U.S. Open play and before Sunday’s finale would have averted the final day debacle (which followed the Saturday debacle). This takes me back to Saturday evening when The Golf Channel’s Rich Lerner’s interviewed Meeks as winds howled and the man in charge of the course denied then that watering was necessary.

"Fascinating that a Golf Channel reporter can recognize what is necessary to keep the course playable and after 30 years and several Open screw-ups Meeks cannot."

[jeffwarne]

Pat,
agreed the first 3 days were fine on the greens,(although the dead calm conditions were disappointing)
We all know the greens were a debacle when the PREDICTED weather front blew through saturday night.

My gripe is cutting the fescue and bluestem that's always there(that the members deal with every day) and adding the silly, weird, green rough at fairways edge.
Just set the fairway width and angles and let them play golf.
or better yet, do nothing and let them play

[Adam Clayman]

Jeff is correct. The fairway width's were the only element that did not fit the design. The firmness would only have accentuated the excitement and help popularize the firm and fast school. The result would have been that more bunkers were in play. 
 There was quite a movement, at that time, for the F&F school. Shinny should have been the ideal case study for the world's stage.
 I recall Tom Paul making a certain prediction, that came true, but, because of this furor over the seventh green, black eyes were handed out and the soft and predictable crowd made their voices heard. Who remembers that guy Thompson?