On which Major championship course....

[Mark_Rowlinson]

....does the architecture exert the greatest influence on the outcome of the tournament?

Carnoustie, perhaps, with its frightening finish terrorising players into making mistakes?

Olympic, for its remarkable record in providing upsets?

Augusta, perhaps, for its wealth of testing pin positions?

Oakmont, for its relentless examination?

[David_Tepper]

Mark -

Without getting to a specific US Open course, it is clear that AGNC & the Masters present a much different test of golf than the collective US Open courses. Of the combined total of 20+ major championships won by Seve, Faldo, Watson, Lyle, Langer, Olazabal, etc., the majority have been Masters victories at AGNC. From that group of players, there has been only 1 US Open win (Watson at Pebble Beach).

Contrast that with multiple US Open winners like Hale Irwin, Curtis Strange and Payne Stewart, who have, with one exception, never really contended in the Masters.

DT   

 

[Phil Benedict]

I think you would have to go with Augusta or some British Open site, because the set up doesn't change that much from regular play, whereas US Open courses are at least as much about the set up as the architecture.  Given the regularity with which the # 1 player prevails at the Old Course, that would get my vote for the Open Championship site where the architecture is determinent.

[john_stiles]

Maybe Bobby Jones got what he wanted from the efforts of Alister Mackenzie.

It is striking in David's short list that there are so many Open victories.

Faldo has 3, Seve 3, and Watson 5.

Water for the courses and scotches for those horses.

[David_Tepper]

Phil B. has a good point about the set-up of the US Open courses (narrow fairways, deep rough around the greens, etc.) playing at least as important a role as the underlying architecture of the courses themselves. 

[Phil_the_Author]

A good example of what David and Phil B. refer to is the 18th at Torrey.

There is little doubt in my mind that if Tom Meeks had done the set-up it would have played as a brutally long par-4. That is why it is so exciting to watch what Mike davis is doing. He is deeply interested in bringing back the original architectural merits and design intents of the courses being used. Even where changes are made to lengthen a hole, for example the 13th at this year's Bethpage Black, it is done for this reason. That hole which could be played as long as 660-yards brings all of the original fairway bunkers very much back into play with several risk/reward options that must be carefully considered.

[Phil Benedict]

As far as US Open sites go Pinehurst is probably the best example of a course where the architecture takes precedence over the set up.  The USGA doesn't rely on severe rough because the green complexes are so challenging.  I was at the US Open at Oakmont with a friend who had been at Pinehurst as well. He told me the rough at Oakmont was much tougher than Pinehurst.

[Philippe Binette]

Muirfield...

the course is so demanding on all the aspects of the game... driving accuracy, working the ball, short game, putting etc... that it doesn't produce fluke winners

Els, Faldo, Trevino, Nicklaus, Vardon, Trevino, Hagen, Player, Cotton....

[Gerry B]

pinehurst has to be considered -as day in and day out the greens / pins will be a factor
carnoustie for its difficulty -one of the toughest tests in golf
others such as oakmont can be either set up to be as difficult as possible however when considering british open courses the weather as opposed to the archictecture is a major factorie the wind.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mark,

Are you refering to the architecture as the original designer meant for it or as it has become. Both Augusta & Pinehurst have been mentioned, yet both courses have been considerably changed from their original design intents. We are all familiar with ANGC changes especially over the last 10+ years, but Pinehurst's greens, which have been specifically mentioned in this thread, are quite different from the way Ross designed them.

So, are you focusing on design intent or the course as it is at the time of the championship being held? For if that is teh case, hands down it must be Augusta as the changes ALWAYS exert a major influence on the play and outcome, and usually as of late in the negative...

[Mark_Rowlinson]

You are quite right to point out the set up of the course. Even for the Open Championship changes are made - the 2nd tee on the Himalayas at St Andrews, for instance - and pin positions are probably in far from everyday positions. As far as Open Championship courses go, most have had a host of different architects modifying things over the years, so each course is only as old as its most recent makeover. I presume it is the same for US Open, US PGA and the Masters. So for the purposes of this thread i think we have to consider the architecture of the course to be that in use at the time of the championship.

Certainly the architecture is a big factor at St Andrews with the Road Bunker, the road and wall influencing everything on the 17th and the Valley of Sin and OOB dictating matters on the 18th. And just about every green has several brilliant pin positions.