354 - Elevated Green - Fronting Rough

[Matthew Rose]

Here is the problem, and I am amazed that nobody on THIS site has pointed this out. The hole is not DESIGNED to play from that yardage. If it had been then perhaps the lay up would be made very tough with severe penalties but it can only be assumed the bunkering and fairway width was designed in a manner to make the hole effectively play 60 yards or so longer than the 411 scoreacrd yardage. WHY? So the players have a similar length shot they have been facing on the other holes that play 460-470 but encourage the driver from the tee? Don't get that either.

Well, the original hole was 370 yards wasn't it? Maybe they should have left it there. Sounds like it's just a bad hole, regardless of whatever tee they use.

[JESII]

What does someone hit on #18 at Pebble Beach with a two shot lead?

[Peter Pallotta]

I've always been told that all good players know to lay-up to their perfect yardage. Don't blast away on your second to a Par 5, lay up to your typical PW distance - that sort of thing. But only the guy protecting the lead seemed to have the sense to do that. Proving once again, maybe, that what those USGA set-up boys know best is how to fry the tour-players' brains....

Peter  

[PThomas]

i thought if anyone would/could hit a wedge close it wold have been Phil..but he didnt

the only 5-time runner up in our National Open!

[Carl Nichols]

What does someone hit on #18 at Pebble Beach with a two shot lead?

Depends on the tee and the wind, but assuming they are somewhat favorable, eagle from your playing partner is a distinct possibility, and thus a par doesn't guarantee victory.  I don't think it's a six-iron. 

[Matt_Ward]

The folly of the existing 18th hole was the inane idea that the USGA could simply move up the tee boxes and think they had added some sort of exciting closing short par-4 with a driveable risk / reward feature. The rough frontage and the extreme elevated green simply did not invite such a tempting tee shot target.

I said for a very long time that the existing 18th at BB is a major strike against the course. It is dullsville. The sheer array of bunkers is nothing more than overkill meant to add something that does everything but add to the qualities of the hole.

Some have said -- see Phil Y as the leading propoent -- that the core Tillie elements need to be preserved or if such a thing is tossed aside then make the 18th in ANOTHER muscle long par-4 -- something BB has plenty of in playing there. Tom Doak correctly surmised the chief weakness of BB in an indirect way by stating that all of the super great courses has at least one stellar short par-4 -- BB doesn't have such a hole -- the existing 18th could be truly changed to reflect that shortcoming and be a similar type hole that one saw with the likes of the 17th at Oakmont in '07.

The 18th, as played yesterday, didn't have the real driveable element that makes the possibility in making an eagle or bogey or worse a real threat to happen. For another US Open to return to BB -- the 18th needs to be altered along the lines I have mentioned. Such an addition would make the course even more exciting and add a dimension that cannot be accomplished despite what the USGA attempted to do yesterday.

[Phil McDade]

Greg:

Par opens the door for who, exactly? Was there someone playing behind Glover/Barnes that we didn't know about? One of these guys making eagle from the fairway? C'mon -- that's laughable. NO ONE ELSE COULD GET TO -4! PAR WINS!

MY COMMENT AS PREVIOUSLY POSTED IS BELOW:
Phil, If I have a one shot lead, par opens the door, if I have a two shot lead, par closes the door (for all intents and purposes). That simple for me.


You lost me further with this post... maybe I am just having a bad day.

Bad day or not there is no such thing as effectively a one shot lead with players on the same hole.

Lucas Glover from press conferences yesterday:

Q. You said yesterday you are a scoreboard watcher. Football analogy. There was a point there when some pretty big names were starting to make some moves. Were you paying attention?

LUCAS GLOVER: Sure. And yesterday I said that would happen. And we were waiting on it. You knew Tiger and Phil were going to make a move, and they did. And Ricky and I started coming back. That probably motivated them more.

But, yeah, I was watching. You have to. I do. You don't. I do. Just like to know where I sit and what I need to do.

----------------------------------------

LUCAS GLOVER: Sure. I was pretty nervous coming down the stretch. 16 obviously was huge. And I'm not sure exactly what happened ahead. But two shots ahead, with two to play, and I thought two pars might do it.

I didn't know what would happen with Ricky that I was playing with. He's been playing so well.

But two pars did it.

------------------------------------------------------



Q. Did you have any debate either in your mind or with Coop about what club to hit off tee on 18?

LUCAS GLOVER: Yeah, we were set on driver, because it takes all the bunkers out of play. And then we decided kind of last minute that if we hit 6‑iron, we would be exactly where we've been the three rounds previously. And we decided to play the hole the way we've been playing it and that was from about 160 to the middle of the green.

And 6‑iron, 9‑iron, couldn't ask for too much else. So that was ‑‑ we talked back and forth about it.

-------------------------------------------------------

Q. Hitting shots down the stretch.

LUCAS GLOVER: Yeah, Disney was catching lightning in a bottle, that bunker shot.

I hit the shots today that I had to hit in the situation, and that was, that might be a little more gratifying. I knew I needed a birdie on 16. Had a good number with an 8‑iron. One of the best shots I hit all week was 17. It was right in between clubs, 4‑ and 5‑iron right to left wind. I'm a drawer, and I hit a fade up against the wind that I couldn't have been happier about.

And then 18, I talked a little bit about that, just played long or played past the hole, take short out. Adrenaline was a factor there with club selection. But I hit the right shot.

----------------------------------------------------------

Q. Looked like you took a moment on 18. Can you talk about your emotions before when you knew you pretty much had this one in the bag but you just had to par out?

LUCAS GLOVER: It was still up in the air. I had four feet, and Ricky had a birdie putt. If he makes that I have curl that in to win.

He had a heck of a putt. Probably should have gone in. It was a great putt. But after that, I had two to get it down for four feet and felt pretty good about it.

---------------------------------------------------------

Sounds to me like a guy playing for par on the last hole...

[Phil_the_Author]

Matt,

Tom Doak's opinion of what is needed for a course to be considered "super great" is simply that... an OPINION. It is not gospel and if you look at the list of his Doak 9's & 10's you will become greatly disappointed over the number of them that do NOT have a "great" drivable par-4.

You also misconstrue what I have stated about Tilly's intent and a drivable par-4 on the Black.

You have become Ahab chasing your personal "white whale" on this issue. If you believe that the Black needs a drivable par-4 that is one thing; to insist that it must be the 18th hole where it simply would never fit into the topography in a reasonable manner is the giveaway. Suggest another hole on the course that would become BETTER if it were changed to a drivable par-4. Therein lies the problem for there isn't an example to be had.

I asked you previously what difficulty you would have if the 18th were played as say the 15th hole. Instead of answering it you simply deflected it. I ask you once again how the 18th would fit in along the way.

Finally, you once again impugn motive to the USGA that simply did NOT exist. They did NOT "simply move up the tee boxes and think they had added some sort of exciting closing short par 4..." That is your INTERPRETATION of what you believe happened. Once again, there was no motivating factor of having a drivable par-4 to finish the round exciting or not in the moving up of the tees. It is your misrepresentation that shows the "Ahab" aspect of this idea.

I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with a redesign of any hole or course, including the Black, if the result is a BETTER hole or course. The proof of that is my recommendation of redesigning the 17th to allow for a longer dog-leg par-4 finishing hole.

Matt, pitch the idea, rally the troops behind. Don't misrepresent what the USGA did as either proof of the rightness of it or as an inane idea when it was neither.
 

[Niall C]

Phil, if Jean van de Velde had hit 6-iron, 9-iron, 6-iron at Carnoustie, everyone would be calling him a genius today instead of a buffoon.  Lucas Glover had the same two shot lead and played the hole very intelligently.  He could have won with 3 putts after Barnes missed his birdie putt.  Lucas is the only one I saw who hit 6-iron off that 18th tee, most were suckered into hitting drivers.
[/quote]

Bill:

Van de Velde had a three-stroke lead on the 18th tee at Carnoustie, not two shots (effectively one shot for Glover, given that he was playing with the only guy on the course who could get to -3), and was facing a much longer hole than Glover -- one more than 100 yards longer than what Glover faced. And, in his defense, vdV argued he had hit driver there all previous holes, and had been hitting his driver well the entire day. He also caught perhaps the worse break in modern major history when his second shot didn't stay in the grandstand, but bounced out. Still, he did play the hole with little thought for how much danger there is on that hole.


[/quote]

Sorry for hijacking a Bethpage thread but let me suggest a different take on Van de Velde at Carnoustie. The 18th at Carnoustie is indeed a long challenging hole and yes, vdv had been using his driver well all week therefore it made sense to go with the driver, if only to give options for the second shot ie. go for it in two or lay up. The fact that he pushed his tee shot shows he only erred on the side of caution as the real trouble is up the left. Having fortunately got a good lie and level stance for his second shot he then had the option to go for it or lay up.

I don't know his thought process but given that there was OB long and left and the burn to the front, then a shot into the grandstand would have given him a free drop beside the green. He wouldn't have been the first player to do that. Phil - you are absolutely right about the bad luck to hit a bit of scaffolding and land back on the other side of the burn. Thats when his brain went to sleep, IMHO, when he decided to go for the green out of deep rough rather than go out sideways and chip and two putt from there.

Niall

[JESII]

What does someone hit on #18 at Pebble Beach with a two shot lead?

Depends on the tee and the wind, but assuming they are somewhat favorable, eagle from your playing partner is a distinct possibility, and thus a par doesn't guarantee victory.  I don't think it's a six-iron. 

Carl,

My question was intended to ask...what would the leaders hit for their shots on #18 at Pebble when a par is all they're tryin gto do...Tiger hit 4 iron off the tee in 2000.

[Michael Ryan]

Sorry to jump in this late...I have just caught up on all the Bethpage Black bashing after spending Thursday through Sunday out at the US Open.  We were hosting clients on the 18th hole all week and I spent more time than I wanted observing the army of maintenence workers doing their best during the numerous delays and downpours.  An actual flowing river of water on Thursday afternoon was somehow worked on through the night in advance of Friday.  After Saturday nights torrential rain, the fairway again was worked on for hours in advance of the 12 pm re-start of the third round.  During that afternoon of play, I would estimate that over 50% of the field called in an official to receive relief from casual water.  I watched player after player get to their ball and call an official and there seemed to be one 10 to 15 yard circle in the left side of the fairway that was playable without taking relief. 

I don't think the movement of the tee forward 57 yards for the final round had anything to do with the recent move towards variety in set up under Mike Davis.  I'm of the opinion that it was done with the thought that most players would hitting some type of club (3 iron, hybrid, up to driver) that would reach the upslope of the 18th, and therefore avoid the areas of the fairway that were simply not at US Open standards.

I'm all about the ability to argue the architectural merits of any and all situations in competitive golf, but personally I think it's a waste of time to discuss this situation in the context that the USGA did it for any other reason than the conditions of the 18th fairway between the bunkers.

[Jason Topp]

I liked the hole because it created a birdie opportunity but only if the player could either layup to full wedge distance between the bunkers or hit a perfect 1/2 wedge.  Contender after contender failed.

While I love driveable par fours they have become so commonplace that it was refreshing to see a short par four that was not driveable but forced some interesting decisions on the player.

[Greg Tallman]

Greg:

Par opens the door for who, exactly? Was there someone playing behind Glover/Barnes that we didn't know about? One of these guys making eagle from the fairway? C'mon -- that's laughable. NO ONE ELSE COULD GET TO -4! PAR WINS!

MY COMMENT AS PREVIOUSLY POSTED IS BELOW:
Phil, If I have a one shot lead, par opens the door, if I have a two shot lead, par closes the door (for all intents and purposes). That simple for me.


You lost me further with this post... maybe I am just having a bad day.

Bad day or not there is no such thing as effectively a one shot lead with players on the same hole.

Lucas Glover from press conferences yesterday:

Q. You said yesterday you are a scoreboard watcher. Football analogy. There was a point there when some pretty big names were starting to make some moves. Were you paying attention?

LUCAS GLOVER: Sure. And yesterday I said that would happen. And we were waiting on it. You knew Tiger and Phil were going to make a move, and they did. And Ricky and I started coming back. That probably motivated them more.

But, yeah, I was watching. You have to. I do. You don't. I do. Just like to know where I sit and what I need to do.

----------------------------------------

LUCAS GLOVER: Sure. I was pretty nervous coming down the stretch. 16 obviously was huge. And I'm not sure exactly what happened ahead. But two shots ahead, with two to play, and I thought two pars might do it.

I didn't know what would happen with Ricky that I was playing with. He's been playing so well.

But two pars did it.

------------------------------------------------------



Q. Did you have any debate either in your mind or with Coop about what club to hit off tee on 18?

LUCAS GLOVER: Yeah, we were set on driver, because it takes all the bunkers out of play. And then we decided kind of last minute that if we hit 6‑iron, we would be exactly where we've been the three rounds previously. And we decided to play the hole the way we've been playing it and that was from about 160 to the middle of the green.

And 6‑iron, 9‑iron, couldn't ask for too much else. So that was ‑‑ we talked back and forth about it.

-------------------------------------------------------

Q. Hitting shots down the stretch.

LUCAS GLOVER: Yeah, Disney was catching lightning in a bottle, that bunker shot.

I hit the shots today that I had to hit in the situation, and that was, that might be a little more gratifying. I knew I needed a birdie on 16. Had a good number with an 8‑iron. One of the best shots I hit all week was 17. It was right in between clubs, 4‑ and 5‑iron right to left wind. I'm a drawer, and I hit a fade up against the wind that I couldn't have been happier about.

And then 18, I talked a little bit about that, just played long or played past the hole, take short out. Adrenaline was a factor there with club selection. But I hit the right shot.

----------------------------------------------------------

Q. Looked like you took a moment on 18. Can you talk about your emotions before when you knew you pretty much had this one in the bag but you just had to par out?

LUCAS GLOVER: It was still up in the air. I had four feet, and Ricky had a birdie putt. If he makes that I have curl that in to win.

He had a heck of a putt. Probably should have gone in. It was a great putt. But after that, I had two to get it down for four feet and felt pretty good about it.

---------------------------------------------------------

Sounds to me like a guy playing for par on the last hole...

I am at a complete loss for words and cannot at this point honestly discern if you are arguing with me or trying to support my point.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

When will you ever learn my friend ?

You are the defender of the realm at all times -- for that you deserve plaudits but you need to take off the ear phones that prevent sensible reforms to happen at BB.

Phil, you make the inane idea that having ANOTHER long par-4 at the end for BB is the answer. It's not -- the course is loaded with plenty of them already. When you have a layout with only ONE HOLE below 400 yards and that one is equally dull right now -- it behooves the folks there to move in a different direction with an ending hole that would add theater and drama and serve as fine counterpoint to all the muscle type holes you play prior to that.

Tom Doak is spot on -- having at least one stellar short par-4 would add much to BB -- throwing in as well the driveable risk/reward feature would have also added much to the finishing drama that we saw play out. The tweaking of the existing 18th hole is not good at all -- it is dullsville.

Phil, I think so much of this is whether the idea comes from one person or the other. You hailed the changes made to the 14th -- I don't see the finishing work there as being so much better. You also rarely, that I can recall, strike a chord against the other additions made -- the fairway bunkers at #9 and #13, come quickly to mind.

Phil, try to realize this -- there are great minds in the design world -- who can take the existing topography and make it work for a world class short hole -- one that blends the Tillie dimensions and keeps the existing area worthy of hosting big time events with large galleries watching from the side areas.

Phil, you can state the pro-18 love fest PR spin until Jesus returns -- but many people who love the Black see the existing 18th as a major anchor around the neck of the course. For another US Open to come to the Black -- the ending hole truly needs a new game plan.

Phil, c'mon, please enough of throwing forward diversion stories about using the 15th or other such holes. The ending hole at BB would be a perfect summary statement in playing the course and clearly because it is a short par-4, with the option of being driveable, would serve as superb change of pace hole than what you encounter prior to that point.

Phil, I salute your desire to be the consumate defender of the realm -- but it's time to realize that the 18th is akin to the Emperor -- he wears no clothes in this situation.

One other thing -- Phil my so-called "Ahab / white whales" is the feeling of plenty of people that BB deserves far better than what you see is there now. It's time to call the hole for what it is now ... dullsville, with all due respect to you.

[Phil_the_Author]

Matt,

Once again you misrepresent what I have said. I have CLEARLY stated that the 18th hole works as is... for the general playing public. I have also VERY CLEARLY STATED that it needs changing and have even offered TWO DIFFERENT REDESIGNS... ON ACTUAL PAPER...TO MIKE DAVIS... TO REES JONES... AND OTHERS...

That is NOT the actions of of the leader of "the pro-18 love fest PR spin..." nor the "defender of the realm at all times..." and I especially am not standing in front of the "emperor" admiring his new clothes as you state.

Despite my very clear and public statements you insist on misrepresenting them and proclaiming my words and views to be something that they most definitely are NOT!

Sorry, but I do like the restored 14th green and the new front left tongue, and can claim to have both been there when the discussion about the possible change and the decision to do so was made. I was also directly asked and gave my opinion on it as with several others.

I am a BIG fan of both the new back tee and the bunker (though not it's shaping) on 9 as were the competitors in this 2009 U.S. Open. I have publicly stated that the new bunker on 13 is not necessary yet also does no harm and can be taken or left but that the enw back tee I am clearly a big fan of and it certainly did what it was designed to do, that is, allow the hole to play for the modern players as Tilly designed it. I have also publicly and privately been critical of two other added bunkers to the course as being unnecessary and poorly placed. I'll let you look those up.

I also took the lead in encouraging restoration of some putting surfaces that no one has spoken of and didn't realize as having happened that also allowed for some different hole locations than in 2002.

Again, Matt, these are NOT the actions of a Kool-aid drinking cheerleader for the cult of Bethpage, but rather those of a pretty balanced lover of the course, design and what Bethpage Black represents to those who want to see it continue to challenge the greatest players in the world as it did once again.

By the way, How many times did Tiger Woods, the greatest of those playing today and arguably the greatest who ever has, BOGEY 18 in his 8 rounds in the 2 Opens on the Black? Look it up, you'll be surprised.

Can 18 be changed in a manner that is consistent with the rest of the design of Bethpage Black? Yes! Can it be a better hole in doing so? Yes! Should it happen? YES!

A very final thought as I've now said all I will on this, why not open a new topic Matt and ask for suggested designs for a new drivable par-4 finishing hole on the Black. I promise that every one of them that is sent my way will be given to all those involved in making the decision... Who knows, maybe you will be proven correct...

[Kyle Harris]

It took 71 holes of golf for Glover to get the hole needing par to win.

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

The hole does not exist in a vacuum. The setup was genius in my mind, and the players had options to attack the hole and attempt to solve the problem of making birdie.

[Greg Tallman]

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

A bit harsh and quite possibly incorrect.

[Kyle Harris]

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

A bit harsh and quite possibly incorrect.

Probably true on both counts, but my point is more that Glover earned the right to play the 18th the way he did.

Has anyone mentioned how he did on the 16th under similar pressure? In fact, there was probably even more there as Duval was on the 17thgreen and probably not going to three putt those Bethpage greens that nobody ever three putts...

[Joe Hancock]

I still don't understand why everyone thinks the short distance left to the pic created a spin issue for these guys. It create a distance control issue, as they all seemed to have either over estimated the yardage or juiced it a little to guarantee they didn't come up short, but I didn't see any shots roll out or release after they landed. It wasn't a spin control issue. It was a fear of being short issue.

Joe

[Greg Tallman]

I still don't understand why everyone thinks the short distance left to the pic created a spin issue for these guys. It create a distance control issue, as they all seemed to have either over estimated the yardage or juiced it a little to guarantee they didn't come up short, but I didn't see any shots roll out or release after they landed. It wasn't a spin control issue. It was a fear of being short issue.

Joe

Too short to safely throw it past the hole to a wider section and spin it back.

You are also correct that nobody played very aggressively and tried to fly it short or even with the hole into the narrow part of the green. Guess i should not say they did not TRY... but it sure seemed that way from the results.

Too much "just give yourself a chance from 20 feet" is you ask me.

[Carl Nichols]

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

I'm not sure what "This" is intended to refer to here.  But assuming it's something like needing to be able to make smart decisions under pressure, I'm quite certain that although there are many, many reasons I'm not a tour player, that isn't one of them.

[Kyle Harris]

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

I'm not sure what "This" is intended to refer to here.  But assuming it's something like needing to be able to make smart decisions under pressure, I'm quite certain that although there are many, many reasons I'm not a tour player, that isn't one of them.

More attacking the rather myopic view that critiquing the 72nd hole of a tournament with one data point seems to forward.

I think it was the right call as it presented a question for the golfers that hadn't been posed all week. I think more and more that people want to watch a trainwreck at 18 to decide the tournament, and will forget the rest of the tournament.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

I didn't misrepesent anything you said -- youi are the guy who wants to make #18 ANOTHER long par-4 instead of what's there now. Hello? Does having ANOTHER long par-4 really make the course more complete in any significant way? No, it doesn't.

You say the 18th works for the general public. Big deal. I can have just about any sort of hole and it would work for the general public. The issue is getting a hole that preserves the public option while still having the elasticity and creativity for the world's best. The present 18th is dullsville Phil -- repeat after me 20 times -- dullsville to the max. you can defend it forever but the net result is there to be seen.

BB lacks a stellar short par-4 Phil -- it's time to come to the table -- smell the coffee -- and admit the obvious. The major push between the '02 and '09 events has been singular minded to adding more length -- inserting a few fairway bunkers and revamping the 14th green into something that is truly outside the scope of what fits there. The 18th -- the major missing link -- was left as is and it fails miserably.

Phil -- you love BB and take any suggestions from others (who love it no less than you) - as being beyond what is acceptable.

Phil, you keep on harping about items being "consistent" with the Black -- I have suggested many of them -- I was the guy who suggested that the 7th be split between a four par and five par for the rounds at the Open. I was the guy who labored to make sure that the downslope at the 6th was returned to fairway grass -- as it always has been -- for the '09 event. I also mentioned how such holes as #2 really do need a better green than what is there now. I can certainly provide others and I have noted a number of your previous statements.

You ask about Tiger -- Phil, the hole that ruined Tiger for the '09 event wasn't the 18th -- it was the 15th. Yes, Tiger bogeyed the hole a few times - including the final round in '02 when making five (5) there didn't mean squat to him and his overall win.

Having a stellar short par-4 at the 18th at BB is what's needed -- it would be the ultimate counterpoint to all the long muscle holes faced prior to that point. Giving players a real option for going for the green or laying up can be designer -- my God, designers have overcome plenty of other obstacles far greater and far more challenging than doing what I have suggested. Phil, I hold out hope for you, it not too late -- repent my good man -- and be an advocate for the Force to have such a hole at the 18th. The dark side has taken hold of you but I am confident you will see the light I have shined for the path you need to walk.

[Phil McDade]

This is why absolutely none of you will ever come close to sniffing the air between the ropes in such a tournament as a player.

I'm not sure what "This" is intended to refer to here.  But assuming it's something like needing to be able to make smart decisions under pressure, I'm quite certain that although there are many, many reasons I'm not a tour player, that isn't one of them.

More attacking the rather myopic view that critiquing the 72nd hole of a tournament with one data point seems to forward.

I think it was the right call as it presented a question for the golfers that hadn't been posed all week. I think more and more that people want to watch a trainwreck at 18 to decide the tournament, and will forget the rest of the tournament.

Kyle:

A question for the golfers that hadn't been posed all week? I guess for Glover the question was 5-iron vs. 6-iron -- a shot most any professional playing on a mini-tour can hit successfully to that fairway under those (soft) conditions.

Cabrera won at Oakmont, in part, because he successfully navigated a very hard closing hole with a par. So did Olgivy. Monty hit a terrific drive at WFoot, only to hit a poor second and was quite properly penalized. Mickelson lost the tournament because of one truly stupid decision -- his second shot -- and one debateable one -- driver off the tee. Great holes on a US Open course ought to punish poor play.

I thought Glover played a very solid back nine, esp. with a clutch birdie set up by a wonderful approach on 16, after having been in the lead all day. But he was hardly challenged on the last hole, and I'd argue the US Open ought to provide a stern test for players on the closing hole. Cabrera and Olgivy passed theirs in fine form; Glover took a safe, smart, easy way home on a hole that demanded little of the skill he displayed all week.