Ogilvy on course setup...

[Jason Walker]

Bayley-
not sure how you infer that is my contention--it is not.   In fact, just the opposite--the field all play the same course.  As an aside,  if you look at the last three major championships, plenty of golfers felt they played a course that was unfair versus the other half of the field on a particular day.

But per Paul T's remark, my main point is I think it's perfectly acceptable once in a while to require in a major championship that the best golfers in the world hit greens in regulation or face consequences.

[George Pazin]

...my main point is I think it's perfectly acceptable once in a while to require in a major championship that the best golfers in the world hit greens in regulation or face consequences.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that Geoff Ogilvy is saying there should be no consequences to missing a green. I don't think anyone would say this. I think his point is that ideally the consequences should result in a situation where the main component of recovery is skill; he seems to feel under these types of setups that it is more luck.

You may have a quibble with that on many levels, but I think you and Paul T are mistaken in your interpretation of his comments.

[Richard Choi]

Just because everyone plays the same course is no excuse for a poor setup. Geoff is 100% correct in his assessment. When a bunker is preferred outcome compared to missing a fairway by a foot, there is something seriously wrong with the setup.

I think all Geoff is asking for is the setup similar to what USGA is doing with graduated rough. The penalty should be more severe as you move further away from the target.

You can setup a course with 10 yard fairways and 2 feet hay lining the fairways and have someone "execute the shots" and win the course. That does not mean that is something that is beyond criticism.

[Bill Brightly]

While many on GCA might agree with Geoff on how we like to see courses set up for us to play on, I think he is totally off the mark on how courses like Hazeltine should be set up for pros. Once we accept that 300 yard drives are the norm, thick rough must be part of the equation for determining the best player that week. Without that rough around the greens, there is little real penatly for missing a green. Pros do NOT have a God-given right to get up and down when they miss the green, and I think rough is the ONLY thing that significantly lowers their %. This makes every club choice that much harder throughout a round, every fairway missed a big mistake.

I don't think using Whistling Straights as part his argument holds water, that course not only has length but also tremendous wind to defend it.

As much as I like Geoff and agree with his view on course set up for the average player, his comments here seem like whining. Pros have automatic up and down shots that they have practiced to perfection. Thick rough, and inconsistant lies, take them off auto pilot. They hate it, and I love to watch it.

[George Pazin]

Without that rough around the greens, there is little real penatly for missing a green. Pros do NOT have a God-given right to get up and down when they miss the green, and I think rough is the ONLY thing that significantly lowers their %. This makes every club choice that much harder throughout a round, every fairway missed a big mistake.

And yet they had no rough at The Masters for so long...

[Bill Brightly]

And yet they had no rough at The Masters for so long...

And great greens with lots of pace and movement.

[George Pazin]

So what you meant to say was that at courses with no other means of defense, thick rough is necessary?

[Richard Choi]

No, George, I think he meant Hazeltine National has no right hosting a major championship

I think most of us would whole heartedly agree!

[Tom_Doak]

Tom Paul:

Personally I have never been a fan of thick rough, but doesn't the Big World theory defend it?

The lies Tiger had on the last two holes certainly looked crazy hard, but he paid the price of falling behind Yang and having to go for the flag on those holes, when the chances of success were marginal.  (And if Tiger had just made par on 17 and watched Yang three-putt, like Nicklaus would have, does anybody think Yang would've birdied 18?)

Then again, Tiger used to be a genius at shots out of rough like that ... remember the sixth hole at Pebble in 2000, or the 17th at Bethpage in 2002?  Perhaps everybody is just out of practice at it because they don't see those conditions much anymore.

Geoff O. has been consistent about not liking the stuff, but from his results this week, it doesn't look like he has been able to maintain the positive attitude that he had at Winged Foot three years ago.

[Tim Pitner]

I read a quote attributed to Ogilvy in which he said that next year in the majors, at least they will play on "real" courses.  Was he including Turnberry in his criticism of the courses on which majors were played this year and, if so, I wonder what his criticism would be? 

[John_Conley]

No, George, I think he meant Hazeltine National has no right hosting a major championship

I think most of us would whole heartedly agree!

Funny, as I watched I thought it looked exactly like every big event held at Oak Hill, Oakland Hills, and Inverness.

[Jim Franklin]

Geoff O is moving up in my fan liking. I had it when courses grow rough 6-7 inches deep to defend it. Call it whining, but he gained a fan in me. It is no fun watching those guys hack out of that hay. None. And it is no fun playing in that stuff too. I don't care if he is playing the same course as everyone else, it is his opinion.

[Bill Brightly]

Jim,


Have you ever watched pros practice? I love to do this, and they will hit hundreds of simple chip or pitch shots from clean fairway or easy rough lies. Their mindset is no different than yours when you want to lag a 25 foot putt close to the hole. Many times they are practicing on parts of a course not in use, like they did on a extra hole at Ridgewood in last year's Barclays. That would get us suspended on our home courses! The pros up an down game becomes so automatic, and this creates a sense of fearlessness on the tee and with full iron shots that is hard to quantify. Thick rough changes all of that and that is how I want to see pros tested, especially in a major. (The British Open is  totally different and presents its own unique set of challenges.) What I hate is the driving/putting contests that most of the PGA Tour has become. Wind is the other thing that really effects pros,(I think Tiger wins the PGA by 3 if he wasn't so effected by the wind on his shot selection) but you can't produce wind on demand, so rough is the only way, IMO.

[Sean_A]

Jim,


Have you ever watched pros practice? I love to do this, and they will hit hundreds of simple chip or pitch shots from clean fairway or easy rough lies. Their mindset is no different than yours when you want to lag a 25 foot putt close to the hole. Many times they are practicing on parts of a course not in use, like they did on a extra hole at Ridgewood in last year's Barclays. That would get us suspended on our home courses! The pros up an down game becomes so automatic, and this creates a sense of fearlessness on the tee and with full iron shots that is hard to quantify. Thick rough changes all of that and that is how I want to see pros tested, especially in a major. (The British Open is  totally different and presents its own unique set of challenges.) What I hate is the driving/putting contests that most of the PGA Tour has become. Wind is the other thing that really effects pros,(I think Tiger wins the PGA by 3 if he wasn't so effected by the wind on his shot selection) but you can't produce wind on demand, so rough is the only way, IMO.

Bill

In my experience, the best majors to watch are those where the rough is a relatively negligible factor.  The exceptions to this are when the human drama take centre stage and then it doesn't where the event is. 

Your use of the word "test" strikes me as anything but a test because the answer is already known - hit it straight or ELSE.  IMO, this isn't a great formula to see hole after hole, but it is interesting to see it once in a while - as a sort of easy answer if you will. 

Ciao

[Carl Rogers]

Course setups in the extremes, ultra high thick rough or buzzed down aprons stimping at 8 or so should not be necessary on and around properly designed green complexes.  I think it is the artificial contrivance that is the problem. 

Why should it take many months to prepare a course for a championship if the course was designed and built properly to begin with?

[TEPaul]

"Tom Paul:
Personally I have never been a fan of thick rough, but doesn't the Big World theory defend it?"


TomD:

Personally, I'm not either but my "Big World Theory" is not exactly my own personal preferences but more like a reality check of what's going on out there and why. Even with that I see no reason not to lobby in any way we can for our personal preferences of the way things should be in the future. The point with my "Big World Theory" is simply that we should never expect to convince everyone to do the same things. DIFFERENCE is basically the essence of the "Big World Theory" and in the final analysis there is a very good reason why golf AND architecture should always maintain a very large difference and a very wide spectrum. The only rub with that is it can never been done on one single golf course! 

[TEPaul]

"Then again, Tiger used to be a genius at shots out of rough like that ... remember the sixth hole at Pebble in 2000, or the 17th at Bethpage in 2002?  Perhaps everybody is just out of practice at it because they don't see those conditions much anymore."


TomD:

You must be kidding! Players like Woods and the others don't get "out of practice" with greenside recovery shots like we saw at Hazeltine. That rough was like nothing we've ever seen before in a Major and it showed in spades with not just Woods but all of them! It made them ALL look like hackers. There is a reason for that and we saw it all four days! I don't care who it was or how talented they are what we witnessed was pretty much just straight "LUCK" nothing more.

[Bill Brightly]

Sean,

I don't believe that the course set up has anything to do with the level of drama. Rather, it is a function how how well the players execute shots, and a bit of luck to get two or more great "names"going at it.

Without Yang's great round, Sunday is another Tiger victory parade.

Yang's rescue club over the tree wasn't dramatic??? He probalbly loses the championship if he hits the tree.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom P:

I only saw the last five holes of the championship.

Was the rough really that much thicker than at Winged Foot 2006 (or 1974)?  Or Oak Hill, whenever the PGA was there?  Or even Pebble Beach in 2000?  [I played there with Mike Davis the month before the event, and there were a couple of times it took us 4 1/2 minutes to find a ball on the bank of a greenside bunker.]

[TEPaul]

"Was the rough really that much thicker than at Winged Foot 2006 (or 1974)?  Or Oak Hill, whenever the PGA was there?  Or even Pebble Beach in 2000?  [I played there with Mike Davis the month before the event, and there were a couple of times it took us 4 1/2 minutes to find a ball on the bank of a greenside bunker."


TomD:

Obviously I wasn't at those sites to analyze the comparative difficutly of recoverying from greenside rough. All I can say is I have never in my life seen the best players in the world struggle with greenside recovery shots as they did last week at Hazeltine----never seen them struggle even remotely close to how they did last week. I think that has to have taken some serious dedication in setup. I sure can't believe that was some setup "accident."

[Tom_Doak]

It's been a banner year for growing grass up here in the midwest this summer.

I don't think it's an accident the rough was so thick at Hazeltine ... they always start by trying to grow the rough thick, because they don't want low scores.  Looks like they just didn't back down and cut it when they saw how tough it was going to be, as they often do.

[Jason Walker]

I don't have any data to support this but in my opinion there wasn't a fairway or a green on that course that was exceptionally narrow or the landing area small.  That being the case, I have no issue at all with greenside rough being as penal as it was.

[Lynn_Shackelford]

Does anyone disagree with this?
It was far better to land in a green side bunker than to land in the green side rough.

So if your position is you like green side rough then why not remove all green side bunkers for the tournament?

I say let them chip off bare ground like I have to on some poorly maintained muny.  Then we will identify the best players.

[JESII]

Lynn,

I don't think anyone disagrees with the general theme.

I lost count though, is this the 9th or 10th US Open/PGA/Big Time Non-Major in a row after which Ogilvy said the same exact thing. Credit to him for saying it openly, but what is he doing about it?

[Anthony Butler]

"Was the rough really that much thicker than at Winged Foot 2006 (or 1974)?  Or Oak Hill, whenever the PGA was there?  Or even Pebble Beach in 2000?  [I played there with Mike Davis the month before the event, and there were a couple of times it took us 4 1/2 minutes to find a ball on the bank of a greenside bunker."


TomD:

Obviously I wasn't at those sites to analyze the comparative difficutly of recoverying from greenside rough. All I can say is I have never in my life seen the best players in the world struggle with greenside recovery shots as they did last week at Hazeltine----never seen them struggle even remotely close to how they did last week. I think that has to have taken some serious dedication in setup. I sure can't believe that was some setup "accident."

Given the tournament situation, Tiger was faced on the last three holes with classic risk/reward shots. He know he needed at least one birdie to put the pressure back on Yang. On 16 he had to fade the ball into the right hand pin to get it close. He hit it straight and had to settle for par. On 17 he needed to fly the ball all the way back to the pin. On 18 he needed a slight draw to get to the back left hole location. He overcooked it on both occasions. Reward–get close enough for a short birdie putt. Risk-put it in the greenside rough and struggle for par.

From his comments in the interview room afterward, Yang had obviously convinced Tiger he wasn't about to fold. He knew he had to make at least one birdie. He had a green light situation 16-18 and failed all three times.

Perhaps that's not the scenario they had in mind when they set up the course, but it worked out pretty well for the PGA and the viewing public... who ultimately pays Geoff Ogilvy's salary.

Apart from the 1,500 here on GCA.com, the opinion of the 43rd placed competitor at the PGA is of little interest to anyone else who watched the tournament.