Merion - where's the strategy off the tee for the pro?

[JR Potts]

Help me out here.  I played Merion last summer and as stated before, absolutely loved it.  However I keep reading about its great strategy off the tee and quite candidly, I don't see it.  Where is it?  It all seems quite straightforward to me.

Where are the real choices for the tour pro?  I submit that the course is too short for the PGA Tour player to present any real strategic options off the tee.

[Philippe Binette]

I feel like the strategy at Merion would be like the one in Royal Lytham

because of the severity of the hazards and the roughs, the fairways are hard to hit.. so on each hole you'd have to decide how agressive you want to play off the tee...

and since the course is short enough, you could play 3-iron off a bunch of tees, keeping the ball in play but you'll have longer 6-7-8 irons to greens that are hard to hit.. or hit driver, and have a wedge but you have to hit the fairway.

it's not about choosing a line of play, but how patient or agressive you want to be, especially under pressure

[Ronald Montesano]

Ryan,

In order for me to answer your question, I need to rephrase it:  "Where's the strategy off the tee for the pro with a driver in her/his hand?"

By taking the driver out of the pro's hand on certain holes, you create strategy...is it low fairway metal or stinger long iron to enhance run, or is it high hybrid or mid-iron to create a par three-par three scenario on a two-shotter?

The Walker guys, who all bomb the shit out of the driver, were hitting 4-iron from the Hogan plaque on 18 in 2009. Even if they hit driver-6 iron into the fairway and onto the green on 18 in 2013, that green target is going to challenge their approach shots, the bunkers will challenge their misses and the subtle putting surface will demand acuity. And that's one hole only!

[JR Potts]

Tricks:

I respectfully beg to differ with your proposed title change.  Most ofthe holes are such that driver will never be an option and given the length of the hole, doesn't need to be an option.  Besides the 2nd, 4th and 18th, where does the pro have to make a decision (assumng that theyre not just going to step up and bust driver like i suspect)?  Maybe 6, 13 and14?

I don't know, I don't see a lot of agonizing strategic decisions for the best in the world.

[Adam Clayman]

I dare any pro to pull driver on 13. Now that would be worth televising.
Ryan, you might be right about this, but, I suspect the narrow fairways are likely responsible. Otherwise, I could extrapolate that there would not only be directional strategies, off the tee, but also, length. Allowing the player to attempt to play their shot from a lay of the land that would assist them in accessing the pin on their approach.

[Sean Leary]

I think he might be right as well. But couldn't it be said for most US Open courses?

I have played it twice, at different times of the year with the rough not too severe. It was VERY playable that way....Tough but not unfun, even with the tightish fairways.

Chip explained in the other thread why the fairways are so narrow, so we can stop fighting it now. It makes sense for what the club is trying to accomplish, not what 18 handicap internet cowboys want. Although I would love to play it with restored fairways.

Ryan, what do DA and the other pros think of Merion and how it will play in 2013?

[JR Potts]

Sean: I haven't plated with any Tour guys who have played Merion in the last 5-10 years.  And candidly, those guys dont think about the host clubs until they're figuring out their schedule for the year.  I'll bet 70 percent plus of the Tour has no idea where next years Open is going to be. 

My question was a little loaded as traditional US Open and PGA sites get critiqued for being on diminutional off the tee for tour pros as they just have to bust driver....and my point....is the strategy any better if they just bust hybrid all over the place?  I don't think so.

I think it's almost impossible to architect strategy for the tour game.

[ChipOat]

Sean Leary:

I didn't say the fairways were THAT narrow - in fact, my description of 24/7 championship condition mentioned just about everything EXCEPT fairway width.

Actually, the fairways have been widened in many cases from the 1981 Open/1989 Amateur mowing patterns. 

[Adam Clayman]

Chip, Since you know it so well, you could probably hand pick specific locations on every hole which would be the ideal. Is that true? Wouldn't that be strategic planning?

[Chris Cupit]

Unfortunately I tend to agree with Ryan.  For the elite, world class professional angles do not really matter.  If you give one of those guys a fairway lie they are going to be able to hit the green and are furious about making more than par.  They may play to a fat portion of the green in some cases but only on shots outside of 150 and only if there is some real huge penalty for short siding themselves.

In order to have "strategy" for a tee shot where one side of the fairway or another actually matters you must have width.  For 99.5% of golfers I would think 40-50 yard wide fairways would be able to provide sufficent width that could allow for attemptng to favor a particular portion of the fairway.  If you give the best players in the world 40 yard wide fairways they will just bomb drivers and have wedges in in which case angles are irrelevent.

For US Opens (at Merion or wherever else) the fairways will be 22-27 yards wide and in that case all you are trying to do is hit any portion of the fairway.

All the more reason for a bifurcation of equipment.  Let the pros play steel, wood and older balls and let everyone else play whatever the hell they want to and quit messing up the golf courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ryan,

Anytime you narrow the fairways to about 20 yards, you essentially constrict strategy and emphasize target golf.

I think that's true of most Major events.

While, as their ad says, "These guys are really good", as good as they are, I don't know if the reward for hugging one side of the fairway outweighs the risk associated with that plan of attack.

And, with the aerial nature of the game, for the best players in the world, does "strategy" actually exist ?
Can you give me 5 examples of strategy on a narrowed USOPEN/PGA course ?

I'm hoping that other than a new tee or two that NGLA doesn't touch the golf course in terms of fairway width for the Walker Cup

[Dan Herrmann]

How about the tee shot on #4?  (for starters).  I'd think #11, #12, #14, a#15, #18 would also require a lot of thought.
And #2, #5, #6, #1 too.

[SL_Solow]

Pat;  I think that was Ryan's point.  He has consistently suggested that the courses used for the US Open and PGA are set up to test ball striking and not strategic thinking.  I suspect the genesis of this position is the consistent criticism of Medinah on this board.  Ryan has expressed the view that Medinah is now designed to be a test for major championshios and less a members' course.  Hence he argues that much of the criticism is unfair. 

[Chris Cupit]

How about the tee shot on #4?  (for starters).  I'd think #11, #12, #14, a#15, #18 would also require a lot of thought.
And #2, #5, #6, #1 too.

Dan,

The tee shot on #4 confuses me.  I think it may be one of the least strategic actually.  All anyone is trying to do is hit any portion of the fairway in order to give themselves a lay up shot.  What difference does one side of the fairway have if the second shot is a lay up for 95% of the best players in the world?  Now the second shot may get the guys thinking as to where they want to be for their third shots.  

#11 is a hole where anywhere in the fairway is fine.  With a wedge second shot and a green that does not have huge movement, anything but the left rough is fine.  (Right rough is no treat but left rough is dead).  

#12 I don't remember one side being any better than the other.  #14 and #15 are lay ups most likely either short of the narrowing point at #14 and certainly on #15 to keep from going through the fairway there.  #18 is a busted tee shot up to whatever point the fairway gets really narrow (if that is how it is set up).  

The firmer and faster will result in lots of divots on those tee boxes  Most on this site praise firm and fast but for Merion as firm and faster shortens an already short course (by world class standards) and narrows fairways, the tee shot becomes nothing more than "what club can I chase down there to keep it in the fairway"?  On holes that dogleg players will play to the turn point.  On holes that narrow up alot they will play for the roll out to stop at that point and on a few holes like #2 and #18 that are long and straight where length can result in a significant;y easier next shot, they will try and bomb it (again provided the fairways are not narrowed up at 300 yards).

Please don't misunderstand this post--I think Merion is fantastic and one of the greatest courses our country has.  I just don't think that the way 99.5% of us view strategy of the tee bears any resemblance to how the elite, world class golfers look at the same shot.  I don't think it will be necessarily a great test of driving skill with a driver but unlike many golfers I don't think that is always bad.  Nicklaus hit three drivers a round I think (#2, #4 and #18) back in '71 and I think that will be the case for many again in 2013.  Again, I think it is more interesting to see players pick different clubs off the tee versus instinctively grabbing for the same club.  However, they will be playing to distance spots with those clubs not really trying to favor one side or another.  There will certainly be a game plan and strategy as to what second shot they plan on attcking with and that is a strategy of course but not the startegy we like to think of on this site necessarily.

Tiger's display at Hoylake was masterful and I think when he did pull out driver it made for more interest than having him just grab for driver all day long.  In that case weather and conditions dictated a very strategic "tacking" around the course.  This is in contrast to Muirfield (1972) where I think Jack Nicklaus hit irons for three days due to thick rough on every hole.  Of course many may argue it was a poor strategy as he left himself too far behind and his final round charge (with driver in hand) came up short.

    

[Tom_Doak]

The strategy is on the approach shots, not on the tee shots -- what do you have to do to keep the ball below the hole, and how far below the hole do you have to play to be certain you wind up there?  Merion has a great set of greens, and strategy will never go out of style with greens like those, even if the players often have wedges in their hands.  [And where don't they?]

[Terry Lavin]

The strategy is on the approach shots, not on the tee shots -- what do you have to do to keep the ball below the hole, and how far below the hole do you have to play to be certain you wind up there?  Merion has a great set of greens, and strategy will never go out of style with greens like those, even if the players often have wedges in their hands.  [And where don't they?]

Probably so.  It will wind up being a wedge/putter championship.  Snooze.

[Mike Sweeney]

Much of the same was said in 1981, and I saw the first two days. Here is a good summary of David Graham's win in 1981 at Merion:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1124588/1/index.htm

17 fairways and 18 greens hit on Sunday will probably win it again.

[Peter Pallotta]

Devil's Advocate Time (or Reality Check, I'm not sure):

The trouble isn't Merion (or any other golf course in the world). The trouble is our pre-occupation and parrot-like yammering on about  'strategic thinking'.  No matter what the golf course, there is very little 'thinking' required to play golf. You can aim to the left side of the fairway or to the right, to the right side of the green/pin or to the left. One practice round and it's suddenly crystal clear: all black or white, all right or wrong. That's not 'thinking'; geez, that's barely even 'choice'.  It's binary, it's how computer's 'think' -- and goodness help us if that's what passes for 'thinking' in the modern world. By comparison, a much maligned and Rees Jones-doctored US Open course where it's straight up the middle every single time, requires, at the very most, exactly 50% less 'thinking'.  

Peter      

[JR Potts]

Peter's comment highlights the reason why I never truly understood the term "strategy" when trying to hit my tee shot. I'm usually just holding on for dear life while trying to find any part of the fairway.

[Tom ORourke]

There was a point of discussion about the tee shot on #4, saying that is a layup hole. Not so fast my friend. I was following Molinari during round #1 of the last US AM, and he got home in two. You have the strategy of playing aggressively, or making it a 3 shot hole. The tee shot on #5 is important as the further right you go the more the right to left slope, and you do not want to be coming into a left hole location there with a draw. And that hole is now over 500 yards so driver may be the play there. Merion is my favorite course because of the angles. I think even the pros will need some strategy off the tee if they want an easier approach shot to put the ball on the proper place on the green. A player like Tiger may hit driver 5 - 6 times tops, probably less, but will still need to think about where to put his tee shot. And some of the bombers may try to go deep on holes like #8 or #10 to try to leave a pitch or sand shot to the green. I don't think it is bombs away but neither is it all irons and hybrids. At least not if you are going to win.

[Patrick_Mucci]

The strategy is on the approach shots, not on the tee shots -- what do you have to do to keep the ball below the hole, and how far below the hole do you have to play to be certain you wind up there?  Merion has a great set of greens, and strategy will never go out of style with greens like those, even if the players often have wedges in their hands.  [And where don't they?]

Tom,

How much strategy can there be when wedges are hit into those greens ?

Being below the hole is an inherent, if not a universal, strategy, especially for the best golfers in the world.

Will transforming the greens into rock hard surfaces be another line of defense ?

While these guys aren't infallible, it's hard to imagine any course defending par without gimmickerie

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I never said anything about defending par.  I don't care about that, as long as the championship requires its champion to play great golf.

I agree with you that watching guys hit wedges to every green is kind of dull.  It's been a problem everywhere for ten years or so ... not just at Merion.  Merion has dealt with it for a lot longer, maybe they have the answer.  I just wish they weren't out there tearing up the course right now to try and "handle" the problem.

The greens were rock hard for the 1971 Open, I've heard Bill Kittleman describe it in gruesome detail.  That was a pretty good championship.

[William_G]

  Merion has a great set of greens, and strategy will never go out of style with greens like those, even if the players often have wedges in their hands.  [And where don't they?]

+1

[Peter Pallotta]

Peter's comment highlights the reason why I never truly understood the term "strategy" when trying to hit my tee shot. I'm usually just holding on for dear life while trying to find any part of the fairway.

R - and THAT'S why, IMO, modern courses that come in at about 6900 yards and that are routed expertly through quality sites with smartly-contoured greens and a limited amount of random bunkering are better than the rest, i.e. not because they require a great deal of (or a great deal more) strategic thinking than other courses, but because they offer more interesting golf in a more aesthetically-pleasing environment as part of an enjoyable journey that can be pleasantly walked.

P

[JR Potts]

Peter's comment highlights the reason why I never truly understood the term "strategy" when trying to hit my tee shot. I'm usually just holding on for dear life while trying to find any part of the fairway.

R - and THAT'S why, IMO, modern courses that come in at about 6900 yards and that are routed expertly through quality sites with smartly-contoured greens and a limited amount of random bunkering are better than the rest, i.e. not because they require a great deal of (or a great deal more) strategic thinking than other courses, but because they offer more interesting golf in a more aesthetically-pleasing environment as part of an enjoyable journey that can be pleasantly walked.

P

And we generally agree.  However, it's hard to "play-down" to those set-ups and most guys (me incuded) don't want to do it all the time.  I equate it to having a bazooka at your disposal - that you know you probably shouldn't shoot - but you know doing so would be so much fun.  So you do....

I guess that could be considered strategy though.