[Phil McDade]

David:

In Davis' defense (and I don't defend him that often here ), I think he's trying to add some element of choice and thought to tee shots, esp. the par 5s. If you look at his specific ideas on changes:

-- He views #3 green as perhaps too severe and gimmicky;

-- He wants to add some challenge to the tee shot at the long par 4 5th (I had the same thoughts when I toured the course last year, in that even the back-tee shot from high on that hill didn't look all that difficult for the top players);

-- He seems to want to create different ways to attack the two par 5s -- #s 7 and 14 -- that create risk for those going for it in two, yet provides a safe corridor for those playing it conventionally.

-- I think he's right on #15; the green surrounds are too severe it seems to have a go at that hole with driver. Needs to play @ 275-300 for that to be an option? But that's a hole original to the design; Davis has had little to do with it since its inception.

-- He's on target with #16 -- a hole in which the greensite (not quite a punch-bowl, but it's a deep green sunk into its surrounds) lends itself to a blind or semi-blind tee shot.

-- He seems to want to do something similar with #17 as #5 -- create a bit more challenge to the tee shot, not simply make the hole play longer.

[David Cronheim]

Phil:

I don't disagree with him on the bulk of the changes. My comment, more generally, was that I think the USGA has a habit of nitpicking and making changes that aren't necessarily improvements.

I'm not sure about #15. I played it from a back tee so going for it wasn't an option, but I would've laid up anyway. I thought it was an interesting hole because a well-played layup over/around the high-walled fairway bunkers left an awkward approach. I have no problem with that on such a short hole. It was a unique challenge because, normally, I'd try to never leave myself that second shot. It's severely uphill, from an odd yardage and it was very difficult for me to gauge the distance. I believe I hit it 20 feet, 2 putted and was very happy to escape with a par. I didn't think it needed to be driveable to be an interesting short hole. Not every short hole has to be driveable. What happened to all the interesting 350-375 yard par 4's? I always loved #3 at Augusta.

[Phil McDade]

David:

You may be right about that -- that's a good thought about the short but not drivable par 4 with the awkward chip. I thought from the first time I saw that hole that it was really severe in terms of trying to drive the green (which I think was the original intent of the hole).

[Terry Lavin]

Pat,

You asked, "Does Mike Davis play architect too much?"  I suppose that's a legitimate question, even if what he's really doing is trying to take advantage of the architecture in order to be more creative with his setup decisions.  I don't know if Davis would claim enough knowledge about course architecture to "play architect", but he sure knows enough about hosting national championships and enough about architecture to be a valuable source of information.  In the case of Erin Hills, a course that is still embryonic as compared to some of the other places that host USGA championships, I am guessing that he had some significant input into some architectural changes.  And like Rees Jones' work with other hosts of US Opens, I'm sure that the architect and owner at Erin Hills did their best to implement some of his recommendations.  Nothing wrong with that, since it is the USGA that is going to promote the heck out of the otherwise unknown course.

[Jud_T]

I guess I don't really have a problem with EH catering to the whims of the USGA.  The course is a work in progress and this is their best chance financially to garner significant publicity in the distant suburbs of Milwaukee.  I just wonder how many non-sticks will travel to Erin, WI and pony up for a difficult walk.  I guess there's a bit of overflow traffic from Whistling Straights but I'd guess there's plenty of tee times available at the other Kohler courses (and Lawsonia for that matter.)

[David Cronheim]

David:

You may be right about that -- that's a good thought about the short but not drivable par 4 with the awkward chip. I thought from the first time I saw that hole that it was really severe in terms of trying to drive the green (which I think was the original intent of the hole).

I think you're 100% correct that it was originally intended to be driveable, but it's VERY severe. It's not worth a chance. However, I like it as an awkward chip. How often from 60-70 yds are pros going to struggle to put the ball inside 30 ft....not often, but they will there.

[PCCraig]

Pat,

You asked, "Does Mike Davis play architect too much?"  I suppose that's a legitimate question, even if what he's really doing is trying to take advantage of the architecture in order to be more creative with his setup decisions.  I don't know if Davis would claim enough knowledge about course architecture to "play architect", but he sure knows enough about hosting national championships and enough about architecture to be a valuable source of information.  In the case of Erin Hills, a course that is still embryonic as compared to some of the other places that host USGA championships, I am guessing that he had some significant input into some architectural changes.  And like Rees Jones' work with other hosts of US Opens, I'm sure that the architect and owner at Erin Hills did their best to implement some of his recommendations.  Nothing wrong with that, since it is the USGA that is going to promote the heck out of the otherwise unknown course.

Terry,

I understand. And perhaps this is really the future of the Open host courses as I can't imagine him making the same comments so loosely at Merion, Oakmont, Olympia Fields, etc. What struck me was just how matter-of-fact his comments were, as if changing the fairway contours was an easy fix.

That being said, I thought Erin Hills looked good yesterday in the coverage I saw, and was interesting to watch. As long as the winning score is reasonable and the Championship is a success financially, I can see them going back to Erin Hills once a decade.

[Jim Colton]

It's remarkable that for a long time, this course promoted the fact that little or no dirt was moved during its construction. Now I can't keep the multiple iterations straight in my head.

[Phil McDade]

Mike Davis goes over the "tweaks" he envisions for Erin Hills for the US Open:

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/128405428.html

In an effort to go completely over the top   I thought it might be helpful to depict some of the holes Davis talks about with photos; all photos taken from EH threads posted by myself and Joe Bausch:

Hole #1 (par 5 that played at 560 yds for stroke play and can be pushed back to 637 yds).

Davis: No. 1, par-5: "We will use not only the tee we used for (U.S. Amateur) stroke play (qualifying) for the U.S. Open, but we’ll go one back or maybe even build one in between. Because I think that that tee probably played a touch short. The back one, they can go ahead and bulldoze because we’ll never use it."

Here's the tee likely to be bull-dozed:

The hole can be played from the tips at 637 yards; here’s the tee shot from the very back tees. The green sits just above the farthest-right blue umbrella, middle-left of picture.


Hole #3 (a long par 4 that can play as far as 500 yds.)

Davis: "I would say if I had a concern about a green, the third green is the one. I’ve had that concern all along and I think this week kind of proved that out."

A look back at the 3rd, with its two-tiered green (one of the larger ones on the course). This green was also expanded at the request of the USGA to be closer to the fronting bunkers.



Hole #5 (another long par 4 that can play @ 500 yds)

Davis:  "This was the one that surprised me. Here’s a hole that’s 500 yards where I do think we need to do something with the drive zone because I think that that one, the kids were just bombing it down the left side and you were watching them hit at most a mid-iron into the green. So I think shifting (the tee) slightly to the player’s right is going to make them think a little bit more off the tee and bring that bowl that’s kind of short-right much more into play."

The fairway on this hole has been shifted left; from the way-back (U.S. Open) elevated tee, the shot is over a large area of native grass to a fairway that runs off to the left. The fairway of the 7th hole, which runs in the opposite direction of the 5th, can be seen to the left.


A closer look at the fairway contours; I think Davis wants to bring in the blind element for the approach shot that comes from being on the right side of the fairway.


Hole #7 (par 5 of 600+ yards that plays over the NLE Dell hole)

Davis: "The par-5, I think, needs something else in the drive zone because again I think you can stand up there and almost not think and wail on it. The rest of the hole played great."

From the back tee:


LZ:


A look back:


Hole #14 (another long par 5 that can play 600+ yds)
Davis:  "There are going to be some big changes for the Open. That’s one where we really want to make it a risk-reward par-5 and right now it’s too long from the tee we’re playing and it would be way too short from the next tee up. There’s like 80 yards difference between those two tees. So we’re going to try to get a tee in there. And then the area that’s short-right of the green and to the right in the drive zone, we’re going to make that much more penal. So you’re either going to play it as a three-shotter going up the left or you try to carry it but if you don’t carry it and make it you’re going to be in trouble. We’ll get that right. It’s nobody’s fault, but that’s not quite done yet. It’s a work in progress."

Two looks at the fairway landing area.



Two more looks at the fairway; sounds like Davis wants to bring these fairway bunkers more into play by building a tee at @ 540-550 yds (it can play as far back as 614; played at 586 during stroke play):



From Joe's comments: These bunkers can't really be challenged from the back tees, but can be from the middle tees:


Hole #15 (shortish par 4 originally designed as a possible driveable par 4; played at 370 yds for stroke play.  Back tee is the highest point of the course).
Davis: "This is a hole where I don’t think we know yet how it will play for the Open. We’re going to start using the up tee some for match play and I’m convinced that Tour-level players will never try to drive that green if you put a driver in their hands. So I think we’re going to have to go down a couple tees and see what they do with 3-woods – for some of the kids maybe even less than 3-wood."






Hole #16 (mid-range par 3)
Davis:  "Has been a very pleasant surprise. I think that hole has played beautifully. We have a new tee that’s up a little bit to the left; when we have it there in match play it will be a partially blind shot where you just see the top of the flag. You don’t see the whole flagstick, which is kind of neat."

Note my original comments from the EH thread of a year ago
I actually prefer this tee (171 yards, according to the yardage marker), as the glacial mound hides a good portion of the green and would make a flag on the back (and even middle) portion of the green invisible. For perspective, the green extends as far back as a line extended down from the third large oak tree from the right.


A look back; the tee that Davis talks about is to the right of the small V-shaped notch in the landscape just to the right of the line of tee boxes:


Hole #17 (a par 4 that can play @ 480 yds)
Davis: "Here’s a hole that’s 509 yards and I said to myself, ‘I know what’s going to happen. They’re going to take a long hole and they’re going to make it into a short hole.’ Because that hole always plays straight downwind. It’s a straight shot, which for good players, they can just bomb it. They don’t have to think about a certain angle or movement to the fairway. There’s one that I think for the Open, a new teeing ground that’s slightly offset to the player’s left would make you think more about, ‘OK, if I hit it on this angle I’ve got to hit it a certain distance but if I hit it too far it’s going to go through the fairway.’ I think there’s some other adjustments to 17, too, with the mow lines, particularly up near the green that we want to create more closely mown – particularly short-left where you can bounce your shot on."

This is the offset back tee that I think Davis references, but maybe he wants a tee more off-set to the left than this one; there's room for it from just behind the 16th green:


A look back at the fairway; Davis may want a tee located (looking at the picture) just to the left of the walking path, on the other side of the small U-shaped dip in the land there.


Two looks at the green surrounds:

[David Cronheim]

Great pictures! Thanks for sharing them. I think the pictures of 15 really show what a tough short hole it is as a NON-driveable par 4. The center bunker is right in the middle of the landing area. It divides the fairway into three little spots. The tee shot is almost like playing to a par 3. You have to pick which small section of the fairway to hit to. You can bail right, but you leave a longer shot. I love it with the tees back.

[Phil McDade]

It's remarkable that for a long time, this course promoted the fact that little or no dirt was moved during its construction. Now I can't keep the multiple iterations straight in my head.

Jim:

They really have moved very little dirt out there. There has been shaping of greens, of course, but to use one example: the 4th green was originally located in a natural depression at the end of the fairway; it's now located on a natural shelf that sits above the fairway. Big change, yes; but not a lot of dirt moving other than the shaping of the green there. The single biggest change from its original conception to now is the addition of really challenging bunkering. Alot of the changes Davis talks about it are tees that will simply be located in somewhat different spots than now, and new tees require the least amount of dirt moving as anything.

It's a gigantic piece of land, and you can do a lot with it -- one of the reasons I think Davis really likes it.

[Kalen Braley]

No comment on the 2nd hole?  The one with the teeny green? 

I guess it was either playable or if not Mike liked seeing them struggle and take bogeys.

[Phil McDade]

No comment on the 2nd hole?  The one with the teeny green? 

I guess it was either playable or if not Mike liked seeing them struggle and take bogeys.

Kalen:

See post #54 on this thread, particularly the 4th point. #2 appears to play as designed -- a short, gambling par  where birdies and even the occasional eagle is possible, but also frought with some danger. Played just slightly over par (4.016) during stroke play. Davis likes it; he should -- it's one of the best holes out there.

[Kalen Braley]

No comment on the 2nd hole?  The one with the teeny green? 

I guess it was either playable or if not Mike liked seeing them struggle and take bogeys.

Kalen:

See post #54 on this thread, particularly the 4th point. #2 appears to play as designed -- a short, gambling par  where birdies and even the occasional eagle is possible, but also frought with some danger. Played just slightly over par (4.016) during stroke play. Davis likes it; he should -- it's one of the best holes out there.

Thanks Phil,

I must have skipped right over that bit when you 1st posted it.  Sounds like they have what they want then.

[Phil McDade]

Field report, having just returned from Saturday's semi's:

-- Anyone interested in seeing truly fast and firm conditions should head out to EHills, either tomorrow for the finals or soon after, before fall rains hit. This is as ideal of a maintenance meld I've seen on a course -- fescue fairways a light shade of green, yellow/tan in sports, not brown, nothing burned out, and a firmness to both the fairways and greens that demanded players take into account the often-significant rollouts of shots.

-- The weather has been very good, and -- ideally -- shifting winds have significantly changed how some holes play. This week has seen a traditional seasonal wind out of the south/southwest, a brisk wind out of the north, and today -- unusually so, because you don't see it that often in these parts -- a funky wind out of the northeast. From both a weather and wind perspective, this week has been ideal for showing off how an "inland" links-like course can play.

-- The course gets the US Open in six years, and seems likely to be put into some kind of US Open rota, given Mike Davis' obvious love of the place. But it should definitely earn a spot on a permanent rotation to host the US Amateur, and it should consider hosting other kinds of match-play tournaments (like the Mid-Am). The course's elasticity and flexible set-up makes it ideal for match-play; today's set-up featured two driveable par 4s among the first four holes of play, two reachable par 5s (irons for second into one of them), and two par 4s at 500+ yards into the wind that required (or would've; neither match got to hole #17 today) woods for second shots. It's almost as if Davis and the USGA set-up folks don't really care about par at this course, and simply want to offer up a mix of strategies, choices, and shots available to the players. It really works for match play.

-- Those who are fans of other links-like courses built in recent years (the Bandon courses, Sand Hills, Ballyneal) yet still skeptical of EHills (paging Mr. 155-holer ) should make a trip to see how EH plays in its current conditions. Long rollouts (the John Kirk theory of looong shots is in play all the time here), pinball-like bounces, contours affecting play (and needing to be taken into consideration) and providing options about how to attack a hole -- all of those are evident throughout EHills. I was a bit skeptical of the course when I first encountered it -- wet -- last year; when dry, firm and fast -- this is a spectacular course.

-- The holes that initially appealed to me when I first visited the course -- #s 2, 8, 9, and 12 -- still stand out (for my tastes) as first-rate holes, with some options about how they can be played (2, notably) or how they can play in varied conditions. Hole #8, a roller coaster of a par 4, has had players with second shots ranging from wedge to fairway wood this week. A close inspection of #9 -- a tough little downhill par 3 -- reveals just how varied the hole can play simply through the choice of the teeing box. Five separate teeing areas range in yardage from the low 130s to mid-160s, with a teeing width of some 70 yards.

-- I thought the greens a bit tame upon initial inspection last year; I'd amend that now, and a closer look reveals a lot of greens with a lot of interest, and, running as fast as they are this week, full of trouble. Greens at #7, 9 and 13 all feature interesting internal contours, subtle slopes (9 is really tilted from front to back, which you really can't see unless you're standing at the very front of the green), and some really challenging pin positions. The green at #3, which Davis this week suggested might be tamed, is quite severe.

-- I still wonder about hole #15, a shortish par 4 that plays from a tee at the highest point of the course and was designed, in part, to be driveable. It all just seems a bit busy for my tastes, and most players simply played hybrid out to a wide, flat area of the fairway right of all the trouble, with a little wedge in. Dramatic looking, but somewhat dull in how it's played. (Senior, who is really long and was down 3 with 4 to play today, tried to drive the green today, and had the benefit of an ideal helping wind. He didn't make it.)

As for tomorrow's match -- Cantlay is the real deal. Maybe 150 pounds sopping wet, he hits it a ton (his drive at the par 5 #7 rolled out at 403 yds), has a deft short game, and is a steely putter. A very low-key demeanor -- he makes everything look pretty simple, like this is the most natural thing he could be doing. But beware Kraft in tomorrow's final -- dude's got one hot putter.

[Howard Riefs]

Enjoyed a great day at Erin Hills following the Cantlay-Russell match. Phil described the course and how it's playing in great detail. I haven't been on the course since playing it in 2009. It looks quite different, with countless trees removed, assorted new bunkers courtesy of Mr. Lang, greens enlarged, new tee boxes, etc.

It played fast and firm. Greens were running quick -- maybe 13 or so. Cantlay would hit a putt that looked like it would stop 4 feet from the hole and it would run by 4 feet.

When walking the course as a spectator, it's easier to see the massive size of the course. The tremendous room between fairways and behind the greens. The USGA can fit grandstands practically wherever they want. There's no shortage of room for hospitality tents ala Merion.

I've attended the last four US Opens and after today am more excited about 2017 at Erin Hills than I was when the course was first awarded the tournament. The only foreseen challenge will be 25,000 cars descending down county roads each day.

Beyond the course, Cantlay has some serious game. While he didn't drop too many putts today, he can hit it a mile and has a deft short game. Russell hung in the best he could but didn't hit enough greens to make more than one birdie (I believe). I'm looking forward to watching Cantlay-Kraft on Sunday, though it will be on my TV.

Jeff:

That is a pretty severe pin position on #4 -- that's a new green (the original was a punchbowl some 30-40 yds closer to the tee) that sits on a small shelf, with a pretty sharp back-slope, and the green is not that deep, esp. on that right side (as the golfer is looking at it from the fairway). I hadn't thought of a short tee on #4, but looking back at some photo threads, the hole lends itself to that, because of that fronting central bunker and the upslope of the fairway leading up to the green. I would've liked to see whether any of the guys playing yesterday geared down and played it 5-iron/wedge; I'm not sure that's in their DNA. It's a bit less severe on the left side of that green, which is where they'll place the pin most days I'd think when the hole plays at its usual 450 yds.

The tee on #4 was actually up on Saturday and played around 280, with the pin front left. Cantlay played first, and hit a medium iron that landed 20 yards short of the centerline bunker and rolled out until it crawled into it. Russell also grabbed an iron and ended up short of the bunker. Both hit their approaches on the green, with Cantlay hitting a nice wedge from a the downslope of the bunker. If memory serves, Russell two-putted for par while Cantlay three-putted.

[Brent Carlson]

Phil,

Great pics.

I was fortunate to play EH twice before the initial changes, and I found the course superb.  Do you find the recent changes enhance EH overall?  Admittedly the old green on #2 was too small, but I had a soft spot for the dell hole.  It was really neat.  

Having played Chambers Bay quite a bit this year it's amazing the similarities that these courses have.  I'm interested to see how they both play for the Open; should be perfect.  I'll try and catch some of the final tomorrow.

[Mike McGuire]

Town of Erin -- Mike Davis, executive director of the United States Golf Association, went over "minor" changes he foresees at Erin Hills before the 2017 U.S. Open.

Davis already considers the 6-year-old public course to be among the finest championship tests in America but has learned a lot about Erin Hills at the U.S. Amateur this week.

He went over the changes he envisions over the next few years with me. For you golf architecture geeks, here's his hole-by-hole analysis:

No. 1, par-5: "We will use not only the tee we used for (U.S. Amateur) stroke play (qualifying) for the U.S. Open, but we’ll go one back or maybe even build one in between. Because I think that that tee probably played a touch short. The back one, they can go ahead and bulldoze because we’ll never use it."

No. 2, par-4: "It played beautifully. I would make some adjustments in the fairway contour but that will be an awesome hole for the U.S. Open with risk-reward."

No. 3, par-4: "I would say if I had a concern about a green, the third green is the one. I’ve had that concern all along and I think this week kind of proved that out."

No. 4, par-4: "This was a new hole, the green set-up there. That one had me concerned and I watched it this week and it’s wonderful. One of the great changes in this latest renovation."

No. 5, par-4: "This was the one that surprised me. Here’s a hole that’s 500 yards where I do think we need to do something with the drive zone because I think that that one, the kids were just bombing it down the left side and you were watching them hit at most a mid-iron into the green. So I think shifting (the tee) slightly to the player’s right is going to make them think a little bit more off the tee and bring that bowl that’s kind of short-right much more into play."

No. 6, par-3: "Played beautifully."

No. 7, par-5: "The par-5, I think, needs something else in the drive zone because again I think you can stand up there and almost not think and wail on it. The rest of the hole played great."

No. 8, par-4: "Surprised me. I was very concerned that 8 wouldn’t play right and it’s played great."

No. 9, par-3: "That green concerned me. But it’s been awesome. It’s a 140-yard shot downhill but that hole was good. I love the fact that you’ve got a big golf course but then you’ve got a tiny little shot with the scariest green on the course. You really have to know what you’re doing, particularly if you get it firm."

No. 10, par-4: 'This was another one where, I’ll be honest, I wasn’t sure how it was going to play. That fairway is 60-some yards wide and going into it I couldn’t figure out what do we need to do with it. I think in hindsight it’s perfect the way it is because if you play it right and catch that bowl and go down you pick up an extra probably 30 yards. But you’re down in this hole and you’re trying to hit up; the angle’s not as good. But if you play it out to the left, it's a much longer shot but a better angle. I’m convinced that, you know what, the U.S. Open, that’s going to be a 60-, 65-yard wide fairway and it will play marvelously. I was thinking about narrowing it either from the right or the left and it’s good the way it is."

 No. 11, par-4: "Played well.".

No. 12, par-4: "It has played very good. We were nervous in stroke play to play it back for fear that some people wouldn’t get to the fairway. But I think that can be played from the back tee. That’s a very unique hole."

No. 13, par-3: "Played well."

No. 14, par-5: "There are going to be some big changes for the Open. That’s one where we really want to make it a risk-reward par-5 and right now it’s too long from the tee we’re playing and it would be way too short from the next tee up. There’s like 80 yards difference between those two tees. So we’re going to try to get a tee in there. And then the area that’s short-right of the green and to the right in the drive zone, we’re going to make that much more penal. So you’re either going to play it as a three-shotter going up the left or you try to carry it but if you don’t carry it and make it you’re going to be in trouble. We’ll get that right. It’s nobody’s fault, but that’s not quite done yet. It’s a work in progress."

No. 15, par-4: "This is a hole where I don’t think we know yet how it will play for the Open. We’re going to start using the up tee some for match play and I’m convinced that Tour-level players will never try to drive that green if you put a driver in their hands. So I think we’re going to have to go down a couple tees and see what they do with 3-woods – for some of the kids maybe even less than 3-wood."

No. 16, par-3: "Has been a very pleasant surprise. I think that hole has played beautifully. We have a new tee that’s up a little bit to the left; when we have it there in match play it will be a partially blind shot where you just see the top of the flag. You don’t see the whole flagstick, which is kind of neat."

No. 17, par-4: "Here’s a hole that’s 509 yards and I said to myself, ‘I know what’s going to happen. They’re going to take a long hole and they’re going to make it into a short hole.’ Because that hole always plays straight downwind. It’s a straight shot, which for good players, they can just bomb it. They don’t have to think about a certain angle or movement to the fairway. There’s one that I think for the Open, a new teeing ground that’s slightly offset to the player’s left would make you think more about, ‘OK, if I hit it on this angle I’ve got to hit it a certain distance but if I hit it too far it’s going to go through the fairway.’ I think there’s some other adjustments to 17, too, with the mow lines, particularly up near the green that we want to create more closely mown – particularly short-left where you can bounce your shot on."

No. 18, par-5: "I think 18 is one of the great finishes in golf. I think that is an awesome hole. Other than just a little bit of a fairway adjustment there, I think that is going to be one of the great closing holes for the U.S. Open that we have. I think it gives a guy a chance because that should play straight downwind. You can get there in two but you can get yourself in trouble, too."

[Brad Swanson]

Walked the morning round of the finals.  It was my first viewing of Erin Hills, so I don't have the perspective (baggage) from past iterations.  I was very impressed with the course from the perspective of a championship venue.  I enjoyed seeing the finalists hitting hybrids and long irons into the par 4s for approaches.  The turf conditions were PERFECT, very firm and fast.  

My expectations were low due to a lot of the criticism the course has received on this DG.  I was pleasantly surprised.

Brad

[Terry Lavin]

Walked the morning round of the finals.  It was my first viewing of Erin Hills, so I don't have the perspective (baggage) from past iterations.  I was very impressed with the course from the perspective of a championship venue.  I enjoyed seeing the finalists hitting hybrids and long irons into the par 4s for approaches.  The turf conditions were PERFECT, very firm and fast. 

My expectations were low due to slot of the criticism the course has received on this DG.  I was pleasantly surprised.

Brad

I had somewhat muted expectations before I played Erin Hills last fall but I'm a big fan now.

In my judgment this championship has demonstrated that Erin Hills does have every chance to become an instant classic on the national stage. The conditions have been just perfect with the course getting crunchier and crustier by the day. There have been some quirky bounces and nutty runouts on the green but nothing like we saw last year at Chambers Bay. To me this course takes some elements of minimalism adds muscle and some shotmaking demands off the tee with the end result being a pluperfect stage for amateur and professional golf.

In short, an absolute home run that could develop into a grandslam when the big one rolls into those rolling hills six years hence.

[Phil McDade]

Phil,

Great pics.

I was fortunate to play EH twice before the initial changes, and I found the course superb.  Do you find the recent changes enhance EH overall?  Admittedly the old green on #2 was too small, but I had a soft spot for the dell hole.  It was really neat.  

Having played Chambers Bay quite a bit this year it's amazing the similarities that these courses have.  I'm interested to see how they both play for the Open; should be perfect.  I'll try and catch some of the final tomorrow.

Brent:

I think one's perspective on EHills depends in large part on how you view for the course for what it's trying to be. Initially, it was kind of an ultra-minimalist course -- literally, something in which fairways and greens were routed and found, with very little earth moved to accomodate the terrain there. I still think that's what Whitten envisioned for the whole thing. From that perspective, the loss of the Dell is a bummer. But -- it was the second of two consecutive par 3s (which, I don't think the USGA would've gone for), it was a little gimmicky (not the blindness, but the rather simple approach to the hole -- compare it to #9, a real butt-puckerer of a hole), and it was pretty tame -- hard to imagine much worse than bogey being made there.

The single biggest change out there, I'd argue, is the addition of all those bunkers, and that's what makes that course worthy of holding a US Open (maybe worthy is the wrong word; "tough enough" might be a better way of putting it). It now "looks" like a top-tier championship course, and can probably play like it. Before -- I'm not so sure. I think many of the changes there have generally improved the course, but they have also made it more conventional in how it plays.

[Dan Herrmann]

I for one love what I saw on TV.

[Link Walsh]

Glad to see all the positive reviews.  I played version 1.0 about 4 years ago (actually I remember getting in the car afterwards to drive to Lawsonia and hearing that Brett Favre had decided to "unretire" for the first time.  Needless to say that was big news on Wisconsin sports talk radio...)

Loved the course then and I'm really looking forward to playing it again.  The new 10th looks like a great long par 4.  With all the talk about bunkers being added everywhere, I was a little worried it would look too busy.  But it appeared that they got it right this time.  

What more can you ask for as far as championship golf (especially on this site)?  Firm and fast, lots of variety in the par 4s, variable winds, holes that make the player think, holes that for the most part did not require much movement of dirt, etc....


Hopefully, the people complaining that they should have stopped tinkering with the course so much over the past few years saw the end result this week with an open mind.  It's a good course, not just for the "pros" but for everyone.  

I'm looking forward to another double dose of Erin Hills and Lawsonia next summer!        
 

[Joe Bausch]

I'm looking forward to another double dose of Erin Hills and Lawsonia next summer!        
 

Me too.  When you going?!   

[Terry Lavin]

I agree with you, Terry.  It was a colossal home run.  Wish I could say the same for NBC's 3-hour slobbering love affair with Patrick Cantlay ...who lost by the way...although somebody probably still needs to convince Dan Hicks, Gary Kock and Roger Maltbie of that fact. Ugh. 

Like most journalists they sounded a little lazy by focusing on the chosen one but who can blame them?  Cantlay is the real deal. Four PGA starts and all in top 25?  Pretty solid. He lost at the Western Am on the last hole as well. My only question is whether he played too much this summer. Might have shown some signs of burnout recently.

But how about that no-effort golf swing of Cantlay?  Combine it with Kraft's putting stroke and you'd have an amazing golf cyborg!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()