Isn't high, penal rough ideal?

[Patrick_Mucci]

PatC,

Have you ever played Congressional or Bethpage Black ?

Yes.

Great, then you can tell us, with specificity, exactly what makes both courses, "snooze inducing"

Let's start with BPB on a hole by hole basis.

# 1

[Sean_A]

The best reason I can think of to shout down US Open rough is it makes for boring tv.  Less opportunity for heroics and more opportunities to watch guys hack short shots to fairways - BORING.  Less opportunity to watch greenside magic and more opportunity to watch shoes disappear and heads shake - BORING.  Once in a while the overbearing set-up will produce great tv, Carnasty was likely the supreme example of this, but more often than not it makes for boring viewing.  I rarely watch anything more than highlights or the odd hour here and there of the US Open and this year is not likely to be different.

BTW - the best point made in these 4 pages is Jeff's comment about the USGA being the "star" of the show because of course set-up rather than allowing great design to take centre stage.  Pathetic.

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

I'd disagree

Disasters are never boring and that kind of rough can easily lead to a disaster

[Sean_A]

Pat

Rarely does stupid rough create disasters on its own in prime time situations.  Even the Van de Velde nightmare was more an issue of his stupidity than the rough.  Combined, the factors created some of the best golf viewing I have ever seen - just as compelling as The Duel Under The Sun.  Do you recall the sequence of shots?

1. Stupid choice of driver off the tee which in the end he got away with.

2. Stupid choice of 2 iron which would have gone so far right as to be okay, hits the grandstand and plops into vicious rough.

3. Stupid choice to hit at green over burn ends predictably.  Great drama with shoes off as the burn slowly rises!

4. Drop back in rough.

5. Stupid choice to play at hole over bunker from high rough - plop into sand. 

6. Good bunker shot leaving an opportunity to gain playoff spot.

7. Excellent 6 footer. 

That was great stuff and I would argue the rough played a supporting role rather than the staring role.  I have never seen a disaster remotely as good as this with rough playing a part - and this was a very rare incident combining all sorts of elements that went way beyond the condition of the rough.  At Merion we shall see hack out after hack out to the fairways or greens.  Not exactly disasters, but for the greedy dropping two shots will be on the cards.  Boring.

Ciao     

[ChipOat]

I haven't read the whole thread so please excuse any repetitive opinions.

First, NGLA, and most of TOC, are the epitome of wide fairways that, if you miss off the tee, "it follows you all the way to the hole".  This, IMO is due to the angles and other excellent architecture that is ON THE GROUND - including the green complexes.

Augusta National was like that until equipment and player ability forced them to add the "second cut" although that is really less penal - more just to make it harder to spin the ball to those great greens.

As for the great parkland courses such as Merion, Oakmont, Baltusrol, TCC and Winged Foot, I'm afraid the real deep stuff has become necessary for championship play.

Personally, I think it is awful for regular member and guest play.  It adds up to 30 minutes/round and takes much of the fun out of the experience IMO.  Under even semi-championship conditions, a four hour round without picking up when appropriate and only minimal reading of longer putts is impossible unless the group is all members.

For the last two weeks, Merion has been, basically, unplayable for the members from anywhere other than the short grass - of which there is much less, anyway.  I sense that the analogy will be made with Winged Foot in 1974.  "Drive for show" may need to be amended to "drive for dough so you have the chance to putt for dough".

To paraphrase Lee Trevino, contestants that are chipping and pitching for birdies won't be in the hunt for very long.

[Garland Bayley]

Sean,

I'd disagree

Disasters are never boring and that kind of rough can easily lead to a disaster

Patrick,

Great recovery shots get replayed for years on broadcasts. No one ever replays hacking out of the rough. Watching a ball disappear into the rough may be a disaster, but it is the epitome of boring. I remember some NBA teams used female "models" as ball girls to retrieve basketballs. Maybe the USGA can station analogous eye candy in the rough to spice up the event.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland & Sean,

If the rough remains as pictured, I think you'll see guys leaving shots in the rough, and maybe more than once.

I think you'll see doubles and triples, round and tournament ruiners.

Is this how you want the Open decided ?

[Garland Bayley]

Garland & Sean,

If the rough remains as pictured, I think you'll see guys leaving shots in the rough, and maybe more than once.

I think you'll see doubles and triples, round and tournament ruiners.

Is this how you want the Open decided ?

 
What the heck you talkin' about bro'?

[Tim_Weiman]

SArble,

I have never found the US Open to be boring, except possibly the time Tiger won by so many strokes at Pebble Beach.

Anyway, it appears there is a consensus when it comes to thick, deep rough not being appropriate for everyday play, notwithstanding Pat C' s initial post.

My guess is that opinions would also be pretty close when it comes to normal PGA Tour events (personally I don't favor deep thick rough even for these events).

So, the disagreement really boils down to setups for major championships with the majority of GCA types favoring a single "ideal" setup that excludes thick rough and a small minority believing the major championships should be unique, different test with the US Open typically featuring deep, thick rough that puts a strong emphasis on accuracy.

I have never played golf at an elite level, but if I did I probably would most enjoy winning a British Open, perhaps because I have such fond memories of playing golf in England, Scotland and Ireland. Love it!

The Masters is ok, but suffers in my eyes because it is an invitational rather than an Open.

But, while winning the British Open would be the most fun, I would probably be most proud to win the US Open, largely due to the brutal nature of USGA setups. It is precisely the grind that would make winning the US Open so special.

[PCCraig]

PatC,

Have you ever played Congressional or Bethpage Black ?

Yes.

Great, then you can tell us, with specificity, exactly what makes both courses, "snooze inducing"

Let's start with BPB on a hole by hole basis.

# 1

Lets not.

You noted that you thought that if the above rough is needed to host the open at Merion, then perhaps it shouldn't be hosted there at all. I nearly stated that if that rough is needed to avoid hosting another AT&T Invitational at Congressional, oops I mean US Open, then I'm perfectly OK with it.

That's of course on a tournament basis. I'm still waiting for a solid explanation as to how rough makes a golf course less strategic.

[Colin Macqueen]

Sean,
"Stupid choice to hit at green over burn ends predictably.  Great drama with shoes off as the burn slowly rises!"

Now if my memory serves me right the tidal burn was not rising but, as the tide was receding, the burn was getting more shallow! This of course prompted Craig "Popeye" Parry, an Australian golfing icon, to suggest to Van de Velde that to tarry much longer would allow him (Van de Velde) to play the shot off the shingle!! I think that Parry, running out of patience, included an expletive or two in his assessment!

But yes very dramatic golf if a bit rough!

Cheers Colin

[Patrick_Mucci]

PatC,

Have you ever played Congressional or Bethpage Black ?

Yes.

Great, then you can tell us, with specificity, exactly what makes both courses, "snooze inducing"

Let's start with BPB on a hole by hole basis.

# 1

Lets not.

That's because you can't.

You noted that you thought that if the above rough is needed to host the open at Merion, then perhaps it shouldn't be hosted there at all.


Correct

I nearly stated that if that rough is needed to avoid hosting another AT&T Invitational at Congressional, oops I mean US Open, then I'm perfectly OK with it.

How can you be in favor of narrow, narrowed fairways with nine inch rough ?
If it rains, while that rough is at that height, you won't hear the end of it.

That's of course on a tournament basis. I'm still waiting for a solid explanation as to how rough makes a golf course less strategic.

It's quite simple.
Because there is no strategy in terms of where one hits the fairway in order to get the prefered angle into the green, it's target golf on steroids.

It's a pass/fail test, with no variation.

With a fairway 15 yards wide, does it make any difference "where" in that fairway, a golfer's ball comes to rest ?

In order to cope, golfers will go from point "A" (tee) to  point "B" (fairway DZ) to point "C" green, with absolutely no significant advantage/disadvantage to landing anywhere at "point B"

[noonan]

If you want strategy - have graduated rough from the tee to 280 yards out - then go to the penal 9 inch rough

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Jerry I like that but there is  nothing wrong with the deep stuff at 240 either if it is graduated up to the deep stuff.
If you are more than 20 yards offline the deep stuff is okay.
I am not for the deep stuff being proximal to the fairways but if you hit a wild shot, which to me is 20 yards plus then I have no problem with the player being penalised.

[Patrick_Mucci]

MWP,

But, can the player get back to the fairway from the deep stuff ?

If it's wet, assuming they can find it in five minutes, will they be able to get back to the fairway with just one shot ?