What Sucked about Merion This Week?

[Bill Gayne]

I would of like to of seen more drivers and variation in the par threes. What's up with the plants in the left fairway bunker on 18?


Besides that bit of nitpicking it was pretty good. Glad I watched on TV rather than trying to attend.

[Tom_Doak]

Rose was a very worthy winner but I am not sure he has the short game/creativity to win an Open championship where pure ball striking is maybe less of a premium than at the US Open.

You might have said the same thing about Faldo, and he did all right.  There is a premium on ball striking and course management at several Open venues, including any time it's been a wet spring and they're not playing The Old Course.

[Mike Sweeney]

Shifting the 2nd and 15th fairways right next to the roads (Ardmore Ave. and Golf House Dr., respectively) was aesthetically displeasing and also contributed to some of the highest single hole scores.

Agree with you on the 2nd, but not on the 15th. Players were always going to aim away from those bunkers, and the majority of the tee balls I saw go out of bounds on 15 did not land in the fairway and roll out; rather they were big hooks well out of bounds.

John,



Don't understand your logic here, John.  If the players were hitting big hooks off the tee, then shifting the tee over toward the boundary had no effect; they could have just left it over to the right another 10 yards.

I offer Mark's aerial comparison from 1937 that the 15th fairway had minimal shifting. It has been "extended" back. #2 is well documented, but the aerial also shows it was closer to the road in 1937, but obviously wider too:

http://www.golfcoursehistories.com/Merion.html

Now the bunkering at the dogleg on #15 was changed and it did seem to force many players to lay way back:



Mickelson challenged that corner late yesterday and it was an amazing shot to cut the corner and just land in the fairway. Unfortunately it was followed up by a weak wedge shot that took him from birdie to bogey and the tournament was arguably lost on 15 (and 13) with weak wedge play. Combined with his brilliant wedge in on #10, it made Mickelson the perfect golfer to watch on TV yesterday at Merion, for me.  

[Mike Sweeney]

What's up with the plants in the left fairway bunker on 18?

It is the same look at the front bunker at #13, and it has always been in both bunkers from memory. Merion is all about tradition:

[Mark Pearce]

It was a real shame the course was so soft.  Unavoidable, I know, but I couldn't help thinking it would have been more fun with really firm fairways and greens.

[Dan Herrmann]

Nothing.

The best player over the 4 days won.

+1

[Sean_A]

Nothing.

The best player over the 4 days won.

Hmmm, obvious statement, no?  Doesn't the lowest score always identify the best player in a US Open?  Folks say the best player won as if it is compliment to the course.  Very odd logic.

Ciao

[Scott Warren]

And given that any tournament identifies a "best player", I guess that means no tournament course or setup can ever be criticised.

Simple!

[Rich Goodale]

Scott and Sean

There are numerous situations in majors when the "best player" did not win.  Scott in last year's Open, Cabrera in this year's Masters, Faldo in 4 out of his 6 major "wins," Fleck vs. Hogan, Mize vs. Norman and the list goes on and on....  It is refreshing to see a wannabe like Rose finally step up to the plate and stuff the rest of the field by playing the best golf over the 4 days.  And no, Scott and Sean, playing the best does not and never has meant shooting the lowest score.

Rich and Rich

[Brett_Morrissy]

It was a real shame the course was so soft.  Unavoidable, I know, but I couldn't help thinking it would have been more fun with really firm fairways and greens.

Mark, with some/many of the fairways at 20ish yards wide, don't you think that if the fairways were in fact fast and firm, that it would have been a rare tee shot that did not end up in at least first cut of rough. We may have had Justin Rose win with +10 !

 It reminds me of the Aussie Masters at the Heath a few years ago, the fast fairways ensured the players needed to be very careful off the tee to avoid running into the tea tree, with little rough required,

[Thomas Dai]

What Sucked about Merion This Week?

Can't blame the Merion itself as such but the rough set-up for this US Open was crazy. When the best short game exponents on the planet are unable to get the ball on the green with short shots from not far off the fringes, well that is not how things should be IMO. Penalise wildness by all means but don't diminish the requirement for skill and dexterity.

All the best

[Scott Warren]

Rihc and Rich,

I suspected you might have countered by saying that.

In that case, how do you determine "best player" status if not by 72-hole score?

[Mark Bourgeois]

What was wrong:

* setup of 3, 9, 18 for the last round
* fairway corridors on 2, 4, 7, 11, 12
* not trusting Merion's architecture (flattening 12 green, moving bunkers on 15)
* merchandise tent was madness

There was a lot that went right especially on the logistics and many of the choices for hole locations. The 5th was perfect in every way - architecture, setup/presentation, spectating - becomes one of my favorite holes in championship golf.

If the club wants them, the USGA will be back.

Please, next time let Merion be Merion!

[Sean_A]

Scott and Sean

There are numerous situations in majors when the "best player" did not win.  Scott in last year's Open, Cabrera in this year's Masters, Faldo in 4 out of his 6 major "wins," Fleck vs. Hogan, Mize vs. Norman and the list goes on and on....  It is refreshing to see a wannabe like Rose finally step up to the plate and stuff the rest of the field by playing the best golf over the 4 days.  And no, Scott and Sean, playing the best does not and never has meant shooting the lowest score.

Rich and Rich

Huh?  Lowest score doesn't identify the best player of the week?  Your brain has been Dutchified as is evidenced by your double Dutch.

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Scott and Sean

There are numerous situations in majors when the "best player" did not win.  Scott in last year's Open, Cabrera in this year's Masters, Faldo in 4 out of his 6 major "wins," Fleck vs. Hogan, Mize vs. Norman and the list goes on and on....  It is refreshing to see a wannabe like Rose finally step up to the plate and stuff the rest of the field by playing the best golf over the 4 days.  And no, Scott and Sean, playing the best does not and never has meant shooting the lowest score.

Rich and Rich

Huh?  Lowest score doesn't identify the best player of the week?  Your brain has been Dutchified as is evidenced by your double Dutch.

Ciao

No comprende, compadre......

[Patrick_Mucci]

It was a real shame the course was so soft.  Unavoidable, I know, but I couldn't help thinking it would have been more fun with really firm fairways and greens.

Mark, with some/many of the fairways at 20ish yards wide, don't you think that if the fairways were in fact fast and firm, that it would have been a rare tee shot that did not end up in at least first cut of rough. We may have had Justin Rose win with +10 !


Brett,

I agree.

Had the course been fast and firm you might have had a disastrous Open, with the course criticized as being "gimmicky"

[Sean_A]

Scott and Sean

There are numerous situations in majors when the "best player" did not win.  Scott in last year's Open, Cabrera in this year's Masters, Faldo in 4 out of his 6 major "wins," Fleck vs. Hogan, Mize vs. Norman and the list goes on and on....  It is refreshing to see a wannabe like Rose finally step up to the plate and stuff the rest of the field by playing the best golf over the 4 days.  And no, Scott and Sean, playing the best does not and never has meant shooting the lowest score.

Rich and Rich

Huh?  Lowest score doesn't identify the best player of the week?  Your brain has been Dutchified as is evidenced by your double Dutch.

Ciao

No comprende, compadre......

Yes, rather than trying to jam countless fairies on a pinhead with convoluted logic, its probably best to follow the formula.

Lowest score=winner=best player of the week

Simple, honest and best of all, accurate.

or if you like

Best player of the week=lowest score=winner

There is a certain beauty to this formula which trumps the original - don't you think?

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich,

Whom, by your standards, should have won ?

[Josh Tarble]

in my opinion, the only things that sucked were:

1) rain
2) no replica wicker basket in merchandise shop
3) too much good stuff in merchandise store (this only sucked for my wallet)

 

[Mark Pearce]

It was a real shame the course was so soft.  Unavoidable, I know, but I couldn't help thinking it would have been more fun with really firm fairways and greens.

Mark, with some/many of the fairways at 20ish yards wide, don't you think that if the fairways were in fact fast and firm, that it would have been a rare tee shot that did not end up in at least first cut of rough. We may have had Justin Rose win with +10 !

 It reminds me of the Aussie Masters at the Heath a few years ago, the fast fairways ensured the players needed to be very careful off the tee to avoid running into the tea tree, with little rough required,

Then the width of the fairways sucked...

[Joe Bausch]

McLovin',

About the only thing that sucked were the big rains earlier in the week.  I would have loved to have seen the course playing like it was just the week before.  A question I would like answered is if the greens were firmer, would hole locations been different.  I'm thinking so.

Getting around the course as a spectator sure was made challenging on those days with the heavy rains.  Mud, mud, mud in places!  But the crews worked unbelievably hard to rectify the situation, and getting around on the weekend was pretty darn smooth.

Oh, wait, the young girl working as a standard bearer getting hit by Donald's tee shot on the 3rd hole sure sucked.  If I was the walking scorer for that group I would not have let her stand where she was.

[Mike Hendren]

I would like to have seen a set up where the winner was -8 instead of +1.  Lower cut of rough, wider fairs cut out to the fairway bunkers.   The green speed was fine, I never had the feeling while watching that the Stimp was 13-13.5.  Uphill putts were slow, downhill putts were slick. It looked more like 10-11.   

I guess I think the USGA felt there was blowout potential so they event into four corners defense.  It turned out to be not necessary. 

All the half par holes at Merion make it so interesting.   The set up of #2 was just unnecessary. 

Bill,  I believe you got exactly what you wanted.  While the cognoscenti decry the relevance of par on a hole, they nonetheless focus on the winning score relatve to par - +1.  This ignores the fact that both #5 and #18 were de facto par fives, not just because of the distance, but because of the distance coupled with the challenging green contours.  Voila! a winning score of -7.  Your half-par observation is spot on.  Holes 3, 5, 10, 13, 14, and 18 are legitimate half-par holes (assuming 5 and 18 aren't par 5's) with 10 and 13 being adjusted downward.  Under that approach par is 71 and the winning score is -3.

I think the USGA and the club nailed it.

[Mike Hendren]

Agreed absolutely with 2 and 15.... fairway being 6 inches from the OB line was silly.

Yet we all love the 2nd at Talking Stick North.   I didn't care for the proximity of OB on 2 and 15 prior to being there, but the ground contours prevent marginal tee shots from going OB on both holes and par was not overly problematic when players drove in the rough.  Also I saw plenty of second shots from the 2nd and extremely deep 3rd fairway bunker on 15 find the green.  

Bogey
A Merion Apologist

[Mark McKeever]

Did the girl that got hit in the head by Donald's ball go to the hospital? 

Mark

[Charlie Gallagher]

I was hoping to see more risk taking on holes like 1 and 7. I think the reorientation of the fairways proved unnecesary. Merion played way tougher than I thought it would, I undervalued the damage that the lengthened holes would do to score. I also thought her greens would be more solvable given the wet conditions, but that proved wrong too. I agree with the prior comment about how those great green complexes defended the course well. I think the variety of the grasses in the surfaces had something to do with that. I am glad I wasn't there and could watch it on tv, given the ground conditions and more limited movement potential on that little property. I trust the members are going to get their course back in a restored conditon before the autum.