[Mac Plumart]

We need to define terms.  What is a "great champion"? 

If the vast majority of Professional golf is played on golf courses that are not architecturally "great", then our modern day "champions" may not be able to thrive on these types of courses.  Therefore, our "great champions" may not be so.  See Rory's comments on golf courses he prefers and what he expects out of a course.  He already has 2 majors, so is he a "great champion"?

[Cliff Hamm]

There is no better evidence than Baltusrol.

US Opens - 1967 Nicklaus;  1980  Nicklaus;  1993 Janzen (He did win twice.  The other at Olympic).  Despite great champions and championships with excitement the USGA removed Baltusrol from the rota.

PGA  -2005 Mickleson.

In 1967 Nicklaus battled Palmer and 1980 Aoki.  Janzen beat Payne Stewart.  In 2005 the other top 5 were Elkington, Bjorg, Woods and Love.

Now decide which side of the argument Baltusrol fits on.

[Sam Morrow]

There is no better evidence than Baltusrol.

US Opens - 1967 Nicklaus;  1980  Nicklaus;  1993 Janzen (He did win twice.  The other at Olympic).  Despite great champions and championships with excitement the USGA removed Baltusrol from the rota.

PGA  -2006 Mickleson.

Now decide which side of the argument Baltusrol fits on.

Didn't it also hold a Women's Open won by Mickey Wright, she's one of the best female players ever.

[Cliff Hamm]

Yes, she won in 1960.  As an aside it was hot and the first time Baltusrol allowed shorts on the course.

[Jerry Kluger]

Okay guys, take your best shot but here goes:

I have to say that I could not see great architecture producing a great champion.  Forgive me but I have never been to Merion and watching on TV gave me no idea of how the architecture played into Rose's win.  I don't disagree that Justin Rose played the best and deserved to win but what I saw was a course that was set up to be as difficult as possible with extremely narrow fairways and impossible rough.  Was the out of bounds practically bordering the fairway good architecture?  Was a 275 yard par 3 good architecture?  Was a 520 yard par 4 good architecture?  To me, great architecture on short par 4s sets up a risk/reward option but the rough was far too severe for all but a very few to try the risky shot.

Everything I understand about Merion tells me that if they go back to their normal fairway widths and rough heights and density that it would be a great course to play and the great architecture would be obvious.  

If Jason Dufner's drive on 15 had hit that fan instead of him ducking out of the way and Dufner made 4 instead of 7 and went on to post +2 for the others to shoot at that would have been exciting.More importantly, it would have shown that after playing the course a number of times someone in the field learned the course (and the architectural features) well enough to post a low score.

[Bill Brightly]

US Opens identify great golfers who were mentally tough over a 4-day period. The player with the best combination that week wins. IMO, this can be done on a poor course from an architectural standpoint.

When it takes place on a great course like Merion, it is simply more fun to watch, especially for gca nerds. But the "test" that is set up each year is very similar whether it is held at Torry Pines or someplace we like more.

[Terry Lavin]

If the architecture is great, then the renovation architect must have done a great job. Where are the pro-Fazio threads?  Where's the love now?  It sure didn't come through when he got the nod to do the work.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()