News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Please note, each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us and we will be in contact.


noonan

Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« on: June 30, 2013, 08:09:36 PM »
Why do they set up the course so short?

I know Inbee Park is great - but how can someone who is 84th in driving distance win 3 majors in a row.

The USGA tweeted this morning they were setting the course up short.

Do they want to make history?

Inbee make the least athletic move I have ever seen of someone who is as dominant as she is.

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2013, 08:22:08 PM »
Jerry,

I also wondered about that.

Perhaps the forecast had them worried.

For four days, thunderstorms were in the forecast, so perhaps they felt that a rain soaked course would play longer than the yardage.

But I was surprised by how short they played some holes.

As I indicated previously, with Mother Nature's co-operation, 288, 300 and higher could have been the winning score

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #2 on: June 30, 2013, 08:47:29 PM »
I saw a LOT of hybrids and woods hit to par 4's and 3's
1,2,3 (didn't watch 5) 6, (didn't watch 7) 11,14,16, 17 in practice
Lengthen?

The men from any tees existing or new would never sniff hitting that many woods/hybrids as approaches.
Fascinating to watch.
Makes me want to see a rollbaclk all the more for the men and enjoy some of the ground game on the approaches I just witnessed
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Mike Sweeney

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2013, 08:54:27 PM »
Today was the longest setup of the four days:

http://www.uswomensopen.com/scoring2013/dyn/csum.html

here are the previous three days:

http://www.uswomensopen.com/scoring2013/dyn/csum_prior.html

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2013, 09:00:37 PM »
Jeff,

#'s 1, 2 and 3 (2, 3 and 4) are long holes.

Ditto 11, 16 and 17

But, they didn't play 17 back today.

It would be interesting to know the exact yardage each hole played to in the final round today

Mike Sweeney

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #5 on: June 30, 2013, 09:03:21 PM »


It would be interesting to know the exact yardage each hole played to in the final round today

http://www.uswomensopen.com/scoring2013/dyn/csum.html

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #6 on: June 30, 2013, 09:21:57 PM »
Mike,

From the tee markers on # 13 and # 17 it didn't look like they played from the published yardage

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2013, 09:35:00 PM »
"Inbee make the least athletic move I have ever seen of someone who is as dominant as she is."

Jerry K. -

Inbee Park has been a, if not the, dominant player in her peer group since she won the USGA Junior Girls at 16.

a) How her swing looks is not nearly as important as where the ball goes.
b) It helps to be a great putter.

DT

Peter Pallotta

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2013, 09:45:35 PM »
"As I indicated previously, with Mother Nature's co-operation, 288, 300 and higher could have been the winning score."

Patrick - and why is that in any way important, or desirable? And why should that be of any interest to you and me?

I saw 4 days of good shots being rewarded, of poor ones being penalized (sometimes by half a stroke, sometimes by more), of smart positioning leading to preferred angles of approach, and of the need for skill and imagination and touch on and around the greens. I also saw the results: the best golfer on tour today winning after a +2 day, and a very wide range of scores from top to bottom.

All in all, a terrific tournament on a special golf course -- so again, why would you or anyone else find yourself wishing that mother nature had "cooperated" so as to have a winning score of 300 or higher?

Me thinks that despite your comments on another thread, you have been as "Merionized" as most of the rest of the golfing public -- and now somehow think less of Sebonak than you did before.

That's a shame

Peter
« Last Edit: June 30, 2013, 09:48:04 PM by PPallotta »

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #9 on: June 30, 2013, 10:22:01 PM »


I know Inbee Park is great - but how can someone who is 84th in driving distance win 3 majors in a row.

Because she is having the greatest season in the history of golf in putting.   Brandal Chamblee brought this up 25 times over the last 4 days. 

She also has a solid demeanor on the course and seems to lack emotion which is why she probably will not achieve huge off course financial success.   Imagine if this was an American or any player that had some personality?   

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2013, 12:04:58 AM »

"As I indicated previously, with Mother Nature's co-operation, 288, 300 and higher could have been the winning score."

Patrick - and why is that in any way important, or desirable? And why should that be of any interest to you and me?

Because it tells you how difficult the course can be and that the set-up was relatively benign.


I saw 4 days of good shots being rewarded, of poor ones being penalized (sometimes by half a stroke, sometimes by more), of smart positioning leading to preferred angles of approach, and of the need for skill and imagination and touch on and around the greens. I also saw the results: the best golfer on tour today winning after a +2 day, and a very wide range of scores from top to bottom.

Since you were watching the best women golfers in the world you would have seen those shots on any course they were playing


All in all, a terrific tournament on a special golf course -- so again, why would you or anyone else find yourself wishing that mother nature had "cooperated" so as to have a winning score of 300 or higher?

No one wished that Mother Nature had co-operated in a negative way.
There's been a lot of rain in June, rain that softened courses and slowed greens.
Had the course been free of moisture, F&F would have ruled.
Then, if your memory serves you, you'd remember that with less benign hole locations, you could almost pick any winning score you wanted.
The point, which you missed, is that Sebonack can be presented as daunting as you wish.
It can go from relatively benign to ferocious with just some slight adjustments, with the help of Mother Nature.,


Me thinks that despite your comments on another thread, you have been as "Merionized" as most of the rest of the golfing public -- and now somehow think less of Sebonak than you did before.

Then you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Welcome to "moronville"


That's a shame



What's a shame is that you don't understand the issue




Matthew Rose

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2013, 12:43:55 AM »
Quote
I know Inbee Park is great - but how can someone who is 84th in driving distance win 3 majors in a row.

Possibly the greatest putting hot streak you've ever seen?

I thought I saw that at one point, she had one-putted more than 40% of the greens. That's not human.
American-Australian. Trackman Course Guy. Fatalistic sports fan. Drummer. Bass player. Father. Cat lover.

Dónal Ó Ceallaigh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2013, 03:43:00 AM »
Quote
I know Inbee Park is great - but how can someone who is 84th in driving distance win 3 majors in a row.

Possibly the greatest putting hot streak you've ever seen?

I thought I saw that at one point, she had one-putted more than 40% of the greens. That's not human.


I saw her on TV last year at the Evian Masters (I think). She single putted possibly 8 greens on the back nine one day. He putting is unbelievable. 

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2013, 04:39:40 AM »
Park tied for 2nd in putts taken, in a virtual tie with 1st (1.57/green vs 1.58/green) .  But she also was among the top ten in GIR, and made no worse than bogey all week. 

If the USGA had set the course up harder, scores would have gone up; and the glacially slow play would have taken even longer.  As it was, only three players broke par, and the average score was slightly over 76. 

 

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2013, 08:47:59 AM »
Sebonack certainly looked great and it proved to be a worthy test for the women but I missed the quirk.  I would like to see an event played there with really firm and fast conditions with balls running out of the fairways and bouncing off the greens.  Certainly they could not have set the course up more difficult for this event but a men's event could probably bring out its true playing characteristics.  How are the course conditions for member play?

noonan

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2013, 08:51:44 AM »
Sebonack certainly looked great and it proved to be a worthy test for the women but I missed the quirk.  I would like to see an event played there with really firm and fast conditions with balls running out of the fairways and bouncing off the greens.  Certainly they could not have set the course up more difficult for this event but a men's event could probably bring out its true playing characteristics.  How are the course conditions for member play?

Maybe you missed some of the putts where the girls had their backs to the holes...I also seen some of them putt away from the hole just to lag close. The green complexes look awesome.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2013, 09:15:02 AM »
Four players in a field of 68 broke par yesterday. The course may (or may not) have been set up short, but it certainly did not play easy.

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #17 on: July 01, 2013, 09:58:47 AM »
Anybody going to mention that the championship is not the "Ladies" Open?
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Steve Burrows

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #18 on: July 01, 2013, 11:03:53 AM »
Anybody going to mention that the championship is not the "Ladies" Open?

To do so would admit to an array of gender biases and latent sexism (and, by extension, issues of race and class) that too many on this site refuse to believe exist in the game of golf.
...to admit my mistakes most frankly, or to say simply what I believe to be necessary for the defense of what I have written, without introducing the explanation of any new matter so as to avoid engaging myself in endless discussion from one topic to another.     
               -Rene Descartes

Peter Pallotta

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #19 on: July 01, 2013, 12:34:11 PM »
"The point, which you missed, is that Sebonack can be presented as daunting as you wish."

Actually, Pat, I got that point right away. (Sorry to break it to you, but your 'points' are always immediately clear and easy to understand, since they are invariably the most obvious points anyone can make.)

Yes, IF Sebonak was set up differently and mother nature had co-operated (a value laden term) then the course would've played harder and the scores would've been higher. (If memory serves, I believe that you personally experienced the course under tougher conditions, and had been predicting very high scores for the Open IF the weather "cooperated".)

My point was and remains: so what? Are you implying or suggesting or drawing out any interesting or valuable or useful 'lesson' from that fact, or are you simply wishing that the scores had indeed been higher? If the former, what is that lesson; if the latter, why would you or I care?

Peter

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2013, 01:10:13 PM »
Sebonack was presented wonderfully.
the greens were indeed firm and appropriately paced.

Of course they could've been faster , and that would've compromised the wonderful design.
It was quite windy and they had to keep that in mind, yet with a  lot of moisture/humidity in the air, which certainly held down green speeds a bit.

280 won, 287 was third.

The LPGA is fighting an uphill battle for fans and sponsorhip.
They were hitting more hybrids and woods in a round than the men hit in a month, and putting on greens with more imagination and creativity than the men see in a year (and only if they qualify for Augusta and the Open is at Merion or Pinehurst)

I' quite sure no one in authority wanted to see 300 as the winning score

« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 08:00:31 PM by jeffwarne »
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2013, 04:08:33 PM »
Jeff, how do you think Sebonack would work for the men's U.S. Open, and what changes if any might they have to make on the course? 

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2013, 07:47:43 PM »
Jeff, how do you think Sebonack would work for the men's U.S. Open, and what changes if any might they have to make on the course?  

I think Sebonack could hold the Men's US Open tomorrow.
Everything there is presented firm(and as fast as they want it), even this week with some rain and very,very humid conditions.
It would be a shame if they held the US Open there and bastardized the design with narrow fairways and stupid fast greens
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 07:49:25 PM by jeffwarne »
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Sam Morrow

Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2013, 08:00:32 PM »
Yesterday morning the genius of Brandel Chamblee was talking about how the back 9 would be playing close to 4000 yards.

Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Course setup - USGA Ladies Open
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2013, 08:11:51 PM »
Jeff is correct about holding a men's open at Sebonack. The course has an unbalanced par on most days of 35 - 37, with the tips out at 3500 and in at 4000. Yes, 4000, given that you have three long holes on the second half. The only short two holes that can't go back (as of right now) are 8 and 12, both par three holes. They would be short irons or 7 iron at most for the men. Is there room for a longer tee? Probably, but why not have one or two par three holes with seriously tucked pins.

The average Joe and Josette complained about the severity of the greens. What these folks didn't understand was that each hole location sits in a target area that is supremely fair. As such, if a hole were located on either edge or the front, you would see the women practice chip shots and texas wedges from 5 to 10 yards off that side/end of the green. They were using those portions as part of the target. Tough chip shot? No tougher than a 45-feet putt over a ridge or two.

The 9th hole (normally the 1st) would be the top choice for the driveable par four. Since #8 (normally #9) is a reachable par five, the potential exists for eagle-eagle to close the front side. That's excitement, unless they turned 8 into a par four, which they probably would. Follow that up with #10, which cannot be extended beyond its current 380 and you have yet another hole waiting to be devoured by the bombers. The other par five that could be played as a two-shotter is 13...it tips at 550 and could easily be dropped into the 500-520 range.

I heard the numbers 11 (stimp) for the women and 14 (when they want madness and giggles) for club events, bandied about. My thinking is that a men's Open at Sebonack would require the USGA brass to allow for birdies to be made on holes like the short par threes, plus 9 and 10, but to balance that out with a few back-breakers, retaining the optimal even-par finish they cherish.
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back