I also think that OH, while a tough course, isn't my idea of a great course. It is just too one-dimensional. Yes, it demands the player hit precise shots, and long is its own reward, but I was not impressed that there were so many funky and dicey lies surrounding greens in the extreme rough that seemed to me to reward the luckiest clunker of the ball out of that stuff, rather than the most skilled with a wedge. I almost felt like just about any mid handicapper could take a clumpy shot and expect about the same result. Some got lucky, some of course were skillful just because those guys are good. But, you can take the best wedge players in the world like Phil or Tiger, or the garden variety tour pro, and have a clunk at it and expect relatively same result, it seems to me.
I question whether playing a precise shot up a 20-25yard wide fairway in the 280-310yard zone, and trying to keep it on the most favorable side to where the pin is set, with a margin of error of a yard or two, to run into spinach and hay, and factor in ubiquitous overhanging trees, makes for a 'great golf course'.
All that said, a fine striker of the ball, for the very same reasons of precision, won the tournament. It was the same course for everyone. I just don't like that kind of golf. I wouldn't even care to play it with half the rough from 6000 yards, actually.
Great 19th hole grab to a firm and fast surface by the Duff. It gives a whole new dimension to Duffnering.
