Somebody please refresh my memory. Was Davis in his current position or in a top executive slot when they first contracted with RTJjr and recruited Pierce Co. into development of Chambers Bay?
What I am getting at is that when people criticize the runaway and uneven teeing grounds and other interfaces of architecture and maintenance-presentation, was it baked in from the beginning? The idea that the fescue has been constantly on the edge of failure with several fits and starts, and the tweaking after the US Am, then we got what we all should have expected. Thus, if a guy like Davis has already established a reputation as a tweak as we go through the week set-up gremlin, well we got what we should have already have known was going to be the process. I also really don't think he tweaked to favor a particular individual. I think it is merely using the flexibility in the design/architecture that so many have been calling for and now they don't want him to use it.
First we lament we want to see more shot makers who can play the ground and architecture quirks and clever design which would favor perhaps a shorter more deft ball striker. We decry the bomb and gouge. Then we lament the ultimate bomber's so-called disadvantage or at least his diminishment of his power because Davis moves two tees up so other clever strikers could take a shot with some ball movement.
What exactly is it you require of those responsible for set-up of a top national tournament or major?
I do not think moving the tees up was such an advantage to DJ. Afterall, he got to hit fairway woods and even hybrids that most would say are more accurate where others were still hitting the more dicey to control driver. DJ just happened to have an astounding driving game this week. But, remember the Pebble Beach incident where he bombed himself so far astray of a hole that he knocked himself right out of the final mix.
We can talk about DJ's length and how it was disfavored on final round by Davis, etc. But, what we should look at is the near heroics of a guy like Oosteisen who put on a real show of clever ball striking, course management and patience to play the course he found that day, set up by Davis. Between the actual winner and that story line, and final round charges by Ooostie and Scott, we should be glad we got to see an interesting set up on a course designed to be 'different' from standard USGA fare. Next year, we can go back to the shlog of Oakmont. .... and there will be those that will be unhappy with the set up and presentation of the design there.