[Rob Marshall]

Do the fairway bunkers even come into play for these guys?  I’ve watched a decent amount of coverage and don’t remember seeing one shot from a fairway bunker.

[Mike Hendren]

Do the fairway bunkers even come into play for these guys?  I’ve watched a decent amount of coverage and don’t remember seeing one shot from a fairway bunker.

In my two rounds 20 years ago I only visited a couple of fairway bunkers - one at the Swiss cheese 12th fairway.  In my opinion that proves their strategic merit - they must be avoided at all costs. 


Curious if others generally avoided them as well.

[cary lichtenstein]

Ask the guys who missed the cut if they thought the course was too easy!!!!!!

[Thomas Dai]

Do the fairway bunkers even come into play for these guys?  I’ve watched a decent amount of coverage and don’t remember seeing one shot from a fairway bunker.

In my two rounds 20 years ago I only visited a couple of fairway bunkers - one at the Swiss cheese 12th fairway.  In my opinion that proves their strategic merit - they must be avoided at all costs. 
Curious if others generally avoided them as well.

Exactly. They are obstacles and obstacles are best a avoided. A youthful Mr Jones apparently didn’t appreciate this  on his first visit but later came to appreciate it and the importance of the 5.5 in inches between the ears.
Atb

[Sean_A]

...for the mechanical commercial of elite golf as it has become. Its beauty, charms, proverbs and truths are meant for play, for sport, for the zeitgeist of golf and aged experience.  To heap these modern duties of hosting, extracting commerce, imposing facility, accommodating media is to subject it to locusts, to render it disposable like any other puffed-up thing.


But that's a macro picture; the granular decay is that this just doesn't stand up or show very well in the face of what the professional game has become.  I think it is time to retire or ceremonialize it with less frequency as an Open venue in that regard.



The level of driving to, at, thru, over, around the greens, leaving second shots of 150-250 feet is ridiculous, almost a chip-off...Think about 6-12...as this competition plays it... that's nearly 7 one shot holes in a row! (I get it; I get it; 6, 7 and 10 are not routinely drivable)  and then 18?... 100> foot shots for 2 everywhere.



As fascinating and elusive as I, or you, may find those 150 foot windblown contoured chips and rolls with a club in our hands, a repeated series of them on TV dulls the eyes into the exact kind of napping torpor associated with tournament golf from afar.


And again, though there is a lovely "in situ" charm of crossing holes, shared fairways and double greens when one is playing TOC, it produces a plodding near 6 hour pace to the spectacle of watching a competition there.  Moreover, these features cause the players to hesitate and heed nearby action, whereby I see rushed or impatient delays.

I treasure TOC and what it represents in so many ways, but though a lively scoring competition is afoot and fine players dot the proceedings...and a worthy winner will be crowned... there is something so stupid and silly about modern elite golf playing it and a modern exploitations forced upon it to do so.

Sentimental thoughts, but thoughts I wholly disagree with. Pro golf is entertainment. I am immensely entertained this week by golf. First time in a year.

Ciao

[Alex Miller]

Maybe I'm being a bit romantic, but I can't help but love everything about this open... including the scoring. 


A major championship first and foremost should be a test - to identify the champion golfer who plays the best golf. I don't see an argument how that isn't being achieved before our very eyes this week. 


The test doesn't have to come in a carbon copy form of long rough, narrow fairways, and icy fast greens. In fact I'd prefer if it rarely did. TOC still holds questions essential to golf that are not found in as fine a form elsewhere.


While the golf ball and the game is in an entirely different form than previous iterations, can we appreciate that these guys are really fucking good? And that two in particular are answer the call and delivering some spectacular and well thought out answers to the questions TOC has presented!


Oh and yada yada par doesn't matter etc etc... but the point is that not a single golfer in the world who deserves to win will be crowned tomorrow. Only the very best will! And we will have been treated to their and the entire field's skills along the way.

[V. Kmetz]

Some 30 replies in, a bevy of thoughtful, welll-invested posts. I think Alex' most recent one is a good chance to make in-line replies:

Maybe I'm being a bit romantic, but I can't help but love everything about this open... including the scoring. 
I'm in a nearby romantic camp myself and I don't give a hoot about what the NUMBER/RELATION TO PAR "scoring" is, I'm asking for an honest examination of HOW that scoring is being achieved on THIS course for THIS competition of world's best.... long 100-75 foot putts and chips for 2 everywhere... tap-in 3s everywhere... flip wedges everywhere...drivers indiscriminately knocked into rough everywhere...There were/are many criticisms of other major venues for the kind of golf they provoke for elite play... bomb and gauge sucks?...so bomb and chip/putt HERE is better?  Always need to remind...I'm talking not about the course, but about what exactly this course causes for this elite competition; it may show off the quirky sui generis charms of the old girl, but the long putting-chip off being conducted is plenty redundant.  I don't know how critics of the Masters and what ANGC does with the elites find that competition lacking, and find this compelling.  I don't know how critics of Bellerive 3 years ago find the RTJ jr behemoth swaled tiered greens boring...but here the long putting and exacting greenside play is a delight. 

A major championship first and foremost should be a test - to identify the champion golfer who plays the best golf. I don't see an argument how that isn't being achieved before our very eyes this week. 
I don't know who came up with that axiom, "a test"...but a "test" ought to have some stress, some difficulty? No?  I'll not be put in the camp that "wants to see players struggle" as a rule for major success, but I also don't want to gush about a chip and putt off, which is happening for "under par" scores of most of the holes.  Where is the stress, the provocation to be great here? The thought that if you press for greatness/success you court failure/ignominy...it doesn't translate well in a 90 foot putt for eagle, which everybody else has too.  I mean 4, 13 and 17 are the only holes that steel a gamble, there's no gambling or provocative shot situations.  "Champion plays the best golf?" It's time to put this old, subjective saw to bed...EVERY tournament does this...if someone wins, its its own proof.  The 4 shot difference between Cam Young and McIlroy is one holed out from a bunker for 2 (and lucky to have it not up against the face) and one 4 putts from 40 feet....Big, IDENTIFYING difference? Tell me a situation where the winner or contenders clearly did not play the best golf, and were/weren't lucky, or something?  I'll give you a scenario... let's say it's mild early in the tee times and like right now, Ancer is -10, thru 16 and may get to -11... let's say the wind kicks up and roars like it did in 2010 and blows all the playing leaders off the map...though you didn't see or care about more than three Ancer shots all week...will he have been the "best golfer"?...and THAT can happen in these Open venues...look at 2010... those who played in Oostehuizen's half of the draw on Th/Fri did fine...those who caught those 35+ mph winds did not... But none of that is happening here, because the wind is down/off...for everybody.  Great leaderboard? Surely... I'll remind us all of this when we hit future tournaments and other magnificient leader boards....Yet would you feel the same way if the leaderboard was Harman, Theegala, Niemann, Burns, Ancer and Kim?

The test doesn't have to come in a carbon copy form of long rough, narrow fairways, and icy fast greens. In fact I'd prefer if it rarely did. TOC still holds questions essential to golf that are not found in as fine a form elsewhere.
I do not how to respond to the phrase "carbon copy" when, for THIS elite competition, on THIS course Holes 6-12 are almost 7 one-shot holes in a row; where for 7 holes in a row, the elite players drive onto or within 200 feet of the hole/green.  And this then occurs on #18...and what redundancy is being avoided or what strategy/nuance is being realized on #1...Everybody hits to 150-110 in a 100 yard fairway and plays an aerial shot...the only interest is who "fails" that straightforward test...who is interested in difficulty/failure; me or you?  As for the second portion, I say NO...NOT for these guys it doesn't hold more than one or two "essential questions": How far can you hit it leftside?" "How good is your greenside judgement of roll?" For me and you, the Old Course asks infinitely, satisfyingly more...not here for the experts.

While the golf ball and the game is in an entirely different form than previous iterations, can we appreciate that these guys are really fucking good? And that two in particular are answer the call and delivering some spectacular and well thought out answers to the questions TOC has presented!
C'mon, I and everybody else knew it... I simply (have) appreciate(d) it more under the auspices of St George's...almost every year at ANGC...At Riviera...at the matchplay in Austin...at Southern Hills and TCC...at Merion... Yet, though Koepka won at Shinney 2018 (best golfer, right?) that course was a horror... it dampened the proportion of skill to scoring outcomes, skill was flattened and rendered meaningless... here, imo, it's being flattened in the other way...everybody elite gets an ice cream...an eagle chip or putt (and stress free bird if not) on almost half the course. For watching elite play, I don't like a birdie or a bogey "baked" into the hole (as much my own re-rail against hole par, so let's call it "3" or "5")...and   imo, we've got 6 holes like that...6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17 and 18.  Again for MY play and the enjoyment of GCA and recreational fun, absolutely!!  This is like a short game clinic, would like to see a variety of these skilled pro shots.

Oh and yada yada par doesn't matter etc etc... but the point is that not a single golfer in the world who deserves to win will be crowned tomorrow. Only the very best will! And we will have been treated to their and the entire field's skills along the way.

It'd be fairer if you didn't conflate my well held thesis that indy hole par be eliminated WITH the scoring going on here.  My riot against hole par is about the influence on how and what type of holes are built, perceived...about sustainability and fun at the recreational level...about infusing variety of new hole yardages (specifically 240 -280 and 440 - 480)...about changing the dialogue and apprehension of holes and their design.... as I said at the top, I don't care what these physical scores "ARE" or what their historical relation is...(e.g Stenson's scoring record from Troon may well be broken today) as about how they're being realized... bomb and chip/putt.  Stenson's incredible week and his final round 63 outlasting Phil is a great place to leave off for now... rewind the tape...watch that again friends... THAT's equally pleasant architecture showing off much, much more of the VARIETY of skills than you're seeing this week... THAT's a player in a moment with all the answers, not just the drive and the resultant 50-200 foot shot, not just a free swing and I'll figure it out with a Texas wedge...THAT's a player being provoked not only by the precious prize (like any competitor is, even at the Barbarsol) but by what the course permits, forbids, makes one risk, and how it rewards.  That's an unquestioned best player of the year identified... this year the irony of saying "any" of them will have been worthy is to counter your own point in its absurdity, that's it somehow identifying the best.  Look at last years St George's final round again...look at Rahm's round in the hunt, though he didn't win...

Do love the conversation and thank all for contributing...

[cary lichtenstein]

Yesterday's golf was the most compelling round in years, I hope today will be equally thrilling

[Mike Hendren]

V, I enjoy your well reasoned contributions here.  My head says you might be on to something. My heart says otherwise.


Cheers.

[Terry Lavin]

Some 30 replies in, a bevy of thoughtful, welll-invested posts. I think Alex' most recent one is a good chance to make in-line replies:

Maybe I'm being a bit romantic, but I can't help but love everything about this open... including the scoring. 
I'm in a nearby romantic camp myself and I don't give a hoot about what the NUMBER/RELATION TO PAR "scoring" is, I'm asking for an honest examination of HOW that scoring is being achieved on THIS course for THIS competition of world's best.... long 100-75 foot putts and chips for 2 everywhere... tap-in 3s everywhere... flip wedges everywhere...drivers indiscriminately knocked into rough everywhere...There were/are many criticisms of other major venues for the kind of golf they provoke for elite play... bomb and gauge sucks?...so bomb and chip/putt HERE is better?  Always need to remind...I'm talking not about the course, but about what exactly this course causes for this elite competition; it may show off the quirky sui generis charms of the old girl, but the long putting-chip off being conducted is plenty redundant.  I don't know how critics of the Masters and what ANGC does with the elites find that competition lacking, and find this compelling.  I don't know how critics of Bellerive 3 years ago find the RTJ jr behemoth swaled tiered greens boring...but here the long putting and exacting greenside play is a delight. 

A major championship first and foremost should be a test - to identify the champion golfer who plays the best golf. I don't see an argument how that isn't being achieved before our very eyes this week. 
I don't know who came up with that axiom, "a test"...but a "test" ought to have some stress, some difficulty? No?  I'll not be put in the camp that "wants to see players struggle" as a rule for major success, but I also don't want to gush about a chip and putt off, which is happening for "under par" scores of most of the holes.  Where is the stress, the provocation to be great here? The thought that if you press for greatness/success you court failure/ignominy...it doesn't translate well in a 90 foot putt for eagle, which everybody else has too.  I mean 4, 13 and 17 are the only holes that steel a gamble, there's no gambling or provocative shot situations.  "Champion plays the best golf?" It's time to put this old, subjective saw to bed...EVERY tournament does this...if someone wins, its its own proof.  The 4 shot difference between Cam Young and McIlroy is one holed out from a bunker for 2 (and lucky to have it not up against the face) and one 4 putts from 40 feet....Big, IDENTIFYING difference? Tell me a situation where the winner or contenders clearly did not play the best golf, and were/weren't lucky, or something?  I'll give you a scenario... let's say it's mild early in the tee times and like right now, Ancer is -10, thru 16 and may get to -11... let's say the wind kicks up and roars like it did in 2010 and blows all the playing leaders off the map...though you didn't see or care about more than three Ancer shots all week...will he have been the "best golfer"?...and THAT can happen in these Open venues...look at 2010... those who played in Oostehuizen's half of the draw on Th/Fri did fine...those who caught those 35+ mph winds did not... But none of that is happening here, because the wind is down/off...for everybody.  Great leaderboard? Surely... I'll remind us all of this when we hit future tournaments and other magnificient leader boards....Yet would you feel the same way if the leaderboard was Harman, Theegala, Niemann, Burns, Ancer and Kim?

The test doesn't have to come in a carbon copy form of long rough, narrow fairways, and icy fast greens. In fact I'd prefer if it rarely did. TOC still holds questions essential to golf that are not found in as fine a form elsewhere.
I do not how to respond to the phrase "carbon copy" when, for THIS elite competition, on THIS course Holes 6-12 are almost 7 one-shot holes in a row; where for 7 holes in a row, the elite players drive onto or within 200 feet of the hole/green.  And this then occurs on #18...and what redundancy is being avoided or what strategy/nuance is being realized on #1...Everybody hits to 150-110 in a 100 yard fairway and plays an aerial shot...the only interest is who "fails" that straightforward test...who is interested in difficulty/failure; me or you?  As for the second portion, I say NO...NOT for these guys it doesn't hold more than one or two "essential questions": How far can you hit it leftside?" "How good is your greenside judgement of roll?" For me and you, the Old Course asks infinitely, satisfyingly more...not here for the experts.

While the golf ball and the game is in an entirely different form than previous iterations, can we appreciate that these guys are really fucking good? And that two in particular are answer the call and delivering some spectacular and well thought out answers to the questions TOC has presented!
C'mon, I and everybody else knew it... I simply (have) appreciate(d) it more under the auspices of St George's...almost every year at ANGC...At Riviera...at the matchplay in Austin...at Southern Hills and TCC...at Merion... Yet, though Koepka won at Shinney 2018 (best golfer, right?) that course was a horror... it dampened the proportion of skill to scoring outcomes, skill was flattened and rendered meaningless... here, imo, it's being flattened in the other way...everybody elite gets an ice cream...an eagle chip or putt (and stress free bird if not) on almost half the course. For watching elite play, I don't like a birdie or a bogey "baked" into the hole (as much my own re-rail against hole par, so let's call it "3" or "5")...and   imo, we've got 6 holes like that...6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17 and 18.  Again for MY play and the enjoyment of GCA and recreational fun, absolutely!!  This is like a short game clinic, would like to see a variety of these skilled pro shots.

Oh and yada yada par doesn't matter etc etc... but the point is that not a single golfer in the world who deserves to win will be crowned tomorrow. Only the very best will! And we will have been treated to their and the entire field's skills along the way.

It'd be fairer if you didn't conflate my well held thesis that indy hole par be eliminated WITH the scoring going on here.  My riot against hole par is about the influence on how and what type of holes are built, perceived...about sustainability and fun at the recreational level...about infusing variety of new hole yardages (specifically 240 -280 and 440 - 480)...about changing the dialogue and apprehension of holes and their design.... as I said at the top, I don't care what these physical scores "ARE" or what their historical relation is...(e.g Stenson's scoring record from Troon may well be broken today) as about how they're being realized... bomb and chip/putt.  Stenson's incredible week and his final round 63 outlasting Phil is a great place to leave off for now... rewind the tape...watch that again friends... THAT's equally pleasant architecture showing off much, much more of the VARIETY of skills than you're seeing this week... THAT's a player in a moment with all the answers, not just the drive and the resultant 50-200 foot shot, not just a free swing and I'll figure it out with a Texas wedge...THAT's a player being provoked not only by the precious prize (like any competitor is, even at the Barbarsol) but by what the course permits, forbids, makes one risk, and how it rewards.  That's an unquestioned best player of the year identified... this year the irony of saying "any" of them will have been worthy is to counter your own point in its absurdity, that's it somehow identifying the best.  Look at last years St George's final round again...look at Rahm's round in the hunt, though he didn't win...

Do love the conversation and thank all for contributing...

An overly prolix response to well-stated, pithy points won’t get you anywhere, in my judgment.

[Peter Pallotta]

V, I enjoy you well reasoned contributions here.  My head says you might be on to something. My heart says otherwise.

Yes, me too.
The comparisons to St George's and Stenson-Troon are relevant and compelling; Henrik's exemplary ball striking was key to his record scoring. But, Vince, are we not proving ourselves tyrants and bullies in that very comparison itself -- demanding of 'the old girl' that she be that and not this, that she act not herself but like someone else, lest she be abandoned and left behind for good?
What kind of heartless rakes have we become, in these cruel days of late stage capitalism, as 'the numbers' get more absurd by the minute?
There are literally a hundred thousand + Par 4 holes in the world -- is there really not room enough in our hearts to continue honouring this unique collection
of 14 of them?

[John Kirk]

And around the turn they come, into the stretch...  and here comes Cam Smith, the People's Choice, from the outside!

[V. Kmetz]

Yesterday's golf was the most compelling round in years, I hope today will be equally thrilling

Well, that could mean something, if you'd relate what rounds, on which courses, you are comparing it to; otherwise it's just ends at your viewing taste.  Thrills imply some element of danger, risk...very. very much absent this week and non-existent in the very beginning, the very end and the middle of the course this week.

An overly prolix response to well-stated, pithy points won’t get you anywhere, in my judgment.

Yeah...for a moment I forgot I was on the internet, where substance is forever inferior to pith.


Here you go Pithacles... Bomb and chip sucks every bit if not more than bomb and gauge

[V. Kmetz]

And around the turn they come, into the stretch...  and here comes Cam Smith, the People's Choice, from the outside!

...Just like Masters, the PGA and the USOpen which produced Scheffler, Thomas and Fitzpatrick's worthy wins... pith for TL

[Terry Lavin]

Yesterday's golf was the most compelling round in years, I hope today will be equally thrilling

Well, that could mean something, if you'd relate what rounds, on which courses, you are comparing it to; otherwise it's just ends at your viewing taste.  Thrills imply some element of danger, risk...very. very much absent this week and non-existent in the very beginning, the very end and the middle of the course this week.

An overly prolix response to well-stated, pithy points won’t get you anywhere, in my judgment.

Yeah...for a moment I forgot I was on the internet, where substance is forever inferior to pith.


Here you go Pithacles... Bomb and chip sucks every bit if not more than bomb and gauge

Last edit: it’s gouge, not gauge. Otherwise I’ll concur with that point.

[V. Kmetz]

An overly prolix response to well-stated, pithy points won’t get you anywhere, in my judgment.

Yeah...for a moment I forgot I was on the internet, where substance is forever inferior to pith.

Here you go Pithacles... Bomb and chip sucks every bit if not more than bomb and gauge

Last edit: it’s gouge, not gauge. Otherwise I’ll concur with that point.

Yes, rightful catch - you see how I'm lost in pith.

[Sean_A]

Cam Smith on 17 is on it's own enough to validate TOC as the premier Open venue.

Ciao

[MCirba]

Two thoughts:


This is the first tine I've watched more than an hour or two straight of televised golf this year.


I'm really happy that new players who came into golf over the past few years are getting to watch this.

[Pete_Pittock]

now also known as:


Cameron Outdoor Stadium

[Ronald Montesano]

Pete Pittock...you stand alone.


The rest of you lot ... ay-oh

[Ira Fishman]

My 88 year old Mom called me after the final round today. She played a bit of golf many years ago, but now watches because my Dad enjoyed it so much. The purpose of her call was to share how captivating and intriguing TOC (not the term she used) was compared to US courses and how exciting she found the Championship. She may not have Jeff Warne’s depth of knowledge, but she clearly gets it.


Ira

[Kalen Braley]

Despite the pith, i think VK is exactly on point with his comments....even if I don't agree with his final conclusion.  I was certainly entertained with the coverage from the last two days,

But as he points out, let us not delude ourselves that this was an actual examination of anywhere near the full set of skills in the players' toolboxes.  At this risk of being overly reductive, they could have called this the "5 club max Open" and the outcome would have been basically the same.  Driver, chip, putt, Driver, sand wedge, chip, putt, etc,....rinse and repeat over and over and over again.  Hell they could have saved themselves a shit ton of money by staging it at a local Top Golf complete with targets/competition setup for each of the aforementioned tools to determine a winner.

Make no mistake TOC has certainly been well obsoleted, even if it still was must see TV for almost entirely sentimental reasons. I for one never tire of scenes from St. Andrews and the course, whether it includes The Open or not....

[Niall C]

But as he points out, let us not delude ourselves that this was an actual examination of anywhere near the full set of skills in the players' toolboxes.  At this risk of being overly reductive, they could have called this the "5 club max Open" and the outcome would have been basically the same.  Driver, chip, putt, Driver, sand wedge, chip, putt, etc,....rinse and repeat over and over and over again.  Hell they could have saved themselves a shit ton of money by staging it at a local Top Golf complete with targets/competition setup for each of the aforementioned tools to determine a winner.

Kalen


I don't think you could be more wrong. I saw as wide a variety of clubs used as I see when watching the Masters, but the difference is that on a fast running links with a bit of wind the players have to shape their shots different ways, control the ball flight and spin to a greater extent and be ten times more imaginative with their short games.


Niall

[Kalen Braley]

Another interesting fact I saw presented near the end of the telecast.

This year there were 20 players who finished at -10 or better after 72 holes.  If you add up all the other finishes from the rest of The Opens held at TOC going back to the 1800s...this has only happened 29 other times...combined!!

I think this validates to a large extent VK's comment in his OP..

"But that's a macro picture; the granular decay is that this just doesn't stand up or show very well in the face of what the professional game has become."

P.S.  And I would add this happened on a course that's added hundreds of yards in length in recent years.  Can you imagine these guys playing TOC from the 1990s or earlier?

[John Kavanaugh]

How did Rory’s ball striking today compare to Norman’s famous loss to Faldo at The Masters?  I’m watching a replay of the just concluded Open and something is perfectly amiss. The best player in the world to have not won a major in eight years is playing good but can’t get the ball in the hole.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()