Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Jason Mandel on July 21, 2004, 10:45:47 PM
-
Today was the Philadelphia Open, a 36 hole stroke play event hosted by the Golf Association of Philadelphia. The event, which is mainly for the professionals in the area, (45 pros,15am's) was won by an amateur, Chris Lange for the 1st time since 1997.
The tournament was played on a GCA favorite, Philly Country Club, one of Wiliam Flynn's finest in the area. Something to note is that not 1 player managed to break par either for a total score or for an individual round.
From what I heard, and from the scores that I saw, the course was playing very long and very tough.
Jason Mandel
-
Jason,
Funny story about Chris Lange and Philly CC...
When I was coaching the Haverford School golf team in 1999 we arranged to play St. Joes Prep at the Centennial 9 of Philly CC. As usual, the coaches played against each other after the kids teed off and I was introduced to the other coach for the first time - Chris Lange.
He never gave me any indication of his background in the sport and we played the C9 in 20-30 mph winds. Chris proceeded to go out and birdie 4 of the first 6 holes at which point I knew something was up. He was rolling in putts from everywhere. He finally explained his background in the sport (qualified for multiple US Am's, 2-time Philly Am champion, member at PV, etc.) at which point I didn't feel so bad about getting waxed by him.
I got to know him over the next few years in our matches - he is intense on the course but a really nice guy.
This brings it full circle - at least I know now that I am in pretty good company when it comes to losing to Chris at Philly CC.
-
TEPaul,
What, in your opinion made the course play hard ?
How did conditions vary from membership play ?
-
Pat:
I don't think the course was much different from everyday membership play regarding greenspeed. The pins placements were pretty difficult, though, apparently right on through. Gap set the pins, I think, and I don't know that they used any 6-6-6 method of difficulty except using front, back, middle. I didn't really analyze all the pins but most were just in spots that the players had to get pretty close to for a chance at birdie. In a sense it seemed to me the greens were a bit in the "greens within a green" mode as from the wrong spots it appeared hard for some to two putt. I know that course pretty well and it seems it was set-up pin placement-wise just using all the most sophisticated nuances almost every green has. The greens at PCC are really something---they're very nuancy to figure out how to putt. The course has always had that unique reputation of greens with sort of mysterious breaks and rolls. One reason just may be that almost all the PCC greens are William Flynn shapes and surrounds but with Perry Maxwell interior slopes and contours!!
Many players were also saying the greens had enough grain in them to throw them off just enough. I noticed almost everyone seemed to be coming up short on some or getting others way past. This is pretty strange because PCC has new A-1 greens that're only about three years old but they do have grain which is sort of odd up here at those speeds.
It also looked to me as if the firmness of the greens was such that the players couldn't figure out whether their aerial shots would ckeck or not. The blue grass rough surrounding the greens also creates inconsistent recovering.
The bluegrass didn't appear all that long but it was thick from all the rain we've had making approaches out of the rough really hard to control sometimes.
And the course was absolutely tipped out and playing really long with a couple of par 4s over 485. The 17th with its new tee on the right played real hard too for driving.
Technically Lange was one over par for 36 but GAP's tournament printed cards called the 6th hole a par 4 yesterday so the course was a par 70 yesterday instead of its normal 71.
Philadelphia C.C. just can be a hard course, I guess. It's shown itself to be that from time to time. It played really hard I think in the 1939 US Open that Nelson won by sinking that famous one iron on #17. (By the way, Michael McDermott hit his approach shot to the 17th green from right next to the Nelson plaque in the fairway, only yesterday McDermott hit a 6 iron in to Nelson's 1 iron!
It's hard to say what it was exactly as not many said there was anything unfair exactly, just a course that was set-up and playing really hard throughout---and all in all it showed.
There were some pretty well-known competitors around here who got up into the 80s without too much problem.
Another little tib-bit I didn't realize until I got there is a local women pro entered the Open but she had to play from the tips (same tees) which she was a bit upset about. She shot 92-87.
Lange won with 70-71.
-
I said in an earlier thread I deleted that I was going to post a thread about how the amateurs in that tournament reacted to the way the course was set up and playing compared to many of the professional contingent in the tournament (45 pros and 15 amateurs).
A number of those pros were smoking, some WDing and others complaining to GAP or saying they wanted to write a letter but the course and the set-up didn't seem to bother the amateur contingent much.
I think the reason was is the amateur contingent are used to playing courses like that and set-up that way. I think they play tournaments around here that are sometimes set-up harder than what they give the tour pros on the PGA Tour.
-
TEPaul,
It could be that the amateurs are in it for a lark, and the Pros are in it to make a living, and that's a mighty big distinction, when money is on the line.
I found the McDermott - Byron Nelson story very telling.
On one hand, a man reputed to be one of the greatest ball strikers of all time, one of the greatest PGA Tour Pros of all time, hit a one iron in his prime, and now, a part time golfer hits a six iron from the same spot.
I know that the "flat earth" society has finally disbanded, but those that think there has been little improvement in distance over the years need to reread your post.
-
"It could be that the amateurs are in it for a lark, and the Pros are in it to make a living, and that's a mighty big distinction, when money is on the line."
Pat:
Maybe that is why pros complain more over something like yesterday. I can certainly tell you though that an amateur such as Lange showed that he understands how to handle himself on a tough course better than any other pro in that field. And I can also tell you with real assurance that part of what bothers many of those pros in a tournament like yesterday is the fact that they just got beat by an amateur--even a couple of them. They don't like that thought.
The guy who finished second was a pro. I'd been telling him where he stood yesterday from time to time against Lange and when he came off the 36th green knowing he'd finish second (Lange was in the last group and about four groups behind him) he said he'd played with Lange a couple of weeks ago and he wasn't any amateur--that he hit the ball like a pro.
I felt like saying--"Well Dave, what exactly does that mean--Chris Lange has been a dedicated amateur golfer for 50 years?"
-
I can assure you that the Amateur competitors, myself included, aren't playing in the GAP Open for a "lark", we play because we want to win...$$$ or no $$$. I did here some griping from the professional ranks, but it was certainly not called for. The course was tipped out and the pins were in difficult, but not unfair positions. The golf course is in perfect condition, the greens were quick but not as fast as I've seen them before.
I wasn't surprised at all that that one of the Amateur's won yesterday. Chris Lange is a helluva competitor, and has been playing really well as of late. Philly CC is a course that we play more frequently than many of the local PGA pro's, and it is a course that you really need to be familiar with to score well. From being a local Assistant Pro years ago, I don't think I'd be out of line in saying that the courses and more importantly the setups that we play as amateur's in this area, are more difficult than the setups the pro's are used to playing each Monday in their PGA Section events.
-
I wasn't at the Open this year or last year but I know last years was at Huntingdon Valley. There is no way that you can tell me that Philly Country played harder than HVCC?
Also, how big a difference is there really between most of the local pro's in the area and some of the better GAP players, I, for one don't really think there is too much of a difference at all. There are a few pros in the area that really play golf a lot, but as most of the pros will tell you their real job is on the lesson tee and in the pro shop, while a lot of these amateurs pretty much have jobs that allow them to let golf take a priority in the summer.
Tom,
What were the players complaining about specifically? The one complaint I heard was about number 5 being turned into a par 4, but that really just messes with the mind more than anything else. I heard the greens were not overly fast and while the rough was tough, it wasn't us open rough.
I agree that while the gap may set up their championships tougher than the local sections, these guys are out there playing for a decent purse that the gap put up. instead of writing letters, don't play next year.
jason mandel
-
Just thought I would throw a few pix of Philadelphia CC up here, for those who have an interest in this thread, since there are not many threads about the course, with specific shots of a couple of the holes mentioned above...
I thoroughly enjoyed my visit there, although as you can see (and perhaps feel) from the pictures, the heat and humidity were in full force that afternoon...
The view from the 3rd tee
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663094/large.jpg)
I loved the various angles employed throughout this hole..
The 6th hole from the general area of a decent tee shot
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663105/large.jpg)
There is no good way to do justice to the steepness of the hill on which the green sits, or to convey the necessity to stay below the hole...
Panaroma from the 16th fairway, with the 11th green behind the 16th
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663134/large.jpg)
As has been discussed on GCA before, this is the site of significant tree removal...
17th tee box, from adjacent to, and above, the back right tee
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663143/large.jpg)
17th hole, looking backward from the green
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663294/large.jpg)
Gosh, what a hole! Too much for me this day, and must be one of the nation's all-world 4-par's, in terms of toughness...
As Philadelphia CC was my first exposure to Wm. Flynn, it was terrific learning experience, especially in terms of angles of attack, bunkering schemes, etc...
As I hit "post preview" and view the pictures, I can feel the humidity rushing back to me--in true GCA fashion we walked that day, but even the most strident walking advocates could have been excused in those conditions!
Peter
-
Flynn strikes again! :)
Great pics, thanks for sharing.
This got me wondering - are there any other metro areas with so many good courses by a single architect?
-
Great pics Peter. Thanks for posting them. I'll be playing the Fazio 9 at Philly CC in a few days with a good friend and I'm going to get the chance to walk around the Flynn 18 and I can't wait.
Side note...anyone like or have any thoughts on what to look for on the Centennial 9 as I have never played it? ie. things one might miss the first time around, good holes/bad holes.
I've never really heard alot about C9 but I'm sure it will be fun.
-
Jason,
Funny story about Chris Lange and Philly CC...
When I was coaching the Haverford School golf team in 1999 we arranged to play St. Joes Prep at the Centennial 9 of Philly CC. As usual, the coaches played against each other after the kids teed off and I was introduced to the other coach for the first time - Chris Lange.
He never gave me any indication of his background in the sport and we played the C9 in 20-30 mph winds. Chris proceeded to go out and birdie 4 of the first 6 holes at which point I knew something was up. He was rolling in putts from everywhere. He finally explained his background in the sport (qualified for multiple US Am's, 2-time Philly Am champion, member at PV, etc.) at which point I didn't feel so bad about getting waxed by him.
I got to know him over the next few years in our matches - he is intense on the course but a really nice guy.
This brings it full circle - at least I know now that I am in pretty good company when it comes to losing to Chris at Philly CC.
Geoffrey,
As a former St Joe's Prep golfer, my guess is that your Haverford squad waxed The Prep. Chris grew up more with my older sisters, but he has pretty much been one of the top 2-3 golfers in Philly for years.
Chris Lange,
If you read this, I am still waiting for The Prep golf team fundraider at your other course. ;)
Peter,
More pictures please !! I know you have them.
-
Thanks for the photos.
Has PCC recently taken out trees, or did they do a better job controlling growth? It doesn't look as overtreed as many courses from the same era.
-
George,
They recently completed a MAJOR deforresation. A couple of the holes you wouldn't even recognize if you saw the before and after, namely #11.
jason
-
Mike,
St. Joes Prep has actually fielded a pretty good team over the past 5 years and they play a brutal non-conference schedule.
If memory serves me right I believe we won the match but it was pretty close... we had one of our guys shoot a 37 and he hit only one green in regulation - he was something like 7 for 8 getting up and down.
-
PCC sure did take out trees in the last two years. They basically concentrated on a particular area (#11, 12, 16, 6) but there seems to have been lots of thinning out elsewhere. The job they did is a great example of what happens if you take out what was an endless overgrowth over the years---you show how beautiful looking through parts of the course can be and you show off the really big beautiful trees that no one saw for years since they were covered up and blocked from view by so many other useless trees.
Glad to see Jamie Slonis weight in with his impression of exactly how the course played in the Philly Open and how other courses play for the class A GAP amateur tournaments compared to what the local pros play. Jamie plays in most of these things. All I do is officiate these days which means riding around in a cart with a radio and a rules book basically watching!
As far as what some of the pros were specifically complaining about yesterday---nothing that I could tell particularly probably because there really wasn't anything in particular to complain about. They just don't like shooting high scores I guess and feel that something has to be said.
But the more thoughtful ones I know like Terry Hertzog (couple of time recent Pennsylvania Open Champ) simply said the course played really hard--but there was nothing wrong with that.
-
As I have had a few requests for some additional shots, here are a few more pictures from Philadelphia CC, with a bit of an emphasis on the "vista" shots across the bowl area in the middle of the course...
From the tee of the sporty 5th
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663101/large.jpg)
...and, from the 12th fairway, back across the 5th green, over the 6th tee and to the 18th and the clubhouse
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31670257/large.jpg)
The awkward (for a fade/hard pull hitter such as myself) tee shot off the 10th
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31670274/large.jpg)
While I have never been there, I envisioned this tee shot as being very "Shinnecock"-esque...
From the 18th fairway, the view across the 10th green and beyond
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31670283/large.jpg)
A more traditional view from the 11th tee, which has been nicely presented before here on GCA...
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663115/large.jpg)
and again from the 12th fairway, the view back across the 11th to the opposite hillside
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31670554/large.jpg)
Another hole I personally found very challenging because of the "cape" like aspects of the tee shot, the 14th was, according to our host, the old #1
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663122/large.jpg)
Finally, a bit closer view of the 18th green and clubhouse, taken from the 10th fairway
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31670564/large.jpg)
Peter
-
Is there a reason there appear to be so many little trees throughout the course? Did they plant a new one for X old ones taken down?
-
Peter:
That second to last shot of the 14th was the old 1st. If you looked to your right you can see some rather elaborate old buildings which are now maintenance. That was the old clubhouse. And the 13th hole was the old 9th with the present 3rd behind it being the old 18th where Snead could not get out of that fairway bunker in 1939 and just gave away the only US Open he really should have won!
-
Brian:
They did plant a few little ones in certain areas, I think. I wish they hadn't but the net effect of what they did is dramatic. Some of those shorter ones may just be dogwoods though.
-
Peter,
Great photos.
The Par 3, 11th hole at Philly CC gets my vote as the "Best transformation of a golf hole". The tree removal and subsequent remodeling of the bunkers on this hole is fantastic. It was always a pretty good hole but the green was never in great shape due to the lack of sunlight. This green used to be entirely closed in with large trees from the bottom right all the way around the green to the left. I was really blown away when I saw the new look for the first time a couple of years ago.
Philadelphia CC and now Gulph Mills are the "Poster Courses" of successful restoration/renovation and tree removal in the Philadelphia area. The before and after pictures would really surprise alot of guys.
-
Jamie:
The use of words and terms for what one does to a golf course can get pretty funny. I consider what we did to GMGC recently to be in the vast majority a restoration, but in the beginning of our master planning it seemed some in the club didn't like the sound of that word or term so we changed it to the GMGC "improvement plan" or just "Master Plan" although nothing was changed on the plan because of the change to what we called it.
It probably had to do with one guy on the golf committee back then (until he got thrown off it) who was being a complete pain in the ass and resisting restoring the course. A couple of times he tried to embarrass me by standing up and saying this was 2000 and who the hell cared about Donald Ross who hadn't been here in 75 years? After he did that in a couple of meetings I told him to go down to PVGC (where he belongs) and ask who the hell cares about George Crump who hasn't been there in about 85 years. Thankfully that quieted him down! ;)
-
Tom,
Sorry...I did mean to use the term restoration. I'll modify my original post accordingly. Those two terms do get mislabled and misused quite often.
I can appreciate your point, because now at Tavistock we have a "Selective Tree Management Program." This program was previously known as..."Were're going to cut down all the unneccessary, infringing, ugly-ass White Pines, Spruces, etc that we can possibly find...so that our Superintendent can grow grass and not be a tree trimmer, and so that we can play golf on this newly grown healthy grass instead of chipping out from the tree roots." ;D
-
Jamie, any time you want you can count on me to help you reorganize Meyer Lansky's "Murder Incorporated" into the golf architecture version of "White Pine Murder Incorporated". I hate those things.
-
Tom,
Thankfully for us at Tavistock, our views are shared wholeheartedly by Jim Nagle & Ron Forse.
-
What a difference when you take the trees out!
Here's #11 at PCC before clearing things out:
(http://community.webshots.com/s/image5/3/52/54/65435254jATvKS_ph.jpg)
and after:
(http://www.pbase.com/image/31663115/large.jpg)
hard to believe it's the same hole...
-
Scott:
Thanks again for those "before and after the trees" photos of the 11th at Philadelphia C.C. It'd be hard to find such a dramatic comparison anywhere! I remember well playing that hole before the tree removal. For some reason some golfers (me included) felt the urge to swing a big draw at that green and as one can see in the first photo the chances of hitting the trees on the right in mid-flight were very good. The hole is a very dramatic change in look now from the tee but the far more dramatic change is when you look back at it behind #16 when playing that hole. Some members of Philly apparently still can't get used to the look coming down #16 as it's looks like both greens are almost "stacked". I wonder if any of the members have actually tried to play from the approach on #16 right on over that green directly onto #11. In a way that'd be like playing from #13 at GCGC directly over that green onto #15 green behind it!
-
Anyway, I think the point of this thread was to show Philadelphia C.C was a very good test for the best in this section in it's Open Championship. As high as some of the scores may have been it didn't seem that anyone had anything legitimate to complain about with perhaps one interesting exception--that being the transitioning of the 6th hole down to a par 4 for the championship making the course play to a par 70 at slightly under 7,000 yds.
There's an interesting historical fact here with transitioning down par 5s to par 4s. In the 1939 Open the USGA decided to transition down to par 4s both #6 and #12, making PCC perhaps the only course to play a US Open at a par below 70.
We do have some architectural and set-up documentation on that 1939 Open. It seems William Flynn was opposed to this transitioning down of those two par 5s. The home pro mentioned at the Open that he didn't think calling #6 a par 4 for the GAP Open was a very good idea either and I agree. He said he thought it felt better as a "go/no go" short par 5 and I feel he's right about that.
The hole at around 490 is really not designed as a long par 4--it's much better as a short par 5 as the green is really elevated from the second shot approach area. All the green-ends of the PCC par 5s are designed as par 5 greens, in my opinion. The greenside bunkering on the other two certainly is (#3 and #12) and again the elevation of #6 makes that hole so too.
But as even Michael Mcdermott (probably the longest in the Open field) said on the 6th hole---"what difference does it make what they call it---call it a par 3 as far as I'm concerned as we're all just trying to play it in as few strokes as possible?" And one of his fellow competitors said "Maybe you guys want to say I made a bogie here, but I feel I made a par". (he was laughing).
It was interesting though, the psychological impact it had!
-
TE, Wayne and others
What is the general opinion of the restoration work at Spring Mill? Here is an interesting comparison.
(http://www.golfclubatlas.com/images/Spring%20Mill1.jpg)
(http://cakili.image.pbase.com/image/31663101/large.jpg)
-
Tom MacW:
The general opinion amongst the membership, tournament players and others regarding the work done at PCC is that it's an overwhelming success.
PCC's super, Mike McNulty, is really good and one of the things he absolutely insisted on was that the bunker surrounds on the course not be touched in the recent restoration.
He did tell me, though, that the only bunker he made a bit of a mistake on was the bunker to the left of the 5th green there. He thought even though it was so close to that pond it didn't need any special drainage considerations.
He said he was wrong about that.
By the way, that tree just to the left of the 5th green is one of the most "strategic" trees I've ever seen on a par 3. I think it may have been a huge question about what to do about it in the restoration but they opted to leave it there, and I couldn't agree more. There's scarely a player who stands on that tee who doesn't thnk hard about that tree!
-
TE
Were the bunkers at #11 changed at some point...today are they an accurate representation of what Flynn created?
When did PCC change the order of the holes? Why?
-
Great pictures guys. thanks
-
"TE
Were the bunkers at #11 changed at some point...today are they an accurate representation of what Flynn created?"
I think they are. Maintenance practices may make them look a little different but I think that's the way they were.
"When did PCC change the order of the holes? Why?"
The order of the holes changed when the new clubhouse was built on the other side of the course. That required the club to build a new hole (present #18, original #5). The present #18th is by William Gordon (many year heas foreman for Flynn), I believe.
-
Tom MacWood,
I agree whole-heartedly with Tom Paul's response. I have played the course a few hundred times over the years, my in-laws are 40+ year members, I know many members, and they have a lot of really top flight players both male and female. I don't know anyone who is critical of the work that Ron Forse and his number one man, Jim Nagle did. Now the multi-million dollar clubhouse renovation is another matter. In any case, Ron remains the consulting architect for the club and his group along with Mike McNulty, one of the really good superintendents in the district--and as a number on here know, someone who is very approachable, and the rest of the golf professional staff contribute to the great conditions and playability of the course.
Mike McNulty has also done a terrific job in maintaining the club's archives. Between the collection of drawings and aerial photos that he assembled (Hagley photos and others), there is a wealth of evidence for Ron and Jim to consider for their work. My thoughts are that their work is outstanding.
Now Tom, as to the photo of the the 5th green with the original fronting bunker now a bulkhead, well that pond floods fairly regularly and the front of the green started to collapse. That is why many years ago the pilings were put in. Nobody likes them and I can tell you with certainty that Mike McNulty would love to have that bunker put back in. It was reminiscent of the bunker fronting the 14th at Pine Valley, well at least in that the sand went right down to the water. But it was causing the green to erode and this is the solution the club went with a while back and continue with today. I don't know when that large tongue was put in the front left bunker, I rather like the look of the earlier version. There are 2 not original tongues in the right greenside bunker on 14 that look quite a bit worse than this one, not from the fairway--you only see the first one, but in the bunker or to the right of the green. This is knit-picking because the return to size of many of the Flynn bunkers and the look of the surrounds is superb, probably the best of any of the Philly area Flynn parkland courses. The added tee length works very well and does not at all come across as stretching the course too much.
Philadelphia Country Club is a fine Flynn design in wonderful playing conditions. Yes, the 18th hole went from a really great hole 5th hole to a mediocre 18th when they moved the clubhouse but otherwise the course is very close to its Flynn (and a bit of Maxwell on the greens) roots.
-
Also, how big a difference is there really between most of the local pro's in the area and some of the better GAP players, I, for one don't really think there is too much of a difference at all. There are a few pros in the area that really play golf a lot, but as most of the pros will tell you their real job is on the lesson tee and in the pro shop, while a lot of these amateurs pretty much have jobs that allow them to let golf take a priority in the summer.
Jason
Please explain why then are the amatures not winning each year? Also what exactly is the Amatures record in the Ping Challenge Cup even though a few of the better pros skip this event each year, especially when there is an event that day with a cash prize available. If the amatures are so much better why does the GAP (run by amatures) only provide them 15 spots. The pros are much better. Two of the four amatures (Hyndman & Sigel) that have one this event are in the pantheon of Mid-Amatures on a International scale! This is why Chris Lange will probably consider this win one of his top achievements. Chris is a great guy and I am happy for him. He is now certainly in the pantheon on a local level.
-
Mike,
First, I never said the Amateurs were so much better, I simply asked the question how big a difference there was between the better amateurs in the area and the professionals.
I believe only 15 spots are afforded to the Amateurs is because this event is really supposed to be for Pro's, hence the size of the purse. It really gives some of the pro's a chance to pick up a decent paycheck. The event really is not "open" as it proclaims itself to be. I think one of the reasons so few amateurs have won the event is because qualifying for the amateurs is so difficult. While the pros play in a qualifier and maybe have to shoot a 76 or 77 on a course that is set up for normal play, the amateurs have to qualify for about 10 spots, since 5 are exempt I believe, while trying to qualify for match play of the Philadelphia Amateur. This year I think 145, or +2 is what it took to qualify on a 7200 yard cricket club.
I think it says a lot that out of the top ten players, 3 of them are amateurs, considering they make up such a small part of the field. I'm not saying its the case with the top shelf pros in the area, but their are a lot of pros out there that are professional in name only, and they will as much as admit that. At my own club, I would take the top 4 amateurs against the 4 professionals that work at the club every day of the week.
Chris Lange is an outstanding golfer, and his history speaks for itslef. What I said wasn't said to diminish his accomplishment, but brutal honesty that I really don't think that at least in our section, there is that much of a difference between a large part of the amateurs and professionals in the area.
I would take guys like Michael McDermott, Jamie Slonis, Chris Lange, Chet Walsh and Buddy Marucci in his hey day to go up against the top pro's in the area and take my chances.
99% of the professionals that play in these events in the section are CLUB pro's. What makes them such a better player. Half of them are giving lessons all week or working the shop the other half of the week, or making sure that their members are happy. I think it is a credit to them that they are as good as they are with as little time as most of them have to play.
Jason Mandel
-
I surely don't think one can say that the top amateur contingent in the Philadelphia district is or has been better than the contingent of the best local pros. The long Philadelphia Open record just doesn't show that.
What it does show is occasionally the top amateurs in this district can give the local pros a run for their money and have from time to time. Lange is one of those amateurs. In any era it's not uncommon for one of the top amateurs to step in there and take the Philly Open. Mike Brown did it in 1997 in a rain shortened Philly Open. Actually two years ago Lange had the Open right in his grasp with only three holes to go at PVGC and sort of gave it away. He also lost out in an 18 hole play-off in the Philly Open to Sigel about ten years ago at Philmont.
Jay Sigel won the Philly Open something like six times and he by no means played in it every year. But of course Sigel could be fairly considered to be the second best amateur in American golf history given his amazing career record on a local, national and international level (before he became a senior pro). In a win/participation percentage Sigel probably dominated the city and state Open like no pro ever has.
I doubt it would surprise anyone that much if a handful of local amateurs won the Philly Open. That could include such as Mcdermott for sure and some such as Slonis and a few others.
But the strength of the pro contingent around here is a whole lot deeper than the amateur contingent--and the record of the Ping Challenge matches shows that pretty clearly! It's not that often either that a good contingent of local amateurs and pros tee it up against each other anyway.
The point I was trying to make on this thread is it seems the local class A amateurs around here play courses with set-ups that are probably more demanding than those the local pros play in their local circuit. And I think that's precisely what Philly C.C showed the other day!
That's what Jamie Slonis seemed to indicate in this thread. He's be one who'd know best--as he's one of the best local amateurs in the district right now and he used to be a local pro and obviously knows what their local circuit is like! The thing I thought was interesting, though, was how many local pros were complaining how hard Philly C.C was but I just didn't hear any of that from the amateur contingent. That led me to believe they're simply more used to it!
-
I mentioned Tom Paul's observation about the overwhelming majority of the griping after the Philadelphia Open came from the pro ranks to Pete Trenham, longtime fixture in Philadelphia Professional ranks at St. Davids, a chronicler of the local PGA history, and the father of our fellow GCAer. Pete's reply was that pros are so forbidden to complain about their own clubs that when they go elsewhere the floodgates tend to open up.
-
Wayne:
That's interesting what Pete Trenham said. But I don't know, things must be changing. Philly C.C. head pro (who played in the Open) was rightfully proud of the course but was not shy about saying he thought the 6th would've been more interesting if they called it a par 5 on the GAP card (instead of dropping it to a par 4 on the GAP tournament card).
And at my club, GMGC, our former pro, Terry Hertzog (one of the real premier players in the state) who left this year was very vocal and helpful with his architectural opinions on our course.
And our new head pro, Tom Gilbert, is equally as opinionated and helpful about our arcitecture and course. The assistant pro, Tom Cecil is super good on architecture and surely offers his opinions on anything and everything, thankfully!
But Philly C.C did it right---their restoration is an overwhelming success, everyone thought so. The pins were just tough in the Open, but not unfair, the course was maxed out and there was some grain in those A-1 greens that definitely threw many off on speed.
Lange's victory was actually pretty interesting.Talk about putting yourself in a position to win. In the middle of his second round last nine (36 holes) he had a five shot lead and actually bogied three out of the last four holes.
-
TEPaul
Patrick is completely wrong you are a smart chap. I could not agree more. BTW the members at these courses that host the amature events don't know what they are doing and often push the envelope to far I know people that are reluctant to return to certain invitationals for just this reason.
TEPaul & Wayne
I always caddied for Dad in the Philly Open. He loved giving the needle to his members and others that were often involved in the administration of the tournament. I am sure it was nice for a change to turn the tables on his own members. One year I remember well we had a top 10 finish with solid play after a bad start, the amature in our group struggled all day and finished with the same score his name Jay Sigel.
Most local pros are reluctant to vocally complain about any facet of one of their own events as the clubs and sponsors are truely appreciated, however the Philly Open is a GAP event so it is open season. BTW this is also the case for the PGA tour at the Majors, hard for the Tour to fine a player for making less than favorable comments about an event not run by the Tour.
-
"TEPaul
Patrick is completely wrong you are a smart chap."
Mike:
Let's not be too hard on the poor wretch---he's not completely wrong--he's only wrong about 98% of the time.
-
Congratulations to Pete Oakley for winning the Brittish Senior Open. Oakley, who has played in the section for years certainly proves how good some of the pro's are in our section.
Jason
-
Did Oakley win? I missed it all--damn! Wouldn't you say that ultra-course manager Pete Oakley winning the British Senior Open is somewhat akin to Todd Hamilton winning the British Open? I would!
I fully expect Matt Ward to come on here and state this is proof positive that his opinion Portrush is a good course but the fairways are too narrow is correct!
Just watch! ;)