How much does score matter to you at the US Open ?

[Matt_Ward]

Eric:

Good points.

I've always believed that a course that had to overdose on the high rough / hay and the extremly narrow fairways was really weak from a design / strategic point of view. The more a course needs to be "helped" the more it becomes clear that it has real weaknesses that need to be bolstered.

I credit Mike Davis for what he's done -- he's brought the USGA out of the dark ages with its "par penchant" and brought back into play real thinking and the opportunity to play aggressively when called upon.

[Sean_A]

The problem with this is that people always think about it in the abstract, instead of the specific.

What's the low scoring record for the US Open?  Is it still Nicklaus v Aoki at Baltusrol?  That Open didn't suck.

What's the low scoring record for the Open Championship?  Is it still Tom Watson v Nicklaus at Turnberry?

Anybody see a theme developing?

Tom

Its a dilemma for me.  Theoretically I don't care about and the Duel in the Sun was just about the ultimate example of this - though to be fair Jack and Tom were miles beyond everyone else so the course played much more difficult than its normally stated.  On the other hand, Carnoustie was a thrilling event to watch when par was "protected".  One thing we all have to rememebr is the stars of the game are the players and they go a long way to creating our memories while the course is rightfully the second star position. 

Ciao

[Dave_Miller]

Be curious to see what people think.

No doubt the topic has gone through a major change point for many -- clearly the designs and what has been to various courses over the years has made for some real comments -- pro and con.

I frankly don't care much about final scores -- so long as there is some deterrent for poor play and the flip side -- rewards for those who do execute. I also like to see players be encouraged to use drivers more -- rather than take the automatic conservative layback approach to playing.

Frankly, I have found the work carried out by Mike Davis to be the best thing to have happened to the US Open in quite some time.

Matt
Not at all low score wins and just provide risk/reward challenges.
Best
Dave

[Kirk Gill]

As I recall low score wins regardless of whether it is over par, under par or even par....

The USGA's practice of making par 5 holes into par 4 holes with greens not designed to receive long irons is ridiculous. I saw the new USGA tees on #6 and #9 at Congressional this week. The holes will both play well over 600 yards and will remain par 5's for the Open. Unfortunately #11 will be designated as a par 4 once again. 

What's interesting to me about these comments is that if you really believe the first, then why does the second really matter?

Part of it IS a headgame for these players - how they deal with the constant difficulty, the higher than usual scores..........

[Matt_Ward]

The key item that Mike Davis has tried to emphasize is to scale penalities proportionally -- especially with rough height.

Players need to play -- the obligatory sideways pitch out with the SW is truly a statement that the preparation of the course has been botched. BB should be a far different layout than what it was in '02 -- I have had a few people update me on this from having played the course in the last 7-10 days.