Olympic

[Jordan Caron]

Chip said it best.

I put a great deal into the experience of the course. The location, the trees and the walk. Having played there last April, I enjoyed the experience more than the actual course.

It`s a beast with no let up. You have to work it both ways and it tests all facets of your game. For that it makes a great Open course. I haven't seen many holes closely but I'm not thrilled with the setup. There seems to be a lot of shaved areas that are in bail out areas which I'm not overly fond of. Especially as they take the ball further away from the hole.

[Jim Nelson]

I played Olympic two weeks ago, and the course is much more open than it appears to be on TV. For me, i never had any sensation of hitting down a chute.  Of course, i didn't hit from the tips either.  In fact, i was surprised at some of the rather generous landing areas.  The tree cutting program has changed the look of many holes, not the least of which was #4.  With a lot of trees removed, wind could be more of a factor below the tree line. Regarding walking, I walked and carried and did not think it that difficult, but then I often walk. Very few level lies, but this isn't Florida.

Finally, the view from the tee box on 18 is amazing.  Looking up towards that bowl with 20K surrounding it surely makes the heart beat faster. On Sunday with a lead... Good luck keeping it steady. You can't see the landing area and when you reach it, you feel like you are looking straight up with the whole bowl and bleachers exaggerating the effect.  Fantastic finishing hole.

[Cliff Hamm]

The beauty of Olympic is undeniable. It looks unlike any other course I have ever seen. In watching it I thought what a beautiful park,  just add a few gardens...

I also believe it may have been a better test of overall golf if the fairways were not so narrow. The trees themselves are certainly penalizing. Narrowing of fairways, however is a problem with every U.S. Open. This is one area where PGA gets it right.

[Joel_Stewart]

The beauty of Olympic is undeniable. It looks unlike any other course I have ever seen. In watching it I thought what a beautiful park,  just add a few gardens...

I also believe it may have been a better test of overall golf if the fairways were not so narrow. The trees themselves are certainly penalizing. Narrowing of fairways, however is a problem with every U.S. Open. This is one area where PGA gets it right.

The problem with your theory is that if there is no rough, the ball rolls into the trees and down hills.  Which is harder?  The USGA has tried to incorporate both for this Open.  The USGA wants you to drive it accurately which I think is a good thing. 

Yesterday Rory tried to drive the 7th and blocked it right.  It ended up in heavy rough and he blasted it out over the green into a bunker.  If the rough was cut, he would have went into the trees and who knows if he would have had a shot?

I'm in enjoying it mainly because the course is set up differently than it ever has been before.  The superintendent the club employs has never thought of such creativity and interest and normally just grows the rough everywhere.  I'm sure on Monday he'll start the changes back to his liking.

[Jud_T]

It will be very interesting to compare this setup to Merion and Pinehurst.

[Tom Kelly]

The problem with your theory is that if there is no rough, the ball rolls into the trees and down hills.  Which is harder?  The USGA has tried to incorporate both for this Open.  The USGA wants you to drive it accurately which I think is a good thing. 

I don't think it is a case of which is harder, but of which is more interesting both for the players and the spectators.

For me it is far more interesting watching the players being punished by having to deal with shaping shots under, over and around trees and bumping shots into and lofting shots over slopes after hitting inaccurate drives or approaches than watching them hack shots out of heavy rough which just run uncontrollably through greens/fairways into more heavy rough.  

Personally although I can appreciate the the argument for, I am not one for trying to limit scoring by making the course as hard as possible. Though if that is the objective I am certain there are far more interesting ways of making a course tough than just growing the rough in and making it deep and lush.

[Tom Kelly]

It will be very interesting to compare this setup to Merion and Pinehurst.

I will be fascinated to see what happens at Pinehurst after the great work that Coore & Crenshw appear to have done.

It is a course that has gone from almost disappearing off my radar of interest to the top of my bucket list. Surely they can't mess about with the set-up too much, just make the greens really fast & firm?

[Phil McDade]

Does anyone think it a bit goofy that 8 of the 9 hardest holes -- based on first-day play -- were on the front nine (save for the extremely short par 4 7th) and 8 of the 9 easiest were on the back nine? I'm not sure I've seen a major course that unbalanced.

Set-up, or design?

http://www.usopen.com/en_US/scoring/cstats.html

[George Freeman]

It's a great course that the USGA is temporarily bastardizing. This too shall pass.

Terry - can you expound?

Seems to me it is playing exactly as Mike Davis wants it to.  I enjoyed watching  yesterday's coverage.  The firmness of the course is, to me, key as to how it plays and how exciting it is to watch.  I like the shaved areas as well.  All of it combined really puts stress on these guys.  And the type of stress firm & fast golf courses give pros is vastly superior to the stress created by knee-high rough a foot off the fairways and greens.  

Is it as good as watching the Open at St. Andrews on a hot, dry day?  No.  But it is a hell of a lot better than watching the coverage at Congressional last year...

As for the course: seems like a better US Open course than a members course, although I could be wrong.

[David_Tepper]

Phil M. -

The first 6 holes at Olympic have had the reputation as being the toughest opening stretch in U.S. Open golf for decades. My guess is, if you checked the stats from the 3 prior U.S. Opens at Olympic, you would find the front-9 played harder than the back-9. The front-9 has some of the "slope-i-est" fairways on the course.

With the 8th hole having been changed from an uphill 135-140 yard par-3 to an uphill 190-200 yard par-3, the front-9 plays that much harder.  

I think it is much more a function of design/lay of the land than set-up.

DT

[PCCraig]

Olympic is a great classically hard golf course with some really good holes. That being said if I had to play it every day I think I'd quit golf. For those here that have played golf with me will know, my mostly one dimensional ball flight doesn't exactly translate into low scores there!

I do enjoy watching the professionals play a 7000 yard (short?) golf course that is giving most of them fits.

[Jud_T]

It's going to get really interesting if the wind picks up over the weekend.  We might see some really big numbers out there.

[Kalen Braley]

It would seem Olympic bring out the love/hate thing from people.

The coverage I saw yesterday looked absolutely fantastic.  The trees, the views, the canted fairways, slippery greens, it all totally worked for me.  But it could be because I'm a bay area native and miss the beauty of the place even more that I haven't lived there in nearly 10 years now.  Just watching on TV, I can still recall the smells of the ocean and the thickness of the air....I need to get back, its been too long.

[Phil McDade]

David T:

Thanks for your insights -- I'm not necessarily critical, just that I'm not sure I've seen a major course that unbalanced. Should make for some interesting dynamics the last day if this is closely contested.

[David_Tepper]

"It's going to get really interesting if the wind picks up over the weekend.  We might see some really big numbers out there."

Jud T. -

That is a really good point, especially as the last groups are not going to be teeing off till 2:00pm or so on the weekend. The wind at Olympic typically picks up mid- to late-afternoon, which could make things difficult for those still out on the course after 4:00pm.

DT

[Matthew Petersen]

I don't love it, but I find it fascinating. Watched mostly yesterday from the featured groups online coverage which is interesting because you do get to see far more of the course management side in that you see all the tee shots and approach shots that are so often missing from standard coverage.

What I thought was unique was that I cannot remember a course where the emphasis was greater on the tee ball. My standard way of thinking about golf starts at the green and how you want to approach it, and that determines your thoughts on the tee shot. Doesn't really seem to be the case at Olympic. Seems like if you can get it in the fairway, you will have an approach that is not difficult for any player of US Open caliber. Most greens are open in front and very few of them have much of a unique shape at all. Greens are bunkered but not in a way that seems likely to dominate your thinking if you have hit the fairway. The course isn't about angles on your approach, it's about the angles and slopes on the tee shots.

But, boy, if you miss the fairway, then getting it up around the green becomes all kinds of interesting.

[Jud_T]

No one will be in red numbers when this thing is over.  Par has officially been protected.

[Tom Kelly]

Tom Kelly - I think what Joel means is that a lot of holes are on the edges of really steep hills, you shave all the rough away and those balls could run 70-100 yards off into adjoining fairways or just about anywhere. It's fantasy land to think that you can have little or no rough there. It's just not the type of site. I've only played it twice so I could be talking nonsense here. But I think that was what he was getting at.

That is a fair point but and I not saying we should get rid of the rough full stop. Does it have to be 4 inches deep, lush and grown in so tight to make the course tough?

I have never been to the course myself, but from the little I have seen on the TV its doesn't look at all fun to play it in its current set-up.

[Michael Dugger]

I don't see anything about Olympic that is fundamentally different than any other U.S. Open set up.

Pebble was a total bear.  Cabrera won at Oakmont with a score of +5.

A U.S. Open style set up is NEVER going to fit the definition of "fun" unless you consider being a professional player like Michael Thompson who slayed the dragon yesterday shooting -4.

I bet he had fun. 

Nevertheless, I think the set up looks very appealing.  The winner is going to earn it this year.

I like watching golf played this way far more than I do watching guys go 22 under par by throwing darts at spongy greens.

[Mac Plumart]

Anyone played Harbour Town and Olympic?  Or Eugene and Olympic?

Can you compare and contrast? 

I've played Harbour Tow and Eugene and felt some similarities.  Seeing Olympic I'm thinking they might be a similiar type of courses.

[PThomas]

Anyone played Harbour Town and Olympic?  Or Eugene and Olympic?

Can you compare and contrast? 

I've played Harbour Tow and Eugene and felt some similarities.  Seeing Olympic I'm thinking they might be a similiar type of courses.

I have played them all Mac....Olympic is far more difficult than the other two.....I guess a lot of trees have been taken out there..but still quite a test to stay the least!

HT also has a good number holes...10 rounds between the three I' d go Eugene 1, Olympic 7 and Ht 2

[Jason Thurman]

Does the setup really look THAT hard? I'm seeing guys hitting good approaches from the rough. I'm seeing greens rolling very fast and very true. I'm seeing a premium on driving but with ample opportunity to recover. I think, mostly, you have plenty of opportunity to make bogey from the rough or the fairway.

It's a US Open, so of course it's difficult. But I don't see anything that isn't ideal about the presentation of this course. Plenty of tough and interesting shots and an excellent exhibition from the guys near the top. Too hard? Hell, a high schooler is hanging around the leaderboard!

Everybody talking about fun should drink some beer and play a scramble. This is the US Open.

[David_Tepper]

One feature of Olympic that makes the course play a little harder than it looks is that a number of the greens (#1, #3, #9, #10 & #16) are no higher at the back than they are in the middle. This makes shots hit from the rough with less spin or shots coming in on a low trajectory very hard to keep on those greens. Other than #18 and, to a lesser extent, #4 & #8, very few of the greens slope noticeably back to front. 

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Cliff we will just have to disagree. I do not think you get the course at all or maybe architecture for that matter. I am glad you enjoy this site but read a bit more and play places that are different from your apparent likes. it may surprise you how many great courses have different styles of architecture. 

[Matt MacIver]

I'm a BIG fan of what I'm seeing at O Club this weekend: fast and firm, lots of roll-outs and bounced, almost felt like I was watching The Open, hard to hold a green, lots of short grass around the greens, some rub of the green good and bad bounces.  I'd heard about the reverse-camber fairways but wow - whoever said 18 flat fairways wasn't watching what I was.  Maybe in certain areas of each fairway there is a premium landing area?  I couldn't tell but that would be even cooler.  Love those greens!  20 ft of break?!  A premium on ball striking and putting on glass will with the US Open today - in PRIMETIME! 

Then it goes back to the Members, I think they have something special there - I'm guessing that course is fun and challenging to all ages and types of golfers - one ball, limited water or OB?  Reminds me of #2 but with more elevation and interesting fairway contours.