Could Payne Stewart have won on a Mike Davis set-up?

[Ran Morrissett]

Payne could win at Pinehurst - that is undeniable.

Yet, he didn't possess Kaymer's impressive firepower and Payne couldn't drive the 3rd and 13th holes today for instance (both of which Kaymer birdied). Could he have pitched it close at either or both? Maybe, Payne was certainly a world class competitor.

As I wrote under the 8th hole in My Dream Course entry under Best of Golf, why no love for the intermediate par 4? Every time a hole gets shortened to 310 from the 350-400 range, we lose one. We need to start a campaign in support of this forgotten, neglected type hole. When well designed LIKE THE 13TH AT PINEHURST, it provides great golf as well as being an asset to the fabric of every course.

Best,

[DMoriarty]

The irony is that the old great short par fours were rarely intended to be drivable.  They played more like a 350 hole plays now. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ran,

Payne's equipment was significantly different as well.

[jeffwarne]

The "driveable" par 4 of today, however contrived, is simply the 245 par three of 60 years ago, when they weren't afraid to make pros hit woods and even drivers to holes, and called them par 3's.

Overused,predictable silly concept in USGA events.
Leave it at 350-400 and let the longest hitters possibly have a go. Driving a 308 par 4 on hardpan is hardly story worthy for a world class player.

[JWL]

Payne was no fan of the setup of the 18th hole at Olympic where his putt went up to the cup and then turned around and rolled down to the front of the green, some 30 feet away.   It simply cost him the Open title, as I recall.....and he wasn't a bit happy and he let the USGA know how he felt.   That green was ultimately softened to be playable.   There was a lot of that going on at Pinehurst yesterday.....so based on past history, Payne may not have loved the set up too very much.   I wish he was here to let us know.

[Jud_T]

The thing I don't understand about the setup is this-  They have a 7500 yard par 70 to protect a number, then they go ahead and move tees up 50-70 yards on 2 holes to make them driveable and provide "drama", effectively rendering the course a Par 68.  Seems like they're serving diametrically opposing masters, neither of which is particularly forward-thinking in GCA terms.  If they could get over 70 being the perceived minimum for a championship test, they wouldn't have to trick up every course as much to keep the winning total close to Even.

[BCowan]

The course doesn't play 7500 yards, that is the white line number.  Plus with all the chase and heat the course played relatively short.  The drivable short par 4's is very cool and forward thinking.  If only the greens could be firmer and slower, but Rome wasn't built in a day! 

[BCrosby]

Not to take this thread off-track, but driving distances increased by about 35 yards across the board (for longer hitters it was more like 40 yards) from the year Payne won (1999) to six years later when M. Campbell won (2005). Which would have a direct bearing on holes considered drivable.

I don't know what the distance numbers were for this year.

As for Ran's question, Golden Age courses had many half par holes, but they were usually played from their normal tees. I don't recall reading accounts where tees were moved around much on those holes.

Bob

[Jason Topp]

I completely agree with the point on the midlength par 4.  A good one is a pleasure to play and they are disappearing.