[Peter Wagner]

I'm struck by a thought after watching the first two rounds of the US Open: it sure looks as if the USGA is moving in a newer and more creative way.

1.) I love the variable length tees being used.
2.) Three levels of rough seems to make so much sense in that the penalty increases based on the golfers inability to execute a planned shot.
3.) Hand-held video for the gallery and online video for those desk bound.
4.) 10 TV channels on DirecTV (NBC plus channels 701-709) allowing viewers the flexibility of watching what they want.
5.) Prime time coverage for most of the US.

Numbers 1 and 2 above are causing players to think and at the same time making it more interesting for players and spectators.  By playing with Torrey's architecture the USGA has brought more architecture into play.

Numbers 3-5 above are making this tourney more entertaining for all.

I like this new direction the USGA has taken.

- Peter

[Tom_Doak]

I was hoping they wouldn't get the idea that they have to tinker with the architecture on all of the best courses in America.  Thank God Mike Davis is a good guy, or I'd be really concerned about that part of the new direction.

[Peter Wagner]

I was hoping they wouldn't get the idea that they have to tinker with the architecture on all of the best courses in America.  Thank God Mike Davis is a good guy, or I'd be really concerned about that part of the new direction.

Tom,

I think Mike really understands what he's doing and he, maybe more than most, would understand your point.  IMO, Torrey needs a little bit of creativeness in the setup to hold the attention of viewer and player and the USGA hit it right on the nose.

- Peter

[Adam Clayman]

While they shortened the tees 200 yards today, Saturday, the pin positions appear to be in spots that are unreadable. Little micro breaks are evident as well as contrary slopes built by the hand of man.

Why do they feel it necessary to trick up any place?

At least at Shinny the excitement was evident and the firmness accentuated it all.

[Mark_Fine]

I think the best thing they are doing is trying to make the bunkers hazards again.  They are very unpredictable (as they should be) and you don’t see too many players happy to be in them.  The three levels of rough is better than 5" cabbage next to ribbons of fairway but it must be making Superintendents around the country CRINGE.  It is a "fairness" thing that is only going to add to maintenance costs as other clubs try to do this.  It is unnatural as well. 

[Tom_Doak]

I will second that thought about the rough.  It's eminently fair, but it's really expensive to maintain three heights of cut, and it looks silly, too -- lots of parallel mowing lines.

[Don_Mahaffey]

The three levels of rough is better than 5" cabbage next to ribbons of fairway but it must be making Superintendents around the country CRINGE.  It is a "fairness" thing that is only going to add to maintenance costs as other clubs try to do this.   

Mark, I doubt that three levels of rough is going to become the norm. For all the talk about duplicating what you see on TV, one that doesn't happen all that often is really penal rough, it's just too much for most players. Thru the years I've caught a lot more crap for letting the rough get long than for cutting it too short. Remember when they walk mowed the fwys at the US Open? Everyone said all the top courses would be doing that soon also...never did happen as a little common sense is still used most of the time.

[John Moore II]

Don--I do think that many clubs have gone to at least 2 cuts of rough, with 1 inch high cut around the edge of the fairway and then a higher cut away from the fairway. I certainly do not think the wheat fields they have surrounding the fairways at Torrey will become common, when the members start losing 6-10 balls a round, they will decide its foolish, it they don't all ready see it as foolish just by seeing tour guys standing in grass up to their calfs.

[Don_Mahaffey]

J,
Step cuts have been used for decades. The PGA tour has mandated step cuts at all venues for as long as I can remember...completly different than the graduated rough idea used by the USGA...which for the purpose of testing the world's greatest player happens to be a very good ideal, IMO. I don't think you'll see that sort of approach at most clubs, at least not for long.

[JohnV]

While they shortened the tees 200 yards today, Saturday, the pin positions appear to be in spots that are unreadable. Little micro breaks are evident as well as contrary slopes built by the hand of man.

Why do they feel it necessary to trick up any place?

At least at Shinny the excitement was evident and the firmness accentuated it all.

Adam, the course has been shorter than the 7643 yards advertised every day this week.  The hole locations were good.  I'm tired of hole locations we see on tour where you almost can't misread them.   Also, at the speeds the greens are at, micro breaks show up that aren't evident otherwise.  6 foot putts are not gimmes this week like they are on tour most weeks.

I don't think there is any attempt to trick up the place.  Mike is looking to make it playable.  Notice how he shortened #4 when he hid the hole behind the bunker.  That is logical.  The hole location was not accessible with the length of club required after a tee shot from the back tee for many of the players.

I also like the fact that he hasn't hung the holes on the edge of the greens like the tour does.  Especially some of the middle hole locations which can put a player to sleep, but will penalize the non-thinking player who misses on the wrong side (see #18 on Thursday as an example).

Regarding the layered rough, a lot of courses these days have a first cut, second cut and then fescue beyond it.

[John Moore II]

Don--perhaps I am not so well versed in agronomy, but what is the difference? If the cut goes from 1 inch, to 2 inches, to 3 inches, what is the difference between 'graduated' and 'step cutting?'

[Don_Mahaffey]

 J,
The step cut is the thin strip of rough, usually 6 ft as that is about the width of the mower used. It rings the fwys and sometimes the greens. After that you have the rough cut and then as John noted you sometimes transition into the native. This type of maintenance has been around for a long, long time.

What the USGA is doing is cutting the step cut, they are calling it the first cut, and then cutting another ring at an inch or two longer that looks to be about 10 yards wide? Then another and then finally the cabbage rings that...I think.

That's pretty busy and designed in be more penal as the get farther away from the fwy What the USGA is doing is new...at least to me, while the small strip of rough that separates the fwy from the primary rough has been around a long time.

[JohnV]

Starting at Winged Foot, the USGA decided that the player who hit it just outside the "step cut" could get end up getting a much worse lie than than the one who hit it much wider so they decided to add that second step where the penalty wasn't as severe.

In the past the USGA said they wanted the rough to add .5 strokes.  I saw a stat on Geoff's GD blog that the penalty was .3something for the first two days.  If that is due to the second step, I think it is proper.

[John Moore II]

Don--so pretty much, the only difference is that instead of one step of intermediate rough, then regular, then out to the unimproved stuff, the USGA is just going with 3 or 4 steps then to the unimproved, and in some cases, no rough and straight into the canyons?
--It seems to be step cutting more extensively, but still the same concept. Is that mostly on target?

[Patrick_Mucci]

I will second that thought about the rough.  It's eminently fair, but it's really expensive to maintain three heights of cut, and it looks silly, too -- lots of parallel mowing lines.

Tom,

I'd agree.

However, what's the line on how many clubs will ask their superintendent to replicate the look over the next year ?

[Mark_Fine]

The influence that U.S. Open setups has on golf courses is FAR greater than most of us think it is.  It is right up there with the Augusta National look    Narrowing of fairways, speed of greens, lengthening of holes, influence of rough, elimination of playing angles, shifting of greens and hazards,...,etc.  Yes this is the U.S Open, but it is one of the most watched events in golf.  What positive aspects do "the course set ups" for the tournament have on the architecture/maintenance of other golf courses?  It is a dilemma that there is no easy answer for but where one is necessary.  Maybe Mike Davis will eventually get there.  Furthermore, the TV commentators constantly talking about "how long this golf course is" doesn't help matters either.  I guess if you are a golf architect it means you might be asked to find ways to build more and more back tees (this is a fact for sure), but it does little to help an already very expensive game.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()