CANVAS EXTREMES 04' V. 09'

[Adam Clayman]

It's taken five years, but we finally have the anti-thesis of Shinnecock Sunday, as it relates to thump, to put a full spectrum on fimrness into perspective. While the first two and half rounds back in 04' were played on what I'll call a reasonable canvas, the last round, as we all know, pushed the canvas to it's extreme.  If Mother nature can provide this end of the spectrum, What's wrong with what Mark Michaud provided?

A saturated BB showed it's architectural merits this week. Just as a firm one @ SHGC did in 04'. The similarity that deserves criticism would be the surrounding of bunkers with the lush stuff at both venues.

With other threads spewing some of the negatives, this soft version yields, I was wondering which version is best for a U.S. Open. With just a little bit of drying the leaderboard is filling with the higher ranked players. Is that important? Is having exciting golf?

I'm taking the approach that seeing the full spectrum, even if it takes five years, is pretty cool. I'm confident that the firmer canvas is more testing, and exciting, however, Those that whine about this year's softness are just as wrong as those who decried Shinnecock's firmness.

Thoughts?

[Phil McDade]

Adam:

Good thoughts --as one who has been critical of the set-up of the Black during the initial days of the tourney, I'm glad to see a course finally showing its teeth, with what appears to be much tougher and particularly firmer conditions (particularly wind).

But really, only Mickelson and perhaps maybe Mahan are top-tier players making a move uo the leaderboard. Tiger really never contended; I don't believe he was within three shots of the lead the entire day when he finished on 18. And, to be honest, Glover and Barnes in particular are playing really quite poorly, just awful, un-thoughtful golf, in a way (esp. with Barnes) that appears to have little to do with the tougher conditions.

In general, I think the US Open should strive for tough, fast&firm conditions that test these guys. The shoot-out that was the first two days of this Open weren't in keeping with the tourney's emphasis on putting these guys through a difficult four days.

[Anthony Gray]

  Even with receptive greens this year the winner came in at -4. The rock hard greens of past opens can punish good shots which does not identify the best players. I say soften them up more in the future and let the golf course stand on its own merits.

  Anthony

[Adam Clayman]

The rock hard greens of past opens can punish good shots which does not identify the best players.

This is flawed logic beyond belief.

How is a shot considered good if it results in being punished?

 

[George Pazin]

  Even with receptive greens this year the winner came in at -4. The rock hard greens of past opens can punish good shots which does not identify the best players. I say soften them up more in the future and let the golf course stand on its own merits.

  Anthony

Interesting. So in your view, Lucas Glover edging out Barnes, Duval and Mickelson was identifying the best players, but Goosen edging out Mickelson was not...

[jeffwarne]

  Even with receptive greens this year the winner came in at -4. The rock hard greens of past opens can punish good shots which does not identify the best players. I say soften them up more in the future and let the golf course stand on its own merits.

  Anthony

Interesting. So in your view, Lucas Glover edging out Barnes, Duval and Mickelson was identifying the best players, but Goosen edging out Mickelson was not...

At Shinnecock they could've controlled the conditions, but chose to let it be a freak show by pushing the envelope and misreading the weather(even though it was predicted)
At Bethpage they did the best they could with what the weather dealt-no one chose the soft conditions

[George Pazin]

My post had nothing to do with the cause of the conditions, it dealt with the results of the conditions.

It is interesting that you label a contest between 2 of the best golfers in the world a freak show. Guess you feel the same way about The Open in 03 at Sandwich, where Ben Curtis came out atop a stellar leaderboard.

[jeffwarne]

My post had nothing to do with the cause of the conditions, it dealt with the results of the conditions.

It is interesting that you label a contest between 2 of the best golfers in the world a freak show. Guess you feel the same way about The Open in 03 at Sandwich, where Ben Curtis came out atop a stellar leaderboard.

George,
I have tremendous respect for the competitors and venue involved in the 2004 Open, as well as the golf that was played.
It's just a shame that the powers that be felt  a gem like Shinnecock had to be bastardized for the event.
Firm and fast is wonderful-I play and love it all the time in the UK and elsewhere-and Shinny could've been played that way but it got away from them in a week it didn't need to. It's great course every summer-doesn't need the USGA to make it play so.

[Adam Clayman]

Jeff, In your last reply you imply the week was bastardized. That was not the case. It had rained Friday night and the course showed signs of that by yielding lower scores Sat. morning. There was also a forecast for rain Sat. night that did not materialize. The point I was attempting to make was that Shinnecock's Sunday round, where scores ballooned due to the firmness, is just as acceptable a test for the best players in the world, as the lower scores made on the saturated Black.  Just because the majority of pros are use to having a canvas receptive to their aerial assault game does not mean the USGA shouldn't test them by throwing them a curve every once in awhile.

Every hole at Shinny was birdied that Sunday by someone. The low Am was accustomed to F&F and his final position reflected that.

[Peter Pallotta]

There is no ultimate or definitive testing ground, only partial and preliminary ones.  In that context, the variables and possibilities are endless, and the results only tentative and temporary, in varying degrees. We can say: Lucas Glover is the 2009 U.S. Open Champion. We can say: Tiger Woods has won 14 major championships. We can say: David Duval finished at 2 under par.  It means only what we want it to mean. And the appropriate canvas is the canvas that we deem appropriate.  It would be nice to simply let the canvas drape as it would, with nature, without the hand or influence of man. But then we'd all be out of a job. And then how would I pay my green fees?  (This, Adam, the question of the preferred canvas, I fear is just the other side of "ego").

Peter