Merion Today

« **Reply #175 on:** August 26, 2005, 09:17:02 PM »

TE Paul,
Just for this post, make like no Merion members what-so-ever will be payiing attention to this thread and give us the honest truth.

Pat, If I'm not correct, could TE's change of heart be classified as a flip-flop? If so, I think you were in fact right about him all along!

Tom, Do you actually think the grass around the bunkers; the Hugo "Puffy" Wilson tuck n' roll poof's which on some holes looks as if they're getting ready to collapse if someone should step on the edge of them as well as the shape of those bunker "bowls" are in character with the Merion-East legacy which was left to our generation?

I doubt you will be able to give an honest answer which you know is right. I really do, and don't get me wrong the course is in very decent looking shape with all things considered, but for all of the trouble they had there you would think at least someone would be willing to step up and say "We made some mistakes....."

But that would be dreaming.

« **Reply #176 on:** August 26, 2005, 09:22:15 PM »

Quote

This is also the last thing I'm saying on this thread regarding the changes.

I guess I lied!

« **Reply #177 on:** August 26, 2005, 09:22:31 PM »

Quote from: Tommy_Naccarato on August 26, 2005, 06:24:34 PM

Kyle,
Correct me if I'm wrong here, it's been a great many years since I read Stephen Foster's "The Red Badge of Courage" but wasn't the actual meaning was from the wounds from war?

If so, then given what I've seen in this year--exactly what Superintendents go through day to day, it most definitely the Red Badge of Courage. Most especially when dealing with the politics of the USGA, as well as rambuncticious green committee members.

Also, given the weather of the Philly area the last few months which can be best considered a war with Mother Nature, it certainly has to be considered a war which Matt Schaffer seems to be winning. I'm sure he has the wounds to prove it.

Tommy,

You are right, however, the red badge WAS the wound. So if you are giving the super the red badge of courage, wouldn't you be inflicting the wound? Now, I am sure there are a few you want to do that to, but I don't think it applies here.

As far as I know, every super in the Philly area already has several.

« **Reply #178 on:** August 26, 2005, 09:27:41 PM »

Kyle,
Yes, this would be correct. Infliction wasn't the point of course, it was the right to wear the wound proudly and with honor.....

« **Reply #179 on:** August 26, 2005, 09:35:23 PM »

By the way Tomas,

The way that course looks... he deserves the CMOH.

« **Reply #180 on:** August 26, 2005, 10:03:24 PM »

From post #183;

"Jim Lewis asked;

"We all recall the outrage expressed by many when the bunkers were redone a few years ago. The tv commentators were very complimentary of the "restored" bunkers. Are they off base or was the earlier concerns premature? I haven't read this entire thread, but I didn't see any comment on the bunkers from those at the tournament, or from any of the critics of the re-do.

Jim:

All of that is an interesting story, in my opinion.

Many on this website (and others) were fiercely critical of the bunkers of Merion after their recent redo. Many on this website were fiercely critical of the club, the contractor (Macdonald & Co) and the architect (Fazio).

Was that criticism warranted or premature? Perhaps it was premature simply because the look of the bunkers before they had the time to grass in looked entirely different than they do now. Back then the sodded grass surrounds were short and the bunkers really did have a "puffy and upholstered" look because of that. Do the grass surrounds have that "puffy and upholstered" look now? Not at all. Today the grass surrounds actually look like they could have been that way for a hundred years.

However, and it probably is a large HOWEVER, that ultral rugged grassy look that Merion's bunker have now (which is actually pretty neat looking for bunkers) just happens to look nothing like the grass surrounds that Merion East has ever had in it's 90+ year history.

Were some on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com premature in criticizing the look of the Merion bunkers because they hadn't had the chance to grow in? I think so, and I feel I was one of them. It never really occured to me how rugged and natural their grass surrounds would look in a few years.

But for some who continue to criticize Merion's bunker project I guess that fact does not get around the issue that they look very little like the bunkers of Merion East ever looked before.

Did the bunkers of Merion East ever look better than these bunkers? That's an interesting question. In my opinion, they probablynever did, except during that time in the 1920s and 1930s when they had those lacy grass edges. The way the Merion bunkers used to look in more modern times was really very little different than a lot of bunkers around here at other courses. The only real issue was those old bunkers, even though they looked a good deal like many of the bunkers around here at other courses, were Merion's----and I guess that alone made them very special somehow. Did they need a ton of work before the recent bunker project? They need work desperately before the recent bunker project---particularly sanding and drainage which had basically totally failed.

They most certainly did. The real issue was could they, or should they have just fixed those old grass bunker surrounds vs totally rebuilding and regrassing them?"

TommyN:

If there's anything about that post of mine where you think I'm being disingenous for some reason, I believe you'd be wrong.

Are the bunkers of Merion what they used to be? Of course not. Are they good bunkers now? I believe they are. Were they great bunkers before the lastest bunker project? No they really were not. They were no different in shape and look and playability than many of the bunkers on plenty of other courses around here that needed a good capital restoration or improvement. The only difference with Merion East's old bunkers is they were Merion East's----nothing more!

Should they have done the sanding and drainage only with those old bunkers and restored the look of the surrounds to the way they were in the 1930s? You know I've always felt that way and I still do.

They look nothing now like they ever did but the fact remains the bunkers they have now are good bunkers in many ways---they just happen to be nothing like the look of the evolutionary bunkers that Merion East had before.

« **Reply #181 on:** August 26, 2005, 10:19:03 PM »

"I doubt you will be able to give an honest answer which you know is right. I really do, and don't get me wrong the course is in very decent looking shape with all things considered, but for all of the trouble they had there you would think at least someone would be willing to step up and say "We made some mistakes....."

TommyN:

If someone like you is primarily interested in Merion admitting that some mistakes were made during the bunker restoration I'm sure I could get them to admit that, and have that reported on here. If that's what this is all about on here (Merion admitting some mistake may've been made) then it's pretty disappointing, don't you think?

People like you ought to learn how to get the hell off the "constant complaint train" and start recognizing and admitting what's gone right at Merion East.

« **Reply #182 on:** August 26, 2005, 10:57:12 PM »

I was at the final round of the 1971 US Open and can tell you they had the baskets. I remember walking by the practice putting green and they have little baskets for those holes.

« **Reply #183 on:** August 26, 2005, 11:06:12 PM »

Joel,

Yep, I should have gone back into my notes. As I posted earlier, it was the 1950 Open that used flags...every other major was baskets.

« **Reply #184 on:** August 27, 2005, 03:02:53 AM »

Tom Paul,
I'm not going to take this any further, tarnishing what seems to be a great tournament on one of the great courses in the game.

Another thing is you won't ever see me playing both sides of the fence just to appease a "C" membership at a "A+"course. (You remember that one don't you?)

« **Reply #185 on:** August 27, 2005, 03:42:18 AM »

"Tom Paul,
I'm not going to take this any further, tarnishing what seems to be a great tournament on one of the great courses in the game."

I'd say that's a very level-headed position to take on here.

"Another thing is you won't ever see me playing both sides of the fence just to appease a "C" membership at a "A+"course. (You remember that one don't you?)."

I stand by everything I said in response to Jim Lewis in post #183 and everything I said in post #190. Perhaps you see that as playing both sides of the fence to appease the membership of Merion. I don't. I see it as an opinion that's somewhat different than the one I had about 2-3 years ago. The reason my opinion has changed is because the bunkers of Merion East don't look the same as they did 2-3 years ago just after the bunker project was completed. Back then if I'd known some of the things I know now about bunker grassing and what it can accomplish I probably wouldn't have said some of the things I did then. I believe in giving credit where it's due and I believe in admitting it when I make a mistake. If you think that's playing both sides of the fence to appease the membership of Merion East then I'm sorry. I don't see it that way at all. I do remember when you came to Merion but I can't remember now whether it was before the bunker project, during it or after it. In my opinion, to truly understand this entire issue it does help a lot to have been completely familiar with the bunkers of Merion East before the recent bunker project, during the project and just after it was completed, as well as how they are now. There are approximately three bunkers in the high right side of the Quarry Hole that were done in-house---personally that's the bunker look I'd like to have seen throughout the golf course. Some may not see a difference but if they'd like to know what I mean I'd be glad to explain it.

« **Reply #186 on:** August 27, 2005, 02:31:06 PM »

Tommy:

Although it happens I'm talking about Merion in replying to you, the point I'm about to make is, in fact, a philosophical belief that I have regarding global golf architecture.

To wit: I do not believe the bunkers at Merion are too deep BECAUSE I really like deep greenside bunkers and have never seen one that I thought was "too deep". To me, most of them aren't near deep enough to be appropriately penal (according to my personal preferences, of course).

I think the deepest I ever saw is on Dye's TPC West in Palm Springs (is it #16 - a par 5??). There's probably others that are even more penal than that.

« **Reply #187 on:** August 27, 2005, 02:45:21 PM »

Chip:

There're probably only about a half dozen bunkers at Merion East that're really deep (or with significant height to get out of). I doubt even half the membership could get the ball up to the green from the right greenside bunker on #3 but it's always been like that. In descending order of difficulty from there I'd say front #13, left #7, front #8 and right front #15. Other than that I wouldn't call them that deep unless you're right up near the lip of many of them. Basically Merion East just traded shallower bunkers with hard pan sand surfaces that were hard for many to get out of for that reason for good sand surfaces and more bunker depth or height. Of course the grass surrounds don't look anything like they used to at any time in Merion's history. Actually the grass surrounds look about 500% more rugged than they ever did at any time in Merion's history. BTW, it was a nice surprise to run into you yesterday.

« **Reply #188 on:** August 27, 2005, 08:24:25 PM »

Couple things about the bunkers:

Does Merion still have the "White Faces" which seem to be well-illustrated in Geoff Shackelford's Golden Age book? When were those pics taken? The picture of the "White Faces" on the 12th hole looks ravishing, and nothing like what I see on tv (admittedly not a good source). Not much face now. I should note that there is a pic of the 12 greensite in the Confidential Guide, which looks nothing like the pic in Geoff's book either, so the white running up to the green seems to have been lost a while ago.

Actually, aside from the long grass surrounding the bunkers, the bunkers look (and I say only look) quite similar to the ones done on the North Course at Olympia Fields in shape, size, "cragginess" and people seem to indicate they have similar depth. (That's why I asked if anyone had trouble getting in and out of them. How's the drainage on the really deep ones, anyway?)

« **Reply #189 on:** August 27, 2005, 10:35:40 PM »

Quote from: redanman® (for Q) on August 27, 2005, 11:49:55 AM

Quote from: Craig Disher on August 25, 2005, 10:54:45 PM
I took a few pictures while following Zahringer and Deacon.

How were you able to get your camera (what kind) in? Nice pictures, BTW. ( I followed George at PCC on Monday, seeing how my age-peers are doing!)

I heard informally from someone who should know that it would be ok to use it. I kept the camera (Nikon Coolpix 995) in plain view; no one objected.

« **Reply #190 on:** August 27, 2005, 10:54:44 PM »

Tom Paul:

You're clearly hitting too many greens in regulation at Merion and not visiting enough bunkers as you've not correctly identified their severity of depth.

#8 isn't really all that deep.

#12 (right) is probably as deep as #3.

#10 is at least as deep as #15 and close to being as deep and demanding as #13.

What IS unassailably true is that ALL of the greenside bunkers are noticeably deeper than before. As we have often discussed, I like that.

And as I said to Tommy, I'd like to see that virtually everywhere in the world.

You need to let your precision iron play decay a little bit to get the same true picture as we higher handicap types.

It was good seeing you, as well, although I was sort of expecting that would happen even with your Wild Horse protoge already on his way home.

« **Reply #191 on:** August 27, 2005, 11:03:11 PM »

Finally got over to Merion today.

I'll try to write more tomorrow, but since I've had quite a bit to say about the bunkers in the past, I thought I'd weigh in...

The good news is they look better...a LOT better. As Tom Paul mentioned, they've evolved a bit, but my sense is the real story is that the thick bluegrass has died off quite a bit, particularly on the steeper slopes, and fescue has been "encouraged". In fact, Joe Logan told us the faces had been "done over", purposefully getting rid of the bluegrass. To that I say "Hallelujah". They don't look quite as good as they probably will in a few more years, but they are starting to get the tattered and ragged look again, and I felt encouraged that some wise maintenance practices seem to be making a difference.

One thing they seem to be missing however, which clearly existed in the past, is contour within the bunker itself. As Tommy pointed out, balls seem to gather back into the flat center of the bunkers, which really didn't happen much in the past. The bowls of the bunkers are fairly concave, so they don't have the same "iffiness" that they had before. They are deeper, yes, but they are fairer, and for the better player, they are probably easier than they were in the past.

One last thought before bed...

Anyone who thinks the high scores at Merion this week were due to some type of over the top, draconian setup is simply dead wrong.

It played soft, frankly, and the rough was spotty. I did not see one "pitch out" all day, but instead full shots played from fairly benign lies in the rough. The greens were soft, compared to how I've seen the course in the past. I was really surprised to see how well the course held up.

I found myself thinking that Merion might actually be the toughest course in the country.

« **Reply #192 on:** August 28, 2005, 10:08:18 AM »

Mike Cirba said;

"As Tom Paul mentioned, they've evolved a bit, but my sense is the real story is that the thick bluegrass has died off quite a bit, particularly on the steeper slopes, and fescue has been "encouraged". In fact, Joe Logan told us the faces had been "done over", purposefully getting rid of the bluegrass. To that I say "Hallelujah". They don't look quite as good as they probably will in a few more years, but they are starting to get the tattered and ragged look again, and I felt encouraged that some wise maintenance practices seem to be making a difference."

Mike:

I can certainly check with Matt Shaeffer or Bill Greenwood about that but I doubt the grassing of Merion's bunkers has been "done over" as Joe Logan mentioned and you reported. Those grass surrounds simply needed a few years to establish themselves properly. There's basically no way around that or no short-cut to that. That is the factor virtually no one on this website who originally criticized them understood---and that incuded me. Obviously that's something we all learned and that fact should be admitted.

Initially they did have some trouble establishing the grass surrounds because of ineffective irrigation and southern exposure burn-out but that was corrected a couple of years ago.

The fescue needed the time and the right condition to look like it does now. Obviously noone on this website was willing to give those bunkers that time before criticizing them. The reason for that is most on here obviously didn't understand all that much about bunker construction and agronomy.

You say they're starting to get that tattered and ragged look again? Are you kidding? One can hardly find bunkers anywhere that look as tattered and ragged and naturally grassy as those grass bunker surrounds on Merion right now. And there's no "again" to it at all. As I said to you yesterday at no time in Merion's history did their bunkers have grass surrounds that was that long and tattered and ragged looking. The only time they looked even remotely that "grassy" is during the era from the late 1920s to the 1940s or 1950s when the little "eyebrows" and capes were let grow. After that the grassing of Merion's bunkers was maintained much less "grassy" then it was then or is now. And before this recent project some of the bunkers were very different this way than others.

There's a whole lot more "volume" in the grass surrounds of these present bunkers (both length of grass and volume of sod on their tops and surrounds) and the tops of some of them lap over much more than they used to. This might be a problem and actually already was with one---eg #13. As far as much more grass lapping over, that's obviously got a lot to do with the fact that the sand contours are not so much same as they used to be.

I think the look of the grass bunker surrounds now is extremely ragged and tattered and natural looking, matter of fact far more than it ever was in Merion's history and maybe that's what bothered some on here. As I mentioned to you the look of the bunkers of Merion before the project actually wasn't much different than many courses around here. Only problem with changing that at Merion (versus other courses) is they were the bunkers of the famous Merion East.

« **Reply #193 on:** August 28, 2005, 11:16:10 AM »

I haven't spotted Puffy Wilson yet when the TV camera pans the spectators. Do they allow folks in the gallery to play in the sand after the matches conclude? They say Moe Norman was known to sleep overnight in bunkers when he'd travel to various tournaments. Mike, are you totting a sleeping bag?

« **Reply #194 on:** August 28, 2005, 12:05:33 PM »

RJ:

The spectator atmosphere at the US Amateur at Merion was a pretty relaxed one. Mark Rowlinson (from England) was here for the Wednesday and Thursday rounds and he said he was struck by how cozy Merion East was and how user friendly the place was for the spectators who could basically get right next to any player in any match.

There was minimal roping compared to pro tournaments and other than the sides of a few tees and greens the spectators could roam around the course at will.

There were plenty of rules officials and marshals but sometimes things got pretty funny as spectators (and even a few carts and such) crossed way out in front of players about to hit.

On Firday in the quarterfinals Austin Eaton was standing on the 4th tee about to hit and spectators just kept filtering out of the trees to the left about 100 out and below the tee and walked across the hole. The marshals were screaming and yelling and waving at them as those spectators looked back up the hill and stopped dead like deer in headlights and then fled back into the trees. That took a couple of minutes and then Eaton was just about to pull the trigger and another spectator walked right across the hole causing the marshals to really freak out. Eaton backed off and said rather stentorianly---"Don't worry about it, that's just my father."

Puffy Wilson? He's gone. The bunkers of Merion no longer have that puffy and upholstered look to them. The long and ragged and natural looking grass surrounds have obfuscated all that.

I guess I'd have to say the real irony of those bunker surrounds now compared to how they were before the project is that before the project the club said those surrounds had to be fixed because they were collapsing and falling apart. But the fact is now the sheer volume and weight of those grass surrounds is so excessive compared to the way they used to be that the issue of them slipping and collapsing to some extent will probably always be part and parcel of Merion East's maintenance practices.

« **Reply #195 on:** August 28, 2005, 02:23:57 PM »

Quote from: Mike Cirba on August 27, 2005, 11:03:11 PM

One thing they seem to be missing however, which clearly existed in the past, is contour within the bunker itself.

Would you explain how a bunker can have internal contour despite the impact of wind, rain, water from irrigation heads, golfers, sand pros or hand raking and gravity ?

Could you also explain how they maintained and preserved the internal contour of their bunkers on a consistent basis in the past ?[/color]

As Tommy pointed out, balls seem to gather back into the flat center of the bunkers, which really didn't happen much in the past.

In the past, was gravity suspended at Merion ?[/color]

The bowls of the bunkers are fairly concave, so they don't have the same "iffiness" that they had before.
What "iffiness" ?
Would you describe the "iffiness" that a ball encountered when entering the bunkers on # 13 ?[/color]

They are deeper, yes, but they are fairer, and for the better player, they are probably easier than they were in the past.

Wouldn't deeper bunkers make them inherently more difficult ?

How are they easier for the better player if they're deeper ?

Wouldn't new sand be less compacted, thus making them more inconsistent, fluffier and more difficult when combined with their added depth ?[/color]
One last thought before bed...

Anyone who thinks the high scores at Merion this week were due to some type of over the top, draconian setup is simply dead wrong.

Are you suggesting that the field is very weak ?[/color]

It played soft, frankly, and the rough was spotty. I did not see one "pitch out" all day, but instead full shots played from fairly benign lies in the rough. The greens were soft, compared to how I've seen the course in the past. I was really surprised to see how well the course held up.
How do you explain wedges ricocheting off of greens like they were kevlar ?[/color]

I found myself thinking that Merion might actually be the toughest course in the country.

Well then, based upon the comments that not much is different about the golf course when compared to membership play, perhaps they're hosting the Class C Club Championship and not the US Amateur at Merion this week [/color]

« **Reply #196 on:** August 28, 2005, 03:48:57 PM »

It's amazing to me the way some are describing the way Merion was and is now----particularly the way the bunkers used to play and play now. It sure isn't the course I know and watched US Am competitors on every single day for the last week?

And Pat, what is this description that the greens of Merion were like kevlar with wedges riccohetting off of them? Who said that? They were nothing like that. They were a nice firmness in the middle of the week but even then a well struck wedge from the fairway would take a bounce or two and then check and often back up some. After a light rain Saturday morning they were more receptive than duing mid-week. All last week I must have watched hundreds of shots of all kinds of clubs into those greens on all holes and not one time did I see a ball riccohete off a green like it was kevlar. So don't go trying to claim they were like kevlar because there were a couple of thousand people there and a couple of hundred competitors who will tell you otherwise.

« **Reply #197 on:** August 28, 2005, 04:00:30 PM »

TEPaul,

It must have been trick-photography or a special effects experiment that the networks were trying out.

Kim hit a perfect wedge into # 18 and the ball reacted as if it hit concrete and bounded off of the green.

I'm sure, in reality, that the ball hit, bounced once and then spun back 15 feet.

« **Reply #198 on:** August 28, 2005, 04:25:20 PM »

Pat:

How do you know Kim hit a perfect wedge off #18? Did you hit that wedge for him? And how do you explain the hundreds and hundreds of shots that were played into these greens by competitors all week long? I guess you think the conditions of the greens are like Kevlar on the strength of one shot you saw on TV. It'd be a bit smarter and a whole lot more accurate to go with what thousands of spectators at the golf cousrse and hundreds of competitors at the golf course have seen and done all week long.

At 4:30 eastern time Molinari sure has turned this 36 hole match around (3 down at lunch to 2 up through ten holes). He's also five under par in the afternoon through ten holes!! Can he keep that going and get near a competitive course record 63?

Six under through 11! Jeeesus. This probably shows what happens when it rains and the greens are soft. Merion needs firm greens.

« **Reply #199 on:** August 28, 2005, 04:57:22 PM »

Quote from: TEPaul on August 28, 2005, 04:25:20 PM

Pat:

How do you know Kim hit a perfect wedge off #18?
Because of the distance, swing and ball flight.[/color]

Did you hit that wedge for him?

That would be against the rules.[/color]

And how do you explain the hundreds and hundreds of shots that were played into these greens by competitors all week long?

Those are called approach and recovery shots.
They are necessary if one wants to play a hole.[/color]

I guess you think the conditions of the greens are like Kevlar on the strength of one shot you saw on TV.

I didn't say that I had only seen one shot on TV.
I merely cited one shot that I saw.[/color]

It'd be a bit smarter and a whole lot more accurate to go with what thousands of spectators at the golf cousrse and hundreds of competitors at the golf course have seen and done all week long.

I can only vouch for what I saw.[/color]

At 4:30 eastern time Molinari sure has turned this 36 hole match around (3 down at lunch to 2 up through ten holes). He's also five under par in the afternoon through ten holes!! Can he keep that going and get near a competitive course record 63?

It sure helps when the putts fall.

Both players seem rather poised, considering that it's the final round..[/color]

Six under through 11! Jeeesus. This probably shows what happens when it rains and the greens are soft. Merion needs firm greens.

The better players seem fearless when the greens are receptive to approach shot.[/color]

News:

Tommy_Naccarato

Tommy_Naccarato

Kyle Harris

Tommy_Naccarato

Kyle Harris

TEPaul

TEPaul

Joel_Stewart

wsmorrison

Tommy_Naccarato

TEPaul

ChipOat

TEPaul

Jeff Goldman

Craig Disher

ChipOat

Mike_Cirba

TEPaul

RJ_Daley

TEPaul

Patrick_Mucci

TEPaul

Patrick_Mucci

TEPaul

Patrick_Mucci