The 87th PGA Championship / Baltusrol

« **Reply #25 on:** August 12, 2005, 01:09:17 AM »

Quote from: James Bennett on August 11, 2005, 07:48:03 PM

If there is a really difficult month of summer to deal with agronomically, why schedule events at that time in that area then.

Summer usually brings good weather, but, Mother Nature doesn't operate on a fixed schedule.
You can have a great June, July and August, or you can have a horrible June, July or August.[/color]

I recognise that this is probably a pipe dream, and that TV time slots are the critical issue. The Masters is a one course major, so they can pick their April time of year that suits them (and their blooming flowers),

whereas the US Open and US PGA could be played nearly anywhere in the US in July and in August,

That's not true.

They can't be played in southern climates for a variety of reasons.[/color]

so I assume the window for TV is selected based on the shorter golf season of the NE.

No, the US Open is scheduled every June, with the last round on Father's Day.

Since the British Open is in July, the last Major of the year is scheduled in August.

In addition, conditions are usually great for golf in the NE at that time of year.[/color]

I accept that the money issue and TV timeslots are more important than the impact of presenting a course at its highest level in difficult weather.

They aren't more important, but, they're factored into the equation.

What courses in the NE haven't been in great shape for a US Open or PGA in the last ten years ?[/color]

« **Reply #26 on:** August 12, 2005, 02:11:42 AM »

Patrick

Firstly, I concur with your comments. Thanks for the weather info - I have been trying to understand how long the difficult season is in parts of the US eg the NE. I live in an area that has a dry summer (LA come San Diego style weather) so understanding the difficulties of humid summers does not come naturally. Also, I note the timing of Fathers day in the US. I now recall hearing that on this website earlier. Fathers day down under is early September.

My comment re the US Open or US PGA locations in summer was intended to convey that, given the current schedule and the rotation of courses, the event can be scheduled to be played across a wide cross-section of America, which produces a variety of weather outcomes depending on the region of the course chosen and that year's weather. My comment could have been worded better. I am aware (from this web-site) of nature's more extreme problems with scheduling such events in the south.

I am not aware of any particular course in the NE of the USA that hasn't been properly presented for a past US Open or PGA because of the weather. The talk on this site implied that many courses in this area were having difficulty this year, and that Baltusrol was being managed to get it to desired playing conditions by the first day of play.

The underlying point of my posts, based on my limited experience of other weather extremes (summer droughts) is that a careful choice has to be made over the grass types and irrigation practices used to provide the best surfaces for play over a year. This can involve compromises to playing conditions at some stages of the year (I am lucky to be able to play year-round). It may be that play at a certain time of year has a greater priority, and so changes may be made to turf/irrigation for that purpose. By way of example, I assume that one of the reasons that Kingston Heath undertook a recent A1 greens upgrade (from Egmont bent) was to provide a greater tolerance to extreme heat/drought, particularly as this weather extreme can occur when a major championship is conducted. This change has not compromised playability at other times of the year.

« **Reply #27 on:** August 12, 2005, 09:11:29 AM »

Sean O'Hair is off to a good start today! This kid is impressive. Is he not the best young talent out there?

He is keeping a diary on www.pgatour.com....he said the greens were slow yesterday and he thought the practice green was a good foot and a half faster than the greens on the course! That would not be a good thing...interesting.

« **Reply #28 on:** August 12, 2005, 11:00:08 AM »

Muni:

You are 100% on target. Baltusrol was prepared with plenty of water and cultivation of the rough. Not only did the club plant sod Kentucky Bluegrass strips alongside each hole -- but the narrowing in of the fairway at certain "choke" points in combination with the sheer density of the rough makes driving the ball that more important.

I do agree with Brad Klein's assessment of Baltusrol in GolfWeek. The Tillie handiwork is really obscured by all the makeover items that have been done collectively over the course of time.

Baltusrol is in the manner of a muscularized steroid produced layout. It is not architecturally compelling but it is doing what a major championship is supposed to do -- single out the players who are playing best and eliminate those who are not.

« **Reply #29 on:** August 12, 2005, 12:17:28 PM »

Baltusrol is doing an excellent job of identifying the best golfer. The leader board at this point is very strong even absent Tiger. Scores are low. Goes to show that length and rough are just not factors. Only wind and incredibly fast and/or firm undulating greens protect against par.

« **Reply #30 on:** August 13, 2005, 09:44:15 AM »

Mark has been syringing the greens to keep them alive. This as everyone knows, is very different than what was done during the U.S. Open. There they were "watering" the #7 green to soften it up. At Baltusrol, they are mearly cooling down the temperature of the grass to keep it from dying. Very little water is applied, just enough to drop the temperature of the blades and I suspect they will be doing it again today.

By the way, Emil Loeffler (of Oakmont) was one of the first superintendents to do this syringing. He actually developed a special hose that he claimed helped "emulate" falling rain. Along with heavy rollers, it was one of his secrets to keeps his greens alive and very very fast!

Mark

« **Reply #31 on:** August 13, 2005, 11:15:10 AM »

Well, well, well...Tiger is playing some golf today. He still has the 17th and 18th to play and the way he talks they are both excellent opportunites for birdies and possibly an eagle.

So, maybe he can get to -2 or -3 for the tourney.

Do you think Phil is due to come back to the field? Fire up a 73 or something?

This tourney might still have some life in it!

« **Reply #32 on:** August 13, 2005, 11:41:21 AM »

Quote from: Craig Sweet on August 13, 2005, 11:15:10 AM

Well, well, well...Tiger is playing some golf today. He still has the 17th and 18th to play and the way he talks they are both excellent opportunites for birdies and possibly an eagle.

So, maybe he can get to -2 or -3 for the tourney.

Do you think Phil is due to come back to the field? Fire up a 73 or something?

This tourney might still have some life in it!

IMO, if Phil shoots the last two rounds under par, the tournament is over. Tiger would have to fire two 63´s to even have a prayer of catching him. The whole field needs Phil to backtrack a bit.

« **Reply #33 on:** August 13, 2005, 12:09:47 PM »

ZZZZZ par,par finish for el Tigre. Phil showed up 5 hours early in that heat! I guess he really wants this one.

But, Kelly was probably cooling off this morning with a morning skate with the NJ Devils. Go you cheezehead, puck slapping, Badger!

« **Reply #34 on:** August 14, 2005, 08:56:27 PM »

Jim Nugent.

Had a weather interuption not stopped the tournament,
- 2 might have been in a playoff.

If it rains tonight, the golf course will be softer, and the greens more receptive to approach and recovery shots.

It looked like everyone was dropping like flies and a wire finish.

If Tiger hadn't three putted # 18 yesterday with his aggressive eagle putt, - 3 in the clubhouse just might have been the winner.

« **Reply #35 on:** August 14, 2005, 10:04:03 PM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on August 14, 2005, 08:56:27 PM

Jim Nugent.

Had a weather interuption not stopped the tournament,
- 2 might have been in a playoff.

If it rains tonight, the golf course will be softer, and the greens more receptive to approach and recovery shots.

It looked like everyone was dropping like flies and a wire finish.

If Tiger hadn't three putted # 18 yesterday with his aggressive eagle putt, - 3 in the clubhouse just might have been the winner.

You´re right, Patrick, and actually -2 could still win though I would only put money on it if I got around 100 to 1 odds. As it turned out Phil didn´t have to shoot under par to put away the tournament the past two rounds: two over would have done the trick and maybe even four. Eager to see what happens tomorrow.

« **Reply #36 on:** August 14, 2005, 10:12:12 PM »

Jim,

At 10:00 pm, It's lightening, thundering and raining pretty good.

The forecast for tomorrow is showers in the morning with Isolated thunder storms in the afternoon.

I hope it breaks for the tournament.

« **Reply #37 on:** August 14, 2005, 10:56:21 PM »

Do you guys think the greenside rough surrounding the 17th and 18th makes the holes play easier or harder? The players seem to be able to just smash it at the greens from 250+ and if it misses the green or runs through its still finishing close to the putting surface for a lot of simple up and downs.

« **Reply #38 on:** August 15, 2005, 11:51:16 AM »

Shane:

You need to come to Baltusrol and see how "simple" the up and downs you mentioned. They are far from that and I personally witnessed many of them during the week.

« **Reply #39 on:** August 15, 2005, 12:05:46 PM »

Jonathan,

You are no longer a prophet.

« **Reply #40 on:** August 15, 2005, 05:10:53 PM »

Quote from: Tony_Chapman on August 09, 2005, 04:53:28 PM

Matt - I was just on the PGA website and was looking at the second hole. Can guys just drive it over the cross bunkers now and chip it on?

It appears it may be like a 270 yard carry over the bunkers? Am I close?

I spent a fair amount of time on that hole yesterday. I probably watched 8 of the final groups play that hole, and no one carried the bunkers. It's an uphill shot to reach them.

« **Reply #41 on:** August 15, 2005, 05:38:17 PM »

What does 240 in additional yardage get one as it relates to Baltusrol? Comparison from the 1993 US Open (7152 yards).

1993 Average Rank 2005 Average Rank
470 4.262 2 478 4.268 3
381 4.116 10 379 4.026 16
466 4.235 5 503 4.406 2
194 3.069 14 194 3.087 14
413 4.213 6 423 4.157 9
470 4.260 4 482 4.243 4
470 4.309 1 505 4.479 1
374 4.047 15 380 4.062 14
205 3.145 8 212 3.153 10
454 4.127 9 460 4.206 5
428 4.262 2 440 4.128 12
193 3.081 11 218 3.147 11
393 4.071 13 424 4.168 8
423 3.991 16 430 3.964 17
430 4.178 7 430 4.194 7
216 3.073 12 230 3.202 6
630 4.977 17 650 5.038 15
542 4.684 18 554 4.526 18
7152 72.100 7392 72.454
+0.354

A crude analysis shows that 240 yards added in 12 years allowed Baltusrol to gain +0.354 shots over the course average for the 1993 US Open.

Some other interesting data tidbits:
Hole 1--45 birdies in 1993; 46 in 2005;
Hole 2--45 birdies in 1993; 73 in 2005;
Hole 3--42 birdies in 1993; 28 in 2005; !
Hole 4--61 birdies in 1993, 65 in 2005;
Hole 5--39 birdies in 1993; 57 in 2005;
Hole 6--34 birdies in 1993; 40 in 2005;
Hole 7--37 birdies in 1993; 34 in 2005: !
Hole 8--64 birdies in 1993; 72 in 2005;
Hole 9--47 birdies in 1993; 51 in 2005;
Hole 10--50 birdies in 1993; 49 in 2005; !
Hole 11--39 birdies in 1993; 65 in 2005;
Hole 12--2 holes in one, 49 birdies; 45 birdies; !
Hole 13--71 birdies in 1993; 1 eagle, 56 birdies in 2005; !
Hole 14--73 birdies in 1993; 91 birdies in 2005;
Hole 15--45 birdies in 1993; 56 birdies in 2005;
Hole 16--53 birdies in 1993; 32 birdies in 2005; !
Hole 17--88 birdies in 1993; 1 eagle, 87 birdies in 2005;
Hole 18--9 eagles, 186 birdies in 1993; 20 eagles, 223 birdies in 2005; !!

The length did matter on holes 3 and 7, the 500+ yard par 4s.

The length on the par 3s on the back did make a bit of difference.

Clearly, the 18th as a par 5 is now lacking--the 15th at Bethpage, as a par 4, was much tougher, e.g.

My thought is the 240 yards plus the narrower fairways plus the sprinklers in the rough lines ensured a status quo result from 12 years ago. 10 were under par in both 1993 and 2005.

« **Reply #42 on:** August 15, 2005, 06:03:45 PM »

As it played out, I don't think the 18th was lacking as a par 5 in this year's PGA. If it were a cinch birdie hole, Tiger would be in possession of the Wannamker Cup right now. He played the hole in one under for the four days.

Because it was shorter than 17, players seemed to feel it was a must-birdie hole, and that tends to create some poor swings. On the other hand, it certainly provided the potential for a last-hole birdie that might win the tournament -- and that's what happened.

« **Reply #43 on:** August 15, 2005, 06:07:49 PM »

looked like Tiger almost hit it in the water off the 18th tee on Sunday

« **Reply #44 on:** August 15, 2005, 06:15:36 PM »

Guys it's important to realize how wind conditions changed from Sunday to Monday even for just the few holes played today.

You could see this with how much longer the 18th played for the contending groups on Monday as opposed to what the hole played like on the day prior. Players needed fairway metals to get home as opposed to mid-iron shots.

Ditto the 17th. On Monday it played as a full three-shot hole.

Baltusrol presented both par-5's for the bulk of the event as downwind situations. The option to go for the target was helped immensely by the wind and dry fairway conditions. It would be most interesting to see how a different wind pattern would have made for the event.

« **Reply #45 on:** August 16, 2005, 06:56:35 AM »

Mickey - right you are! My prediction that Woods would not be there was a complete whiff. It's pretty amazing testimony to Tiger's ability - make exactly the cut line then go on to almost win it. He seems to be doing this on occasion, It's like he gets pleasure spotting the field 20 lengths just so he can see if he can catch em at the finish line.

JC

« **Reply #46 on:** August 16, 2005, 08:13:07 AM »

Quote from: Jonathan on August 16, 2005, 06:56:35 AM

Mickey - right you are! My prediction that Woods would not be there was a complete whiff. It's pretty amazing testimony to Tiger's ability - make exactly the cut line then go on to almost win it. He seems to be doing this on occasion, It's like he gets pleasure spotting the field 20 lengths just so he can see if he can catch em at the finish line.

JC

Tiger does not yet quite have his game together. For example, I just looked at the U.S. Open stats. Tiger led the field in GIR, with 54. 5 more than second best. But he was 2nd to last in putting, with 128. (Vijay was last with 129.) Campbell hit 41 greens but took 113 putts.

In the PGA, Tiger threw away lots of strokes, especially on the par fives, opened with the 75. Yet as you point out, still nearly won.

If Woods gets his game together, if he stops wasting so many shots, he is going to steamroll over the tour.

« **Reply #47 on:** August 17, 2005, 09:19:29 AM »

The word I hear is that some USGA people will be meeting with folks at Baltusrol rather soon. Of course -- it could be nothing more than very preliminary discussions.

Frankly, if I was Baltusrol I would go with the PGA -- the openings are much more realistic and the good will the PGA generated was substanial.

We shall see ...

P.S. Hard to see how four (4) locations -- BB, WF, SH and Baltusrol all compete for an Open when other sections of the country rarely see the event outside of the Northeast quadrant.

« **Reply #48 on:** August 17, 2005, 10:53:22 AM »

a good point, your last one Matt...The USGA , by not showcasing around the Open around the country more, wastes a golden opportunity to grow the game

« **Reply #49 on:** August 17, 2005, 12:24:51 PM »

Matt Ward,

Where do you suggest that the USGA take the OPEN in Mid-June ?

News:

Patrick_Mucci

James Bennett

Craig Sweet

Matt_Ward

Cliff Hamm

Mark_Fine

Craig Sweet

Jim Nugent

RJ_Daley

Patrick_Mucci

Jim Nugent

Patrick_Mucci

Shane Gurnett

Matt_Ward

Mickey Boland

JeffTodd

peter_mcknight

Rick Shefchik

PThomas

Matt_Ward

Jonathan Cummings

Jim Nugent

Matt_Ward

PThomas

Patrick_Mucci