[Mike_Cirba]

Last week, prior to The Open, I read an article suggesting that this might be the last Open at Lytham due to the course's modest length which would leave it vulnerable to the long-driving professionals.

Well, the Open came and went, the wind didn't blow, the course was soft the first two rounds, and after all the fuss, everyone now expounds on what a marvelous site Lytham was and how interesting was the challenge it presented.

David Duval played superbly and finished -10.  A number of others finished below par, but I've heard no one exclaim that Lytham didn't present an appropriate challenge.  This is a clear case of showing how frankly silly and arbitrary is the USGA's standard of PAR as the goal for a winning score in the US Open.

A few years back, the USGA asked Nick Price to play at Merion and report back as to whether it would make an adequate US Open test.  He stated in the affirmative, but qualified his statement with the probably accurate assessment that the USGA would have to accept that the winner would likely be six or seven under par.  

Since that time, it seems the USGA has backpedaled.  Recent comments by some USGA officials suggesting that the pros would be hitting wedge into 12 or more holes at Merion are meant to suggest that the course is now somehow extinct.  Why, I read the same thing about Lytham last week, yet the pros would be as careless to hit driver at every hole at Merion as they would have been to do the same at Lytham this past week.  Careless play is careless play.  

Is the mental approach of the two ruling bodies that diametrically opposed in what they want their championship to be?  How much sense does protecting par make when championship sites are extending their yardage to 7,300 yards, par 70?  Does this make for interesting golf like we all witnessed this past week?  

[Fred_C.]

Mike:

As usual, you make far too much sense to be of use to the USGA.

Since money does matter to the USGA, do you think their bottom line would be adversely affected b/c they would have to curtail the number of spectators?

[TEPaul]

Well, exactly, why not Merion indeed?

It seems like almost everyone was thrilled with the Open Championship at Lytham. Has anyone on the regulatory bodies been falling off their chairs and fainting with Duval's score (to par)? I don't think so, thank God, so what's the big deal?

[Mike_Cirba]

Fred,

Great question!  The question I'd ask back to the USGA is, "how much is enough?"

I'm assuming that the past two US Opens at Merion in 1971 and 1981 were profitable affairs.  There is no question that Merion would be able to accommodate less spectators than say, Medinah, or Hazeltine, or Oak Hill, or Atlanta Athletic Club for instance.

However, I thought the primary purpose of the USGA was to advance the game of golf; not add to their already considerable coffers.

In the age of lawsuits, technological threats to the game, focus on length over strategic interest, just think what a wonderful message it would send for the USGA to go back to Merion.  As Tom Paul would say, let's see Tiger and Bobby Jones head to head for history!  Let's see today's pros focus on golfing their ball in ways that they aren't normally used to in the states.  Let's see players think and let's see them sweat.  

Would a return to Merion be a resounding success?  You betcha' it would, on multiple levels!

However...

It seems the USGA has decided that isn't going to happen based on the echoes coming from Far Hills.  Frankly, I think that decision is based on the monetary reasons inherent in your question.  I think it actually has very little to do with the golf course or the quality of the challenge.

If that is so, then I'd suggest the following...

The USGA should contact Merion officials and tell them the REAL reasons that they are no longer under consideration, because it seems the club has been doing a LOT to their course in an effort to placate USGA officials and somehow improve the level of challenge.  At some point, that becomes dangerous and counterproductive to a wonderful golf course.  

C'mon USGA...come clean about Merion!  Is it $$$$ or that the course is somehow not the wonderful challenge that many of us believe it is!

[Brian B]

My question would be do the members at Merion want to host a major event? They already host a great amateur event in the Hugh Wilson. That alone should prove how difficult the course remains today. I'd have to believe that if i were a member there i wouldn't want tens of thousands of people walking around and ruining a course as spectacular as Merion.

[ForkaB]

Mike

Fred C is right.  What got into you to try to talk sense about the USGA and it's policies regarding the Open?  Get with the program, man, and start saving up for tickets to the 2012 extravaganza at Shadow Creek!

[Mike_Cirba]

Brian B;

I can assure you that the membership at Merion is well aware of their place in history and is seeking another US Open.  They want to be a part of future history, not a museum-piece.

Rich;

Shadow Creek?  Are they also planning to build a dome over it prior to the event for a perfectly controlled environment?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Cirba,

It appeared that Lytham, with all its nearly 200 bunkers, wind (high or low velocity) and severe rough is a more difficult playing challenge for the pros.

The logistics of hosting the big show may now be beyond Merion's ability.

It is just nonesensical to take the USGA to task regarding money.

The USOPEN for years, supported every tournament and every project the USGA ever had, and.... many complained that the USGA didn't have deep enough pockets to weather litigation that might be coming their way.

You can't have it both ways.  The USGA can't be a charitable organization when you want it to be, and then turn into a for profit entity when you snap your fingers.  
Make up your minds, what do you want.

What about all the people and corporations that sponsor the USOPEN and other events through the USGA, should they be told to take a hike ?

I think the USGA has done a great job over the years.  I know many people who have served, and are currently serving on the executive committee of the USGA.  They are as dedicated to golf as any of us, and have put their time where their mouth is, by serving the organization, without pay or reimbursement for expenses.  They are intelligent people, and the decisions they make are done after counseling with advisors and consultants.  Are they infallible, no.
Are they trying to do what's best for golf, yes.  If they don't do something, it's usually for a very good reason.

So, stop bitching and moaning about Merion, the Open, and the USGA.  Let's see how the
Amateur fares before jumping to conclusions.

[ForkaB]

Mike

You've got to PROMISE to keep this a secret, but my sources at Far Hills tell me that they are planning to put a dome over the whole of Vegas, with voice recognition entry pass technology to let you into the City and/or Tournament.  The code words are likely to be either"

"IN THE HOLE!!!!!!!", or

"YOU DA MAN!!!!!!" or

[ForkaB]

Mike

You've got to PROMISE to keep this a secret, but my sources at Far Hills tell me that they are planning to put a dome over the whole of Vegas, with voice recognition entry pass technology to let you into the City and/or Tournament.  The code words are likely to be either"

"IN THE HOLE!!!!!!!", or

"YOU DA MAN!!!!!!" or

[ForkaB]

Mike

You've got to PROMISE to keep this a secret, but my sources at Far Hills tell me that they are planning to put a dome over the whole of Vegas, with voice recognition entry pass technology to let spectators into the City and/or Tournament.  The code words are likely to be either"

"IN THE HOLE!!!!!!!", or

"YOU DA MAN!!!!!!" or

"SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!!"

....all of course depending on which ticket package you buy........

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

My points are simply these;

1) The USGA seems to set even par as some type of arbitrary value for the winning score.  I seriously question whether this approach leads to either interesting golf or the best player winning on a regular basis.

2) I love the USGA and have been a member for many years.  I am not asking them to be a charity, and I think it's a far-reaching assumption to claim that a US Open at Merion would not be a profitable affair.  

3) It seems that the USGA has been sending a lot of mixed messages to Merion over the past decade.  If the real issues are money and logistics, then they should make it clear to the membership that Merion is "off the table", and no longer under consideration FOR THOSE reasons.  Instead, what we hear from the USGA are issues related to the challenge of the golf course itself, leading to significant changes to the course in an effort to placate those concerns.  The most recent comments by a major USGA official (can't recall his name at the moment) about Merion having 12+ wedge approaches is just the type of thing I'm talking about.  

I'm not the one feeding this speculation or crying in my beer because the US Open is not returning to Merion.  Instead, I'm asking the simple question of...which is it?  The course or the money?  In light of the wonderful tournament at Lytham this past week, are the USGA's concerns about protecting par in the least bit warranted?

Patrick; I'm sure you would agree that it's patently unfair to keep dangling the promise of another US Open in front of Merion if there has been a clear decision made at Far Hills...for whatever reasons.  Someone should just tell the club the bad news.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

I'm just not as sure as you are with regard to the content of the communications between the USGA and Merion.  

What knowledge do you have that mixed messages are being sent to Merion ?

Secondly, par became a farce, especially in the desert.  Playing conditions were set up to encourage ridiculously low scoring.  Many took offense to this and begged for par to mean something.

I want to see the best players in the world challenged.  I want to see them play holes that aren't pushovers, where par, bogie and higher are a possibility, and where good golf is rewarded with birdies or better on par 5's.

I liked it when the last three guys on the golf course each had a chance to win the tournament, and all they had to do was.....
make a PAR.  But, PAR wasn't such an easy number to post on that last hole, and I think that's the way it should be.

Neither Merion nor the USGA can ignore the money.

First everyone complains that Merion ruined their golf course, and in the next breath, complains that the USOPEN should be returned to that hallowed site.

Let's see how the Amateur works out, then ask questions about the OPEN.

[TEPaul]

The coming amateur is not going to show the USGA, the golfing world or anybody else whether or not the golf course of Merion can hold another Open. It can hold an Open if Merion and the USGA want it to.

This wouldn't be the first time that Merion held an Open or the second or third either! It has held Opens and obviously it can again! And it can hold an Open without having the Pros tear it to pieces against par too. It can also do it even if Merion expands their fairway widths back to the size they were in 1930 and take trees down to the look of 1930 too. And their new bunkers will be just fine too for the pros. They will look and be different but they will work OK. This is what Merion apparently plans to do. Are they doing this with the knowledge or blessing of the USGA? Who knows and who cares?

Face it, some of us who know Merion understand that much of the strategy and intensity of playing Merion in an Open is going to be down at the greens and the green-ends, but is that such a bad thing? The greens and everything about them is one of Merion's best features and one of it's best defenses. I know because I know that golf course and also just witness the last Hugh Wilson. If they'd held the Open under the conditions of the last Hugh Wilson, believe me the pros would have had all they needed to test and challenge them! Obviously they could have done a lot better than some of the Nation's best mid-ams but still that is a fairly good relative measure.

If the USGA doesn't want to go back to Merion for revenue reasons that's a different matter and that's their business but they shouldn't blame it on the golf course and imply that it's obsolete. That's just not true and it's not honest either.

[JamieS]

I knew this thread would exist today, I almost posted a similar one last night. After much thinking and debating,let me play devil's advocate:
Merion is one of my very favorite courses, but I don't think you can compare it to Lytham when it comes to testing the best in the world. The courses are just too different in design. Lytham, although not that long in overall length was a good test, (even with mild greens) due to firm fairways, very severe fairway bunkering, and very high rough. It seemed to play longer than its yardage due to the many irons hit from the tees to avoid the bunkers/rough. It is a true linksland test, even without the usual high winds.

Merion, on the other hand, is even shorter than Lytham, and its defenses would have to be set up to the extreme.(it is a given that you can make the greens lightning fast and hard, and grow the roughs to unspeakable lengths, this would also make the local muni difficult). Merion can be set up extremely firm and fast with mild rough, as it was at this years Hugh Wilson, or it could be set up firm and fast with very severe rough. The one drawback to the "very" firm setup is that Merion doesn't allow for the ground game on the approach shots as well as the links type courses. There are a few holes that allow an approach to land short and run on(#'s 2,5,6,14,17,18), and there are many holes where the ball must be carried to the green/putting surface(#'s: 1,3,4,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,16). If you simply breakdown each hole you can see my point. Also, in comparison, to test the best, I don't think you could get away with setting the green speeds at Merion similar to Lytham(too many short approaches at Merion).

Wedge Fest?
The pros would not have to hit drivers off the tees to be hitting wedges into the greens. The following are all holes that could be a wedge approach, while still hitting an iron of the tee: #'s 1,2,4,7,8,10,11,15, you could also add the par 3 13th.  Even setting the logistical problems aside, I am afraid that with the quality of todays tour players and the technology being what it is today, Merion has seen its last open.

Please don't get me wrong, I would love to see the very best tackle Merion, no matter the relation to Par, but I can see the point of the USGA from a yardgage perspective, and their fear of a shorter course. Forget the USGA $$$'s, that is another discussion.

Anyway...  
I can't wait to see what transpires at the 2005 US Am(Matchplay will be great), it'll be interesting to watch how the course fairs against the very best AM's and the Pro's to be.

[JamieS]

Tom,
I didn't see your post before entering mine. I agree with you that the greens at Merion are its best defense, and yes, at this year's Hugh Wilson they were extremely challenging. The only problem I see is that in order for the course to test the very best players in an Open setting, and not have them shoot lights out, the greens would have to be set up very near the edge of unplayable, very firm and very fast. The one fear I would have, is hearing people say they had to "trick" the course up. You and I both know that Merion is plenty difficult for nearly every player under normal conditions, but the tour players of today can chew up any course under normal conditions.

[GarySmith]

JamieS,

I think you made a good post on why Merion has seen its last U.S. Open.

Mike Cirba,

I think the USGA official you are thinking of is Tom Meeks, the guy primarily responsible for setting up the course. I also think your notion that the USGA is hung up on even par being the winning score is outdated. If you go back to the last 20 or so U.S. Open, very few courses held the winner to even par. In fact, I can only recall Shinnecock in '95, and Olympic in '98 holding the winner to even par. In the last 20 years, there has been quite a few minus 6 scores, at least one minus 7 (Merion '81), and one minus 8 (Medinah), being the winning total. (not to mention Pebble 2000, but I don't really count that one) P. J. Boatright told me back in '90 that under par scores were acceptable to the USGA. By the way, I believe the late Mr. Boatright was quoted as saying Merion would no longer host an Open because of too many irons off the tee.

I also speculate that the USGA is being diplomatic when they say that the problem with Merion is lack of space for tents, etc. I think the Tom Meeks-12 wedge view is really the predominant view and reason for great old Merion being left out as far as the Open is concerned. I'm guessing that the USGA shudders to think what may happen if the course got soaked with rain prior to an Open.

I hope I'm not accused of being myopic, or worse yet, an idiot, but I would like to see Merion host a Senior Open at 6500 yards. A Woman's Open (6200?) might also be very interesting.

[GarySmith]

Now that I think of it, I think the winning score at the last two Baltusrol Opens was minus 8, as well.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jamie/Gary;

I'm gathering from your comments and observations that you believe Lytham's defenses are more stringent than Merion's?  

Perhaps that is so, because I thought Lytham held up pretty well with damp conditions the first two rounds and not much wind to speak of all week.

The high rough played a factor, no doubt, as did the bunkers.  Still, the fairways seemed fairly generous in terms of overall width.  

I just don't see much in terms of differentiation.  Lytham made a wonderful Open site back when Player and Seve, and Lehman won, and still does today.  Merion made a wonderful site when Hogan, Trevino, and Graham won, as well, and I look at total card yardage difference of about 200 yards and don't see the distinction.

[GarySmith]

Mike,

I agree that there was not much wind at Lytham last week, but that was unusual. The wind helps defend courses such as Pebble, Lytham, etc, so their paper yardages can often be thrown out. (granted, wind can also shorten a course, but those downwind shots are often the most uncontrollable)

The 6700 yards at Merion are more often the real deal. It is not even the yardage per se, I just speculate that there is a perception (right or wrong) by the USGA that all 14 clubs of golfers of Open caliber are unlikely to get thoroughly examined at Merion. Of course, nowadays there are probably few courses that would.

 

[JamieS]

Mike,
The card yardage difference is correct about 200-300 yards. The difference I see is that Lytham played longer, due to the players steering around the fairway bunkers. A tour player could go around Merion and hit it in very few fairway bunkers(there are far less to avoid), and the ones they would hit it in are less severe than at Lytham. At Lytham, it is generally a one shot penalty for a ball hit into a fairway bunker, not the case at Merion.
The biggest difference I see, and the USGA sees as well are the number of holes that are able to be hit with an iron tee shot and wedge approach. Anything other than the very firmest of conditions and the tour player will go very low with that many wedge approaches. With the exception of the 18th hole, under firm conditions, the tour player could go around without hitting a driver all day. This is the main reason(outside of logistics) that I think the USGA has ruled out Merion. Does the best test include driving the golf ball, with something other than irons?
The course is a very difficult one for even the best AM's, but for the tour players, I don't know...

[ForkaB]

Forget about Lytham, which was in a class by itself.  Last year's British Open (2000) was a very, very good examination of the best golfers in the world.  The best player prevailed.

How many drivers were hit off the tees at TOC? Were not most of its greens approached with wedges or even putters?  It does not seem to have bothered the R&A.  TOC will retain its place in the Rota.  Why should it bother the USGA?

To me, the best golf shot I saw last week was Duval's 8-iron second shot to the 7th.  He hit dirver off the tee and found position A.  He had only an 8-iron to the "par"-5 hole.  He hit a career shot which landed on the only 2-3 yard square of turf that would allow his ball to end up within 25 feet of the hole.  He two putted for birdie.

Somehow, I can't help thinking that if those who have played Merion think that size really matters, and that Merion's lack of size makes it incapable of challenging the best players in the world, there is something with the bunkering and/or greensites at the course which is significantly mediocre.  If this is so, I am not sad that there may not ever be another Open held there.

Ignorantly iconoclastic, as usual

Rich

[John_Conley]

I don't know what the answer is, but I do think players should be able to hit a few more drivers than they did.  It was great to watch them struggle with the approaches to firm greens, but being able to roll balls 40 and 50 yards when hitting a 3 or 4 iron definitely shortens the course.

We are so wet this summer that I'm probably just jealous.

Lytham and Merion are two venues that probably don't allow today's player enough opportunities to hit driver (Or 3-wood or Driving Iron if preferred) IMO.

Venues that do?  Hazeltine did, ditto Medinah and Oakland Hills.  While these may not be the greatest courses in America, they have served as worthy venues for the U.S. Open.

Interlachen, where I caddied, has hosted a recent U.S. Senior Am and Walker Cup and will soon host the Solheim Cup.  I'm sure you could go to severe conditions - LONG rough, hard greens, par down to 70 from 73, etc... - and host another U.S. Open there... but it does seem easier to do it at Hazeltine and the like.

[JamieS]

Rich,
Firstly...Lytham is a much better overall test than TOC. Secondly...links golf offers many more variables than can be found on most US Open courses.  
Granted the best player won last year at TOC, but how about when Daly won, would you agree that TOC now favors the very long hitter?. As I recall, many drivers were hit at the TOC,(many to clear all of the bunkers that used to be in play), quite a few to drive par 4's. The TOC is the birthplace of golf and therefore will always keep its position in the Open, what happened to some of the other courses that used to host that tourney? TOC is also very different, it can barely be compared to the other links courses on the Open rota, let alone Merion.

Actually the greens at Merion are fantastic and among its best feature, they possess a wide variety of slope and contour, and are very difficult under most conditions. I love Merion and think the course is a great test of golf. I am just trying to give reasons/explanations that I feel the USGA would give from their point of view.  Yes, the course can be set up in such a way, as to test the best on and around the greens, or it could be set up with severe rough, that makes you wedge it back into play. I think the ideal setup for Merion would be very firm fairways and greens and moderate rough, this would allow players to choose to play a shot from the rough to the green, but with very little chance of it holding(due to lack of spin control).
The overall point I was trying to make, is that based on the distance today's ball is traveling, the USGA sees a potential lack of a full test, and the potential for softer conditions would render the course defenseless under the onslaught of wedges.

[ForkaB]

Jamie

Great and thoughtful reply.  I agree with virtually all you say, and if anything in my previous post(s) seemed to indicate otherwise it was because I was unconsciously being imprecise and/or consciously being provocative.

The main point I am struggling towards is to explore the difference between green complexes at links courses and those at parkland courses.  To me, Lytham showed (epitomized by the pin position on the 7th I mentioned above) how you can make a course that is "short" for today's players and today's technology still challenging for anyone--even under very benign weather conditions.

Is it impossible to set up a course like Merion to offer the same sort of risk/reward challenges that were offerred by Lytham?  Is it not possible to prepare the green surrounds so that bold shots will be rewarded if executed correctly, but similar shots which are hit poorly will roll into difficult, but potentially recoverable lies?

And, isn't Olympic, when set up for US Open conditions, just a Lytham without fairway bunkers?  Like Lytham, you must drive the ball almost perfectly accurately, if you use driver, but there are options, with shorter clubs off the tee, that leave commensurately harder second shots to the green.

This is the real problem with TOC these days--you can 3-iron/9-iron it to death, if you have the skill and mental toughness to do so.  If that is what Merion would be reduced to in a US Open, so be it, and let's enjoy the other great US venues that are available.  If not, let's use our bully pulpit to try to get a Lytham-like Open to Merion in the near future.

Cheers

Rich

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()