Not just any old Shinnecock thread!

[A_Clay_Man]

Did anyone see Shagecki's shot toady on 11?

The camera followed it with an etreme close-up as it spun-off and left the putting surface, made it past the collar, accelerated thru the primary and into the bunker. I'd swear Tim burton was behind the lens. Very cool!

[Matt_Ward]

Dan:

The greatness of the 10th hole needs to be seen because TV has a tendency to flatten out things. It is without question one of the finest mid-length par-4's we have in the States.

And better yet -- the following par-3 11th is simply a delicious hole. What a green and bunker complex protecting it.

They expect wind to pick up out of the Northwest tomorrow so that may have an impact on things.

Clearly the stretch of holes from #9 through #11 is an architectural combo that any afficinado should really see in person to understand the greatness they collectively present.

[Rick Shefchik]

I invite you, gentlemen (and, of course, ladies), to post here, as the tournament progresses, specific *moments* when Shinnecock's architectural genius (apparently undisputed here, or anywhere) reveals itself and, in so doing, creates unusually interesting golf competition.

I don't know if it's genius or just excellent maintenance, but Danny Chopra nearly drove the first green Saturday, and walked away with a par when his tiny little chip shot rolled up close to the hole, turned right and rolled back off the green.

Green speeds have definitely increased as of Saturday, and I'd say Shinnecock is going to defend itself quite successfully today, despite measuring less than 7,000 yards.

[TEPaul]

For the touring pros what I'm watching today I'd consider the course's absolutely "ideal maintenance meld"---just couldn't get any better than this with the exception of a bit stronger wind from the N or NE!

I even like the interesting par skewing on the front nine with #5 definitely playing like a long par 4 and #7 (which as expected is playing really one dimensionally weird) being a little short par 4+. (Maruyama) being the last player today apparently was the only one to hit the green in regulation.

OOUUCH! Maruyama just putting it off the green! That'll be the story tonight boys----#7 and the USGA is going to get fried for this hole today!! But hey, those guys still know they just have to try to get their 4 somehow and run to the 8th tee.

DOUBLE OOUCH. Phil had about a ten foot par putt and then about a 20 foot bogie putt. As expected this hole will be the story-line. It had to be right on the edge most of the day and with the wind and sun went over it for the last groups.

This is a course and set-up that's perfect for a national Open--it requires really well thought-out shots and even more mental steel and resilience if they don't work out.

I just love to see the imagination that Shinnecock is requiring from the players today!

[ForkaB]

Final Score:

Grinding 1, Imagination 0.

Shinnethingy has architecture, but it really didn't show it very well this week.  I never thought I would say this, but I'll take Pebble Beach ahead of it for an Open, any day.

[A_Clay_Man]

Rihc- Are you just baiting TP?

Everything was perfect. Right down to the decision, the winner made, way back on the front nine to NOT play to the green. Rather he chose a creative approach and chipped it forty yards for position. That was the hope of one tom paul and it did show, not only the difficulty when nastiness is placed in the line but also how good that Retief guy, and the Flynn guy, really is.

Did you see VeeJay below  #7. (Even the announcers forgot about it) He was the only one I saw, putt it, way up to the right, and he just missed the bird.

There was plenty of creativity, so much more than the usual fare presented.

 I just didn't expect most of it out of Jeff Maggert.

[TEPaul]

"Rihc- Are you just baiting TP?"

Adam:

I certainly hope that's what he's trying to do, otherwise he's definitely showing himself to be the complete dunce on real golf and real architecture I've suspected him to be for the last five or so years!

[JohnV]

Final Score:

Grinding 1, Imagination 0.

Shinnethingy has architecture, but it really didn't show it very well this week.  I never thought I would say this, but I'll take Pebble Beach ahead of it for an Open, any day.

Rihc, you must be kidding.  The imagination required to get the ball close from any of those lies around the greens was immense.  Much better than the old days when there was 6 inch rough around the greens and they just chopped it out.  How many different ways did guys try to get it close on 10 on the second shot?  How many different clubs did players take off tees on par 4s?  I saw drivers, three-woods, utility clubs, irons.  Players had to think and determine the best way for them to try to make a par: from the tee, from the fairway and around the greens.  How can you call the third shot that Mickelson played on 16 just grinding and not imagination?

[RJ_Daley]

One thing only the luckiest of GCA posters will get to see, is how the course is brought back to the members course in the coming weeks.  I say the true mark of the grandness of this golf course architecture will be in the reversion back to normally experienced conditions, leaving still one of the most wonderful courses anywhere.  I can't imagine that the 7th or 11th will be anything more than exciting and challenging without being thought of as "over the top" when the green speeds revert back to 9.5-10.  When the fairways are widened back about 5-8 yards on each side, this will be a wonderful course for many levels of golfers.  JOhnny MIller is right, this course is a jewel.  

[Dan Kelly]

I second, third, or fourth those who think Rihc must be
either joking or daft!

Explain thyself, Goodale! What did you mean:
It has architecture, but didn't show it off this week?

One question for the group, especially those who've played
Shinnecock: Does anyone ever putt up the hill on 10?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

I'm surprised.

I think playing Shinnecock requires more imagination then Pebble Beach, especially under the conditions today and during the previous days.

I don't think that the competitors took the time to carefully analyze how to play Shinnecock.  It wasn't just another Tour stop.

Just look at the trajectory of the short approach shots to front pin positions, they didn't have a clue, prefering to get them airborne rather then low so that they could run up to the front pins.

Look at all the chilli dips.
Look at all the wedges that landed short and came back to the players.
Look at the absence of 4, 6, and 8 iron bumps and run-ups.
The players were unfamiliar, uncertain and intimidated by Shinnecock.

This was more like a British Open course then the typical US Open course, and they weren't prepared for it.

I would venture a guess that one of the reasons Mickelson did so well is that he arrived at Shinnecock about a week early, and spent a good deal of his time playing and practicing shots that he would encounter.

Most other competitors couldn't CRAM in time for the ULTIMATE TEST.

The other unusual thing about Shinnecock is that the wind was from the north a good deal of the time, instead of the prevailing Southwest, and I think that added to the uncertainty of playing the golf course.

Option wise, I think Shinnecock presents far more choices, on almost every shot.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Pay him no mind Pat. Rich is trying to be..............Rich.

[A_Clay_Man]

Low Am... Guy from NM.  
If the kid golfs in the winter here, Shinney was soft compared to what we get in the winter months.

It had to be a major factor in his performance, compared to all those tour guys.

[TEPaul]

For my part, I think 2004 Open Sunday at Shinnecock was one of the very most interesting days of high level golf I ever saw. It wasn't always pretty, it sure as hell wasn't boring and I sure did learn a lot! Congratulations Retief Goosen and congratulations Mark Michaud!

[ForkaB]

I agree with everybody (even Tom Paul) that Sunday's rounds was as entertaining golf as I've seen for a long time (maybe even since the 2004 Masters....).  I also fully agree with Dan Kelly's description of it as "Extreme Golf."  That's what makes the US Open fun (sometimes)--watching the best players in the world make fools of themselves (or occasionally, heroes).  All credit to Retief and Phil for some riveting theatre.  But......

...I'll stand by my initial reflection that it was grinding and NOT strategy that won the day.  The only shots I saw which entailed any significant strategy were Phil's attempt to run it up onto 10 and his 3rd shot into the backstop on 16.  Unlike Pat, I don't consider the decision as to whether or not to hit 1-iron or utility club to "position A" as strategy.  Nor do I chastise the players for NOT hitting more low percentage shots (i.e. those punch 4-irons that we old men who forgot how good those guys are sometimes use on firm and fast courses to avoid embarrassment).  Strategy is.......och, I won't spoil it for Pat and Tom and Tommy and others.  I'll let them learn about strategy all by themselves, when they are ready for it.

Others on other threads have it right.  Shinnecock is a very great golf course that was humbled on Sunday not by the greatest golfers in the world, but by the amateurs who set the course up for an exercise in grinding and attrition rather than an examination one's ability to play strategic golf.  IMHO, of course.

[TEPaul]

"Strategy is.......och, I won't spoil it for Pat and Tom and Tommy and others.  I'll let them learn about strategy all by themselves, when they are ready for it."

Richard:

You wouldn't recognize strategy at Shinnecock yesterday if it spit in your eye and bit you on the nose!    

[ForkaB]

Go back to sleep, Tom.  You are obviously hallucinating.

[TEPaul]

Good idea Rich--I'm going to do exactly that as reading your posts on the Open at Shinnecock is a complete waste of time. No strategy, you say, only a grind? How old are you my boy? Did no one ever tell you the United States Open has always been a grind--it supposed to be---that's what makes an Open Champion---intelligent thought, strategy, excellent shot-making, great recoverry. chipping and putting, perserverace and mental toughness! Congratulations, by the way, you've finally taken your rightful place atop the trash-heap of negativism.

[ForkaB]

Sweet dreams, Tom...............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

OK, now that TEP is asleep, does anybody else out there (Tommy N.?) agree with me on the analogy between a US Open set-up and the actions of the French general staff in WWI (as portrayed in Kubrick's "Paths of Glory")?

Yes, it is "strategy" to send young soldiers out of the trenches and over the barbed wire to capture an "Anthill" and see how many, if any, come back alive; and depicting this act can be great theatre and possibly high art; but, is the act itself the noblest expression of the art of strategy?  I think not.

Let me add, since I had to edit a tyop or two above......

To take the WWI anaolgy a bit further, wasn't the Shinnecock 2004 Open am eye-opening example of a technological stalemate between the attackers and defenders of "par?"  One one side you have the players and their equipment, who have been developed into finely tuned attacking machines.  On the other side you have the preparers of the course--USGA offcials and local groundstaff--who take the architecture they have been given (by Flynn or whomever) and strive to make it as impregnable to the players as possible.  Because of technological advances in agronomy (as well as new "doctrine", i.e. the obsession with speed) the defenders have reached a point where they can frustrate any attacker, if they wish to, by making any course virtually unplayable.  And, in doing so, don't they vitiate most if not all of the strategic options available to the player/attacker?

I think yes, and this is why I think that this year's US Open was not any sort of celebration of golfing strategy.  Rather, it was a paean to anti-strategy, much like WWI, and I, for one, would rather watch man using his brain to soar above nature than being forced to crawl in the mud (sic) and die in the trenches.  But, to each his (or her) own.......

[Brian Phillips]

Tom,

I was thinking as I went to bed last night about the intelligence thing.  I began to wonder why our European players have not come close recently to winning and the only one to really have come close are players like Montgomorie and Faldo both of whom are pretty smart cookies.  However, the generation that came after them like Westwood, Clarke and Garcia just don't seem to get it when it comes to the US Open...they just seem a bit lost when the going gets tough.

Hopefully the latest generation like Rose, Casey and Donald seemed to be a little more switched on and with experience and decent caddies one of them could win it.

I have to agree with Rich but I didn't really see that much strategy out on the course yesterday, more of a keep out the shit sort of strategy but not really much else.

From what I have seen of Pebble and of Shinnecock on tv I don't know how Rich can even compare the two...I think he is pulling you leg...

Brian

[ForkaB]

Brian, et. al.

I am not trying to pull anybody's leg (particularly TEP's, as his have been pulled so many times in his brief visits to the UK that he is starting to walk funny..... )

From my one game at SH, I think it is one of the finest golf courses in the world.  For players of your and my and Tom Paul and Pat Mucci's abilities (i.e. virtually everybody but the top 1000 or so players in the world) it is full of stratgic options and a joy to play.  For the big boys, however, I think that the past 4 days showed that it could not give them a sufficient test, until the course set-uppers decided to go to the edge of goofy golf.

I have played PB many times, and while I think it is great too, I also think that it offers fewer strategic otpions to the non-top-1000 players in the world than does SH, and fewer tests of OUR skills.  However, for the top-1000, I think it offers MORE options and is a greater test of THEIR skills, and without the USGA having to trick the course up.  If the US Open is designed to identify the greatest gofler in the world, I think, now, that PB does it better than SH.

That's all I'm trying to say.

[Brian Phillips]

Rich,

You know which course has the highest final round average since the war in the US Open....?

Pebble Beach

Brian

[ForkaB]

Yes, Brian, but it was Mother Nature and not Mother Meeks who made it that way........

[A_Clay_Man]

SHiv- Disagree. Just because the definition of a good shot was moved, from pinseeking, to short, or to some other teeny tinny section of the canvas, doesn't make it bad. It is just different! Different than what most of 'these guys' are used to, but not an unfair question to ask, the best of the best with superior knowledge, and, technology of implements. Why play to thier game?

Explain the top Am's showing?

The most aware golfer won! and the audiences response to him, was embarassing, to me.

MAybe they should Tag this one as "The subjective open"

[A_Clay_Man]

DAve- Balderdash is your exaggerations I don't recall the hole numbers, but when he elected to chip to the front of the green, rather than gong for the green, was the exact scenario Tom Paul predicted would "open" peoples eyes. When he said that, I agreed with how significant it would be, but not with how it would open peoples eyes. As you have evidenced. Later, after one of his  misses, he made the choice to fly the bunker and attack the green. Both decisions were rewarded with par. Is that golf? Somedays you hit like shit and score reasonably well. Others, you strike it great, and can't score. If anything this open exmplified all the things Behr was trying to write about. But since he didn't use really small words, nobody understood him.