US Amateur at Olympic ...

[Mike Benham]

The US Amateur at Olympic is less then 6 weeks away.

And an interesting quote in this article:  

"But topic A as the event approaches: What about the 18th green?

Players in the amateur will find a much tamer surface than the one Open contestants confronted nine years ago. Olympic Club officials, responding to criticism from the USGA, tried to create more potential "hole locations" on No. 18, to prevent another Stewart-like furor -- so they reshaped the green in 2000, raising the front (which reduced the slope) and widening the back."


SF Chronicle article - US Amateur at Olympic

[Sean Leary]

Mike,

How much different does it play?  Is it a really noticiable difference or minor?

[Evan_Green]

There is quite a difference on #18. Its no longer as fearsome a hole as before...particularly from above the hole.

But its still a fairly small target and you can definately make a bogey if you find the greenside bunkers because you have such little green to work with...

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Yes it is different but when playing firm and quick that green will still put a chill in you if above the hole.

[Joel_Stewart]

It should be noted that the work done on #18 was done under the old management and long gone superintendent John Fleming.  It was done in haste but I didn't see anyone complain during the US Junior Amateur two years ago.  They can speed the green up as much as anyone wants, such as this years Invitational.  I'm sure it will be quick for this years Amateur.

The 18th green is the least of our worries at Olympic!  

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

It should be noted that the work done on #18 was done under the old management and long gone superintendent John Fleming.  It was done in haste but I didn't see anyone complain during the US Junior Amateur two years ago.  They can speed the green up as much as anyone wants, such as this years Invitational.  I'm sure it will be quick for this years Amateur.

The 18th green is the least of our worries at Olympic!  

What is the most?  #2?  #3?  

[Matt_Cohn]

I heard from a 5 handicapper today who shot a 92 on the Lake a few days ago and said it was virtually impossible. But then I asked him about the rough around the bunkers, and he held his fingers about 3 1/2" apart. That didn't seem right.

[Joel_Stewart]

Its possible the rough around the bunkers is that length since its all brand new sod.  I haven't been out in about 2 weeks and didn't think it was that hard although depending on the tees you buddy played and the pin placements it can play pretty tough.  I'll assume he played bad, really bad for a 5 to shoot 91?

[Matt_Cohn]

Hmm. Wasn't a buddy, just a random guy I overheard. Perhaps he just thinks he's a 5, but a tournament-ready golf course proved otherwise!

[wsmorrison]

Forget for the moment how the revised 18th plays/would play for the top amateurs, what does the membership think about the changes?  They play it for a lifetime and not for a week.  I know the tendency for better players is to embrace a change that helps them score more consistently.  For you course raters (not you rank rankers ) Does the course rating change very much when a difficult green is softened?  How much effect might there be if two severely sloped greens are softened considerably on a 6500 yard par 70 golf course with a rating of 73 and a slope of 144?  

[Tom Huckaby]

Wayne:

I am a course rater.  I really am.  I don't play one on TV and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.  That being said, I greatly defer to John VanderBorght, who is one of the nations experts at this and can likely give you exact numbers right off the top of his head to exactly answer your question... But I'll take a stab.  The short answer is:  a little, but not a whole heck of a lot.

Answering in course rater lingo, in the case of 18, if there is no tier any more and you would no longer call it highly contoured, then that will knock it down one category under green surface, and change the target rating to omit a T notation and thus also knock down Target.. which will have a cascading effect on a few other criteria...

The net effect being the hole will come out a little easier, as you'd expect.

Do the same thing on another hole and we double the effect, obviously.

So now the answer, for which we need JV and I am only guessing... I'd say the 73 changes to 72.6 and the 144 goes down to 141-2.

But JV can give an exact answer.

In any case... wasn't Lake re-rated fairly recently?  I seem to recall it being done last year... was 18 changed since then?  Other changes?  If there are too many, sounds like a call to the NCGA is in order.

 

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
Olympic is one of my favorite courses and so is #18.  I'm not a member but during the mid 90's I felt like I was as I played it almost every month while out there on business.  Other than when they are trying to get goofy with pin locations and green speeds, the old green played just fine.  I'm sure Joel will chime in.

Regarding that 6500 yard course; I went through the training just so I understood it and am a certified slope rater in PA (big deal - NOT).  I'd tell the club that the course rating will stay the same but the slope rating will drop to 129    Maybe that will keep them from tampering with one great set of greens.  Once they touch one, it is like a disease and more will get tampered with.  

[Scott_Burroughs]

I would think that the thinning out of the trees would have more affect on actual playing difficulty than one green.  It may not affect CR/Slope, but I think it should.  With the thinning out of the trees, recovery shots (and finding balls in general) should be easier, but also could be from thicker turf/rough, due to new-found light/air flow).  I would also think that the course is windier now.

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

Thanks for your reply.  I hope we do hear from JVB.  It is information that ought to be considered in making an informed decision on change.

Mark,

I am simply gathering information so I am better informed in a general sense about the consequences of change.  I would put rumors into perspective and avoid discussions of potential change characterized as tampering.  

[Tom Huckaby]

I would think that the thinning out of the trees would have more affect on actual playing difficulty than one green.  It may not affect CR/Slope, but I think it should.  With the thinning out of the trees, recovery shots (and finding balls in general) should be easier, but also could be from thicker turf/rough, due to new-found light/air flow).  I would also think that the course is windier now.

Thinning out trees will definitely have an effect on CR/slope also... one of the criteria used is Trees and obviously the numbers there would go down if trees are thinned, for exactly the reasons you state.  Of course rough is its own criterion though - so if the result is thicker rough, then obviously that makes that one go up.

Wayne - I wonder if this information really would be considered... that is, would a club like Olympic care all that much if their rating and slope drop a couple points?  And I really think the drop is going to be fairly minimal, as I listed.  My feeling is many other factors going into deciding to make  changes such as this before effect on course rating.... but what do I know?

 

[Mike Benham]

A couple of comments ...

As of a month ago, the rough on the Lake Course was relatively short.  They have been been raising the rough by 1/2 inch per week if my sources are correct.

For the most part, the trees at Olympic Lake, should not come into play for a top notch amateur player.  The thinning of the trees has allowed for the wind to be more of a factor then before (Scott - I don't think the course is "windier" as the wind was always present, just blocked by the trees ).

The factors that will make the course an acceptable challenge to Amateur contestants are the firm and fast fairways and greens.  The contestants that have afternoon tee times are going to have the biggest challenge with the afternoon winds and the dried out greens.

As for the tall fescue around the bunkers, well, it would be better to be in the bunkers then in the tall, thick bladed fescue.

[Matt_Cohn]

When was that picture?

[Mike Benham]

When was that picture?

December 2006 ...

[Jim Sweeney]

I will enjoy watching the amateur at Olympic, as I played the championship there in 1981. I have not reviewed the record book but I believe the cut was 157- the highest in the history of the Amateur to that time.

The tree program will be an enormous factor. In '81 I'll bet there were parts of the Lake course that never got direct sunlight. The ground was not quite soggy, but damp all the time. Combined with the heavy ocean air, drives over 250 yards were very rare.

Interestingly, the Ocean course average score was a fraction higher than the Lake average, if my memory serves me correctly. That was certainly a reflection of the sun dried fairways and the wind, since the course played along the ocean cliffs in spots. (I believe that two or three of those holes are now part of the beach.)

The quote from the SFC article about the USGA criticising the eighteenth green is most certainly hyperboly. I did hear that the USGA told the club it could not conduct another championship there with that green as it was. But the club made the choice to change it. As it was, 1/3 to 1/2 of the green could not be used for hole locations due to its steepness. Remember Payne Stewart's four putt? T. Meeks took  a calculated chance and lost. But there was a lesson there- something had to change.

The US Amateur needs eight hole locations, and the old green simply could not handle that many if only half of it was available. Yes, they could slow it down, but it would have been an awful lot to make it the unused areas playable. Remember the Southern Hills Open? If you start playing with green speeds like that, you'll get burned one way or another.

I believe the members of the Olympic Club want good, stern test, and to hold major championships. The changes to the 18th green allow them to do so. The hillside surrounds, the clubhouse looming over the green, and the stately eucolyptus, palm, and pine trees make a grand stage, and I'm glad Olympic is still part of the USGA championship equation.

[David_Tepper]

Jim Sweeney -

The list of participants in the 1981 US Am is quite impressive (Hal Sutton, Paul Azinger, Corey Pavin, Ronan Rafferty, etc.) and I am sure you are proud to have been part of that event. That was a strong field, which makes Nathaniel Crosby's victory even more remarkable.

I played the Lake Course several times prior to the event in 1981 and also played there 2 weekends ago. My recollection is that the rough that year was deeper then than at either of the subsequent US Opens on the Lake and much deeper than the rough is currently.

The 3 holes on the Ocean course in 1981 are now basically the site of the 9-hole, par-3 Cliffs Course. The Ocean Course has gone thru 3 or 4 incarnations and transformations since 1981. I will be VERY interested to see how the current Ocean Course stands up during the 36-hole qualifier. If the wind blows, the scores there may very well be higher than on the Lake.

DT  

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
You said:

"The US Amateur needs eight hole locations"

At the green speeds today, how many of our great classic courses have 18 holes with 8 hole locations (heck how many have 9 holes with eight hole locations)?  The answer is not many (if any).  

How did they hold the Amateur at Merion if they needed eight hole locations per green?  I can assure you, there are not eight on each of those greens  

[Joel_Stewart]

I believe the members of the Olympic Club want good, stern test, and to hold major championships.

Nobody cares.  The members know how good the course is and if someone goes low - congratulations.  Everyone knows that Olympic is hard, its a great accomplishment if you can shoot in the 60's especially under tournament conditions.  I would also add there is no back room meetings to discuss scoring, the greens committee and the board have never had any type of discussion on how to make the course harder.  I would say the reverse is true, the greens committee want the super to explain why he is growing the rough so high especially in certain places.

I do think a good many of the members are still not happy with 18.  Not only did they go from 6 degrees to 4 degrees they took the spine out that was in the middle front.  The green is a poster child why a knowlegeable architect should be used and a professional shaper.  Both Weiskopf and Johnny Miller came out while the work was being done and walked away shaking their heads.

Mike:  Thats a great picture of the 18th, it must have been taken with a telephoto lense but I doubt it was from the tee?  The super just loves this look, he obviously doesn't believe in rough should not stop a ball from going into a hazard.  Almost all the bunkers are surrounded in rough, a subject he has never been able to explain except it looks pretty.

[Mike Benham]

Mike:  Thats a great picture of the 18th, it must have been taken with a telephoto lense but I doubt it was from the tee?  

The original "unretouched" photo ...

[Matt_Cohn]

Didn't the fairway used to stop 40 or 50 yards in front of that green?

[AndrewB]

For the most part, the trees at Olympic Lake, should not come into play for a top notch amateur player.

The exceptions to account for "for the most part" in my view are the trees on the right side of 12 before the fairway starts (even more so now with the new tee back and to the right) and the tree short and right of the 18th green if you hit your tee shot on the extreme right side of the fairway or rough.

I suppose the long players still might flirt with the trees around the bend of the fifth hole from the tee, but they're too far out for me to mess with now.