Oakmont (pics)

[Chip Gaskins]

I was lucky enough to play Oakmont recently.  What a fantastic place.

Major Take Aways

    * Raised lip fairway bunkers to prevent full shots to the green
    * Green approaches - nearly every hole has a fantastic area in front that allows for running shots
    * Strategic cross bunkers - over half the holes have cross bunkers to tease the player who hits wayward drives
    * Meandering  ditches (everywhere)
    * Great internal green contours (#9, #18 especially)
    * Mediocre Par 3s (good, but not 4 great ones)
    * 210 bunkers
    * Greens that slope from front to back

More posted here: http://thelaststop.typepad.com


Hole #3


Hole #9


Hole #15


Hole #18

[George Pazin]

Thanks for sharing.

I must admit to a GIGANTIC bias, but I'm somewhat stunned that you think the par 3s are mediocre. I can only imagine you must play Cypress on a regular basis.

Seriously, #6 is phenomenal, with a hillside tilt that must be seen to be believed.

#8 is amazing to me, the green looks like a tiny speck from the tee.

I guess I could see someone not being overly impressed by #13, although I personally love the green because of it's strong slope to the front.

And #16? Wow, I always thought that was rightly acclaimed as one of the great par 3s in championship golf.

All in all, a fantastic set to this biased golfer.

 

[Mark_Fine]

Mediocre par threes    I don't think so. 

[Chip Gaskins]

OK, i will reword it.....as a group the par 3s are not as good as the par 4s and par 5s

Maybe my pin placements didn't bring out the best in each hole

[Ryan Farrow]

Oakmont's biggest weakness, the Par 3's.

Mediocre? Compared to other courses of its quality (top 25), sure mediocre could describe them.  Lets not kid ourselves.

[Dan Herrmann]

I love living in Pennsylvania!

[Jay Flemma]

Oakmont is my favorite major venue because the greens slope every WHICH way and because the fairways are canted.

Flat lies are for pansies!

[Dan Chapman]

Great photographs, thanks for sharing.  The place looks incredible.

[Mike Bowline]

Thanks for taking the time to take the photos. Amazing what the course looks like with all the trees removed!

[Brian Cenci]

When did you play?  I played the 3rd of May and the greens were double punched and all the fairways punched.  I can't imagine those greens at full speed.  The thing that I took away from the course was that it wasn't too bad off the tee but near the greens you were doubly punished for even a little offline shots.

-Brian

[George Pazin]

Mediocre? Compared to other courses of its quality (top 25), sure mediocre could describe them.  Lets not kid ourselves.

I really haven't been fortunate enough to see many other top 25 courses, but I have a hard time imagining this to be true.

Please elucidate.

[Mark_Fine]

I've played and/or walked them all (on any of the U.S. lists) and I would disagree as well. 

[Chip Gaskins]

man, i didn't intend for this become a big debate...sorry.

99% of my write up was about how great i thought Oakmont was and how it is now my #2 of the courses i have played and how i think the #3rd hole is the best i have ever played.  i simply mentioned i thought the par 3s were not as good as the par4s and par5s comparatively speaking.  i think there are several courses with better par 3s (NGLA, Augusta, Bandon Trails, Portrush ) however I think only *one* course is better overall (PV)

long story short, Oakmont was a ton of fun and though really hard, played really fair.  i would love to play it everyday!

[George Pazin]

Chip, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I just found your remark interesting, and I'm especially interested in Ryan's follow up.

Heck, if anything, I respect your forthrightness - many folks don't offer any criticism at all of the great courses.

[Ryan Farrow]

George, I think it was Chip here that brought up an excellent point, but the 3's are nowhere near the quality of the par 4's & 5's at Oakmont, it is simple as that.

Then you have courses like Riviera with 4,6,16, hell even #10 is just as good as anything Oakmont has to offer.  And this has been my argument in the past, Oakmont is an experience that needs all of its pieces working together. When you start to break it apart and compare it to other courses, it does not work out so well.

[Mark_Fine]

Ryan,
I respect your opinion about the par threes but dont' agree.  I just ran through in my mind the par threes on the top 25 courses in the U.S. (at least what GD and GM think are the top 25 courses) and Oakmont can hang with almost all of them.  Of course this is very subjective but to say they pale to the quality of the 4's and 5's really says something about what you think of Oakmont's 4's and 5's    Even the first two par threes at Cypress, I think they are fine holes but I don't get giddy about them. 
Mark

[George Pazin]

How are Riv #4 & 6 any better than Oakmont's #6, 8 or 16?

EDIT: I'm not trying to give you a hard time, either, I just think the 3s at Oakmont are terrific holes (and as a set, I think the 3s at Oakmont are fantastic - the only thing maybe lacking as a set would be a short one). I'd be really interested in hearing how any holes (other than maybe the obvious ones like PV #5 or CP #16) are any better.

[Peter Wagner]

Chip,

Thanks for your post!  I find your blog very helpful to me as there are many courses that you have played that I haven't (lucky bastard!).  Great pics from Pine Valley and Augusta and again very informative for me.  I'm bunker focused at the moment and these pictures are timely.

Best,
Peter

PS. BTW, nice family pics as well!  Perhaps my 'lucky bastard' comment is an understatement!!!

[PThomas]

thanks Chip...always great to see pictures of Oakmont

[Chip Gaskins]

Oakmont is my favorite major venue because the greens slope every WHICH way and because the fairways are canted.

Flat lies are for pansies!

you're correct the fairways are canted and it works well here. 

would you say Olympic Club's are canted as well?  i don't ever remember having a remotely flat lie there.  which gets old after 18 holes.

[David Stamm]

How are Riv #4 & 6 any better than Oakmont's #6, 8 or 16?

EDIT: I'm not trying to give you a hard time, either, I just think the 3s at Oakmont are terrific holes (and as a set, I think the 3s at Oakmont are fantastic - the only thing maybe lacking as a set would be a short one). I'd be really interested in hearing how any holes (other than maybe the obvious ones like PV #5 or CP #16) are any better.

I haven't played Oakmont, so I can't say how good the par 3's are. They certainly look very good as does the rest of this magnificent course. But 4,6 and 16 at Riviera are all world. Riviera's par 3's are amongst the very best that one can play, IMHO. Are they WAY better than Oakmont's? I don't know. Thanks for the pics Chip.

[Matt OBrien]

I played oakmont last year and i thought it was a great golf course. In my top 4. Speaking of bunkers, was it me or does oakmont do a great job of hiding come FW bunkers by growing the rough over the lip and cutting the grass in such a way that you can not see the bunker? I cant tell you how many times the caddy would not be there and I would hit a shot that I thought was just off the FW and it was in a hidden bunker.
As for the Par 3's I thought they were good bot could be better with a little variation in length. They are all very long except for 13. Oakmont would be great with a short par 3 like 13 and Merion or 10 at PV.

[Mark_Fine]

Matt,
From the blue tees - #6 - 168 yards, #8 - 225 yards, #13 - 153 yards, #16 - 211 yards. 
Mark

[Matt OBrien]

I guess they just play alot longer the day I played. Im not that short but i felt like I hit 5 iron to every hole

[John Foley]

Is this a case that none of Oakmonts's par 3's stand out as memorable?

I loved #6 especially the internal contours and #8 while brutal long was not memorable.

All of them are good but none, as a stand alone hole, is anywhere near great.

The 4's & the 5's though, there are some all-world holes.