[Cliff Hamm]

The US Open indisputably has more prestige than the PGA Championship.  The US Open typically is played on what are considered better courses.  Yet, I maintain that over the past 5 years the PGA is the better championship.

The past 5 PGA champions:

Harrington (-3, 277) - Oakland Hills
Woods (-8, 272) - Southern Hills
Woods (-18, 270) - Medinah
Singh (-8, 280) - Whistling Straits
Mickleson (-4, 276) - Baltusrol

The past 6 US Open champions:

Glover (-4, 276) - Bethpage
Woods (-1, 283) - Torrey Pines
Cabrera (+5, 285) - Oakmont
Oglivy (+5, 285) - Winged Foot
Campbell (E, 280) - Pinehurst
Goosen (-4, 276) - Shinnecock Hills

There is no doubt the US Open is played at the better courses.  There is also no doubt that the scores are higher and the winners less notable.  Why? 

It would appear that the USGA's attempts at protecting par have backfired.  It has lead to an era whereby the greatest golfer is no longer identified and the golf is boring. As far as I can recall the Open's have also not been especially exciting to watch. One might argue that August leads to better, fast and firm conditions, but look no further than Shinnecock to see what the USGA would do with August fast and firm. 

While it lacks the prestige and the A list courses the PGA has become the better of the two tournaments, is more exciting and is identifying the better golfer when compared with the US Open.The US Open seems intent on embarassing rather than identifying the best.  Until this changes the US Open will continue to have the prestige but not the spectator interest of the PGA. 

Thoughts?

[George Pazin]

Off the top of my head, it seems like your sample size is too small. Going back to 2000 would add Tiger, Tiger, Furyk and Goosen again to the US Open, while it would add Tiger, Beem and Micheel to the PGA. That would seem to shift the balance back to the US Open.

Interesting premise, anyway. Golf has such fine lines to success - at least when Tiger is not in the mix - that it is hard to draw broad conclusions, imho.

[Cliff Hamm]

Going back to 1997 the two surprise winners of the PGA are Beem and Micheel.  Other winners during that time period are Toms, Woods, Singh and Love.  I would make the case that since 1997 only 3 players (I include Toms) have won and not been A players.

The Open winners back to 1997 would include Woods, Goosen, Furyk, Stewart, Janzen, Els.

I will still maintain the PGA is the better of the championships.  Only 2 outsiders and one B player since 1996 is not a bad record with great champions in every one of the last five years and likely this year.

As Harrington has just tied Woods this years could be something special and the course is Hazeltine.  The PGA gets it...

[JR Potts]

The US Open typically is played on what are considered better courses.

Oakland Hills
Southern Hills
Medinah
Whistling Straits
Baltusrol


There is no doubt the US Open is played at the better courses.

I think that your premise on the golf courses is flawed.

Medinah and Southern Hills have each hosted 3 US Opens.
Oakland Hills has hosted 6 US Opens
Baltusrol has hosted 7 US Opens.

Whistling Straits is too new to include.

[Cliff Hamm]

The US Open typically is played on what are considered better courses.

Oakland Hills
Southern Hills
Medinah
Whistling Straits
Baltusrol


There is no doubt the US Open is played at the better courses.

I think that your premise on the golf courses is flawed.

Medinah and Southern Hills have each hosted 3 US Opens.
Oakland Hills has hosted 6 US Opens
Baltusrol has hosted 7 US Opens.

Whistling Straits is too new to include.

They may have held the Open but are no longer in the rota.  Hard to argue that at least  Shinnecock, Oakmont, Pinehurst and Winged Foot are stronger than any of the aforementioned PGA courses.

Again, why does the PGA currently conduct a tournament with more drama and higher ranked champions?

[Matt_Ward]

Clliff:

A good part of the storyline for the PGA's success has been the consistent set-ups -- save for last year with OH/S. Give that credit to Kerry Haigh who handles that responsibility. I would argue that only after the ascension of Mike Davis has the USGA made a really solid move in presenting the National Open in a much better manner.

The PGA has understood that the show rests with the players -- give them an opportunity to show their stuff -- but simply don't give it away.

I think you can make a much better case that the PGA is much more prestigious than many believe. If anything, it's the Masters which has suffered for its overall presentation since the time of Hootie and extending forward.

[Cliff Hamm]

Matt ... couldn't agree more.  Make them work for a birdie but don't take away bogeys for mistakes.  Don't continually take away driver with bowling alley fairways.  Don't view a successful tournament as one where no one breaks par.  Realize...these guys are good.... and let them show it...

If Mr. Yang is paired with Mr. Woods and wins this thread should be deleted 

[Jay Flemma]

I tihnk you should measure it interms of excitement, not who wins...

U.S. Open

bethpage - meh all week, then great for 3/4 of the day, then anti-climactic again
torrey - holy smokes!
Oakmont - Excellent!
WFW - OH MY GOD - awesome, terribly sad, but riveting
Pinehurst cool.
Shinny - excellent

PGA

HazNat - got pretty good now, but we must wait and see
OHCC - outstanding
SH - Only OK
Medinah - dog meat
Baltusrol - pretty good
PGA - weird, but good.

[Cliff Hamm]

Jay, in terms of the excitement factor for the US Open is has come down to the end.  The tournament itself is often a yawn. The last open I attended was WF.  It did not have the feel of ultra excitement until the very end and then became extremely exciting, but not because of great golf but because of not so good golf...birdies bring excitement.  Tough pars do not.  The end might be exciting but the tournament overall not so much.  Again, the PGA gets it.  Give the fans a tough, fair test where birdies can be made  and by the way well earned, and I will say that is more exciting.  Also, over the past five years the names do matter.

BTW...I have always considered the US Open the best of the majors.  Attended all 3 at Baltusrol - 67, 80 and 93 and all had wonderful elements of excitement.  Saw Floyd win at Shinnecock and thought it was great.  Stood near Fuzzy when he waved the flag at Norman at WF - another wonderful moment.  Was at TCC when Strange somehow managed to beat Faldo.  All great tournaments.  BUT the US Open is no longer what it was.  And that is a shame.

[JLahrman]

I really think the PGA needs to stop going to courses that are basically US Open castoffs (Hazeltine, Oak Hill, Oakland Hills).  It reinforces the status of the tournament as a poor man's US Open.

If I were the PGA I would take five newer courses and make that the rota.

Whistling Straits
Ocean Course
?
?
Too bad the US Open snagged Chambers Bay, but I would try to include it.

Need a couple of other suggestions.  But I feel this approach to the sites would give the PGA a much more distinct identity.  I had my doubts about Whistling Straits but I felt it was the best course and setup the PGA has had in recent memory.

[JR Potts]

I really think the PGA needs to stop going to courses that are basically US Open castoffs (Hazeltine, Oak Hill, Oakland Hills).  It reinforces the status of the tournament as a poor man's US Open.

I don't think anyone pays that much attention to the course selection, its major championship history and current golf body alignment other than the 1500 posters and 7 lurkers on this site.

[Wade Whitehead]

There is no doubt the US Open is played at the better courses.

Cliff: Is it even possible to play the PGA on "better" courses than the US Open venues used over the past decade?  If so, where?

WW

[JLahrman]

I don't think anyone pays that much attention to the course selection, its major championship history and current golf body alignment other than the 1500 posters and 7 lurkers on this site.

Ryan, that may be true.  But a much larger percentage of golf fans feel that the PGA Championship has an identity crisis, although they may not have many good ideas about what to do about it.  I think creating a completely distinct course rota from the US Open is one way to address it.  Get away from courses that the US Open uses or has used in the recent past.

[Mark Pritchett]

PGA vs. US Open

The battle for third place among the majors!

 

[Cliff Hamm]

There is no doubt the US Open is played at the better courses.

Cliff: Is it even possible to play the PGA on "better" courses than the US Open venues used over the past decade?  If so, where?

WW

The US Open is typically played on the best courses there are with the caveat being they must be able to handle crowds, traffic and tents.  With the obvious exception of Torrey Pines obviously a great list.  For the PGA I do believe a mix of old and new is nice. 

That being said my problem continues to be the USGA set up of courses for the Open.  Mike Davis has improved the set up but still a long way to go.  Narrow fairways enough and make the greens like concrete and I am convinced the most mundane of courses, if the length is there , would yield high scores.  Boring but high scores.

Simply put the USGA has taken the architecture out of the US Open.  It simply doesn't matter.  Keep it in the fairway, avoid 3 putts and survive.  For that reason the PGA  has become the more exciting and better tournament albeit less prestigious.

[Matthew Rose]

I always found it more interesting when the PGA went someplace you couldn't ever see an Open going to. Oak Tree is a good example. The USGA doesn't seem to go to Dye courses very often, apart from maybe Crooked Stick once in awhile.

Ideally I could see the US Open contested on the traditional courses and the PGA showcased on new courses.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()