Are we seeing a silent, but dramatic shift from the USGA....

[Chip Gaskins]

With these photos from Pebble heading into this years U.S. Open and these comments about the complete 180 degree turn around at Pinehurst as they begin to prepare for the 2014 U.S. Open it certainly seems to me that the USGA is changing its feelings about "protecting par" and more importantly course set up.

I think this picture is from about the same spot Tiger lashed out of heavy rough (onto the green!) in his final round in 2000 and now it looks like the ball would roll right off the cliff.

And Mike Davis on Pinehurst for 2014:

“I think you’ll see a dramatic aesthetic difference in the 2014 Opens,” said Mike Davis, the USGA’s senior director for rules and competitions. “It’s going to put more guesswork in it. More shot-making will be put into it.

“It will bring back one of the all-time great courses. I don’t know if it will make it easier or harder. I don’t think we as the USGA care. If it’s slightly easier for the Open, who cares? We just want it back to what it can be.”

[TEPaul]

Chip:

Yes, we are seeing a fairly dramatic shift from the USGA and I think it all pretty much emanates from Mike Davis. He's instituted some very clever changes in Open set-ups in the last few years and the good news is they all seemed to have met with real success amongst both players and spectators.

By the way, Mike Davis just loves old golf course architecture and he's very knowledgeable on it and the little things that make it work better and best.

I also think Davis is a lot more intuitive on how to prevent things from running right over the top in Open set-ups as have notoriously happened in the past before he took on the control of the position he's in now. His remark very early Sunday morning to me was a bit like those famous Apollo 13 words. While checking the set-up very early Sunday morning in the 2004 Shinnecock Open apparently his prophetic words came over the radio---"I think we've got a problem." 

 

[K. Krahenbuhl]

Here is another look.  There are a lot of new and interesting mow lines out there and I think it will be a great Open...

[Carl Nichols]

I've never played Pebble -- are those hazard stakes? 

[K. Krahenbuhl]

There are stakes along the cliff, but the big one you see is the 200 yard marker.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Lets not be lulled into a sense of security here...
The objective in removing the rough in that area is not to aid the golfer....quite the opposite.
Because of the new bunkering on the left of the hole, the rough that used to be there would have acted as a buffer for the playing playing"safe" to the right.
Now..any ball that is drifting too far right will roll into the hazard, it makes the drive alot tougher.

[JESII]

But a more appealing tougher...right Michael?

[Bill_McBride]

A lot of U.S. Opens are played on our classic age golf courses, and I think Mike Davis and the USGA's new goal is to make those courses play as originally conceived by the old dead guys.  It is such an exciting possibility!

The other Open has pretty consistently followed that plan (with weather related exceptions like Carnoustie) and the consistent result has been a more exciting Championship.

[Brent Hutto]

I'd rather see Phil Mickelson playing out of a fairway bunker because he was a afraid of a cliff than see him gouging yet another ball out of ankle-deep rough because he wasn't afraid of anything. I believe that is the trade-offl in mind with the proposed setup of the hole in question.

P.S. And if Phil's score goes up six strokes or down four strokes as a consequence I don't actually give a damn.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Jim...Absolutely...Much more pleasant to the eye and I also agree a shot from the bunker is more exciting than a hack out of the rough...plus it will be fun to see some balls run over the cliff edge.
All be it in some sadistic kind of way.

[Brent Hutto]

All be it in some sadistic kind of way.

OK, I'm busted. Guilty as charged.

Unfortunately, I'll be in London attending a performance of Macbeth at Shakespeare's Globe on the Saturday and on a plane crossing the Atlantic on Sunday so my sadistic pleasure will be tape-delayed, at best.

[Terry Lavin]

There's nothing silent about it.  

[Jim_Coleman]

I'd rather see Phil Mickelson playing out of a fairway bunker because he was a afraid of a cliff than see him gouging yet another ball out of ankle-deep rough because he wasn't afraid of anything.

     Am I missing something?  Why wouldn't he be afraid of hitting into ankle-deep rough?  All they're doing is changing the penalty for a poor shot from a nasty shot from rough to a one stoke penalty, unless the player is lucky enough to have the ball stop before it goes over the ledge.  In which case, the hole got easier.  It's certainly not obvious to me that one is better architecture than the other ... just different.

[Jud_T]

Jim,

There's little strategy or shotmaking skill involved in the 100 yard hack-out layup from the deep rough....

[Jim_Coleman]

There's less strategy in dropping a ball.  At least from the rough, you might be tempted to take a chance, depending on the circumstances.

[Jed Rammell]

Its too bad Mike Davis isn't running the Masters.

[Jud_T]

There's less strategy in dropping a ball.  At least from the rough, you might be tempted to take a chance, depending on the circumstances.

Yes,

But there's much more strategy off the tee now as you're less likely to bomb away up the right side as you know the water is now in play and you are forced to consider flirting with the bunker...Not to mention the bunker shot decision of loft vs. lip etc....

[jeffwarne]

Its too bad Mike Davis isn't running the Masters.

Mike Davis looks good because the US Open needed fixing
The Masters doesn't

[George Freeman]

There's less strategy in dropping a ball.  At least from the rough, you might be tempted to take a chance, depending on the circumstances.

Yes,

But there's much more strategy off the tee now as you're less likely to bomb away up the right side as you know the water is now in play and you are forced to consider flirting with the bunker...Not to mention the bunker shot decision of loft vs. lip etc....

I would agree with you Jud.  Makes them think more on the tee box.  Where before they could just wail away with the driver and not be concerned about the water (unless they REALLY miss it), just a potential poor lie in the rough; now they start thinking about giving up that 30-50 yd driver advantage and playing a fairway wood or something else off the tee b/c their worried about missing right.

More thinking = good IMO.

[Tom_Doak]

I notice that no superintendents have posted on this thread yet.

I appreciate what they are trying to do, but mowing the edge of the fairway over a cliff like that is very dangerous not only for players, but for the guys on the mowers.  I hope they aren't going to try to keep that look once the Open is done, or it is an accident waiting to happen.

[Phil McDade]

Chip:

I'm not sold -- yet. Pebble is the one Open course (well, perhaps Shinnecock) where wind can dramatically impact things in a much more pronounced way than most other US Open courses, it seems. So I'm hopeful for baked-out conditions, firm winds, glassy poa greens, and rounds where par is a struggle.

This is the one tournament of the year where the course and in particular the set-up ought to make these guys struggle. It's rarely done during the rest of the golf season, and increasingly doesn't happen in the other three majors (not that there is anything wrong with that; I'm of the view the folks at the Masters have gotten the balance near-perfect).

A repeat of 1992 at Pebble, in terms of conditions, would be ideal in my mind.

[TEPaul]

I've spoken to Mike Davis a couple of times about Open set-ups and how good I think they've been with some of his new philosophies; last time he mentioned he felt it was a lot easier to get what they were looking for with Open set-ups in California but for the life of me I can't remember what he said the reason was behind that.

[Mike Cirba]

I've spoken to Mike Davis a couple of times about Open set-ups and how good I think they've been with some of his new philosophies; last time he mentioned he felt it was a lot easier to get what they were looking for with Open set-ups in California but for the life of me I can't remember what he said the reason was behind that.

Tom,

Could it be that it's easier to get F&F conditions in southern CA in mid-June than in Boston or Westchester County...or Philly?

[Phil McDade]

I've spoken to Mike Davis a couple of times about Open set-ups and how good I think they've been with some of his new philosophies; last time he mentioned he felt it was a lot easier to get what they were looking for with Open set-ups in California but for the life of me I can't remember what he said the reason was behind that.

Tom,

Could it be that it's easier to get F&F conditions in southern CA in mid-June than in Boston or Westchester County...or Philly?

I was just going to say -- predictable weather patterns in California in the summer compared to the rest of the country?

[Tom Yost]

I'd rather see Phil Mickelson playing out of a fairway bunker because he was a afraid of a cliff than see him gouging yet another ball out of ankle-deep rough because he wasn't afraid of anything.

     Am I missing something?  Why wouldn't he be afraid of hitting into ankle-deep rough?  All they're doing is changing the penalty for a poor shot from a nasty shot from rough to a one stoke penalty, unless the player is lucky enough to have the ball stop before it goes over the ledge.  In which case, the hole got easier.  It's certainly not obvious to me that one is better architecture than the other ... just different.

My thought is that the rough, especially the "US Open" style rough, really has little to do with golf course architecture, but rather the maintenance/course setup practices.

When a course has a natural feature, such as the cliffs at PB, isolating that feature with a strip of thick rough takes that feature out of play, effectively diminishing the architecture.  

It may be argued whether that matters at all when setting up a course for a championship test.  Maybe it doesn't, but as one who observes and studies golf course architecture, I like to see the features of a course actually come into play.  If they shoot under par, so be it.  The unrelenting style of narrow ribbons of fairway lined with thick rough essentially makes every course look and play the same.