[William_G]

the course looks fantastic, would love to play it someday

only Inbee Park was under par today

the slow play is ridiculous and compounded by the pre-shot routines

two-somes tomorrow, maybe they will finish while we're young

[Dean Stokes]

I have played the last two Friday afternoons at our club in a six some - four hours both times and we simply don't rush. This problem really has become out of hand at both club and professional levels and would be the main reason I'd quit golf after thirty years of it being a huge part of my life.
Sebonack looked good today and I spoke to a young member who said it is in perfect condition. I don't see anyone catching Park tomorrow for her third in a row.

[Tom ORourke]

I kind of high-jacked this thread with my "slowly" comment, and I am sorry about that. But, since we are on that topic, I am watching the lining up everywhere. Why not just say no more lining up assistance, just like the way Johnny Miller used to have Andy Martinez crouching behind him get outlawed. I am also watching a caddy with a yardage book comparing notes with a player with a yardage book - why not just approve GPS during play so they can walk to the ball and see 116 front, 123 middle, 140 back? Would that help? I can see that the slopes of these greens call for knowing where to land your ball, but week in and week out most courses are pretty straightforward on where to hit it. I think that one of the cool things here is that you just can't throw it up there anywhere on the green and be okay. I am loving the course. I liked the blimp shot showing the proximity of the three courses, some of the overheads of the greens, and the trees there are just great. I like courses that ask you to hit reasonable shots, yet penalize you when you fail. Sebonack looks like that kind of course. It looks like it would be a great Ryder Cup site as some of these holes look like great match play holes, but I doubt that will happen. I hope the course is set up hard tomorrow as I think it could be very dramatic over the course of all 18 holes.

[jeffwarne]

At one point today, Paula Creamer was standing there talking with her caddie for 1 or 2 min (I don't know why she can't have this conversation while waiting for other shots), then addresses the ball, retreats, caddie re-paces and re checks the yardage, then both stand there doing NOTHING for another minute or so, then another discussion, yardage check, and FINALLY Paula hit her shot. Even the announcers were remarking how much time she was taking.

If I was playing in the group, I probably would have gone nuts. And this is a player who has her own "While we're young" commercial. If this wasn't so sad, it would be funny. USGA is a joke.

Richard,
You missed the BEST part.
When they cut away because she was taking SO LONG....... wait for it.........
They played her "while we're young" commercial, and after it was over.....
they came back live, she took two more practice swings, her caddie lined her up, and the announcers backtracked and said she was really fast once she got over the ball ----yeah after about 3 minutes

[Tom ORourke]

A similar action was taken by Stacy Lewis on Friday. It was taking so long I actually backed up the dvr and timed it. Par five 15th hole, third shot from 86 yards. She took 90 seconds of discussion with her caddy, and then changed clubs, and ended up taking over 2 minutes for an 86 yard shot. I know it is the open, and important, but for an 86 yard shot on a Friday? Not 186 yards on Sunday on the back nine. And she did not make birdie on it anyway. But the more important factor is that they were never out of position so no timings were being done. Somewhere in front of them the lead groups are playing that slowly and those groups need to be timed. Each group has a walking official so why aren't they doing their job? I wish the USGA could explain that one.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

86 yards ?

That's unacceptable, but until the USGA starts meting out penalties, slow play will be the play for the day

[Jim Nugent]

By the time I looked for stats, midnight passed, and apparently so did the day's numbers.  They do have stats for the full three rounds, so I'll copy and review what seems important from that.  

Length of course for 3rd round:   6629

Average score after 3 rounds:       76.04

Rounds under par, 3rd round:        1

Scores under par after 54:              5

Ave drive:                                 238 yards (226 on #1 and 250 on #2)

Fairways hit:                               84.7%

Toughest fairway:                         5 -- 66.5%

GIR:                                          58.7%

Toughest green to hit:                 11 -- 29.3%

Hardest hole:                              11 -- 4.551

Easiest hole:                                 8 -- 4.942

I'm pretty sure the field averaged over 77 in the 3rd round.  They continue to have almost no problems hitting fairways.  But they have a lot of trouble hitting the greens, even though they almost never play from rough or fairway bunkers.  

They are averaging slightly over par on the set of par 5s.  Is that common in the women's game?  

[Jerry Kluger]

Jim: The conclusion I arrive at from the stats is that width is good and angles are even better.  Give plenty of width off the tee but wrong side of the fairway means wrong angle to the green so no GIR. 

How are they doing are the par 3s so far as GIRs?

[William_G]

Tom,

86 yards ?

That's unacceptable, but until the USGA starts meting out penalties, slow play will be the play for the day

How about, at the same time, handing out awards and money for good times?

Looking forward to seeing more of Sebonack and those fun greens!

[Jim Nugent]

 Jerry, I agree completely.  This should be an eye-opener, at least for women's golf: you don't need tight fairways and penal layouts to challenge the world's best.  Would love to see how the best men players could handle a course like this.  Kind of a throwback to the original ANGC, and what Jones and MacKenzie were trying to achieve.  

[Adam Clayman]

I would like to believe that a 90 second discussion over an 86 yard shot, would illustrate how good and complex the architecture is.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I would like to believe that a 90 second discussion over an 86 yard shot, would illustrate how good and complex the architecture is.

Adam,

It's got nothing to do with the quality of the architecture.

[Jud_T]

It'll be interesting to see what the ratings are for these broadcasts.  While us nerds get a semi-chub out of seeing the course as much as the golf, Park is lapping the field and I'm guessing her Q-rating on these shores isn't exactly off the charts, even if it should be given what she's accomplishing.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jud T,

If the ratings are poor, some of the blame has to be directed toward NBC.

I don't think NBC produced a particularly interesting product.

While there was no "bunching" of the field, ala Merion, the telecast left me hoping for so much more, but it never came.

I would have expected seeing some of the disasters that had to occur during the course of play.

Watching Karie Webb ponder a wedge for eternity before hitting it into a bunker wasn't my idea of interesting TV

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()