US Open prep at Chambers Bay: Extreme Measures

[Garland Bayley]

I just can't believe that the actual greens aren't better than the ground immediately in front of them (in terms of design or character, if not playability).  If true, doesn't this make a massive statement about the golf course?

I'm sure none of us would want to play eighteen temporary greens.  Wherever your line is, mine is somewhere under four (and, very likely, equal to zero).

WW

Again a misconception. A temporary green is not necessarily "the ground immediately in front of" the regular green. The temporary can be as much or more than 50 yards from the regular green.

[Garland Bayley]

If the temporary greens at Chambers are "fantastic", why not use them in the Open?

Not bunkered?

[Mike Bowen]

I agree that the temporary greens are very good.  Not better than the real greens but can be very fun to play to.

As far as the prep for the US Open, it's crazy that hosting one tournament can have such a massive impact on a course.  There have been numerous renovations and plenty of extra care taken to ensure the course is in perfect condition.  It reminds me of the Olympics.  They have gotten so large and requirements so massive that it is taking away from the games.  Is all of this necessary to host a golf tournament or have we completely jumped the shark?

[Wade Whitehead]

I just can't believe that the actual greens aren't better than the ground immediately in front of them (in terms of design or character, if not playability).  If true, doesn't this make a massive statement about the golf course?

I'm sure none of us would want to play eighteen temporary greens.  Wherever your line is, mine is somewhere under four (and, very likely, equal to zero).

WW

Again a misconception. A temporary green is not necessarily "the ground immediately in front of" the regular green. The temporary can be as much or more than 50 yards from the regular green.

Understood, but I have never in my life played a temporary green that was much more than a closely-cut oval directly in front of or beside the closed putting surface.

WW

[Jon Wiggett]

Seems to me that if one year you have to effectively rebuild a highly regarded classic course such as Merion in order to hold an event such as the US Open then it is the type of challenge that is being set that is at fault not the course. They should choose a course and then trust it to produce a solid and honest test.

Jon

[jeffwarne]

Seems to me that if one year you have to effectively rebuild a highly regarded classic course such as Merion in order to hold an event such as the US Open then it is the type of challenge that is being set that is at fault not the course. They should choose a course and then trust it to produce a solid and honest test.

Jon

+1

or perhaps even choose a standard of equipment that keeps the scale of the venue relevant.
Imagine enlarging baseball playing field dimensions every 5-10 years.

[Brent Carlson]

I just can't believe that the actual greens aren't better than the ground immediately in front of them (in terms of design or character, if not playability).  If true, doesn't this make a massive statement about the golf course?

I'm sure none of us would want to play eighteen temporary greens.  Wherever your line is, mine is somewhere under four (and, very likely, equal to zero).

WW

Again a misconception. A temporary green is not necessarily "the ground immediately in front of" the regular green. The temporary can be as much or more than 50 yards from the regular green.

Understood, but I have never in my life played a temporary green that was much more than a closely-cut oval directly in front of or beside the closed putting surface.

WW

Wade,

There are a lot of things about Chambers that nobody has seen before.  It's truly unique in the world.  Hopefully this Open goes well and spurs more emphasis on fast and firm.

[Keith OHalloran]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

[Scott Weersing]

Ok, I guess they should have built a second green on no. 15 out there in the middle of the large bunker to the right of the green.

It reminds me of the two greens at Banff on the famous par three.

I wonder if they should add alternate greens to Chambers Bay. There used to be an alternate green on no. 1 at Bandon, but it was not because of wear and traffic.

What other fescue courses, I know not many fescue courses, have alternate greens?

[Jon Cavalier]

This sort of pisses me off - I am (or was) considering playing Chambers Bay next month and was told something completely different by phone. I called recently for precisely this issue (concerns about US Open Prep) and was told a very different story.

What were you told?

I am still planning on playing it one more time before the US Open. It is a bummer that it still costs so much, but other than the 15th hole precaution, there is little to detract from the experience.

I called specifically because I was concerned about having to hit from mats in the fairway (like they did at Merion in 2013). I was told that they had "a couple" temp greens in for the winter, but that they would likely be back to regular greens by the time of my trip (they actually said that "maybe" one would still be a temp. I asked whether there would be any other modifications or restrictions for the open, and was told those likely would not take effect until late March or early April. In short, was told that it would be the full course except for the possibility that one green would be a temp.  And I was also very clear that I'd be coming from across the country, was about to book a flight, and that playing Chambers would alter my flight plans by at least a day.

Moderately annoying. And maybe I'm in the minority, but having never seen Chambers Bay and having looked very much forward to playing it, I have zero interest in playing to 5 or 6 temp greens.

Having said that, I'm more surprised and disappointed that the course is choosing (or being forced) to make these kinds of modifications for this length of time to host a tournament (no matter how big). I certainly don't recall Bethpage shutting down a third of its greens more than half a year in advance in either of the two years they hosted. This is particularly disappointing because Chambers is a muni.

In the end, it's not my course and so it's not really my concern, but as an outside observer, I find this all a really odd way to promote what the USGA claims to want to promote. Just my opinion.

[Garland Bayley]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

A bunker or two three or so acres in size.

[Steve_Lovett]

Won't this all be a moot point after June, with the spotlight off and Chambers Bay becoming just another high-profile public golf course.

It seems like a lot of pre-tournament fuss. I played it last spring with a few temps. The conditions seem agronomically fragile - is that correct?

[Keith OHalloran]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

A bunker or two three or so acres in size.

Garland, do they really have bunkers larger than anyone has ever seen before?

[jeffwarne]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

A bunker or two three or so acres in size.

Garland, do they really have bunkers larger than anyone has ever seen before?

Keith,
and that's just the temporary bunkers 
in fact one would be hard pressed to know they're temporary bunkers

[Matthew Essig]

Well, there are only a handful of bunkers (about 10 or so). Most of the dozens of acres of sand are through the green.

[Brent Carlson]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

Keith - I say this humbly as I have not played all other US Open venues.

In my opinion Chambers has these unique qualities:

- scale - massive acreage and dunes
- firm and fast - even more so than Pinehurst.  Mike Davis can pick a winning score with the firmness.  You could bounce balls like tennis balls if you wanted.
- elevation change for a US Open
- wall to wall fescue.  I can't think of any other Open with 100% fescue.  Some poa has crept in.
- elasticity.  There is so much Mike Davis can do in regards to length out there.
- elevation change.  Lots of it.  A bit too much for my liking.
- width.  Although the USGA has largely taken this away.

Is the course ideal for an Open?  We will see.  I like the idea of munis and firm and fast.  I definitely recommend the course, preferably after mowing lines have been restored.  IMO it's a solid Doak 7.  Before the USGA got involved it was nearly a 9 in my book.  Should be fun...

[jeffwarne]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

In my opinion Chambers has these unique qualities:

  Mike Davis can pick a winning score with the firmness. 
  There is so much Mike Davis can do in regards to length out there.
width- Although the USGA has largely taken this away.

 Before the USGA got involved it was nearly a 9 in my book. 

In my delusional fantasy world they pick a course, play it as it is, and the only name we would mention is the winner.
Who's the field setup guy for the NFL, who paints the lines and installs the nets for a final four game?
Sure hope they've got the advance team out for the 2018 World Series narrowing the field (they don't know who's in it yet?-how on earth will they protect score?)

[Jeff Shelman]

I am going to be very interested to see how this thing plays out.

I played CB last May -- so about a month shy of what would be the tournament week -- and I left having no idea how the Open will play out.

I'm most interested in what happens with the greens and how the players react to them. There's a chance that they don't get super fast and if that happens, the pros will probably complain. But if they do get fast, I think the players will complain about the conditions being too fast for the slopes in the greens.

[Garland Bayley]

Brent,
I have not had the pleasure of playing Chambers Bay. Can you talk about some of the things that it has that no one has seen before?

A bunker or two three or so acres in size.

Garland, do they really have bunkers larger than anyone has ever seen before?

Do you know of any bunkers three acres in size elsewhere? When they opened, they intended them to be bunkers, but as Matthew indicates perhaps they are now playing them as waste areas.

[Brent Carlson]

I am going to be very interested to see how this thing plays out.

I played CB last May -- so about a month shy of what would be the tournament week -- and I left having no idea how the Open will play out.

I'm most interested in what happens with the greens and how the players react to them. There's a chance that they don't get super fast and if that happens, the pros will probably complain. But if they do get fast, I think the players will complain about the conditions being too fast for the slopes in the greens.

Jeff,

Good point.  IMO they shouldn't make them too fast with the contour and firmness of the greens.  At some speeds it becomes goofy golf.  The other thing to consider is the slopes and strategy were built for a certain speed.  The features play best at stimp 9 in my option.

[Grant Saunders]

Grant,
  Im not sure how much you were on twitter last weekend, but this became a passionate discussion among us Supts. Many feel the USGA's "down with brown" look at Pinehurst hurt the industry and the golf world. It did not make people excited to play golf and many comments Supts reported at their clubs regarding it, was negative. American's dont like brown, brown turf isn't healthy turf. Overly lush isn't, either. Pinehurst looked poor. If the USGA was so into "down with brown," why wasn't the US Womens Open and Amateur and the other 10 USGA Events presentedd in such a way?

Anthony

I saw a bit of that talk and it was interesting stuff.

My beef with Pinehurst was twofold:

1: It was held up as now being low input and reduced water use as the result of a major renovation. This to me is bullshit. If you want a course to receive lower inputs, don't turn the irrigation on for as long or simply use less fertilizer. The notion that you somehow have to undertake some huge amount of disruption and fork out millions to be able to lower inputs is not a good message to put out there.

2: It was simply too extreme an example to get people interested. As you say, most people freaked out and any suggestion of trying to go down the lower input path is now going to be met with resistance because of the association it now has with Pinehurst. The analogy I have used is its like holding up a picture of a runway model figure and telling all obese people that is what they need to look like. Why not use an image of a normal healthy person who isn't bordering on anorexic as the ideal goal. People are going to be far less intimidated by something that is more achievable and they are more likely to meet those goals.

[Sean_A]

Grant

In the case of Pinehurst, didn't they need to remove acres of bermuda and replace it with "native" so that lower inputs and less money spent cutting grass could be achieved?  It would be a strange thing to just starve the grass and let whatever happen, happen...no?  

I am most decidely in the pro Pinehurst camp because not only will less resources be required (if the owners follow thru with the concept), but also because the course is visually far more interesting than previously...especially from the tee.  Its seems crazy not to showcase the sandy site rather than pay more money and waste resources burying it under bermuda.  Now if they could only bring back the Ross greens  

In terms of what is achievable, I think most people understand that like Augusta, Pinehurst is special.  It has money, history and design pedigree behind it and therefore should be treated and thought of as something special...especially when it hosts a US Open.  

Its excellent to see Mid Pines go the same route and while it looks very different, Old Town headed more or less down the same path.  Anytime I see the promotion of less is better its a good thing.  

Ciao

[Joe Hancock]

Grant

In the case of Pinehurst, didn't they need to remove acres of bermuda and replace it with "native" so that lower inputs and less money spent cutting grass could be achieved?  It would be a strange thing to just starve the grass and let whatever happen, happen...no?  

Sean,

This statement surprises me, coming from you. I would think you would much prefer native to happen in a natural way. What could possibly be more natural than letting nature run its' course...so to speak?

Yeamans Hall(I've mentioned this example before) is the best look I've seen on a great course. The rough transitions to different grasses that have adapted to the (lack of) conditioning and then just melts into the native soils/ pine straws that are already there...no one manufactured the look...or playability.

Joe

[jeffwarne]

Grant

In the case of Pinehurst, didn't they need to remove acres of bermuda and replace it with "native" so that lower inputs and less money spent cutting grass could be achieved?  It would be a strange thing to just starve the grass and let whatever happen, happen...no?  

I am most decidely in the pro Pinehurst camp because not only will less resources be required (if the owners follow thru with the concept), but also because the course is visually far more interesting than previously...especially from the tee.  Its seems crazy not to showcase the sandy site rather than pay more money and waste resources burying it under bermuda.  Now if they could only bring back the Ross greens  



Ciao

I would be very curious to know if there are less "inputs" ,time,and money involved in maintaining the current Pinehurst.
I.e. the fairways are wider, and the "rough"/sand while not mowed has to be periodically raked/weeded/somethinged.

(and that's not including the costs of a new irrigation system, and complete fairway linerenovation nad rough transformation form bermuda to wire/unirrigated waste)

[JMEvensky]

In terms of what is achievable, I think most people understand that like Augusta, Pinehurst is special.  It has money, history and design pedigree behind it and therefore should be treated and thought of as something special...especially when it hosts a US Open.  

 

I think this was the USGA's fatal error. By showcasing the changes to P2 without explaining how those changes could also be beneficial to Podunk CC,most people's takeaway was the US Open and P2 are "special cases" which require maintenance practices above and beyond normal.

As a club member who has tried to stop some of our maintenance insanity,I would've liked the USGA to use their bully pulpit to explain in lay terms the pluses and minuses of the changes at P2 and how those changes might be beneficial further down the food chain.