[Jason Topp]

Jaime Diaz wrote an interesting piece about challenging Tour Pros:


https://www.golfdigest.com/story/golf-course-architecture-the-great-divide-jaime-diaz?mbid=nl_090517_golfworld&CNDID=38035635&spMailingID=11850710&spUserID=MTMyNjM4ODg5ODQ2S0&spJobID=1240380876&spReportId=MTI0MDM4MDg3NgS2


One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 


His description of the setups at the US Open and PGA:


Because heavy winds that regularly whip along the Wisconsin plains never came, and rain did, fairways made wide to allow for the expected conditions gave the players too much room. The extra high rough that the USGA installed to punish the wildest wind-blown drives barely came into play, and even with the damp fairways, the record length of the course barely deterred the longer hitters, who regularly launched 340-yard blasts with relative impunity.
Perhaps in an unconscious response, the setup for the PGA Championship at Quail Hollow went the other way. On a vastly redesigned course, narrow fairways were bordered with new Bermuda rough that was extra thick and wet from rain, while new greens were overly firm and fast—and undulating—as SubAir systems dried them out. The result was a test that offered almost no tolerance for poor ball-striking, in a sense playing the role of U.S. Open for 2017. It was refreshing to see the best players truly tested, and the best strikers of the week were rewarded. At the same time, average tee-to-green play was too severely penalized, and the golf was often painful to watch.

[JESII]

I think tournament organizers need to thicken their skin a great deal.

[Steve Lapper]

Excellent article by Jaime, however, what he once again fails to highlight is the undeniable advance of the ball.


Rather than use his exalted journalistic platform to remind us of the USGA's failure to reign it in, he (disingenuously IMO) chose to focus on set-ups and the inherent tension between GCA's and the touring pros.


At what point will the golfing world wake up, understand, and immunize themselves from the PGA Tour and OEM's fiscal interests? Heaven knows the USGA has overtly failed at assuming that leadership position.



 

[Peter Pallotta]

Always enjoy Jaime's work.
Setting aide what we think *should* be and instead focusing on what *is*, the 2nd-to-last sentence seems sound and sensible enough, doesn't it?

"So that the art of Shinnecock can be brought out rather than overrun, the decision was made [in narrowing the recently widened fairways] that long and crooked has to be punished."

I'm not particularly a fan of the renovated 12th; and, without further changes, I think the pros have "figured it out" already, i.e. the winner of the tournament played to the 13th fairway all four days.
 
But if Hanse's is a (somewhat) flawed approach, then C&C's approach at Shinnecock seems (downright) anachronistic, i.e. a hopeful *wish* that the modern game was something other than it actually is, and a nod to the *idea* (and not the actuality) of how to challenge and engage the world's best golfers.

There is only one realistic bifurcation possible, IMO. On the one hand, the everyday game, where "width" and its association with "more strategic angles and options" has at least some meaning beyond the rhetoric/conventions; and on the other hand, tournament golf, where it is back to square one, i.e. long, narrow, and fast.

[Jim Hoak]

At what point do we stop worrying about what the small (under .1%) of golfers that play the PGA Tour do, and rather focus on the great majority of golfers that play the game of golf for fun?
This obsession with architecture to challenge those who play golf for a living takes away enjoyment from most golfers who don't see the game getting any easier or their scores getting any lower.
I'm fed up with it.  It has led to courses that are obscene--courses spread over too many acres with walks between greens and the next tees that increase the length of the round, with features and hazards that take the fun out of golf, and length rather than playability and strategy driving architecture.
Let the Tour players shoot what they can.  Let's take the game back for those who love it as a game.  The tail is wagging the dog.

[Joe Hancock]

Long and crooked only needs to be addressed when all the greens on any given course are best approached from the center of the play corridor.


Meticulous maintenance of all areas, and the ball need to be addressed.

[Eric LeFante]

Good article, really interesting about Shinnecock narrowing the fairways recently in preparation for the US Open.


I think for the US Open the course should be set up differently than average play. Width is wonderful for 99.9% of golfers but the US Open is meant to test the best in the world and 60 yard wide fairways don't do that. I think 20 - 25 yard fairways are a little unfair, especially at windy sites, but 30 - 35 will reward well struck drives but also make the bombers think about hitting driver on every hole.

[Thomas Dai]

One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 

How much lower would club members hcps be if they never had to hit more than a 6-iron for their second shot on par-4's? Quite a bit I suspect.
Atb

[Phil McDade]

"Because heavy winds that regularly whip along the Wisconsin plains never came, and rain did, fairways made wide to allow for the expected conditions gave the players too much room."
I always thought this was a bunch of malarky...EHills is sometimes windy, and sometimes not. Kinda like the rest of the state. It was windy and dry for the US Am a few years back at Erin Hills, but that was in August -- when those conditions are more likely to prevail than in mid-June. The good judge had it right a while back during discussions of EHills and the U.S. Open conditions -- the USGA is a bit reluctant to host the championship in the Midwest in June, because you can't guarantee wind, and you also can't guarantee thunderstorms avoiding the area and thus soft conditions. EHills would be a much more enjoyable course to watch for a US Open it was located next to Sebanock. Sadly, it's not.

[George Pazin]

Did they hold all 4 majors this year? I didn't notice...

One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 

How much lower would club members hcps be if they never had to hit more than a 6-iron for their second shot on par-4's? Quite a bit I suspect.
Atb

My guess: the scoring difference would be negligible. Probably wouldn't be that much different if DJ hit the occasional 3 or 4 iron into a par 4, either.

[James Brown]

Did they hold all 4 majors this year? I didn't notice...

One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 

How much lower would club members hcps be if they never had to hit more than a 6-iron for their second shot on par-4's? Quite a bit I suspect.
Atb

My guess: the scoring difference would be negligible. Probably wouldn't be that much different if DJ hit the occasional 3 or 4 iron into a par 4, either.

PGA Tour stats show otherwise.  The proximity stats really fall off beyond 200 yards, which is DJ's 6-iron.  The USGA's Amateur stats mirror this same trend with proximity falling off for handicap golfers once you get past 160 yards. 

[JESII]

I imagine Shotlink can tell us what DJ takes to get in the hole with each club in his bag. My bet is the 3 iron is between 0.1 and 0.15 strokes more difficult.

[Garland Bayley]

One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 

How much lower would club members hcps be if they never had to hit more than a 6-iron for their second shot on par-4's? Quite a bit I suspect.
Atb

The tee it forward campaign results in such club usage.
If Dustin reaches in two shots, then it is a par 4 for him. On tour he is playing mostly par 68s, with an odd par 69.

[Garland Bayley]

One fun fact in the article - 6 iron is the longest club Dustin Johnson has hit into a par 4 all year. 

How much lower would club members hcps be if they never had to hit more than a 6-iron for their second shot on par-4's? Quite a bit I suspect.
Atb

The other answer is with slope and course ratings, theoretically handicaps wouldn't change.

[George Pazin]

PGA Tour stats show otherwise.  The proximity stats really fall off beyond 200 yards, which is DJ's 6-iron.  The USGA's Amateur stats mirror this same trend with proximity falling off for handicap golfers once you get past 160 yards.

Please share these stats, I'd love to see them. Honestly, not being sarcastic.

[Garland Bayley]

PGA Tour stats show otherwise.  The proximity stats really fall off beyond 200 yards, which is DJ's 6-iron.  The USGA's Amateur stats mirror this same trend with proximity falling off for handicap golfers once you get past 160 yards.

Please share these stats, I'd love to see them. Honestly, not being sarcastic.

I'm guessing he is referring to
https://www.amazon.com/Every-Shot-Counts-Revolutionary-Performance/dp/1592407501/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1504718809&sr=1-1&keywords=Broadie

[George Pazin]

Perhaps, but I don't plan on buying that book, so if anyone has the relevant stats, please share them.


I don't buy the premise of the book, either (no pun intended), but that's an argument for another day.

[Tim Gavrich]

The plain truth is that when it rains more than is expected, and the greens get soft, but are still fast and smooth, pros will shoot low scores. That's just the way it is, and the way it's going to be until an even more catastrophic mistake is made, whereby the pros are forced to use completely different, inferior equipment.


We see it time and again: when fairways and greens are firm, the truly skilled players rise to the occasion, because the entire field suddenly has to think in more than one dimension. And when you get those conditions on a course that rewards versatility of skill, you get both more compelling golf and less gaudy winning scores, regardless of the length of the course. Let's remember that TPC River Highlands - all 6,800 yards of it - yielded a winning score of -12.



Trying to force a certain winning score even under soft (i.e. easy) championship conditions is going to lead to setups that are obviously (at least to our trained eyes) manipulated by the tournament runners.


It's the male ego exposed for its often excessive fragility, and it's hurting the sport more than any club or ball. Just sit back and enjoy the superlative skills when these guys come to your beloved course and let the scores happen how they happen.

[Derek_Duncan]

At what point do we stop worrying about what the small (under .1%) of golfers that play the PGA Tour do, and rather focus on the great majority of golfers that play the game of golf for fun?
This obsession with architecture to challenge those who play golf for a living takes away enjoyment from most golfers who don't see the game getting any easier or their scores getting any lower.
I'm fed up with it.  It has led to courses that are obscene--courses spread over too many acres with walks between greens and the next tees that increase the length of the round, with features and hazards that take the fun out of golf, and length rather than playability and strategy driving architecture.
Let the Tour players shoot what they can.  Let's take the game back for those who love it as a game.  The tail is wagging the dog.

I'm with Jim. I don't see TOUR length as a problem that needs to be analyzed to death. I'm in favor of a tournament ball if certain hosts want to introduce it, but otherwise, play on.


I'd like to see Opens and PGA's held at the traditional rota clubs for the sake of history, continuity and because they're great courses. Oakmont and Merion held up pretty admirably, and so did Pinehurst for the most part.


If they get lit up now and again because it rains and there's no wind, I can live with that. I'd rather see a record score set at Shinnecock or Winged Foot than at an untested venue like Erin Hills.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()