[John Chilver-Stainer]

 Ever since the Minister banished the first stick and „ball“ players from the Kirk yard for their rowdiness on to the Links, Gowf and ultimately Golf, has survived thanks to the rules of Etiquette „written“ or „unwritten“.

 
Basicly Etiquete is showing respect for each other and safety for everyone.

 
The idea that golf has unlimited Freedoms, and anyone can deliberatly play down the „wrong“ fairways in the name of cool strategy, is a false premise.

 
As has often been said one, man‘s Freedom fighter is another man‘s Terrorist.

 

[Jon Sweet]

Lukas Michel - the current Mid-Am champion - played at Oakmont and made an interesting observation.


'All the penal bunkers are designed to be 280-320y drive zone on each hole - but not if you go down another hole. Also the bunkers have high front faces but are easy to get out of backwards from another fairway.'


 'It shows how contrived the courses are to host a US Open.

Wait. So a bunker raised on the hole side is contrived for the open? Should they raise it on the tee side to keep balls out? I’m confused.

He was making two seperate points. The first was if you drive into a fairway bunker on another fairway you play out over the low lip of the bunker - the end closest to the tee as opposed to the end closest the green which are much steeper.


The 2nd point I think was how the dimensions of the course - width, speed and length - are distorted to keep scores high in the Open.
It was Pete Dye who did the extensive study of the greens in 1962 and determined they were much slower than they are now. It'd be interesting to know if the fairways are narrower now than they were.

The first of your take on his two separate points wasn’t confusing.
The bunkers being 280-320 out contrived for the open wasn’t right in my mind. The tees they’re playing aren’t the members tees I’d imagine. Or at least not the tees most members play, so I’d guess those same bunkers are numbers off their tees proportionate to the difference in distance. I believe they pride themselves on the difficulty of their course and the speed and firmness of their greens. In fact, slowing them down for tournaments. So… are they uncontrived for the open?

[archie_struthers]

 


When I was a bit younger we used to play in a super fun tournament called the Heil at Wildwood CC  (now Shore Club) in Cape May County , NJ. It was a hoot and the unofficial opening of the competitive golf season at the Jersey Shore. It wasn't just a shoot out for low handicappers and the range of handicaps was from plus 4 to 20 . Lots of drinking and some really good competition. The greens were and continue to be some of the best in the state.


Playing a match  (better ball of partners , flighted  by qualifying score)  against a couple hotshots from Philly I was surprised to see them aiming for alternate fairways depending on the pin placements. After losing a couple holes to birdie we followed there lead and had a really interesting match. Birdies were necessary to win most holes. They started a trend which the founding fathers frowned on and wanted to curb without a lot of discussion. They simply strictly enforced the pace of play rule and you absolutely could not wait for an alternate fairway clear to play your tee ball. Most of the field who could take advantage of this bought in to the camaraderie this established and we pretty much played it straight on for the remainder of the tournament . Kind of a let's have fun and respect the wishes of the host club .....plus we all wanted a re-invite the net year. It was too much fun to miss!

[Philippe Binette]

Players are adding length (10-15 yards) to the hole by playing up the wrong fairway for a better angle... it's strategy at its finest...


Looking at the hole maps, the fairway at 12 start at about 170 yards of the back tee... so players playing 14 can get it to 90 yards to the 14th green,  look for the usga to remove 25-30 yards of fairway and turn it into rough (or make it 12 yards wide) on 12th so players won't be tempted on the 14th tee to play up the 12th

[Philippe Binette]

The fairways between 160 yards and 200yards of the tee are useless at a us open... so it could be converted into rough or made 12 yards wide (might look stupid) for the us open..


At bethpage, they had the fairway starting a 230 of the tee on 1 or 2 holes... it's a little to far

[Mark_Fine]

Wonder what Gil will do when he comes in to do work on the bunkers,…?  Maybe add more?  No doubt he will be thinking about this issue.

[Rob Marshall]

Final round of our district championship was played on Oak Hill East. The tees weren’t all the way back but I watched a guy play the 7th hole by hitting his drive at the 6th tee. I mentioned the play to a member who has won the club championship there in 5 decades. He did a double take and then said it was a good play for a long hitter. Took the creek out of play and probably had a flip wedge in. It will be interesting to see if any of the pros try that in 2023.

[Mike_Clayton]

Lukas Michel - the current Mid-Am champion - played at Oakmont and made an interesting observation.


'All the penal bunkers are designed to be 280-320y drive zone on each hole - but not if you go down another hole. Also the bunkers have high front faces but are easy to get out of backwards from another fairway.'


 'It shows how contrived the courses are to host a US Open.

Wait. So a bunker raised on the hole side is contrived for the open? Should they raise it on the tee side to keep balls out? I’m confused.

He was making two seperate points. The first was if you drive into a fairway bunker on another fairway you play out over the low lip of the bunker - the end closest to the tee as opposed to the end closest the green which are much steeper.


The 2nd point I think was how the dimensions of the course - width, speed and length - are distorted to keep scores high in the Open.
It was Pete Dye who did the extensive study of the greens in 1962 and determined they were much slower than they are now. It'd be interesting to know if the fairways are narrower now than they were.

The first of your take on his two separate points wasn’t confusing.
The bunkers being 280-320 out contrived for the open wasn’t right in my mind. The tees they’re playing aren’t the members tees I’d imagine. Or at least not the tees most members play, so I’d guess those same bunkers are numbers off their tees proportionate to the difference in distance. I believe they pride themselves on the difficulty of their course and the speed and firmness of their greens. In fact, slowing them down for tournaments. So… are they uncontrived for the open?

Do they really slow the greens down for the US Open or is that just an urban myth?
Royal Melbourne greens are really fast - but I've never played them faster than they were for the last day of an Australian Open. But, don't try telling the members that!

[JESII]

Final round of our district championship was played on Oak Hill East. The tees weren’t all the way back but I watched a guy play the 7th hole by hitting his drive at the 6th tee. I mentioned the play to a member who has won the club championship there in 5 decades. He did a double take and then said it was a good play for a long hitter. Took the creek out of play and probably had a flip wedge in. It will be interesting to see if any of the pros try that in 2023.

Rob, drove towards the 6th tee? Or the 5th tee?


Still interesting.

[Ben Hollerbach]

While the USGA has shown little concern for this strategy at the US Am. It has to be a concern for them now in the run-up to 2025. With so few people on site this week the danger level is low, that won't be the case for the US Open. They can strategically place bleachers and scoreboards around the course to try and discourage certain shots, but I'm not sure that will stop everyone.


It's possible that the USGA's lack of concern this week is public-facing and internally they are scrambling. It's also possible with the announcement of a long-term relationship with Merion and the US Open that they are also preparing an equipment rollback that will go a long way towards negating this wrong fairway strategy in the future.

[Anthony Gholz]

Tom:


At least Hanse eliminated the reasons for one of the wrong way fairways in his redo at Oakland Hills.  The seventh is now back to its original routing and green site (and green and bunkers).  This eliminates the trip down #2 fairway that a few at the last amateur were using.


They can still go down 10 on 18, but with Ross's bunkers restored on both 10 and 18, that may not be wise anymore.


Anthony

[Jim_Coleman]

   When playing up an adjacent fairway is good tactics, you have bad architecture. Not just bad, but dangerous architecture.  I see no other remedy than the introduction of trees.

[Rob Marshall]

Final round of our district championship was played on Oak Hill East. The tees weren’t all the way back but I watched a guy play the 7th hole by hitting his drive at the 6th tee. I mentioned the play to a member who has won the club championship there in 5 decades. He did a double take and then said it was a good play for a long hitter. Took the creek out of play and probably had a flip wedge in. It will be interesting to see if any of the pros try that in 2023.

Rob, drove towards the 6th tee? Or the 5th tee?


Still interesting.

The current 6th tee is the old 5th tee. The old par 3 6th no longer exists. They added a par 3 after the 4th.

[jeffwarne]

   When playing up an adjacent fairway is good tactics, you have bad architecture. Not just bad, but dangerous architecture.  I see no other remedy than the introduction of trees.

The architecture didn't get "bad" all of a sudden.


Something else changed, but an entire generation has been allowed to experience that as "normal", and the previous generation is scared Shi$#@less of losing the few yards age used to take and/or a few $$(and they are the decision makers)


So here we are, listening to silly proposals, or being told the sky's not falling.
Move along-nothing to see here.


On topic-I find the topic kind've interesting as it relates to angles and risk reward-and cross country golf.

[Kalen Braley]

   When playing up an adjacent fairway is good tactics, you have bad architecture. Not just bad, but dangerous architecture.  I see no other remedy than the introduction of trees.

Why Ruin it for the members?

Just put in OB stakes for the week of  the US Open.

P.S.  Not sure if it was here, but someone asked if the successful players use this strategy?  Just watched both guys IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH, play to a wide open section of fairway on 10, to have a perfect angle into 11 green.

[Jim_Coleman]

   I think internal ob’s are also a sign of bad architecture.

[Mark_Fine]

The members are not happy.  We will see what Gil does. 


Jim,
The BEST way to play the Old Course at St. Andrews is keep it left up the parallel holes.  Is that bad architecture?  Right is mostly OB and gorse bushes.  No reason to hit it right on very few of the holes. 

[Jim_Coleman]

  No Mark, the Old Course is marvelous.  The fairways are 100 or more yards wide and mostly in full view. Never heard anyone complain of a danger. Yesterday, Bones said someone was almost killed at Oakmont at an Open he caddied at. Also, playing another fairway at Oakmont sometimes is a better option; not so at OC I don’t think.

[Jon Sweet]

Lukas Michel - the current Mid-Am champion - played at Oakmont and made an interesting observation.


'All the penal bunkers are designed to be 280-320y drive zone on each hole - but not if you go down another hole. Also the bunkers have high front faces but are easy to get out of backwards from another fairway.'


 'It shows how contrived the courses are to host a US Open.

Wait. So a bunker raised on the hole side is contrived for the open? Should they raise it on the tee side to keep balls out? I’m confused.

He was making two seperate points. The first was if you drive into a fairway bunker on another fairway you play out over the low lip of the bunker - the end closest to the tee as opposed to the end closest the green which are much steeper.


The 2nd point I think was how the dimensions of the course - width, speed and length - are distorted to keep scores high in the Open.
It was Pete Dye who did the extensive study of the greens in 1962 and determined they were much slower than they are now. It'd be interesting to know if the fairways are narrower now than they were.

The first of your take on his two separate points wasn’t confusing.
The bunkers being 280-320 out contrived for the open wasn’t right in my mind. The tees they’re playing aren’t the members tees I’d imagine. Or at least not the tees most members play, so I’d guess those same bunkers are numbers off their tees proportionate to the difference in distance. I believe they pride themselves on the difficulty of their course and the speed and firmness of their greens. In fact, slowing them down for tournaments. So… are they uncontrived for the open?

Do they really slow the greens down for the US Open or is that just an urban myth?
Royal Melbourne greens are really fast - but I've never played them faster than they were for the last day of an Australian Open. But, don't try telling the members that!

Buddy played them at well north of 17 the day he played.  Member I know that’s a member of the course I caddy at backed it up. US Open has them at roughly 13 to 14 so…

[Kalen Braley]

   I think internal ob’s are also a sign of bad architecture.

Perhaps...but still seems using OB stakes once or twice per decade for a US AM or US Open seems to be a helluva better solution than putting trees in those corridors.

[Rob Marshall]

I find it hard to believe that a flat putt at Oakmont runs at 17 especially on a daily basis. The average golfer unless they actually have a stimp has no idea what the speed really is.

[Mike_Clayton]

I find it hard to believe that a flat putt at Oakmont runs at 17 especially on a daily basis. The average golfer unless they actually have a stimp has no idea what the speed really is.

Not to mention how ludicrous 17 is - why would anyone want to play greens at that speed?

[Tom_Doak]

Wonder what Gil will do when he comes in to do work on the bunkers,…?  Maybe add more?  No doubt he will be thinking about this issue.

That's just what Oakmont needs -- a redesign and a bunch more bunkers.  Not.

Some of these problems are unintended consequences of tightening landing areas in the previous renovation.  It's a matter of being careful what you wish for.

[jeffwarne]

I find it hard to believe that a flat putt at Oakmont runs at 17 especially on a daily basis. The average golfer unless they actually have a stimp has no idea what the speed really is.

Not to mention how ludicrous 17 is - why would anyone want to play greens at that speed?

The greens at Oakmont have slopes.
There is not a chance the greens run at 17.
The ball would never stop.
Mistaking slope and fast greens.
Sorry, 17 doesn't work with anything near decently sloped greens.


The greens ran at 7 in 1963 and downhill putts were fast.
Prove me wrong.

[mike_beene]

When I have played Oakmont there is no way they stimp at 17. They are fast but so are 1000 other places. Used to be they were faster than other places, but that ship sailed. Stump readings are about as accurate as claimed carry distances on web sites.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()