Oakmont USGA type layouts are killing golf...

[hammergolf]

“A difficult golf course eliminates a lot of players. The U.S. Open flag eliminates a lot of players. Some players just weren’t meant to win the U.S. Open. Quite often, a lot of them know it.” 
 

Jack Nicklaus

[wedgegame]

16 minutes ago, italianstallion said:

There’s a perfectly good fairway on every hole they can use that won’t inhibit anything at all though. 

 I guess I'd rather see a difficult but achievable recovery shot rather than a stock hack out, but hey there's nothing wrong if you like watching humans cut grass with primitive instruments. 

Edited June 13 by wedgegame

[PedronNiall]

21 minutes ago, Shane Cavitt said:

The primary rough is not 9 inches. It is 5.25 inches. The fescue in the ditches is definitely higher. Hence why it is marked as a hazard. 

 

And they're out on the holes that are finished cutting it so that it will stay at about Thursday's height through the weekend. Guy's exaggerating over nothing. 

[manku]

9 hours ago, J13 said:

 

Having been to Oakmont I can assure you the membership wants it to play as hard as possible.  

proving the axiom that golf was designed by sadists and played by masochists!

[WesternRacing]

IMO, of all the aspects of a complete golf game, the ability to drive the ball well off of the tee should be the most important.  I’m for any course that tests that aspect of golf more than any other.  There should be a penalty, a large penalty, for missing fairways.  If you want players to think about leaving driver in the bag more often and leaving themselves with longer approach shots with stronger clubs, penalize them in a very real way for missing fairways.

 

Most professional golf doesn’t do that.  If your ball rolls off the fairway and you can still see it, it’s not rough.  Always cracks me up during the typical PGA event when the announcer says ‘well he’s in the rough’ and I can see half the golf ball from my living room.  Total joke.

 

Missing a fairway should be a half a stroke penalty at least.

 

Edited June 14 by WesternRacing

[wedgegame]

9 hours ago, J13 said:

 

Having been to Oakmont I can assure you the membership wants it to play as hard as possible.  

Which is exactly why the US Open should be played on public courses rather than creating a pissing contest.

Edited June 14 by wedgegame

[widow-maker]

The point is to identify the best player.  But, if it gets too hokey, you bring luck into play  I'm in favor of hard,  but don't trick it up.  You want to see great recovery shots so don't make it impossible recovery shots.  14 on the stimp with sloping greens can be a bit much.  I do like the deeper fairway bunkers that force you to make a choice.  I like the general shaping and configuration of the course.   It's a fine line between difficult and ridiculous and they're flirting with it. 

[black bnr32]

I’d be good with a tiny bit shorter rough to promote a risk/reward decision instead of a guaranteed hack out.  

 

The amount of runout on approach shots is a little inconsistent, which makes some good shots get some bad luck.

 

This brand of golf is ok a couple times per year but as a fan I don’t enjoy it.

[WesternRacing]

14 minutes ago, black bnr32 said:

I’d be good with a tiny bit shorter rough to promote a risk/reward decision instead of a guaranteed hack out.  

 

The amount of runout on approach shots is a little inconsistent, which makes some good shots get some bad luck.

 

This brand of golf is ok a couple times per year but as a fan I don’t enjoy it.

 

But why should someone who misses the fairway have any significant ‘reward’ possible?  On a typical 450 par 4, the Tour Pro covers on average 300 yards, or 65%, of the distance from the tee to the hole using a driver.  So, by far, the driver accounts for more of the movement of the golf ball, by far, than any other club in the bag.  Yet we barely penalize poor control of it.  The risk/reward that we should be focused on is not that which one considers once they’re in the rough, it’s the one that the player needs to consider when they are standing on the tee.  If you don’t penalize poor control off the tee, you are skewing that driver risk/reward relationship in order to favor the one associated with the next shot, one of less difficulty and distance.  That makes no sense to me.

[mosesgolf]

A Johnny Miller esque 63 on Sunday ftw.   The way the course is playing even the folks at +5 are still in it.

[wedgegame]

4 minutes ago, WesternRacing said:

 

But why should someone who misses the fairway have any significant ‘reward’ possible?  On a typical 450 par 4, the Tour Pro covers on average 300 yards, or 65%, of the distance from the tee to the hole using a driver.  So, by far, the driver accounts for more of the movement of the golf ball, by far, than any other club in the bag.  Yet we barely penalize poor control of it.  The risk/reward that we should be focused on is not that which one considers once they’re in the rough, it’s the one that the player needs to consider when they are standing on the tee.  If you don’t penalize poor control off the tee, you are skewing that driver risk/reward relationship in order to favor the one associated with the next shot, one of less difficulty and distance.  That makes no sense to me.

Because it's more entertaining than medieval era lawn management?

[StoutKing]

If the USGA doesn't go back to Chambers then the PGA needs to.  It's a perfect major course.

[Poor Mans Ty Webb]

I just don’t get the negative chatter.

 

What were people expecting? Were we not watching in 2007? In 2016? This is Oakmont. This is what it is. It’s a miracle that there are still a few golf courses that take the best golfers in the world - with all the modern advancements in equipment, training, nutrition, etc. - and bring them to their knees. Especially in spite of the wet spring we’ve had here.

 

I will say - if it wasn’t SO wet this spring, I think the USGA could have gotten away with slightly less penal rough, but I feel like they’ve had to because it’s not as firm as it probably should be. 

 

There are some courses that are designed to be more strategic. Then there are others that are designed to be penal. US Open courses have historically been the latter. They can test different skill sets from year to year, but they’re always a test of skill. 
 

Oakmont only comes about once a decade. It’s a special test.

Edited June 14 by Poor Mans Ty Webb

[StoutKing]

2 minutes ago, Poor Mans Ty Webb said:

I just don’t get the negative chatter.

 

What were people expecting? Were we not watching in 2007? In 2016? This is Oakmont. This is what it is. It’s a miracle that there are still a few golf courses that takes the best golfers in the world - with all the modern advancements in equipment, training, nutrition, etc. - and bring them to their knees. Especially in spite of the wet Spring we’ve had here.

 

There are some courses that are designed to be more strategic. Then there are others that are designed to be penal. US Open courses have historically been the latter. They can test different skill sets from year to year, but they’re always a test of skill. 
 

Oakmont only comes about once a decade. It’s a special test.

Oakmont is a great US Open course every 10-15 years.  I still think it would play better if they would legitimately roll back distance so the course doesn't need to be roided out to the Nth degree.

[mizuno player]

Make it tougher!!  Narrow the fairways. 6..5" rough. Rocks in the bunker sand. I see enough tournaments with winning scores double digits under par. One time a year at even or 5 over is ok, for me. No doubt I'm probably on this island alone! 

 

I like watching the guys having to really think about shots instead of. 178 hole. 164 to cover. 15 behind. 7 iron. They need to raise their handicaps for member guest somehow.. 

[RickyBubbs]

It’s not killing golf, but it is one ugly course. It looks like a player created course in 2k pga where the player couldn’t be bothered to add anything to make it remotely attractive (flowers, bushes, water,…a single tree). If I played there everyday I’d be on antidepressants so I didn’t jump onto the turnpike running through the course. Also, it’s near Pittsburgh…

[Mr.Cleeks]

Valhalla did more to kill golf then Oakmont did. The beauty of Oakmont is it's not tricked up, just a tough course. You can still shoot a good score but these guys should be tested

[StoutKing]

Can Oakmont kill golf a little faster so we can get weekend tee times again?

[Hawkeye77]

15 hours ago, 2over said:

A wise article from a decade ago in GolfWRX nails it... https://www.golfwrx.com/208183/our-games-obsession-with-fast-greens-is-killing-us/

Oakmont doubles down on this with all the greens sloping away from you and bizarrely shaped because they couldn't take the time to design proper greens for enjoyable play. Also the ridiculous rough. Bobby Jones was right that long rough is just covering poor design. Gouge out rough just takes the skill out of the game entirely. A well designed golf course like St. Andrews Old Course allows the bogie golfer to make their bogies or better and the scratch golfer to be challenged. That even in the Open Championship green speed is 10 at most on the Stimp is a big reason. "9 is fine" should be a mantra for making the game fun again. The PGA Tour in the 50's and '60s rarely saw greens faster than 9. Yippy putting has driven many good players from the game. And it's not them. It's the stupid fast greens.

 

Mow the course get rid of the rough (as Augusta for decades had no rough at all and even today is very modest in length). And keep green speeds at 9 and no more than 10 and the game is fun to watch--and more importantly to play!

 

I'm not entertained watching the world #1 4 putt from a perfectly placed approach shot! And if this type of USGA set-up is not to embarrass but identify the best player in the world how come only one current world #1 has ever won a US Open (Tiger, 3 times)? 

 

A full scale revolt against the USGA would be in order. I'm a 2 with 50 years playing experience. I play an Arnold Palmer college course (Lonnie Poole NC State Raleigh NC) that keeps reasonable green speed except when there's a tournament when it's running 14 it's just not fun at all. Thankfully those rounds are only a handful a year. I also regularly play private club that hosts the Senior Tour (Prestonwood Cary NC). The members pride themselves at having greens that run 13-14 on the stimp. Hitting a good drive, solid approach to 15 feet and 3 putting, without hitting a bad putt (I'm not a bad putter) makes you want to quit the game. I'm surely not the only one?

 

 

 

 

LOL, it’s one event, golf is more “alive” than ever. 
 

Been traveling - looks like the same old “hot takes”, haha. 
 

Looks hot - let them wear shorts and make them carry their own bags - that’ll learn ‘em. 

[iBanesto]

These guys are playing for millions of dollars every single week and one hard event is not killing the the game of golf.

 

Talk about an over reaction.

 

I love the fact that players standing over a shot are stressed and have fear running through their head, just like any other amateur player.

 

From the 1974 Massacre at Winged Foot - The grumbling that could be heard through the competitors clenched teeth made the media sense a storm was brewing and demanded to know of Tatum, Is the USGA trying to embarrass the best players in the world? Tatum replied succinctly, No, we are trying to identify them.

 

[iBanesto]

22 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

LOL, it’s one event, golf is more “alive” than ever. 
 

Been traveling - looks like the same old “hot takes”, haha. 
 

Looks hot - let them wear shorts and make them carry their own bags - that’ll learn ‘em. 

 

Exactly.

 

Golf is pretty easy compared to other sports and still get paid a lot more.

• Ride the Tour de France over 3000 km (2000 miles)
• Run at marathon at 2:53 per km (4:36 per mile)
• Play the French Open tennis final for over 5 hours

[Hawkeye77]

28 minutes ago, iBanesto said:

These guys are playing for millions of dollars every single week and one hard event is not killing the the game of golf.

 

Talk about an over reaction.

 

I love the fact that players standing over a shot are stressed and have fear running through their head, just like any other amateur player.

 

From the 1974 Massacre at Winged Foot - The grumbling that could be heard through the competitors clenched teeth made the media sense a storm was brewing and demanded to know of Tatum, Is the USGA trying to embarrass the best players in the world? Tatum replied succinctly, No, we are trying to identify them.

 

Irwin needed braces he clenched so hard. 😉 

 

Fun facts - other mouths his dentist had his fingers in. • Famous orthodontic patients include: Dr. Joyce Brothers, Hale Irwin, Cher, Diana Ross, Phyllis Diller, Chelsea Clinton, Whoopi Goldberg, Daisy Fuentes and Brandi.

[Dave230]

13 hours ago, Frank Newport said:

Ok. But statistically speaking there's no way only 6 guys are playing good golf. I'll give you +2, that makes it 20 guys. A fair test wouldn't lead to only 20 of the best golfers in the world shooting +2 or better over 36 holes. Opinions don't matter scores do and the scores are saying that US Open layouts aren't a fair test of golf.

 

I don't necessarily agree with the OP. I think greens should be fast and firm, but I think it should be possible to advance the ball from the rough when they are this fast and firm. They can't even hold the greens from the first cut today. That's a pretty good penalty.

The course is par 71 for the members with the 9th hole being a par 5 I believe… if you do that here then Burns is -5, 7 players are under par and 35 players are +2 or better. Doesn’t seem as bad. They could also easily change the 8th hole into a par 4, I heard the stroke average was 3.8 which is really a par 4 level. Then it’s a par 72 and Burns is -7, 22 players are under par and it’s more in line with the Masters/Augusta. You’d have the same rough and greens but par is just a number.

[bladehunter]

9 hours ago, StoutKing said:

If the USGA doesn't go back to Chambers then the PGA needs to.  It's a perfect major course.

 Did they get rid of the cauliflower  greens ?  🥬 

[avrag]

10 hours ago, WesternRacing said:

IMO, of all the aspects of a complete golf game, the ability to drive the ball well off of the tee get the ball in the hole should be the most important.

 

Fixed that. 
 

[KNOWMOREDOUBLES]

18 hours ago, kiawah said:

I would rather see more courses have 14 stimp greens than 7 or 8 stimp. That kind of golf is a ton of fun. Also, it's the US Open, if you wanted a weekend warrior-friendly setup, you came to the wrong place

It depends on the greens though. It’s ridiculous going to a course that was built in the 1950’s with sloping greens that were meant for greens that run 8-9 on the stimp, and now with better equipment they run them 12-13 and now they are almost impossible to putt. 

[NosajNeelik]

This might be the worst take on Golfwrx 

[Unplayablelies]

Tough courses? Yes. Id be happy to see the pros turn in scores like my monday senior mens group.

[Pnwpingi210]

10 hours ago, mizuno player said:

Make it tougher!!  Narrow the fairways. 6..5" rough. Rocks in the bunker sand. I see enough tournaments with winning scores double digits under par. One time a year at even or 5 over is ok, for me. No doubt I'm probably on this island alone! 

 

I like watching the guys having to really think about shots instead of. 178 hole. 164 to cover. 15 behind. 7 iron. They need to raise their handicaps for member guest somehow.. 

sounds like 3 of the munis I play in the dead of summer 

[Shilgy]

17 hours ago, fwilliam said:

In an interview yesterday, Scottie Sheffler  stated that Oakmont was not a strategic test, rather he had to calculate what club would hit each fairway. If that was accomplished, then shots into the greens were relatively straightforward. Personally, I prefer a course like TPC Sawgrass , requiring superb shotmaking and more strategy, without linoleum greens,  over Oakmont.

Luckily we can have both…Players in March and US Open in June.