Was the USGA setup for the US Open TOO tough?

[BrisVegas]

I am of the opinion that it is not good for golf to see the world's best players struggle to break 80 in major champs like we've just seen at the US Open.  

Pinehurst #2 is a wonderful, testing course that didn't need to be strangled by the USGA.  When a course has awesome green complexes like that, you don't need to cinch the fairways in to 15 metres wide (or whatever they were).  There's plenty of strategy and test in picking the correct side of the fairway to be on to have a chance of holding the green.  On top of that they grew the rough to ridiculous lenghts.  To me, it was pointlessly punishing.

I would much rather see the game's best shooting scores of around 8-12 under to win a major.  Bring back birdie!

Does anyone else think the USGA has gone too far?

[Fishman Dan]

I think the rough was a little too punishing, and on top of that the greens were nasty. Either 1 or the other could have been a little more graceful.

Mind you, Campbell showed when you kept it in play, the course was good enough to score on!

[McMw]

shinnecock was way tougher than pinehurst...

i thought the course was great, tho I still can't get my head over 460yard plus par4s...

even the rough wasn't too penal....saw plenty of shots that still made the green from the rough...like Gore's into the 12th (?)...and made the birdie...

I did think 28yard wide fairways was stupid tho!!!

[Jarro]

i loved it

personally i get a bit sick of seeing these guys go 20 under to win a tournament every week

[McMw]

goose shot himself in the foot on the 2nd hole...to miss the fairway with an iron off the tee???

and his putting didn't help...

Ernie shot 80 last year...Goose did it this year...

[BrisVegas]

goose shot himself in the foot on the 2nd hole...to miss the fairway with an iron off the tee???

and his putting didn't help...

Ernie shot 80 last year...Goose did it this year...

So - do you reckon the course was fine, but it was just a brain explosion??

[McMw]

personally, I thought it was a bit of a choke...
he prob thought - 3 shot lead...swinging well, putting well...done deal!!!
coz u know no one's gonna shoot a 65 to win it from nowhere...(cambo should have had the 6...

I saw only 3 pins (this morning) that were borderline...but then again...with so much green on the fat side, and then the slope able to bring it in close to the hole...why shoot for the pin???

If tiger can lead the field in GIR after R3, with erratic driving (and he even said so after his r4 interview)...and hensby can finished 3rd, dead last in driving, the rough couldn't have been that bad!!!

[macleod]

as with others i like to see some tough playing days, but i like it spread around..ie. one or two tough days between some nice scoring days with enjoyable watchable golf.

4 days of hard slog and grim faces got boring, i didn't even tape it this morning and plum forgot until i heard it on the radio this morning.

saw the final hole from michael at work and heard the scores and some of the shockers....glad i didn't get up and sit with the cats in the cold to watch it this year!

[markTHEblake]

this course was nothing special, all the usopen courses are set up just as tough.

[Bruce]

What's wrong with it being tough? You probably complain about ODI cricket matches where there's a bit of juice in the pitch and sides battle up to 220 instead of making 300 on flat featherbed.

I agree with the principle of setting up courses to challenge the very best players in the game.

[BrisVegas]

this course was nothing special,  all the usopen courses are set up just as tough.

I disagree. But even if they are all just as tough - do they need to be? I think that once a course get to the ridiculous extreme it becomes a lottery. Who wants to watch the best in the world hack it around and shoot 80?

Donald Ross designed those greens to be a devilish test even when the course is wide open tee to green. It would have been a better tournament if they left it as it was prepared for the 99 Open. The world's best were all in contention at the finish in 99. That's what I want to see.

Anyway, it's interesting to hear that many of you disagree. That's what makes life interesting.

[oz]

I thought it was OK. They didn't have the greens running too quickly, which kept it more realistic. If anything, I'd have like to have seen just a little more length on the fringes and aprons, so that the balls didn't get away quite so far when repelled from those greens.

[AndyP]

Are the scores reflective of the fact that the world's best may have played the course too aggressively? If it is so tough, they may have been better off being patient, taking pars, and waiting for the holes that were genuine birdie chances.

[oz]

I agree a bit, AndyP. Very few players were taking conservative choices from the tee. Perhaps there is a trend developing to pro golf that says smash it and find it, and when the course setup doesn't suit that, some players may have pretty thin off-suit....

[BrisVegas]

Are the scores reflective of the fact that the world's best may have played the course too aggressively?  If it is so tough, they may have been better off being patient, taking pars, and waiting for the holes that were genuine birdie chances.  

I would say that "being patient, taking pars, and waiting for the holes that were genuine birdie chances" was exactly what everyone tried to do. These guys are the best in the world. Are you suggesting that they're not clever enough to have a different strategy for a penal US Open layout.

[AndyP]

Are you suggesting that they're not clever enough to have a different strategy for a penal US Open layout.  

No, I was asking.  Note question marks.  

I'm not an avid golf watcher, so I couldn't possibly comment on this with any authority.

[BrisVegas]

No, I was asking.  Note question marks.  

OK then... In order of your question marks...

1. No.
2. (although not actually a question, but a suggestion ) No. They already would have adopted that strategy.


Man, my head hurts now.

[Bruce]

I agree a bit, AndyP.  Very few players were taking conservative choices from the tee.  Perhaps there is a trend developing to pro golf that says smash it and find it, and when the course setup doesn't suit that, some players may have pretty thin off-suit....

This was alluded to at The Sand Trap in their preview of the US Open.  Bash it as far as you can and then be good with the wedge from a variety of lies.  Course management becomes somewhat one dimensional.

I didn't see any holes like the 7th at Shinnecock last year.  Every hole was manageable if you got it right.  They just reduced the margin for error down to the very hard range.

[markTHEblake]

check out the scores from other US Opens. its not common to see more than one or two players shoot Red. Winning scores only get to 6 red or better when its been raining

The only thing different about this course from the normal US Open setup is the short grass around the greens.

[McMw]

and I thought the short grass around the greens were the best part of the layout - made it interesting...

good preparation for B Open - Goose to win...

[Eag's]

Vegas is on the money with this one
The course was tuff enough without tricking it up even further. Some of those greens were just about unplayable by day 4. How many good shots did you see land close to the flag or even the middle of the green, and run straight off

The ruff was just plain crazy the only option most players had, was to chop the ball back onto the fairway with the lobby rather pointless.
Even the best in the world will struggle to hit fairways 15m wide consistantly.

Bring on the British open I say, then we will see how this game should be played

[McMw]

but how many shots did u see from the rough that actually made it to the green, and gave the player a decent chance at a birdie or a par???

this usually isn't the case on any other US Open layout....at least pinehurst gave the players a chance...

[markTHEblake]

yeah good point, US open courses normally have rough completely surrounding the greens meaning its impossible to hit a green from the rough.

Eags, you have just described a couple of (british) Open courses to a tee.

[cazandpaul]

The only problem with the course from my point of view was that some of the pins were too close to drop off points - otherwise it was a good test of golf.

[Eag's]

but how many shots did u see from the rough that actually made it to the green, and gave the player a decent chance at a birdie or a par???

this usually isn't the case on any other US Open layout....at least pinehurst gave the players a chance...

Sure some made it to the green, but on average 30 to 40 feet away.
When you have the best players in the world teeing it up and not one of them breaks par, then opportunities must of been very slim.

Blakey how many British opens in the last 10 years have you seen where the winner does not break par
Most of the time the scoring is very good.