2018 US Open

[jms62]

Love it. This is what a US Open should be PAR wins. No interest in 25 Under golf.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

Love it. This is what a US Open should be PAR wins. No interest in 25 Under golf.

I think there is a happy medium. A US Open course should obviously be set up very tough. But I don't think they should make the greens so rock hard that they don't hold. And they shouldn't be so fast that if you are 3 feet above the hole and miss the putt that it goes 15 feet by. We've seen that some years.

The greens should obviously be very fast, but not unplayable, like we have seen some years. All they need to do at most of these courses is make the rough very deep, narrow the fairways, and make the greens very fast, but playable. The greens should not be so rock hard that you hit a perfect iron shot and it goes right over the green.

With regards to scoring, you have 140 of the best players in the world. and of those 140 guys, you will have at least a handful who are absolutely on fire, totally in the zone. When you have the best of the best and they are playing their best, I think there should be a few guys under par for the tournament. If 1 or 2 under par is a really good score every day, I think that is fine. I think the winning score for the 4 days should be somewhere around 5 under, give or take a few shots either way.

If not a single guy can break par for the tournament, I think something is wrong. It probably means the course is unfair. I mean when you have the best players in the world, if not a single can break par, the course is obviously too tough IMO. By the same token, this is the US Open. If the winning score is 15 or 20 under, then the course was obviously playing too easy.

I didn't watch much today. I was mainly just following the scores on the internet. But I heard there was a 230 yard par 3, where Tiger, JT and DJ all hit perfect shots and nobody held the green. To me that is ridiculous. A 230 yard par 3 is hard enough, without making the green nearly impossible to hold.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think there is a happy medium. A US Open course should obviously be set up very tough. But I don't think they should make the greens so rock hard that they don't hold. And they shouldn't be so fast that if you are 3 feet above the hole and miss the putt that it goes 15 feet by. We've seen that some years.

The greens should obviously be very fast, but not unplayable, like we have seen some years. All they need to do at most of these courses is make the rough very deep, narrow the fairways, and make the greens very fast, but playable. The greens should not be so rock hard that you hit a perfect iron shot and it goes right over the green.

With regards to scoring, you have 140 of the best players in the world. and of those 140 guys, you will have at least a handful who are absolutely on fire, totally in the zone. When you have the best of the best and they are playing their best, I think there should be a few guys under par for the tournament. If 1 or 2 under par is a really good score every day, I think that is fine. I think the winning score for the 4 days should be somewhere around 5 under, give or take a few shots either way.

If not a single guy can break par for the tournament, I think something is wrong. It probably means the course is unfair. I mean when you have the best players in the world, if not a single can break par, the course is obviously too tough IMO. By the same token, this is the US Open. If the winning score is 15 or 20 under, then the course was obviously playing too easy.

I didn't watch much today. I was mainly just following the scores on the internet. But I heard there was a 230 yard par 3, where Tiger, JT and DJ all hit perfect shots and nobody held the green. To me that is ridiculous. A 230 yard par 3 is hard enough, without making the green nearly impossible to hold.

I agree with your post. Wasn’t watching really close today but from what I gathered the wind had a lot to do with the high scores today.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think there is a happy medium. A US Open course should obviously be set up very tough. But I don't think they should make the greens so rock hard that they don't hold. And they shouldn't be so fast that if you are 3 feet above the hole and miss the putt that it goes 15 feet by. We've seen that some years.

The greens should obviously be very fast, but not unplayable, like we have seen some years. All they need to do at most of these courses is make the rough very deep, narrow the fairways, and make the greens very fast, but playable. The greens should not be so rock hard that you hit a perfect iron shot and it goes right over the green.

With regards to scoring, you have 140 of the best players in the world. and of those 140 guys, you will have at least a handful who are absolutely on fire, totally in the zone. When you have the best of the best and they are playing their best, I think there should be a few guys under par for the tournament. If 1 or 2 under par is a really good score every day, I think that is fine. I think the winning score for the 4 days should be somewhere around 5 under, give or take a few shots either way.

If not a single guy can break par for the tournament, I think something is wrong. It probably means the course is unfair. I mean when you have the best players in the world, if not a single can break par, the course is obviously too tough IMO. By the same token, this is the US Open. If the winning score is 15 or 20 under, then the course was obviously playing too easy.

I didn't watch much today. I was mainly just following the scores on the internet. But I heard there was a 230 yard par 3, where Tiger, JT and DJ all hit perfect shots and nobody held the green. To me that is ridiculous. A 230 yard par 3 is hard enough, without making the green nearly impossible to hold.

Rosey won the U.S. Open @ Merion with a score of +1. Was something wrong with THAT course (other than the logistics) ?? The answer is a big, fat NO. It’s the U.S. Open ffs. Instead of being the board contrarian, why don’t you actually WATCH most of the tournament first before another long-winded post as to why it’s not fair/too tough.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

Rosey won the U.S. Open @ Merion with a score of +1. Was something wrong with THAT course (other than the logistics) ?? The answer is a big, fat NO. It’s the U.S. Open ffs. Instead of being the board contrarian, why don’t you actually WATCH most of the tournament first before another long-winded post as to why it’s not fair/too tough.

I was simply saying that I want to see a really tough, but fair course in the US Open. And in general I think that would translate to a winning score of somewhere around 5 under par total (give or take a couple of shots either way) for the tournament. That is hardly some big contrarian viewpoint.

There are obviously factors that could affect scoring. As JMS said, if the wind kicks up, that can make a huge difference. If it was really windy on a US Open course, then there is a good chance that nobody would break par for the tournament. I wouldn't have a problem with that.

By the way, there have been plenty of players over the years who have complained when the courses are set up unfair. You may think that is just sour grapes when guys complain. But often times their complaints have merit.

[Rupert Pupkin]

I've been watching a little bit today. From what I've seen today, I like the way the USGA set up this course. These are perfect US Open conditions IMO. The course is very tough, but fair. The rough is very deep, as it should be for a US Open.

I actually wish they had deeper rough in non-majors. Many of the courses that they play these days have very little rough. I don't like it when the long hitters are bombing the ball 70 yards off line and getting away with it. There should be some consequence to not driving it straight. I think that week in and week out nowadays on the tour, driving distance is rewarded a lot more than driving accuracy. It obviously depends on the course, but nowadays it seems that far more of the courses they play favor driving distance over accuracy. It may partially be because they think that is what the fans want to see. The fans want to see DJ bomb it out there 340 yards. They don't want him to have to lay up with an iron. Anyway, I would like to see it be at least a 50/50 thing where driving accuracy is at least as important as driving distance, if not more.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I've been watching a little bit today. From what I've seen today, I like the way the USGA set up this course. These are perfect US Open conditions IMO. The course is very tough, but fair. The rough is very deep, as it should be for a US Open.

I guess I spoke too soon. That was a joke out there today. I don't know how the USGA can be so incompetent. The players blasted them and rightfully so:

https://golfweek.com/2018/06/16/golf...-course-setup/

On the Golf Channel, all the commentators were unanimous in their criticism. Brandel Chamblee, Frank Nobilo, David Duval, and Rich Lerner all blasted the USGA and the course set-up.

The USGA admitted that they screwed up. Their excuse was that the wind was worse than they expected. That is a very poor excuse. You can never expect that you are going to know exactly how the wind is going to be. You have to assume that it may be worse than what you are expecting and then set up the course accordingly. You have to allow some wiggle room in case the wind is worse than forecast.

[jms62]

Course was fine in the morning and then the wind kicked up. Those are the breaks.