Kevin Na's US Open Preview (MERGED)

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

I hope the course has lots of spotters

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

You dont have to play this week Kevin.....

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

 

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

 

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

 

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

First of all, whether the deep fescue comes into play depends on how far you hit the ball off line. Having played the course several times, he's right that if you're way off line you can end up basically unplayable but there was a fair amount of room to keep the ball in play. I also visited the fescue several times and didn't have an issue getting the ball on the fairway. Not saying you're going to be able to advance the ball very far though.

It's the US Open...do we really want this to be easy?

Does Kevin have a chance to win? Naaaa

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

 

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

 

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

 

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

 

 

It's the US Open...do we really want this to be easy?

 

 

I'm not advocating for the course to be easy. I just think there are other ways to make a course difficult without the potential for lost balls 5 feet of the fairway. It's gimmicky. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me, but I get the impression that they're coming up with bits to make the course tougher rather than actually setting a course up to challenge the players.

I realize I'll be in the minority here. Oh well.

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

 

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

 

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

 

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

 

 

It's the US Open...do we really want this to be easy?

 

 

 

I'm not advocating for the course to be easy. I just think there are other ways to make a course difficult without the potential for lost balls 5 feet of the fairway. It's gimmicky. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me, but I get the impression that they're coming up with bits to make the course tougher rather than actually setting a course up to challenge the players.

 

I realize I'll be in the minority here. Oh well.

No issues with you Sir...more of how Na presented it. Once you see the course on TV, you'll see how the fescue comes into play.

I get the point but after reading the article in GD about how/why it was built...the dude with the money wanted it that way every day. He wanted even more length and back to back huge...way over 600yds...par 5 holes. I'm way out on a limb I know but saying it will be better than Chambers.

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

 

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

 

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

 

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

 

 

It's the US Open...do we really want this to be easy?

 

 

 

I'm not advocating for the course to be easy. I just think there are other ways to make a course difficult without the potential for lost balls 5 feet of the fairway. It's gimmicky. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me, but I get the impression that they're coming up with bits to make the course tougher rather than actually setting a course up to challenge the players.

 

I realize I'll be in the minority here. Oh well.

Hard to say if you're in the minority here. I think it would have been best to mention Adam Scott and Wesley Bryan as well in your thread title as Na is somewhat of a lightning rod. I personally prefer MacKenzie principles which used to be fully on display at Augusta (including no rough). But modern equipment has forced AN and the tour venues to become much longer and more penal. Davis has done pretty well with set-ups (except for last year). If they keep that rough high they will need lots of spotters and hopefully no one will get hurt playing from it. Play will slow down as well. There is a bunch here at the wrx who like to see the guys struggle. Typically this comes from guys that aren't very good themselves - so don't worry about it.

Originally saw this on Golf Digest (http://www.golfdiges...social_facebook)

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BVNSL7OBWMu/

 

Na gives us a preview of what the rough will be like next week. Now, first off, is this overly dramatic? Probably. But does he have a point? I believe so. I don't want to see the US Open decided by a guy missing the first cut by 2 feet and taking his medicine with a triple. I saw another thread in here talking about Mike Davis' thoughts on distance, and I think he's really trying to penalize the "bomb it with little regard for accuracy" players.

 

I think this is a really flawed way of thinking. Yes, these are the best players in the world and they should be able to adapt their game to conquer one of the toughest courses conceived, but I don't think that should mean that they have to change their game. Bombers like DJ should be able to still play that game without worrying about the penalty of missing the fairway by 10 feet.

 

I really don't think this will be the last of the complaints we hear this week, and I expect that the USGA won't change anything, but man that is a seriously severe penalty.

 

 

It's the US Open...do we really want this to be easy?

 

 

 

I'm not advocating for the course to be easy. I just think there are other ways to make a course difficult without the potential for lost balls 5 feet of the fairway. It's gimmicky. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me, but I get the impression that they're coming up with bits to make the course tougher rather than actually setting a course up to challenge the players.

 

I realize I'll be in the minority here. Oh well.

Your first post referenced missing the fairway by 10', now this post you say 5'. Which is it? More to the point, if you had to put a number on it, how many feet from the fairway should result in a severe penalty in your opinion. Not looking for an arguement, genuinely want your thoughts on this.

Gonna be a 1st time major winner.

Be 6 first timers in a row.

Gonna be a 1st time major winner.

 

Be 6 first timers in a row.

Rickie?

My 3 picks

Kisner

Stenson

Dufner

I agree with Kevin. It's a bad setup, and I have no doubt that several players will voice their displeasure.

But I also remember what Jack Nicklaus used to say about complainers, and checking them off the list of possible contenders. :)

I agree with Kevin. It's a bad setup, and I have no doubt that several players will voice their displeasure.

 

But I also remember what Jack Nicklaus used to say about complainers, and checking them off the list of possible contenders. :)

I'm intrigued...what's bad about the setup?

I agree with Kevin. Course is great. That's too penal for being very close to the fairway. It should favor players like Kevin who are a bit shorter and straighter.

I agree with Kevin. It's a bad setup, and I have no doubt that several players will voice their displeasure.

 

But I also remember what Jack Nicklaus used to say about complainers, and checking them off the list of possible contenders. :)

 

I'm intrigued...what's bad about the setup?

I'm not sure how isolated or how frequent this occurs hole over hole, but if it's the way he's describing it, it's utter bullxxxx.

I've been up there, played it twice since 2015- I absolutely LOVE this golf course. However, there's plenty of ways to make this an amazing challenge without the WAY OVER THE TOP fescue. That was insane. And will make for horrible TV...

So, how far off the fairway is that? Looks to be the second cut, which I have no problem with given it is the US Open.

The US Opens lately have sucked because they went no rough and allowed for bomb and gouge. If not bomb and gouge, there were definitely less dramatics due to the infinite areas for golfers to hit it, find it, and play it.

I grew up in the USGA era where you hit it in the fairway or you suffered, so did most of these players.

I agree with Kevin. It's a bad setup, and I have no doubt that several players will voice their displeasure.

 

But I also remember what Jack Nicklaus used to say about complainers, and checking them off the list of possible contenders. :)

 

I'm intrigued...what's bad about the setup?

I think golf is best played as a seamless series of shots which allow the action to progress quickly and smoothly. When course architecture and/or setup conspire to delay the action, or possibly injure the golfer, or sap the enjoyment of playing, it is flawed.

I believe in stern challenges and penalties for untidy play, but rather than add a stroke or two (or three) to the player's card as the result of an error, superior architecture and/or setup should allow for a recovery, provided that the recovery shot is an elevated test which demands the demonstration of skill and creativity.

Having rough that high not only imperils the physical well-being of the players, but it also invites wasted time and brings happenstance to an undesirable degree.

But, hey, that's just me. :)

I agree with Kevin. It's a bad setup, and I have no doubt that several players will voice their displeasure.

 

But I also remember what Jack Nicklaus used to say about complainers, and checking them off the list of possible contenders. :)

 

I'm intrigued...what's bad about the setup?

 

I think golf is best played as a seamless series of shots which allow the action to progress quickly and smoothly. When course architecture and/or setup conspire to delay the action, or possibly injure the golfer, or sap the enjoyment of playing, it is flawed.

 

I believe in stern challenges and penalties for untidy play, but rather than add a stroke or two (or three) to the player's card as the result of an error, superior architecture and/or setup should allow for a recovery, provided that the recovery shot is an elevated test which demands the demonstration of skill and creativity.

 

Having rough that high not only imperils the physical well-being of the players, but it also invites wasted time and brings happenstance to an undesirable degree.

 

But, hey, that's just me. :)

Appreciate the insights! They closed the course last October and it won't be open for public play until after the Open obviously so I can't speak to how far off the fairway it is now before it comes into play. We had the chance last summer to play it in allegedly US Open conditions with the course set up fast and firm. The fescue was present but that was for shots that were really off line.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the galleries will be walking in a lot of the areas where there is fescue.

Gonna be a 1st time major winner.

 

Be 6 first timers in a row.

 

Rickie?

Yeah, that would be sweet.

Has a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year.

Look under the hood at the stats, tee to green, around the green, putting, *very* solid all around.

Gotta play smart. He likes to roll the dice, and often he comes out ok. But rather see him play patiently.

Eh, I don't mind fescue when you're way off course. That isn't gimmicky. Gimmicky is a green where the ball lands 5 feet from the pin and ends up rolling off and 40 yards back into the fairway.

Gotta love the USGA's sanctity of par which will be precious at this US Open.

But then again when people start complaining about how tough the set up is the winning score turns out to be better than anticipated.

Hey Kevin just don't hit it into that stuff.

The fairways at Erin Hills in most of the target areas are like airport landing runways.

If you miss these fairways, you should be penalized. Seriously. These fairways, both in width and rollout, will be the most generous fairways in a US Open in a long time.

Every golfer knows that the USGA penalizes missed fairways above all else. These guys need to get over it and play. Hit your ball in the fairway and you've got nothing to worry about.

If you are holding the US Open on a course that has fairways wider than any US Open in recent memory... the second cut has to be penal unless you want the final score to be -20.

I'm sorry Kevin but if you miss a massive fairway in the US Open, it should be a hazard. Maybe we should play the event before we start complaining?

Golf is supposed to be about controlling your golf ball regardless if you are hitting it 3ft or 300 yards. The us open and british open imo usually gives the trophy to the best player that week not just the one that goes 25 for 25 inside of 20 feet like pretty much most weeks on tour. All I care about it that the greens aren't rock hard and too tricked up.

Kevin who?

Golf is supposed to be about controlling your golf ball regardless if you are hitting it 3ft or 300 yards. The us open and british open imo usually gives the trophy to the best player that week not just the one that goes 25 for 25 inside of 20 feet like pretty much most weeks on tour. All I care about it that the greens aren't rock hard and too tricked up.

The greens won't be too hard. It's been wet all spring up here.

"Second Cut" or not, the long fescue on most of the Erin Hills holes means you've missed your target by 20 yards. You should be penalized.

Steve Stricker said after his practice round the other day that this course is the best conditioned US Open course he's ever seen. I think we're all in for a good treat. And I think we'll see decent scoring where a number of guys are under par.

I agree with some of the posters in this thread, but I also understand Kevin's frustrations, especially after last year's course setup. Don't hit into it, but it's kinda like having water 3 feet off the fairway on every hole when you cannot find your ball and cannot really hit out of the hazard. A hazard is a hazard, but most people would call that placement of fescue on every hole ludicrous.

I agree with some of the posters in this thread, but I also understand Kevin's frustrations, especially after last year's course setup. Don't hit into it, but it's kinda like having water 3 feet off the fairway on every hole when you cannot find your ball and cannot really hit out of the hazard. A hazard is a hazard, but most people would call that placement of fescue on every hole ludicrous.

Not when the fairway is 30 yards wide to begin with.

A guy like Kevin Na is already defeated, bitching about how a course is set up. Probably has something to do with the fact that he is one of the worst on the PGA Tour off the tee.

Rory said the course was great and was more generous than we've seen in a US Open in a long time... would allow guys to be aggressive.

Attitude matters. If it didn't mean a 7 hour round, I'd root for Na to spend the entire round in the tall stuff!

Rory said the course was great and was more generous than we've seen in a US Open in a long time... would allow guys to be aggressive.

 

Attitude matters. If it didn't mean a 7 hour round, I'd root for Na to spend the entire round in the tall stuff!

How would playing in the fescue speed up Na?