New Venues vs Old Venues at US Opens

https://theocho.ca/t...st-ae5f0eef5c38

I feel that new US Open courses get a bad reputation, especially in recent years. Thoughts?

I think BP and TP will always hold their own because they can be tricked up and lengthened. Some jump on the 'how bad this course was" by just listening to others and not really evaluating the situation for themselves.

I didn't like chambers bay and Erin hills so far is looking very similar, so I'm not really a fan.

Bethpage and Torrey are legit tracks though, I love watching those opens. I think what happened was that the idea of bethpage and Torrey resonated with the USGA and they thought we should go to public courses all the time and make this part of our mantra. The thing is US Open venues are few and far between, and it's tough to just build one.

For the most part, I like that they generally stick with a rotation of historic courses and throw in a newbie now and then. I started playing golf in 2010 and was/am excited for Merion, Pinehurst, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Winged Foot, and LACC. Congressional and Olympic were ... meh, which also describes my anticipation of Brookline. One thing I don't like is holding a major at a course that already hosts a regular tour event (Pebble seems great but Torrey seems overrated). And Chambers was atrocious.

Stick with the classics, and courses built in that era like BP Black. Erin is a joke.

Just look at the top golf courses in the US almost all of them are old courses, the truly great new courses will never host an open due to logistics or not being long enough (Sand Hills, Bandon, Friars). I love Bethpage its too bad the last Open there was a absolute mess weather wise. Torrey is so boring to me but Tiger made it a great Open.

So far I think EH is decent, much better than Chambers, but it sucks that they got so much rain so its not bouncy yet.

The US Open surprisingly has had very few venues over the past 10 or so years I really loved, most have been rather vanilla compared with the Open rota which doesn't feature any lackluster or controversial courses. The best US Open track recently was Olympic Club, Chambers would've been up there but the poor decision to try fescue greens really dampened that for most people.

Tired of pebble and torrey. Awesome trax but tired of watching multiple events at these tracks.

I think the "new" courses just need to bring something positive or exciting, to get included in the "worthy courses debate".

Chambers was a fail because the atmosphere was poor (due to limited viewings and how poor the greens were). It didn't help the end result was based on a missed putt, as opposed to a made putt.

If a new course gets a good vibe and a great outcome for the TV viewers, then it has a chance to succeed. I think Erin Hills is on the right track, based on some enjoyable scores after round 1.

The commentary is still lacking, which doesn't help as well.

For a TV viewer (not so much a golf fanatic) but your average golfer, it's not the course that matters when it's all said and done, its the battles and stories.

If we have no battles or good stories, then we need some enjoyable landscape to look at.

Part of the allure of the classic courses is the history. Seeing the highlights over the years make them nostalgic. I've got no problem with them sprinkling in new courses especially in new parts of the country, gives me/people a reason to visit parts of the country that otherwise we may skip. I cringe when I hear grow the game, but I can't help but think this has the help the narrative of bringing new people to the sport.

Erin Hills is alright so far - entertaining to watch world number 1 2 and 3 shoot a combined +16 while old hacks like Els and Furyk are 2 and 3 under.

More interesting than Oakmont last year I thought.

I really do appreciate the effort to play public courses. The public courses are being designed, however, by people that forgot what good golf course design is.

USGA needs a US Open in the mountains. Montana, Wyoming, Idaho. Thsy could go to Colorado, and play on a course at 8000+ feet, making the 600-yard par 4 a real possibility.

Tired of pebble and torrey. Awesome trax but tired of watching multiple events at these tracks.

Hard when the Pros like the courses and they need them out West.... Me, Im tired of the east coast courses! And when they tune these two up from the regular events, they are two different course! But, Im a homer!

Meh. I like this site just fine. I can be whatever it needs to be. Par can be protected or not. I don't really care. I want to see a course reward great shots and punish poor ones. Middle of the road shots can go either way. So far Erin Hills is providing just that. It's simple really (in theory). Put the ball where it needs to be and you'll succeed. Failure to do so will result in a lot of suckage. This course is fine IMO. And my opinion is not open to debate. It's mine dangit, leave it be. Thanks.

Being non American I am heavily influenced by TV coverage so Pebble Beach will always be the be all and end all US Open venue to me.

Erin Hills is doing a good job right now but probably like it more as a PGA Championship venue

USGA should go to a 10 course rota that includes all the classics - Pebble, Pinehurst, Oakmont, Bethpage, Shinnecock etc.

The PGA major should look to play courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay etc.

I think it would reinforce the identity of both majors

USGA should go to a 10 course rota that includes all the classics - Pebble, Pinehurst, Oakmont, Bethpage, Shinnecock etc.

 

The PGA major should look to play courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay etc.

 

I think it would reinforce the identity of both majors

agree, if they must succumb to commercialism then leave that to the pga. these new courses are all about the developer trying to get exposure to drive more golf vacation traffic to the property.

There are a couple of courses near me that blow Erin Hills away in terms of visuals and that could host a US Open. One recently hosted the Senior Open. Erin Hills is a boring course to watch on TV. Perhaps its the angles that the Fox Sports camera crew is presenting. Does nothing for me. So many great courses to choose from in this country and they've had it at a couple in recent years that were just so-so.

Stick with the old classics. I'm old so maybe that has something to do with my opinion. Ha.

For the most part, I like that they generally stick with a rotation of historic courses and throw in a newbie now and then. I started playing golf in 2010 and was/am excited for Merion, Pinehurst, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Winged Foot, and LACC. Congressional and Olympic were ... meh, which also describes my anticipation of Brookline. One thing I don't like is holding a major at a course that already hosts a regular tour event (Pebble seems great but Torrey seems overrated). And Chambers was atrocious.

Brookline? The Country Club? It's one of the oldest courses in the country and is a USGA stalwart. If you're looking for a "classic" course from "that era" then it fits the bill.

Doesn't hold regular events but did have a Ryder Cup.

Should host it at Spyglass Hill - its good enough for a US Open and would be a nice change of pace from Pebble Beach.

I'm okay with Pebble becasue I never watch the regular event there, if you can even call it regular.

I am a fan of the classics myself. The traditional, old tracks didn't move millions of cubic yards of dirt and used what Mother Nature provided. Today's design theories and concepts center more around how much dirt can be moved and what the property can be transformed into. In many cases, it isn't sustainable over time and costs lots of money down the road in fixing drainage and erosion issues. Speaking from lots of experience on this one.

Although, the land around Erin Hills doesn't appear to have been manipulated very much, which is refreshing. That certainly hasn't been the norm for the past several decades.

Guys like Tom Doak and Gil Hanse are throwbacks to a lost art, in my opinion.

Brookline? The Country Club? It's one of the oldest courses in the country and is a USGA stalwart. If you're looking for a "classic" course from "that era" then it fits the bill.

 

Doesn't hold regular events but did have a Ryder Cup.

No doubt it's a historic course. I'm just saying that, from what I recall from watching highlights of the '99 Ryder Cup, I'm not as excited about it compared to Shinnecock, Winged Foot, Oakmont, etc. Perhaps I'll change my mind in 2022.

Fair enough, man. One thing that is a knock is that it's limited due to the surroundings. But then again I am a homer and grew up playing and caddying in the Baahston suburbs

Brookline? The Country Club? It's one of the oldest courses in the country and is a USGA stalwart. If you're looking for a "classic" course from "that era" then it fits the bill.

 

Doesn't hold regular events but did have a Ryder Cup.

 

No doubt it's a historic course. I'm just saying that, from what I recall from watching highlights of the '99 Ryder Cup, I'm not as excited about it compared to Shinnecock, Winged Foot, Oakmont, etc. Perhaps I'll change my mind in 2022.

The Country Club was marvelously redesigned/updated in time for the 2013 U.S. Amateur.

http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/the-country-club-brookline-ma-usa/

Tired of pebble and torrey. Awesome trax but tired of watching multiple events at these tracks.

How do you get sick of Pebble? My idea of golfing heaven!

Give me Cherry Hills over Erin Hills 8 days a week. The USGA has become a farce and Mike Davis can't leave soon enough for my tastes.