does the usga miss the mark compared to the r&a regarding golf course selection for the open(s)

[golfandfishing]

+1

 

It would be very nice to be able to play a lot of the courses the majors are held at on US soil.

 

Many are available to you now. How many of them have you played?

[Sedge]

+1

 

It would be very nice to be able to play a lot of the courses the majors are held at on US soil.

 

Not a bad point at all, though you would want to exclude Chambers Bay from your "wish list" right?

 

I disagree, I would love to give chambers bay a twirl, just not under the us open pinball style play. Fox really made the course unappealing with Joe Buck announcing, constantly showing steamrollers and the greens being reduced to a linoleum kitchen floor. It looks like a fun track, but I suppose if I ventured to the northwest, I would opt for Brandon or pacific dunes.

[raynorfan1]

+1

 

It would be very nice to be able to play a lot of the courses the majors are held at on US soil.

 

Not a bad point at all, though you would want to exclude Chambers Bay from your "wish list" right?

 

I disagree, I would love to give chambers bay a twirl, just not under the us open pinball style play. Fox really made the course unappealing with Joe Buck announcing, constantly showing steamrollers and the greens being reduced to a linoleum kitchen floor. It looks like a fun track, but I suppose if I ventured to the northwest, I would opt for Brandon or pacific dunes.

 

I don't get it. I can understand wanting access to the US Open courses so that you can see what that test of golf looks like. If you're going to strip the Open style conditioning away from it, you're not playing the same course - you're playing something that sort of looks like the place where they played the US Open.

[chas521]

I hear you but Bethpage doesn't need that increased interest because there are no lulls in play on any course. Yes if it's raining or the threat or if it's very hot and humid, you'll find an opening here and there plus there are walk-ins always waiting to get on. The Black is a championship course, The Red almost to that level, The Blue was the signature course at Bethpage before The Black was updated and received most of the money, The Green and The Yellow are both not bad. All of the them are in nice shape for public courses and that's why they are always busy.

 

Interesting question though (and I don't know the answer to it) is whether Bethpage was in the same situation pre-2002, or did the renovation of the Black and US Open generate interest that lifted the fortunes of all of the courses?

 

You asked a good question here and you'll have to take my answer in faith. I've been playing Bethpage for many years now and although 2002 created a situation where its name became "famous" it was always a crowded place on all 5 courses, Granted that 2002 probably increased the players trying to get on The Black, it was always somewhat difficult to get a tee-time. The reservation phone line was always busy. The Black was always tough but not in the greatest shape [The Blue was]. I would say that The Blue has a front 9 that is as hard as The Black IMO. However, it was re-doctored for 2002 and became the championship course it is now. Barclays this year, PGA soon and Ryder Cup somewhat soon, The tours like it because it is really good for the spectators. It's a shame that it rained so much during 2002 and 9 because the course is a monster. Plus TV couldn't really show the incredible elevation changes. FYI, The Red is very nice also.

[just plain bill]

of all the courses i see on tv (and i got to play riviera once, and played tpc scottsdale once) the one that really makes me want to play it to see what it's really like, is augusta...the u.s. open courses i watch and think, no thanks! looks too tough for me, lol!

[AThompson_3]

Here is where I think the US Open misses the mark. I don't about the public or private debate. I think where they miss the mark is not having a definite "Rota" like the R&A. I know they choose certain courses more frequently and everything. But I think it would be a lot cooler if they would pick 10 courses or less across the country and deem them "US Open Clubs" that would be cooler. For instance, lets say the US Open can only be held at Pebble, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Merion, Olympic Club, Pinehurst, Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Medinah, and Bethpage. So once every decade the US Open will be at one of those 10 courses (whatever 10 courses they decide). Just my thoughts.

[raynorfan1]

Here is where I think the US Open misses the mark. I don't about the public or private debate. I think where they miss the mark is not having a definite "Rota" like the R&A. I know they choose certain courses more frequently and everything. But I think it would be a lot cooler if they would pick 10 courses or less across the country and deem them "US Open Clubs" that would be cooler. For instance, lets say the US Open can only be held at Pebble, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Merion, Olympic Club, Pinehurst, Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Medinah, and Bethpage. So once every decade the US Open will be at one of those 10 courses (whatever 10 courses they decide). Just my thoughts.

 

Keep in mind, since WWII, the US Open has only been played on ~25 different courses. It's more than the 10 or so that the R&A uses, but we have way more geography to cover. Given geography and the politics at play, I don't think there are many more than a dozen or so legitimate contenders:

 

(1) Oakmont

(2) Shinnecock

(3) Pebble Beach

(4) Bethpage

(5) Pinehurst

(6) Hazeltine

(7) Congressional

(8) Torrey Pines (which, honestly, is not nearly in the same class as the others)

(9) The Country Club

(10) Olympic Club

(11) Winged Foot

(12) Southern Hills

 

And other former venues are sort of off the list:

 

(1) Cherry Hills (can't be made long enough w/altitude)

(2) Baltusrol (aligned with the PGA right now)

(3) Medinah (aligned with the PGA)

(4) Chambers Bay (not sure the USGA has any desire to go back any time soon)

(5) Merion (2013 was widely considered the "last hurrah" for Merion)

 

Then some intriguing possibilities:

 

(1) LACC - how will they do in 2023? Could they earn a spot in the "rota"?

(2) Oakland Hills - about to undergo a massive restoration/renovation, would that make it an attractive midwest option?

(3) Erin Hills - my guess is that this is a one-hit-wonder - the owners want the prestige of hosting an Open, but probably not the pain of doing it more than once.

(4) Oak Hill - is Rochester officially too far off the beaten path to host?

(5) Harding Park - would the USGA play at a TPC facility (doubtful)?

(6) Butler National - off the boards until their membership policies change, but is capable of hosting.

 

Anybody else who could host a US Open?

[AThompson_3]

Here is where I think the US Open misses the mark. I don't about the public or private debate. I think where they miss the mark is not having a definite "Rota" like the R&A. I know they choose certain courses more frequently and everything. But I think it would be a lot cooler if they would pick 10 courses or less across the country and deem them "US Open Clubs" that would be cooler. For instance, lets say the US Open can only be held at Pebble, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Merion, Olympic Club, Pinehurst, Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Medinah, and Bethpage. So once every decade the US Open will be at one of those 10 courses (whatever 10 courses they decide). Just my thoughts.

 

Keep in mind, since WWII, the US Open has only been played on ~25 different courses. It's more than the 10 or so that the R&A uses, but we have way more geography to cover. Given geography and the politics at play, I don't think there are many more than a dozen or so legitimate contenders:

 

(1) Oakmont

(2) Shinnecock

(3) Pebble Beach

(4) Bethpage

(5) Pinehurst

(6) Hazeltine

(7) Congressional

(8) Torrey Pines (which, honestly, is not nearly in the same class as the others)

(9) The Country Club

(10) Olympic Club

(11) Winged Foot

(12) Southern Hills

 

And other former venues are sort of off the list:

 

(1) Cherry Hills (can't be made long enough w/altitude)

(2) Baltusrol (aligned with the PGA right now)

(3) Medinah (aligned with the PGA)

(4) Chambers Bay (not sure the USGA has any desire to go back any time soon)

(5) Merion (2013 was widely considered the "last hurrah" for Merion)

 

Then some intriguing possibilities:

 

(1) LACC - how will they do in 2023? Could they earn a spot in the "rota"?

(2) Oakland Hills - about to undergo a massive restoration/renovation, would that make it an attractive midwest option?

(3) Erin Hills - my guess is that this is a one-hit-wonder - the owners want the prestige of hosting an Open, but probably not the pain of doing it more than once.

(4) Oak Hill - is Rochester officially too far off the beaten path to host?

(5) Harding Park - would the USGA play at a TPC facility (doubtful)?

(6) Butler National - off the boards until their membership policies change, but is capable of hosting.

 

Anybody else who could host a US Open?

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

[raynorfan1]

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

 

It would be interesting to have a set "rota", but it wouldn't work with either USGA or local politics. The US Open is a huge event. If clubs knew that they were on the rota, their willingness to host other undercard events (the amateur, the women's amateur, the publinks, etc.) would go down. You'd also have local political issues - when the club can pitch the Open as a "once in a generation" event, the local community can get behind it. When it's once every ten years, reliably, it gets to be a pain for the locals.

 

The loss of Merion as a contender is sad. But there are others on the distant history list (Myopia, Chicago Golf Club, Philly Cricket, et. al.) that would be so much fun to see an open on - but it's just not possible in the modern world.

[AThompson_3]

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

 

It would be interesting to have a set "rota", but it wouldn't work with either USGA or local politics. The US Open is a huge event. If clubs knew that they were on the rota, their willingness to host other undercard events (the amateur, the women's amateur, the publinks, etc.) would go down. You'd also have local political issues - when the club can pitch the Open as a "once in a generation" event, the local community can get behind it. When it's once every ten years, reliably, it gets to be a pain for the locals.

 

The loss of Merion as a contender is sad. But there are others on the distant history list (Myopia, Chicago Golf Club, Philly Cricket, et. al.) that would be so much fun to see an open on - but it's just not possible in the modern world.

Hosting the US Open once every 10 years is a pain for the locals? I completely understand the point you are trying to make there, but I think the more fans and the golf community gets even more familiar with these big time courses and recognize every hole sort of like we do with Augusta. Also outside of Pebble Beach hosting the AT&T every year, most of these courses don't host lesser tournaments anyways. I don't think something like this would ever happen for precisely the reasons you stated, but I thought it was interesting to think about.

[golfandfishing]

Here is where I think the US Open misses the mark. I don't about the public or private debate. I think where they miss the mark is not having a definite "Rota" like the R&A. I know they choose certain courses more frequently and everything. But I think it would be a lot cooler if they would pick 10 courses or less across the country and deem them "US Open Clubs" that would be cooler. For instance, lets say the US Open can only be held at Pebble, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Merion, Olympic Club, Pinehurst, Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Medinah, and Bethpage. So once every decade the US Open will be at one of those 10 courses (whatever 10 courses they decide). Just my thoughts.

 

But courses fall in and out of the R&A "rota" as well. Portrush next year, Liverpool returned in 2006 after about 40 years. The Open does mot have a definite rota.

[az2au]

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

 

It would be interesting to have a set "rota", but it wouldn't work with either USGA or local politics. The US Open is a huge event. If clubs knew that they were on the rota, their willingness to host other undercard events (the amateur, the women's amateur, the publinks, etc.) would go down. You'd also have local political issues - when the club can pitch the Open as a "once in a generation" event, the local community can get behind it. When it's once every ten years, reliably, it gets to be a pain for the locals.

 

The loss of Merion as a contender is sad. But there are others on the distant history list (Myopia, Chicago Golf Club, Philly Cricket, et. al.) that would be so much fun to see an open on - but it's just not possible in the modern world.

Hosting the US Open once every 10 years is a pain for the locals? I completely understand the point you are trying to make there, but I think the more fans and the golf community gets even more familiar with these big time courses and recognize every hole sort of like we do with Augusta. Also outside of Pebble Beach hosting the AT&T every year, most of these courses don't host lesser tournaments anyways. I don't think something like this would ever happen for precisely the reasons you stated, but I thought it was interesting to think about.

A couple of points here:

1. I know members at a few of the clubs listed and there is absolutely a lot of debate about whether it is worth it or not for a significant portion of the members. They still do it but don't be fooled into believing that there is 100% support from the membership.

2. Most still host smaller events as well. There's often a lot more support for those events than the US Open.

[raynorfan1]

What would be really interesting is if the USGA repeated the Bethpage model - identifying public gems and putting up the money to bring them back to Championship conditions. How many great courses are there that don't get a look because of 50+ years of neglect?

[AThompson_3]

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

 

It would be interesting to have a set "rota", but it wouldn't work with either USGA or local politics. The US Open is a huge event. If clubs knew that they were on the rota, their willingness to host other undercard events (the amateur, the women's amateur, the publinks, etc.) would go down. You'd also have local political issues - when the club can pitch the Open as a "once in a generation" event, the local community can get behind it. When it's once every ten years, reliably, it gets to be a pain for the locals.

 

The loss of Merion as a contender is sad. But there are others on the distant history list (Myopia, Chicago Golf Club, Philly Cricket, et. al.) that would be so much fun to see an open on - but it's just not possible in the modern world.

Hosting the US Open once every 10 years is a pain for the locals? I completely understand the point you are trying to make there, but I think the more fans and the golf community gets even more familiar with these big time courses and recognize every hole sort of like we do with Augusta. Also outside of Pebble Beach hosting the AT&T every year, most of these courses don't host lesser tournaments anyways. I don't think something like this would ever happen for precisely the reasons you stated, but I thought it was interesting to think about.

A couple of points here:

1. I know members at a few of the clubs listed and there is absolutely a lot of debate about whether it is worth it or not for a significant portion of the members. They still do it but don't be fooled into believing that there is 100% support from the membership.

2. Most still host smaller events as well. There's often a lot more support for those events than the US Open.

Why would some members not be in favor of hosting the US Open? Would it be because they close the course for a while? Just don't like all the noise around the club or what? I couldn't imagine not wanting your club to be highlighted on arguably the biggest stage in golf. That's just me though.

[klebs01]

The course ends up closed for months, gets destroyed by the gallery, and takes months to recover.

[prsgtrman]

I realize that the number of courses they play it on is already pretty limited. I just want them to definitively call them " The US Open courses" if that makes sense. There are definitely more than 10 or so that could be considered for the US Open. The only one that you mentioned that makes me sad is Merion. I understand it doesn't quite have the capabilities that all the other ones have, but I think it has more character than the others. '13 was probably my favorite US Open in memory and I think the players struggled more their than any course in recent memory. Plus I'm a sucker for 1 over winning a tournament.

 

It would be interesting to have a set "rota", but it wouldn't work with either USGA or local politics. The US Open is a huge event. If clubs knew that they were on the rota, their willingness to host other undercard events (the amateur, the women's amateur, the publinks, etc.) would go down. You'd also have local political issues - when the club can pitch the Open as a "once in a generation" event, the local community can get behind it. When it's once every ten years, reliably, it gets to be a pain for the locals.

 

The loss of Merion as a contender is sad. But there are others on the distant history list (Myopia, Chicago Golf Club, Philly Cricket, et. al.) that would be so much fun to see an open on - but it's just not possible in the modern world.

Hosting the US Open once every 10 years is a pain for the locals? I completely understand the point you are trying to make there, but I think the more fans and the golf community gets even more familiar with these big time courses and recognize every hole sort of like we do with Augusta. Also outside of Pebble Beach hosting the AT&T every year, most of these courses don't host lesser tournaments anyways. I don't think something like this would ever happen for precisely the reasons you stated, but I thought it was interesting to think about.

A couple of points here:

1. I know members at a few of the clubs listed and there is absolutely a lot of debate about whether it is worth it or not for a significant portion of the members. They still do it but don't be fooled into believing that there is 100% support from the membership.

2. Most still host smaller events as well. There's often a lot more support for those events than the US Open.

Why would some members not be in favor of hosting the US Open? Would it be because they close the course for a while? Just don't like all the noise around the club or what? I couldn't imagine not wanting your club to be highlighted on arguably the biggest stage in golf. That's just me though.

 

what was said above and they just dont need or want the exposure.

[VOX]

Its great that the USGA goes to private clubs. It lets the qualifiers play a course that they otherwise might not get to play and it lets spectators see a course that they otherwise might not get to see.

[HoffTTM]

They are missing the boat on several things most notably:

 

a) course setup

and

b) not sure if I read this on here or elsewher but I found it very fitting: compare how much advertising space at the respective opens is taken up by the USGA vs the R&A, the vast majority of Open Championship areas are branded with "The Open" and all that implies.

could add

c) Everyone knows who Mike Davis is, try and name the guy in charge of the Open

[markheardjr]

I'd like to see the U.S. Open played on a desert course. There are plenty of really good options in Palm Springs / Scottsdale area. The argument I guess is that it is just too hot in that time of year but you can find some elevated courses that stay moderately cool. Maybe a PGA Championship then? Maybe move the PGA to Oct/Nov and spread out the majors a bit more?

 

I guess that is the same argument for Florida in the summer, but I think Streamsong is overrated anyways, since someone pointed it out earlier.

 

And potentially add a 5th hosted in AustralAsia land. We don't need The Players to be a major. Augusta already has the American SE locked up, if we're adding one move it somewhere else. US Open and the PGA are really the only tournaments that can showcase difference courses across a vast region. If you want a major at Sawgrass then make the PGA/US go there one year.

 

British Opens (No, not "THE" Open) are all held on rotation on golf courses that don't really offer any variety IMO. I appreciate the history and the birthplace of golf. But you get what you get with British links. They have their rotation down and thats that.

 

Would also like to see them play a U.S. Open in Hawaii maybe. Something like Ko Olau or another good test that isn't already a tour stop. Bandon Dunes should get a major. Or go to Pumpkin Ridge if you want. Pacific NW needs a redo after the travesty at Chambers Bay. Really surprised to see L.A. CC hosting one. Riviera aught to get a major back in the next few years.

[markheardjr]

Its great that the USGA goes to private clubs. It lets the qualifiers play a course that they otherwise might not get to play and it lets spectators see a course that they otherwise might not get to see.

 

I'd rather see local private clubs host a local open and allow access to local talent to play the course they grew up thinking they'd never get to play on. Imagine a place like Pine Valley organizing regional qualifiers and took top 10 from 10 qualifiers annually. Only allow entrants from specific zip codes so it stays local. You're talking about letting 100 local amateurs, who will respect and take care of your course play 1 day a year. Heck, make it a charity event and donate some of the entry fees to local 1st Tee programs or something.

 

The only ways I've been able to get on big name private clubs is either with a promotion through my credit card company, a local charity with a high price tag for entry or miraculously bumping into a nice person that can get me on somewhere.

 

I do like public courses hosting tour events of any kind. Generally those courses have pride in their facility/course and the experience is always more enjoyable and memorable than a place like Streamsong or other over-priced/hyped money grab.

[golfandfishing]

What are they missing in terms of course set up? Aside from last year's greens, the set ups have varied displaying the various types of golf in the US. - Oakmont was traditional old school country club, Pinehurst was a sand hills links, Torrey a west coast parkland, Bethpage was a northeast parkland. The tour stops at resort, desert and TPC regularly, no need for them to replicate those.

[mwmgolfx]

Here is where I think the US Open misses the mark. I don't about the public or private debate. I think where they miss the mark is not having a definite "Rota" like the R&A. I know they choose certain courses more frequently and everything. But I think it would be a lot cooler if they would pick 10 courses or less across the country and deem them "US Open Clubs" that would be cooler. For instance, lets say the US Open can only be held at Pebble, Oakmont, Shinnecock, Merion, Olympic Club, Pinehurst, Winged Foot, Baltusrol, Medinah, and Bethpage. So once every decade the US Open will be at one of those 10 courses (whatever 10 courses they decide). Just my thoughts.

 

Keep in mind, since WWII, the US Open has only been played on ~25 different courses. It's more than the 10 or so that the R&A uses, but we have way more geography to cover. Given geography and the politics at play, I don't think there are many more than a dozen or so legitimate contenders:

 

(1) Oakmont

(2) Shinnecock

(3) Pebble Beach

(4) Bethpage

(5) Pinehurst

(6) Hazeltine

(7) Congressional

(8) Torrey Pines (which, honestly, is not nearly in the same class as the others)

(9) The Country Club

(10) Olympic Club

(11) Winged Foot

(12) Southern Hills

 

And other former venues are sort of off the list:

 

(1) Cherry Hills (can't be made long enough w/altitude)

(2) Baltusrol (aligned with the PGA right now)

(3) Medinah (aligned with the PGA)

(4) Chambers Bay (not sure the USGA has any desire to go back any time soon)

(5) Merion (2013 was widely considered the "last hurrah" for Merion)

 

Then some intriguing possibilities:

 

(1) LACC - how will they do in 2023? Could they earn a spot in the "rota"?

(2) Oakland Hills - about to undergo a massive restoration/renovation, would that make it an attractive midwest option?

(3) Erin Hills - my guess is that this is a one-hit-wonder - the owners want the prestige of hosting an Open, but probably not the pain of doing it more than once.

(4) Oak Hill - is Rochester officially too far off the beaten path to host?

(5) Harding Park - would the USGA play at a TPC facility (doubtful)?

(6) Butler National - off the boards until their membership policies change, but is capable of hosting.

 

Anybody else who could host a US Open?

I would guess that Whistling straits could easily host an open. But since they hosted PGA couple of times will never get the opportunity. Chambers bay was a great course until the USGA fouled it up with their green treatments.

 

TPC snowqualmie RIdge certainly could hold a major. Pumpkin RIdge in Portland area has held amateur and many other championship venues other than the Open but fits all the criteria. But these ware north of California and west of the Rockies.

 

Ocean Course, Kiawah.

 

And I'm sure i'm missing some others that are definitely worthy. And yes, except for Torrey, I've played every single Public course that has held the open. But none of the eastern private ones.

[Shilgy]

I'd like to see the U.S. Open played on a desert course. There are plenty of really good options in Palm Springs / Scottsdale area. The argument I guess is that it is just too hot in that time of year but you can find some elevated courses that stay moderately cool. Maybe a PGA Championship then? Maybe move the PGA to Oct/Nov and spread out the majors a bit more?

 

I guess that is the same argument for Florida in the summer, but I think Streamsong is overrated anyways, since someone pointed it out earlier.

 

And potentially add a 5th hosted in AustralAsia land. We don't need The Players to be a major. Augusta already has the American SE locked up, if we're adding one move it somewhere else. US Open and the PGA are really the only tournaments that can showcase difference courses across a vast region. If you want a major at Sawgrass then make the PGA/US go there one year.

 

British Opens (No, not "THE" Open) are all held on rotation on golf courses that don't really offer any variety IMO. I appreciate the history and the birthplace of golf. But you get what you get with British links. They have their rotation down and thats that.

 

Would also like to see them play a U.S. Open in Hawaii maybe. Something like Ko Olau or another good test that isn't already a tour stop. Bandon Dunes should get a major. Or go to Pumpkin Ridge if you want. Pacific NW needs a redo after the travesty at Chambers Bay. Really surprised to see L.A. CC hosting one. Riviera aught to get a major back in the next few years.

With the exception of a course like there TPC here in Phoenix desert courses cannot handle US Open crowds. None of the privates here, and there are some good ones, could handle the needed infrastructure.

[raynorfan1]

I'm also not sure that you could make a desert course difficult enough for the US Open. Could you narrow the fairways and grow the rough out enough to make it the "test" that the USGA believes its national championship should be?

[golfandfishing]

Not in June, no. And the week of the open it was 115 here several days in a row. Spectators would be dead, several of them.

[prsgtrman]

hell spectators are practically dead during the waste management open. folks were passed out all over the sidewalks after the tournament last time i went.

[golfandfishing]

Lol. that sounds about right!

[Kevin67]

The USGA should only hold their events on PUBLIC courses ! How can a governing body, with a mandate to "Grow the Game", even consider playing at an exclusionary golf course.

 

Members at Private clubs have decided to be private, that is their prerogative, therefore they should get no benefits involved with hosting an open, nor publicity also.

 

Top 100 lists should be only on PUBLIC courses also.

[raynorfan1]

The USGA should only hold their events on PUBLIC courses ! How can a governing body, with a mandate to "Grow the Game", even consider playing at an exclusionary golf course.

 

Members at Private clubs have decided to be private, that is their prerogative, therefore they should get no benefits involved with hosting an open, nor publicity also.

 

Top 100 lists should be only on PUBLIC courses also.

 

Both these things exist - the publinks championships showcase the best golf outside of private clubs, and the Top 100 You Can Play list covers public courses. The fact that each are less popular than their alternative should tell us something.

[golfandfishing]

The USGA should only hold their events on PUBLIC courses ! How can a governing body, with a mandate to "Grow the Game", even consider playing at an exclusionary golf course.

 

Members at Private clubs have decided to be private, that is their prerogative, therefore they should get no benefits involved with hosting an open, nor publicity also.

 

Top 100 lists should be only on PUBLIC courses also.

 

Both these things exist - the publinks championships showcase the best golf outside of private clubs, and the Top 100 You Can Play list covers public courses. The fact that each are less popular than their alternative should tell us something.

 

The Publinks is extinct.