Most Over Rated Course on the Major Rotation

[jons1]

augusta's length hasn't deterred the 'legends' ... not sure where that came from ... pretty sure their age is what's deterred them ... very few people can appreciate just how curved #13 is and how hilly the whole place is ... there are very few flat lies on the course, and the par fives cause fits whether you lay up or not ... yes, part of that is from the greens, but the greens are not the sole defense ...

 

I agree it's an amazing course... but some people didn't like all the changes... well, most of the people were concerned at a minimum....

 

"I like the golf course still," six-time Masters winner Jack Nicklaus told Golf Digest, "but I think they've ruined it from a tournament standpoint." Gone, according to Nicklaus, is the second-shot philosophy favored by Jones and any realistic hope of an average-length player winning a green jacket. "I know what Augusta is trying to do," Nicklaus said this month in a further critique. "Whether they've gone overboard, I'm not sure. All I want is for Augusta to be Augusta, because it's such a great tournament."

 

To emphasize his point that the revised layout will not be friendly to former winners of unimposing power such as Mike Weir and José Maria Olazábal, Nicklaus even cited an icon. "Ben Hogan was not really a big hitter," says Nicklaus. "He was long enough. But Ben Hogan today? Ben Hogan today could not compete at Augusta because he did not have the massive length to compete against the long hitters. Power was always an issue at Augusta, but never so dominant that you couldn't play it."

 

Says four-time champion Arnold Palmer: "I love the place, just love everything that happens there. But now, I'm not so sure. It's changed dramatically from the course I knew the last 50 years."

 

TIGER WOODS: “If you get the right wind, making a par on 18 will be like making a birdie. If you play that hole in 16 in a week you’ll pick up at least a shot on the field.”

 

ERNIE ELS: “It’s 465 up the hill, and that’s a big, big change. We used to hit – on a calm day – a wedge or 9-iron in there. That won’t happen now. It’s 5-, 6-, 4-iron in there now.”

 

VIJAY SINGH: “I hit a driver, 3-iron to the 18th green, so that should tell you. If I’m hitting 3-iron, I don’t know about the rest of the guys. Come Sunday afternoon, with the pin over the top left, that’s going to be a tough one to make par at if you need a par to win.

 

“On 18, if somebody gave me four pars now I would say, ‘OK, I won’t play that hole,’ because I think it’s one of the tougher holes on the golf course. I think there will be more bogeys there than pars. So coming down the stretch, I think there will be more mistakes made on that hole.”

 

BILLY ANDRADE: “On 18, you used to walk off the 17th green and just walk right onto the 18th tee. Now, you have to go way to the right. The tee now is behind some pine trees. If you poll all the players, they probably didn’t know there were pine trees back there.”

 

Augusta native CHARLES HOWELL III: “Granted, it was 35 or 36 degrees in December when I played, but I hit six iron in there with a good tee ball. For a lot of players who don’t hit it as long, it’s going to be a bear of a hole.”

 

 

This is a great article on all the changes for each hole over the years...

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-complete-changes-to-augusta-national

[JD3]

I think "Tiger-proofing" by making it longer was a flawed concept. Granted I can see why they freaked out after he won by 12 shots, hit PW into Par 5 #15, and LW into #18. But by simply lengthening it all they did was squeeze out the shorter hitter that much more. If they really wanted to reduce the importance of length they could make fairways run out into hazards/deep rough less than 300 hundred off the tee ... e.g.. how they setup the par 5 at Valderrama to in the Ryder Cup to help offset the longer hitting US team. But lets face it, in the modern-era people want to see power, and IMO those kind of changes make less entertaining.

 

I also think some people overly glamorize the past, Spieth and Willet won and they weren't the longest hitters (not shortest either). Also Arnie and Jack's wins there (except 1986) were somewhat related to their power too.

 

Bottom line: power is more important than ever in professional golf, but it was important in the past too, and it doesn't completely exclude average length hitters from having a chance today.

[johnseg]

augusta's length hasn't deterred the 'legends' ... not sure where that came from ... pretty sure their age is what's deterred them ... very few people can appreciate just how curved #13 is and how hilly the whole place is ... there are very few flat lies on the course, and the par fives cause fits whether you lay up or not ... yes, part of that is from the greens, but the greens are not the sole defense ...

 

I agree it's an amazing course... but some people didn't like all the changes... well, most of the people were concerned at a minimum....

 

"I like the golf course still," six-time Masters winner Jack Nicklaus told Golf Digest, "but I think they've ruined it from a tournament standpoint." Gone, according to Nicklaus, is the second-shot philosophy favored by Jones and any realistic hope of an average-length player winning a green jacket. "I know what Augusta is trying to do," Nicklaus said this month in a further critique. "Whether they've gone overboard, I'm not sure. All I want is for Augusta to be Augusta, because it's such a great tournament."

 

To emphasize his point that the revised layout will not be friendly to former winners of unimposing power such as Mike Weir and José Maria Olazábal, Nicklaus even cited an icon. "Ben Hogan was not really a big hitter," says Nicklaus. "He was long enough. But Ben Hogan today? Ben Hogan today could not compete at Augusta because he did not have the massive length to compete against the long hitters. Power was always an issue at Augusta, but never so dominant that you couldn't play it."

 

Says four-time champion Arnold Palmer: "I love the place, just love everything that happens there. But now, I'm not so sure. It's changed dramatically from the course I knew the last 50 years."

 

TIGER WOODS: “If you get the right wind, making a par on 18 will be like making a birdie. If you play that hole in 16 in a week you’ll pick up at least a shot on the field.”

 

ERNIE ELS: “It’s 465 up the hill, and that’s a big, big change. We used to hit – on a calm day – a wedge or 9-iron in there. That won’t happen now. It’s 5-, 6-, 4-iron in there now.”

 

VIJAY SINGH: “I hit a driver, 3-iron to the 18th green, so that should tell you. If I’m hitting 3-iron, I don’t know about the rest of the guys. Come Sunday afternoon, with the pin over the top left, that’s going to be a tough one to make par at if you need a par to win.

 

“On 18, if somebody gave me four pars now I would say, ‘OK, I won’t play that hole,’ because I think it’s one of the tougher holes on the golf course. I think there will be more bogeys there than pars. So coming down the stretch, I think there will be more mistakes made on that hole.”

 

BILLY ANDRADE: “On 18, you used to walk off the 17th green and just walk right onto the 18th tee. Now, you have to go way to the right. The tee now is behind some pine trees. If you poll all the players, they probably didn’t know there were pine trees back there.”

 

Augusta native CHARLES HOWELL III: “Granted, it was 35 or 36 degrees in December when I played, but I hit six iron in there with a good tee ball. For a lot of players who don’t hit it as long, it’s going to be a bear of a hole.”

 

 

This is a great article on all the changes for each hole over the years...

http://www.golfdiges...ugusta-national

As is usually the case all of the pre-tournament talk ended up unfounded. Of the players that finished in the Top 10 in 2017 there were 3 guys over par on 18 for the week, 4 under par, and 3 even par. Ryan Moore played 18 at -1 for the week and he certainly isn't a bomber. He ranks 146 in driving distance but is accurate so his total driving goes up to 46. Kuchar isn't really a bomber either.

 

The tour is such that just about anyone in can win if their game falls into place and they make putts. That is why you see threads about the worst player to win a major etc.

 

I will add with Augusta the real shock in being there is just how hilly the course is. No. 10 alone is stunning because you don't get the feel of that hole watching on TV.

[rblmp32]

I think "Tiger-proofing" by making it longer was a flawed concept. Granted I can see why they freaked out after he won by 12 shots, hit PW into Par 5 #15, and LW into #18. But by simply lengthening it all they did was squeeze out the shorter hitter that much more. If they really wanted to reduce the importance of length they could make fairways run out into hazards/deep rough less than 300 hundred off the tee ... e.g.. how they setup the par 5 at Valderrama to in the Ryder Cup to help offset the longer hitting US team. But lets face it, in the modern-era people want to see power, and IMO those kind of changes make less entertaining.

 

I also think some people overly glamorize the past, Spieth and Willet won and they weren't the longest hitters (not shortest either). Also Arnie and Jack's wins there (except 1986) were somewhat related to their power too.

 

Bottom line: power is more important than ever in professional golf, but it was important in the past too, and it doesn't completely exclude average length hitters from having a chance today.

 

I think they were scared of not only Tiger, but what would be coming next. And in that sense they were right. In '97 there were probably 2 guys who could overpower the course like Tiger. Him and Daly. And Daly just never had it around Augusta for some reason. But then a few years pass, and ball and club and shaft technology led to guys picking up alot of yards. So then you had guys like Mickelson suddenly bombing it out there and hitting wedges into every green too. There's a story about Fazio and Hootie Johnson coming up 11 in either '01 or '02 and seeing a ball that had probably like 60 or 70 yards left into the green. They thought someone had hit it into the trees and had to pitch out. Nope. It was Mickelson's tee ball. That was one of the wow moments for Hootie especially that made him think they needed to make drastic changes.

 

The problem is that by changing the course to maintain the sort of clubs being hit into the greens, they changed the nature of the course and the way Jones and Mackenzie wanted it to play as an inland links. Augusta used to be about the angles. Attacking the hole from the correct angle. Adding the rough and lengthening it changed that in a big way. People sometimes scoff at how Jack predicted Tiger would win more Masters than him and Arnie put together (10). And Tiger only won 4 (so far... I know, unlikely). But had they not changed the length, he likely would have made Jack's prediction come true. If you read his new book on the '97 Masters, it's fascinating to listen (I had it on Audible) to him describe each hole and how he used to play it (clubs he hit, etc) versus how it plays now. He was literally hitting PW into 13 and 15 frequently. PW! Into a par 5! Not to mention a wedge of some sort into nearly every par 4. Truly, Augusta was a par 68 for him.

[JD3]

> @"Wedge Wizard" said:

> Pebble Beach Golf Links, Pebble Beach California USA

>

>

>

> Besides holes 7 and 18 Pebble Beach would be your average daily fee golf course. The lay out is garbage....Why you ask.... It hasn't stand up to the modern change we see in the game today. Courses like Oak Hill, Baltusrol, Ocean course, Wing foot have stood up to the test of time.

>

>

>

> Pebble on the other hand, is short, the players in the AT&T go stupid low, and the greens are bad 11.5 months out of the year.

 

Pebble is great. They just set it up too gently this year after all the whining from pros like Rory. Not every hole has to be a "signature" hole ..you need some less dramatic looking ones to balance it out. That's one of the problems I have with modern design; they try to make every hole a signature hole ...which by definition is illogical...and end up with a big piece of junk

[BobMorris]

Torrey Pines. Great piece of land, average layout.

[Awsi Dooger]

I was kind of shocked Valhalla wasn't identified until page 3. To me that's the obvious choice. For a while it looked like we'd be stuck with the PGA there every few years. I was thinking it should be like half a major if you win there.

 

St. Andrews is astonishing. Great litmus test flop toward anyone who knocks it. I've played it once and been there a few more times, including the 1990 Open. Often the golf doesn't matter at all. On some of these crap courses it's a 20 minute shuttle ride to get beyond the corporate tents and all the plastic homes. At St. Andrews you leave the 18th green and within seconds are in an incredibly charming town, shopping for golf souvenirs or food staples or anything you want. I love watching the families walk casually across the 18th and 1st fairway on Sundays toward the beach.

 

It's an ultimate howl when someone refers to hole distance or clubs played into a green. Talk about fixating on irrelevancy. I remember in 1990 standing there alongside the ropes way out near #10 and ignoring several shots while I looked exclusively at all the fascinating nuances in the terrain, not merely near the green but throughout the hole. It's the reason you can stand behind a tee shot and wonder why the heck the pro aimed where he did, until you get down there and now it makes more sense. But often it doesn't fully register until the television coverage spotlights idiosyncrasies that aren't available from the rope line.

 

The closing stretch is fantastic and the view of the town only swells the aura of being there. Heck, even the contrived tee shot over the corner of the hotel is just goofy enough to be fascinating. That's like a Monty Python shot. If it were near the hotel it might seem awkward but since it's actually over the corner it is so far over the top in terms of normalcy that it stands out as wonderful, especially given the awesome remainder of the hole. Watch it often enough in person and you'll note that the wimps who bail too far left end up paying for it, given clumps and angle.

 

I could go on and on...Himalayas, Swilcan Bridge. I'm so fortunate that my dad had enough of a sense of history to take the family there and spend several days when I was 15 years old, just old enough to appreciate the place and also make it around the course in competent fashion. First tee shot I was nervous but hit a low straight bullet. The local caddie said, "Good man." I'll never forget that, nor the carts of sod they had to fill divots. I finally found the shaggy-haired '70s pictures of that round a few years ago.

[LICC]

> @BobMorris said:

> Torrey Pines. Great piece of land, average layout.

 

Completely agree. As to the golf holes, nothing special at all. But does that make it overrated as a major venue? It has length, can be made to have thick rough and narrow fairways, has great views for TV viewers, and tons of space for the tents and attendees. It provides a challenging test, looks good for TV viewers, and has great facilities. So as a major venue it is good, despite a mediocre course layout.

[LICC]

> @EKELLY said:

> NotTheTrees! wrote:

>

>

>

> To those who think my beloved Bethpage Black is overrated:

>

> -You probably didn't listen to the warning sign that basically says you are going to have a bad time if you aren't any good. This is what I am interpreting from your comments. You probably tried to tip the course, in which case yes, it is very long and challenging. But hey, if you play from the whites or reds on a year when they aren't hosting a tournament, the rough and fescue are not bad at all, and the length is more than manageable.

>

> -Bethpage Black is a Tillinghast masterpiece. Each hole stands out in my mind as memorable and challenging in their own ways. The bunkering is gorgeous and the hole design is stunning.

>

> -It is a MUNICIPLE course and a **** good one at that. What is a better major venue than one you can try out yourself?

>

> -Every pro who plays there respects the **** out of it.

>

> Bethpage is undoubtedly one of the greatest and most challenging tracks in the country, and a terrific major venue at that.

>

>

>

> Rant over.

>

>

>

>

> Played it probably 100 times, great track.

 

Whoever says Bethpage Black is boring is clueless. They probably just don’t like the ego hit of a high score from missing fairways. The terrain is excellent. The routing through the property’s valleys, ridges and elevations is excellent. The angles off the tees requiring thought of the shots to hit is fantastic. The scale. The bunkering. It is an incredibly memorable and outstanding course.

[bladehunter]

Whistling straights.

[LICC]

> @dlygrisse said:

> Forty wrote:

>

>

>

> If I had to pick an overrated course that a major has been held on, I'd say Torrey Pines is definitely in the conversation. While it provided great drama in '08 and can stand up to modern equipment, it is architecturally very mediocre. I could name three better courses within 20 miles of Torrey (South) and the San Diego area is already an architecturally lacking region.

>

>

>

> One I'll get crucified for are my feelings about Pebble Beach. I really like Pebble Beach and think it is a fine golf course but it isn't a Top 10 course in the US right now. With a proper restoration it might belong back in the Top 10 but currently it's overrated IMO. 6-10, & 17-18 are all world holes, but much of the rest of the course is not very memorable or strategic. It has history and views and the potential to be one of the best courses again but currently it doesn't meet the hype. I'd rather play Cypress or Pasatiempo in the area right now.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I've played Pebble once and I left thinking that 6 or 7 of the holes were completely unbelievable, 5 or 6 were really good, and 5 or 6 were very mediocre.

>

> 5-10 are great holes, holes that would be memorable on any course and on any stretch of land you were just walking on and sightseeing, 17 has history but is a bit quirky, and 18 is just so **** famous. The rest of the course is a bit of a let down in my opinion, but maybe its just all relative.

 

Playing Pebble is an incredible experience. Everyone knows the spectacular holes along the cliffs, but I think criticism of the inland holes is overblown. Most are interesting, very good golf holes and you are still playing in an amazing setting.

[LICC]

> @76mpg said:

> Hazeltine. Absolutely boring golf course

 

I would add Bellerive, for the same reason.

[LICC]

> @PGArox said:

> Freight-train wrote:

>

>

>

> Erin Hills....too soon?

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I checked Golf Digest's Top 100 Greatest Courses in the U.S. and Erin Hills is given a ranking of 44th. I think that's a questionable ranking for a 10 year old course. It was actually ranked higher in previous years.

 

Well the head of Golf Digest’s rankings is a named co-designer of Erin Hills. GD had originally said that because of this conflict it would not include Erin Hills in its rankings, but somehow he must have changed his mind.

[platgof]

> @mjtoal said:

> pga43 wrote:

>

>

> starsail85 wrote:

>

>

> pga43 wrote:

>

>

> Jasonic wrote:

>

>

>

> Any PGA champ course.

>

>

>

> St. Andrews is awesome, totally different style of golf. Can't judge until you've played it. But that's just my opinion /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> If St Andrews was in the middle of Iowa, they'd be lucky to get $7 for greens fees because of the course conditions. IMO

>

>

>

>

>

> Greg

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Can't quite read your tone but that sounds like an incredibly ignorant comment . Explain to me how you think the old course is in poor condition ?

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I walked all 18 holes the Sunday before the Scottish Open (the course was closed so I walked it and took photos of each hole) and there was at least 100+ divots per every fairway and the greens were in really bad shape. Lots of bare ground in play. It looked very much like a very abused muni. So the fact that I was there recently, walked the course and have been in the golf business for 48 years (34 as a PGA Golf professional), I think it was based on eye witnessed fact and not so much an "incredibly ignorant comment".

>

>

>

> But I did say it was my opinion. The first time Sam Snead saw St Andrews he said "we would't even grow cow beets on land that looked like this place"

>

>

>

>

>

> Greg

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Unlike most of the courses used for US majors, TOC is not preserved for the over privileged and wealthy. It gets a lot of play, except on Sundays and some of the collection areas for drives get a lot of wear. But when hosting The Open, it is brought to peak condition and always provides a great test, the exact nature of which depends on the weather, as is the norm for links courses.

>

>

>

> Fans of one dimensional brain-dead verdant green with lush grass courses such as those which used to host the US Open in the 80s and 90s should look elsewhere, but people who enjoy a unique and changing challenge will love it.

>

>

>

> In 1946 when Snead saw it from the train, it was right after the war when many public facilities had been let go a bit or a lot (Turnberry turned into a RAF base), and he would never have seen anything like it before, so had no frame of reference to judge it. Bobby Jones hated it at first but then learnt to appreciate its challenge. Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods also quite like it.

>

>

>

> Horses for courses, I guess.

 

So if your there for vacation, it will look very rough just like what has been mentioned by posters, who are not all brain dead, and affluent to the hilt, typical brit islander comment.

[Forged4ever]

Oakmont, the most overrated track in the Major rotation???

 

????

 

The same Oakmont that has hosted NINE US Opens, the most of any track in the United Stated, and is in the books for the 2025 US Open?????

 

????

 

The same Oakmont that lists Tommy Armour, Sam Parks, Ben Hogan, Jack Nicklaus, Johnny Miller, Larry Nelson, Ernie Els, Angel Cabrera & Dustin Johnson as its Champions, with ole Benny, Jack, Larry and Ernie stating that it’s Sunday set-up was THE toughest Major final round track/set-up that any of them had ever Played?????

 

????

 

The same Oakmont that has been ranked in the TOP FIVE of both Golf Digest’s & Golf Magazine’s 100 Greatest Courses EVERY SINGLE YEAR OF THEIR PUBLICATION?????

 

????

 

The same Oakmont that along with hosting NINE US OPENS, the most in the nation, has also hosted THREE PGA CHAMPIONSHIPS, FIVE US MENS’ AMATEUR CHAMPIONSHIPS, THREE NCAA DI CHAMPIONSHIPS & TWO US WOMENS’ OPEN CHAMPIONSHIPS, along with being slated to host the 2025 US Open, FAR FAR more than any other track in the nation????

 

????

 

What, you know something about the track that none of the individuals or organizations mentioned above are aware of???????

 

Oh sweet jesus, lemme guess, you also think that the #125 ranked Tour Boy isn’t that great of a Player???

 

????

 

And then St. Andrews???

 

Wait, you also think that The Donald’s water falls are great natural additions and every track should have one????????

 

Hey, it takes all kinda crazy to make this board what it is??

 

I absolutely looooooove this place????!!!!!!

 

And yea, I just found my emoticon keyboard?

 

Have a great week my Friends?

RP

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BobMorris]

> @LICC said:

> > @BobMorris said:

> > Torrey Pines. Great piece of land, average layout.

>

> Completely agree. As to the golf holes, nothing special at all. But does that make it overrated as a major venue? It has length, can be made to have thick rough and narrow fairways, has great views for TV viewers, and tons of space for the tents and attendees. It provides a challenging test, looks good for TV viewers, and has great facilities. So as a major venue it is good, despite a mediocre course layout.

 

I agree, as a venue it's fine. But per the title of the thread, I only had the course itself in mind when voicing my opinion. Of course there are numerous factors when choosing a site for a major championship. I've played the South course numerous times, and never found it to anything more than OK. Once the non-resident rates went through the roof, I gladly stopped playing it. I'm just sorry to see it in the regular major rotation now.

[imakaveli]

Pebble Beach, the American Ballybunion

[gvogel]

> @widow-maker said:

> One of the things about the older courses like Oakmont, Baltusrol, Oakland Hills, Merion, is that the architect took the land that was given to them and built the golf course with a minimal amount of dirt moved. They didn't have the kind of equipment that Pete Dye had. So, you had a lot of parkland style golf courses where they built courses with smaller greens and laid out so that you could walk them. You don't have the manmade artificial disasters awaiting you. TPC's island green is spectacular looking at first glance, but there's nothing natural about that hole.

>

>

>

> The older courses have character but you have to look at the nuances and what the architects did with the equipment they had at the time. The newer courses can be visually stunning but they sometimes come off as looking artificial. I like the older style courses more because they fit my eye better. A perfect example of two courses in the same area but done differently are Arcadia Bluffs and Crystal Downs. They moved a ton of earth at Arcadia Bluffs and some of the visuals are just outstanding. Lots of manufactured carries into the greens, bunkers implanted, no roll ups into the greens. They created landing zones and you play station to station. It's well worth the price to play there. What Perry Maxwell and Alistair MacKenzie did at Crystal Downs was nothing short of brilliant. They designed the course to the lay of the land and the green complexes are possibly the finest I've ever seen. Two totally different styles of golf course, but one looks totally natural and the other looks like it was pieced together... which it was. To me, Arcadia Bluffs is close to a top 100 course, but Crystal Downs is a top 10 all timer. To each his own, I guess.

 

I have a knowledgeable friend who has played his whole life and is in the golf industry. He thinks that Crystal Downs might be MacKenzies best work.

[76mpg]

> @LICC said:

> > @76mpg said:

> > Hazeltine. Absolutely boring golf course

>

> I would add Bellerive, for the same reason.

 

I have played Bellerive and agree, not much there of interest. Nice setting and property though...

[LeftArmBender]

1. Erin Hills dog track

2. Pebble

3. Torrey

[gvogel]

> @JD3 said:

> glenametz wrote:

>

>

> KirkNo-yes wrote:

>

>

>

> I've played Oak Hill in tournament conditions and man alive that course is a beast as well. WF as well. I think the world of majors could stand to bring in some new blood to show what else is out there. Players learn courses and it becomes target golf for them. PH #2's only defense to me is the domed greens but if they are soft and wet and the greens slow down it's not a tough track at all. Pebble is another I could see being in the overrated column because the greens are just crappy as all get out. No championship should ever be decided by a lucky bounce off crappy poa.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I played OHCC a few weeks after the PGA in 2013, and the Friday before the club championship. It was tough, but extremely fair. Back then I was about a 22 index, shot a 99 from the whites, and I think the differential was in the high-teens. Typical Donald Ross course, its all right there in front of you, go get it. I've played all of Ross' designs in the area, and OHCC is significantly better then all of them. The things you don't see on TV is how much up and down and subtle swings there are on the course. They all look straight away on TV, they are not. Balls you think should find the fairway, are on a slightly wrong line, or take a bounce into the rough. A well played shot is rewarded though, which is all you can ask for out of championship layout. That course was blessed with some great land to start with.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> What other Ross courses are in the area?

 

Monroe Golf Club, Country Club of Rochester, and Irondequoit. I walked Monroe when they had the last Wegmans for the ladies, or maybe it was the first Ladies PGA Championship. I thought that Monroe was really good; Gil Hanse did a great restoration there.

[RobS14526]

> @gvogel said:

> > @JD3 said:

> > glenametz wrote:

> >

> >

> > KirkNo-yes wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> > I've played Oak Hill in tournament conditions and man alive that course is a beast as well. WF as well. I think the world of majors could stand to bring in some new blood to show what else is out there. Players learn courses and it becomes target golf for them. PH #2's only defense to me is the domed greens but if they are soft and wet and the greens slow down it's not a tough track at all. Pebble is another I could see being in the overrated column because the greens are just crappy as all get out. No championship should ever be decided by a lucky bounce off crappy poa.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > I played OHCC a few weeks after the PGA in 2013, and the Friday before the club championship. It was tough, but extremely fair. Back then I was about a 22 index, shot a 99 from the whites, and I think the differential was in the high-teens. Typical Donald Ross course, its all right there in front of you, go get it. I've played all of Ross' designs in the area, and OHCC is significantly better then all of them. The things you don't see on TV is how much up and down and subtle swings there are on the course. They all look straight away on TV, they are not. Balls you think should find the fairway, are on a slightly wrong line, or take a bounce into the rough. A well played shot is rewarded though, which is all you can ask for out of championship layout. That course was blessed with some great land to start with.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > What other Ross courses are in the area?

>

> Monroe Golf Club, Country Club of Rochester, and Irondequoit. I walked Monroe when they had the last Wegmans for the ladies, or maybe it was the first Ladies PGA Championship. I thought that Monroe was really good; Gil Hanse did a great restoration there.

 

As well as Oak Hill West and Brook Lea Country Club. Monroe is a fantastic course and surprisingly, seems to hold up pretty well to scoring during most Monroe Invitationals.

[Roadking2003]

> @JD3 said:

> Clear winner imo is Whistling Straits. First the bunker debacle that cost DJ a spot in the playoff.

 

> Next Jason Day makes a mockery of this supposedly unrelenting test by shooting a majors record 20 under par winning total.

 

So, high scores = a good course?

 

Strange

[Roadking2003]

> @Jasonic said:> St. Andrews is awesome, totally different style of golf. Can't judge until you've played it. But that's just my opinion

 

 

I've played it. If it weren't for it's history it would never get my attention. But you can't separate the history from the course.

[BNGL]

Oak Hill. CC of Charleston (Women’s US Open this year). The Warren Course (US Senior Open this weekend). Hazeltine National. Olympia Fields. Valhalla. Medinah. All of these to me I don’t particularly remember any holes. I know 16 at Hazeltine. Olympia Fields I just know Jim Furyk won there, Valhalla has the brick faced 13th (I think), Medinah has the phenomenal clubhouse and par 3s over Lake Kadizah (spelling?) but to me they’re very similar.

 

On a note of Torrey Pines (this goes back before the redo of the North Course I’m not sure what has changed in regards to facilities) but I have heard quite a bit that the facilities suck...foot out. The range, short game areas, and locker rooms aren’t quite tour quality at least for those I have spoken too. And the North was typically one of the worst courses on tour (per player polls) while the South garnered higher scores but was more polarizing (in that there wasn’t much it’s ok, it’s either yes I like it or no I don’t like it).

[lowheel]

Medinah...

[OldBridge]

It's always St. Andrews for me. Yes, it has the history and I respect that but it's my least favorite Open Championship venue. If the wind isn't blowing it's just not that great.

[JellyPig]

> @lowheel said:

> Medinah...

 

I agree. Flat and boring.

Nice clubhouse, though.

[Bingo1976]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Jasonic said:> St. Andrews is awesome, totally different style of golf. Can't judge until you've played it. But that's just my opinion

>

>

> I've played it. If it weren't for it's history it would never get my attention. But you can't separate the history from the course.

 

I would have to agree. Although I have only played it once, and people tell me it is a bit of an acquired taste. I have also played RSG and Carnoustie and would prefer either of them to St Andrews if it wasn't for the history. So not bad, just over rated.

[Carl Spackler3]

Bethpage..... any course that would have me is clearly no place for a major