119th U.S. Open -- What a triumph for the USGA

[North Texas]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > Three things.

> > 1. This US Open absolutely belongs to Gary Woodland and not the USGA administrators. That is crazy talk.

> > 2. As I said several times in the main thread about whether or not the USGA would screw it up again, posters on here would pretty much refuse to give the USGA credit even if the tournament was a success. And this thread proves I was right.

> > 3. Just in this thread, 15th Club has a lot of company when it comes to being arrogant.

>

> Come on. Don’t lower yourself to align with this troll post. I don’t dislike 15th totally. I believe there’s a good guy in there somewhere. He’s just blinded by the Kool aid and the sheltered experience of being invited into the world the USga thrives in. But this original post is one of the worst in the sites history.

>

> And you know that plenty of us have given the USga credit for this Week. But it’s not going to change all the other gripes automatically. The culture and attitude of the blue blazers must change too. Again I’ll say. The new competition director seems to not fit in with the normal mouthpiece of the USga. So hopefully that’s a good sign.

 

Okay, let me be clear. The original post in this thread is an absolute horrible take. And I stand by my other 2 takes.

[15th Club]

> @buckeye440 said:

> I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

 

 

[Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

[North Texas]

> @buckeyefl said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > Three things.

> > 1. This US Open absolutely belongs to Gary Woodland and not the USGA administrators. That is crazy talk.

> > 2. As I said several times in the main thread about whether or not the USGA would screw it up again, posters on here would pretty much refuse to give the USGA credit even if the tournament was a success. And this thread proves I was right.

> > 3. Just in this thread, 15th Club has a lot of company when it comes to being arrogant.

>

> Plenty of people have given them credit for the set up. However, one tournament doesnt change years of missteps. Small victories and one step at a time.

>

> There is nothing arrogant about calling out the USGA because THAT is what gave us this years tournament.

 

The USGA has certainly had missteps when it comes to the US Open. No disputing that. But to say that there has been "years of missteps" is an exaggeration.

 

And I stand by my arrogance statement.

[johnnypro]

> @"15th Club" said:

> Congratulations to Gary Woodland, and Low Amateur Viktor Hovland (closing with 67).

>

> And what a triumph for the USGA! For a month now or more, how many GolfWRX comments and thread topics have been devoted to not if, but how, the USGA would ruin this event? The course setup was near-perfection. Great play was rewarded. Strategy was demanded, and when risks were taken with great execution, the rewards were great. (Woodland, on 14 and 17.) Barely-sloppy play was punished. (Matt Kuchar, a very solid player, going rough, to rough, to rough.)

>

> It was a great leaderboard from start to finish. The best player in the world right now, Brooks Koepka, had an opportunity to exhibit his skills, and was only beaten by an even better performance. History was on the line, as Koepka had a chance at a 3rd consecutive national championship.

>

> We have seen Pebble Beach every year for a Tour event, and for a half-dozen US Opens and never has the course been set up any better. It was the USGA that took Pebble and put it on the Majors map, notwithstanding the wonderful history of Bing Crosby.

>

> With all respect to Gary Woodland for a wonderful win, today belongs to the administrators of the 119th U.S. Open.

>

I agree with everything you say except your last sentence.

I'm supporter of the USGA but the day did belong to Gary Woodland, NOT the USGA bigwigs.

But now, maybe the USGA bashing will stop or at least die down a little?

Please?

 

[buckeye440]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be and great score.

>

> In abstract theory I agree with that. But. You cannot account for the strength of the woodlands and keopkas. You really can’t grow rough that’s completely blast proof nowadays , unless you want to look for golf balls 2 feet off the fairway for 3 minutes every single hole. Can’t be done. I play in deep thick Bermuda. Am a big guy and if it’s inside 125 yards I can move it to the green complex. Even if I can barely see it. The players have outran the us open. Period. The only way to hold the score down is to have greens that aren’t puttable.

 

They could rid of these wide open courses (granted more courses are built that way/redesigned now) so they not only have it hit it a ton but shape it at the same time if they want to give it a go. That would make it harder to get clean shots off making lay ups more likely. Also water the rough every night. Thick, wet = grabby. I also feel like there is a way to make fairway bunkers actually a trap? These guys make hitting out of fairway bunkers look easier than hitting out of rough. Ball is literally never, ever plugged. So unless they have lip issue, it is go for TLI. Why even have fairway traps? They have 40+ other tourneys to play under easier conditions. I want to see them struggle.

[buckeye440]

> @QuigleyDU said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

>

> How many course would be available to be set up that way? you might as well pick one and have it there every year then.

 

There are likely a few country clubs that could fit the bill. Whether they want the open of not is another question.

 

Edit: I don't totally remember these courses but some that are close to these qualifiers Merion, Winged Foot, The Olympic Club, Inverness Club and Canterbury Golf Club (last two because I am from Ohio!).

[bladehunter]

> @buckeye440 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @buckeye440 said:

> > > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be and great score.

> >

> > In abstract theory I agree with that. But. You cannot account for the strength of the woodlands and keopkas. You really can’t grow rough that’s completely blast proof nowadays , unless you want to look for golf balls 2 feet off the fairway for 3 minutes every single hole. Can’t be done. I play in deep thick Bermuda. Am a big guy and if it’s inside 125 yards I can move it to the green complex. Even if I can barely see it. The players have outran the us open. Period. The only way to hold the score down is to have greens that aren’t puttable.

>

> They could rid of these wide open courses (granted more courses are built that way/redesigned now) so they not only have it hit it a ton but shape it at the same time if they want to give it a go. That would make it harder to get clean shots off making lay ups more likely. Also water the rough every night. Thick, wet = grabby. I also feel like there is a way to make fairway bunkers actually a trap? These guys make hitting out of fairway bunkers look easier than hitting out of rough. Ball is literally never, ever plugged. So unless they have lip issue, it is go for TLI. Why even have fairway traps? They have 40+ other tourneys to play under easier conditions. I want to see them struggle.

 

True. I’d be cool with the jack trick of removing every other tooth on rakes etc to make the ball sit down. Watering rough. Etc Even shaving banks beside green etc.

And courses that are tight and tree lined are right up my alley. My only Pet peeve is greens that won’t hold a good high shot , and greens that you can’t reasonably putt. I don’t want to watch guys lag putt from 10 ft all day.

[buckeye440]

> @"15th Club" said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

>

>

> [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

 

I do not really care what Jack thinks on this subject. He bitches and complains about plenty of things too. I know I am in the minority, just expressing my views.

[buckeyefl]

> @buckeye440 said:

> I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

 

You might want to look at AT&T winning scores if you think "they could have done nothing".

[buckeyefl]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > Three things.

> > 1. This US Open absolutely belongs to Gary Woodland and not the USGA administrators. That is crazy talk.

> > 2. As I said several times in the main thread about whether or not the USGA would screw it up again, posters on here would pretty much refuse to give the USGA credit even if the tournament was a success. And this thread proves I was right.

> > 3. Just in this thread, 15th Club has a lot of company when it comes to being arrogant.

>

> Come on. Don’t lower yourself to align with this troll post. I don’t dislike 15th totally. I believe there’s a good guy in there somewhere. He’s just blinded by the Kool aid and the sheltered experience of being invited into the world the USga thrives in. But this original post is one of the worst in the sites history.

>

> And you know that plenty of us have given the USga credit for this Week. But it’s not going to change all the other gripes automatically. The culture and attitude of the blue blazers must change too. Again I’ll say. The new competition director seems to not fit in with the normal mouthpiece of the USga. So hopefully that’s a good sign.

 

two amens in one thread!

[buckeye440]

> @buckeyefl said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

>

> You might want to look at AT&T winning scores if you think "they could have done nothing".

Yeah 268 vs 271. I think PB was a 72 vs a 71. I know this is a totally valid comparison since they play the ATT at 3 total courses but arguably the other courses are easier than Pebble? and still had nearly the same score as 2 vs 4 Pebble rounds. I stand by that they could have done relatively nothing and had similar scores.

 

[bermuda]

> @"15th Club" said:

> > @bermuda said:

> > Kinda funny how the USGA tweeted Woodland's approach on 14 yesterday, saying "Gary isn't scared." In 2010, that ball would've rolled down the USGA's scalped slope. But in 2019 it's a great shot.

>

>

> Yes; interesting.

>

> 1. I'm not thrilled with the USGA's trying to keep up with the apparent norms of current social media in that fashion.

> 2. I expect that Woodland might well have considered a different shot if the green complex was the way it was in 2010.

>

 

3. The USGA admits John Daly was right in 1999 that shots hit well onto a green should not then roll 50 feet off the green.

[rangersgoalie]

I agree

Congratulations USGA

You did the job well this year if a little too conservative.

 

Of course, it is their job to run a National Championship, but nice to see them learn at least for this one

[North Texas]

> @bermuda said:

> > @"15th Club" said:

> > > @bermuda said:

> > > Kinda funny how the USGA tweeted Woodland's approach on 14 yesterday, saying "Gary isn't scared." In 2010, that ball would've rolled down the USGA's scalped slope. But in 2019 it's a great shot.

> >

> >

> > Yes; interesting.

> >

> > 1. I'm not thrilled with the USGA's trying to keep up with the apparent norms of current social media in that fashion.

> > 2. I expect that Woodland might well have considered a different shot if the green complex was the way it was in 2010.

> >

>

> 3. The USGA admits John Daly was right in 1999 that shots hit well onto a green should not then roll 50 feet off the green.

 

If a shot hit into the green rolls 50 feet off the green, then it either wasn't well-hit or it wasn't hit onto the part of the green that it should have been hit.

[QuigleyDU]

> @"North Texas" said:

> > @bermuda said:

> > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > @bermuda said:

> > > > Kinda funny how the USGA tweeted Woodland's approach on 14 yesterday, saying "Gary isn't scared." In 2010, that ball would've rolled down the USGA's scalped slope. But in 2019 it's a great shot.

> > >

> > >

> > > Yes; interesting.

> > >

> > > 1. I'm not thrilled with the USGA's trying to keep up with the apparent norms of current social media in that fashion.

> > > 2. I expect that Woodland might well have considered a different shot if the green complex was the way it was in 2010.

> > >

> >

> > 3. The USGA admits John Daly was right in 1999 that shots hit well onto a green should not then roll 50 feet off the green.

>

> If a shot hit into the green rolls 50 feet off the green, then it either wasn't well-hit or it wasn't hit onto the part of the green that it should have been hit.

 

Or the green has not been watered in a week.

[QuigleyDU]

> @"15th Club" said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

>

>

> [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

 

I am too young to know Jack as a player. But I am not all that big of a fan of Jack as the spokesman of the game.

[North Texas]

> @QuigleyDU said:

> > @"15th Club" said:

> > > @buckeye440 said:

> > > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

> >

> >

> > [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

>

> I am too young to know Jack as a player. But I am not all that big of a fan of Jack as the spokesman of the game.

 

I hear you. Don't know why someone who has won the most major championships ever thinks they know anything about the state of game. Do we still have the "roll eyes" emoji?

[bscinstnct]

> @"15th Club" said:

> Congratulations to Gary Woodland, and Low Amateur Viktor Hovland (closing with 67).

>

> And what a triumph for the USGA! For a month now or more, how many GolfWRX comments and thread topics have been devoted to not if, but how, the USGA would ruin this event? The course setup was near-perfection. Great play was rewarded. Strategy was demanded, and when risks were taken with great execution, the rewards were great. (Woodland, on 14 and 17.) Barely-sloppy play was punished. (Matt Kuchar, a very solid player, going rough, to rough, to rough.)

>

> It was a great leaderboard from start to finish. The best player in the world right now, Brooks Koepka, had an opportunity to exhibit his skills, and was only beaten by an even better performance. History was on the line, as Koepka had a chance at a 3rd consecutive national championship.

>

> We have seen Pebble Beach every year for a Tour event, and for a half-dozen US Opens and never has the course been set up any better. It was the USGA that took Pebble and put it on the Majors map, notwithstanding the wonderful history of Bing Crosby.

>

> With all respect to Gary Woodland for a wonderful win, today belongs to the administrators of the 119th U.S. Open.

>

 

Your post was going fine.

 

Until you said,

 

"With all respect to Gary Woodland for a wonderful win, today belongs to the administrators of the 119th U.S. Open."

 

And reinforced the USGA image as

 

 

 

 

[jkumpire]

As a person who has organized and been involved with national-level events in other sports/avocations, it was gratifying to hear someone say 'good job' and move along. Whether you love or hate the USGA they organized the tournament and all the things that are involved with it well this year. there were few spectator problems, transportation to and from the course for spectators raised no red flags, there was no ginned up controversy by media, players, or anyone else about the tournament. It worked out just like almost every other year when they run the tournament.

They do a good job organizing the US Open most every year, whether one agrees with course setup or not. They stayed in the background, where they belong, and did their job this year. Time to move on.

[QuigleyDU]

> @"North Texas" said:

> > @QuigleyDU said:

> > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > @buckeye440 said:

> > > > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

> > >

> > >

> > > [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

> >

> > I am too young to know Jack as a player. But I am not all that big of a fan of Jack as the spokesman of the game.

>

> I hear you. Don't know why someone who has won the most major championships ever thinks they know anything about the state of game. Do we still have the "roll eyes" emoji?

 

Times have moved past him my man. I think he does somethings extremely well. His tourney is top notch and a great watch. I just don't agree with him on his roll back the game to the 70s ideas.

I don't discredit his accomplishments or his greatness.

[heavy_hitter]

This was the best US Open in years. The story line was the players and not the course or incredibly stupid course set up.

 

People have to stop thinking about protecting par. Pebble Beach is too short and too easy for these guys for the course to ever play even par without making the course unfair. -10 should be the new protecting of par.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

> @QuigleyDU said:

> > @"North Texas" said:

> > > @QuigleyDU said:

> > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > @buckeye440 said:

> > > > > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

> > >

> > > I am too young to know Jack as a player. But I am not all that big of a fan of Jack as the spokesman of the game.

> >

> > I hear you. Don't know why someone who has won the most major championships ever thinks they know anything about the state of game. Do we still have the "roll eyes" emoji?

>

> Times have moved past him my man. I think he does somethings extremely well. His tourney is top notch and a great watch. I just don't agree with him on his roll back the game to the 70s ideas.

> I don't discredit his accomplishments or his greatness.

 

Right there with you, man. Sometimes it feels like if I don't agree with Nicklaus's stance on every issue, some people take it as me saying he knows nothing about golf, and that Idon't respect his accomplishments. Like it has to be all or nothing. Lord knows he's had some takes in the not too distant past with which I hope everyone disagrees.

[QuigleyDU]

> @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > @QuigleyDU said:

> > > @"North Texas" said:

> > > > @QuigleyDU said:

> > > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > > @buckeye440 said:

> > > > > > I think the USGA messed this up. Too easy. Wasn't the winning score only 3 shots less than this years PGA tour stop at the same course? They could have done nothing to the course and had a similar event. I am in the camp that the US open should be brutally punishing (fair, not putting on ice unfair). Rough should be thick and long as **** with pretty much zero chance of reaching the green if you are 5-10 yards off the fairway. Small greens, narrow fairways, doglegs with obstructed corners, tree lined fairways. None of these British open-esque, wide open courses like Erin Hills, Chambers Bay, Shinnecock Hills. I want the course to force the player to make decisions instead of bomb it and pray you have a chance. Par should be a great score.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > [Here's](

"Here's") a Buckeye worth reading.

> > > >

> > > > I am too young to know Jack as a player. But I am not all that big of a fan of Jack as the spokesman of the game.

> > >

> > > I hear you. Don't know why someone who has won the most major championships ever thinks they know anything about the state of game. Do we still have the "roll eyes" emoji?

> >

> > Times have moved past him my man. I think he does somethings extremely well. His tourney is top notch and a great watch. I just don't agree with him on his roll back the game to the 70s ideas.

> > I don't discredit his accomplishments or his greatness.

>

> Right there with you, man. Sometimes it feels like if I don't agree with Nicklaus's stance on every issue, some people take it as me saying he knows nothing about golf, and that Idon't respect his accomplishments. Like it has to be all or nothing. Lord knows he's had some takes in the not too distant past with which I hope everyone disagrees.

 

Sadly with forums that is the way it is sometimes. oh well, I still enjoy coming here none the less.