Why wasn't Cog Hill's Dubsdread ever given a U.S. Open??

[Irishman1979]

This is from an article in 2009 when they played it for the first time after the renovation by Reese Jones....

 

Only 22 players are below par after two rounds of the BMW, the third event in the FedExCup. "The short answer is it's just not that enjoyable to play," said Geoff Ogilvy, who is at 3 over. "Look, if your mission is to really punish a slightly bad shot and make it really hard all day, then it's a success. If your mission is to create a place people enjoy playing, then it's a failure."

 

Now if I'm reading this, it looks like the USGA would eat this up and love to have a U.S. Open at Cog Hill after reading what Ogilvy (2005 U.S. Open champion) said about the layout. As we all know the USGA loves to set up golf courses that punish a slightly bad shot and make it really hard all day long for the players in the field.

 

Thoughts?

[VNutz]

Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

 

But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

[Irishman1979]

> @VNutz said:

> Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

>

> But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

 

Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

 

[farmer]

Not being from Chicago, would the course be ready for a PGA in the new time? Have no idea how long it takes Chicago courses to fully recover from winter.

[T-MAC]

Personally, I always liked the number 2 course over the more popular number 4 (where the Pro's played).

I think they totally destroyed the layout of #4 after the redo. I quit playing it.

[raynorfan1]

Probably politics. Erin Hills was the first non-resort course with a sole owner/operator to host the Open.

 

Selection is a political process. Clubs with deep ties to the USGA are most likely to host. David Fay pushes the event to municipal courses (Bethpage and Torrey Pines), but nobody advocates for a solo owner.

[Dancin]

It will never happen unless they renovate and change the course again. It would be massively hated because the only defense for the course would be to shrink the fairways and grow the rough to where your only option is to punch out and the usga would get lit up by the cry babies on tour thus they would never even consider it.

[VNutz]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @VNutz said:

> > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> >

> > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

>

> Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

>

 

I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

[VNutz]

> @farmer said:

> Not being from Chicago, would the course be ready for a PGA in the new time? Have no idea how long it takes Chicago courses to fully recover from winter.

 

It would be tough, and at the fate of the weather. May can still be a crapshoot around here, we're just as likely to have 40s and rain as 70s and sunshine. If we had a winter like we did 5 years ago it could be an ugly showing. I'm sure some of the premier courses can do more to have a course prepped, but the grass is just starting to come around at that time of year and it's likely too much to risk for a major. That was my biggest issue with the change in schedule. We only have a chance at the US Open now, and the courses here are either not up to that level of quality or are more aligned with the PGA.

[LICC]

> @VNutz said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @VNutz said:

> > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > >

> > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> >

> > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> >

>

> I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

 

I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

[VNutz]

> @LICC said:

> > @VNutz said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > >

> > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > >

> > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > >

> >

> > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

>

> I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

 

Exactly. At the time they were pushing hardest for a US Open it was one of the best public courses around in a time when most majors went to private courses. Since then the public golf landscape has changed quite a bit and lots of better public tracks have been built and hosted majors. It's a nice course, a very good course, but it lacks all the things you mention and doesn't really even have much of a signature hole.

[Irishman1979]

> @LICC said:

> > @VNutz said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > >

> > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > >

> > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > >

> >

> > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

>

> I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

 

Butler National is the same kind of golf course and they always have said it would be a perfect venue if they allowed women to host the U.S. Open.

 

Lets be honest, Cog HIll's redesign is just tough golf, thats it. It forces you to hit solid shots and penalizes you if you miss fairways and greens on the wrong side. It is a perfect course to host the U.S. Open and I'm not sure why everyone hates the place. The course is much more challenging than it was before Jones got a hold of it. Plus the practice facility is perfect for the tour and the course is set up perfectly for spectators as the property is gigantic.

 

The Chicago area is a big market, loves golf, and hasn't had a regular tour event since the Western. If Cog Hill ever gets another tour event I believe it more than likely may be the Champions tour. If you remember the guys on that tour now are the same guys you would have seen in the Western Open when it was in Lemont back in the 90's and early 2000's. Chicago hasn't hosted a Champions tour event in years.

 

If not the Champions tour, then the next option is taking the Korn Ferry tour and putting together Cog Hill as a new venue. Those guys could easily handle it and you could tip them out if needed.

 

 

[LICC]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @VNutz said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > > >

> > > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > > >

> > > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > > >

> > >

> > > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

> >

> > I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

>

> Butler National is the same kind of golf course and they always have said it would be a perfect venue if they allowed women to host the U.S. Open.

>

> Lets be honest, Cog HIll's redesign is just tough golf, thats it. It forces you to hit solid shots and penalizes you if you miss fairways and greens on the wrong side. It is a perfect course to host the U.S. Open and I'm not sure why everyone hates the place. The course is much more challenging than it was before Jones got a hold of it. Plus the practice facility is perfect for the tour and the course is set up perfectly for spectators as the property is gigantic.

>

> The Chicago area is a big market, loves golf, and hasn't had a regular tour event since the Western. If Cog Hill ever gets another tour event I believe it more than likely may be the Champions tour. If you remember the guys on that tour now are the same guys you would have seen in the Western Open when it was in Lemont back in the 90's and early 2000's. Chicago hasn't hosted a Champions tour event in years.

>

> If not the Champions tour, then the next option is taking the Korn Ferry tour and putting together Cog Hill as a new venue. Those guys could easily handle it and you could tip them out if needed.

>

>

 

I understand the infrastructure for tents and spectators is important, but as to the course, other than it being difficult what is special about it that it should be a US Open course? I can't think of another highly regarded US Open venue in which the course's only compelling feature is its difficulty. Oakmont maybe? But that is one of the most historic courses in America.

[VNutz]

> @LICC said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > > > >

> > > > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

> > >

> > > I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

> >

> > Butler National is the same kind of golf course and they always have said it would be a perfect venue if they allowed women to host the U.S. Open.

> >

> > Lets be honest, Cog HIll's redesign is just tough golf, thats it. It forces you to hit solid shots and penalizes you if you miss fairways and greens on the wrong side. It is a perfect course to host the U.S. Open and I'm not sure why everyone hates the place. The course is much more challenging than it was before Jones got a hold of it. Plus the practice facility is perfect for the tour and the course is set up perfectly for spectators as the property is gigantic.

> >

> > The Chicago area is a big market, loves golf, and hasn't had a regular tour event since the Western. If Cog Hill ever gets another tour event I believe it more than likely may be the Champions tour. If you remember the guys on that tour now are the same guys you would have seen in the Western Open when it was in Lemont back in the 90's and early 2000's. Chicago hasn't hosted a Champions tour event in years.

> >

> > If not the Champions tour, then the next option is taking the Korn Ferry tour and putting together Cog Hill as a new venue. Those guys could easily handle it and you could tip them out if needed.

> >

> >

>

> I understand the infrastructure for tents and spectators is important, but as to the course, other than it being difficult what is special about it that it should be a US Open course? I can't think of another highly regarded US Open venue in which the course's only compelling feature is its difficulty. Oakmont maybe? But that is one of the most historic courses in America.

 

Compelling features is more of a modern development in US Open courses IMO. If you look back on US Open venues of the past there are a lot of excellent courses that don't exactly have compelling features.

[Irishman1979]

> @VNutz said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

> > > >

> > > > I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

> > >

> > > Butler National is the same kind of golf course and they always have said it would be a perfect venue if they allowed women to host the U.S. Open.

> > >

> > > Lets be honest, Cog HIll's redesign is just tough golf, thats it. It forces you to hit solid shots and penalizes you if you miss fairways and greens on the wrong side. It is a perfect course to host the U.S. Open and I'm not sure why everyone hates the place. The course is much more challenging than it was before Jones got a hold of it. Plus the practice facility is perfect for the tour and the course is set up perfectly for spectators as the property is gigantic.

> > >

> > > The Chicago area is a big market, loves golf, and hasn't had a regular tour event since the Western. If Cog Hill ever gets another tour event I believe it more than likely may be the Champions tour. If you remember the guys on that tour now are the same guys you would have seen in the Western Open when it was in Lemont back in the 90's and early 2000's. Chicago hasn't hosted a Champions tour event in years.

> > >

> > > If not the Champions tour, then the next option is taking the Korn Ferry tour and putting together Cog Hill as a new venue. Those guys could easily handle it and you could tip them out if needed.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I understand the infrastructure for tents and spectators is important, but as to the course, other than it being difficult what is special about it that it should be a US Open course? I can't think of another highly regarded US Open venue in which the course's only compelling feature is its difficulty. Oakmont maybe? But that is one of the most historic courses in America.

>

> Compelling features is more of a modern development in US Open courses IMO. If you look back on US Open venues of the past there are a lot of excellent courses that don't exactly have compelling features.

 

Correct. Baltusrol being a perfect example. Don't tell me the rolling fairways either make it compelling cause Cog Hill has plenty of rolling hills, its not flat. They also have ravines which require a good carry. For example number 13 the par 4, 15 the par 5 and number 16 is like a roller coaster and if you miss to the left of that fairway or green you are dead.

[LICC]

The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

[Irishman1979]

> @LICC said:

> The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

 

I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

[LICC]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

>

> I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

 

The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

[Irishman1979]

> @LICC said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

> >

> > I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

>

> The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

 

Good choice. I'm not sure how old you are but the way golf is headed I'm putting money on it that one day in my lifetime I will see them build courses that are on active volcano's. Course design will definitely be like Golden Tee by then. Its getting very very silly to be honest with you.

[LICC]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

> > >

> > > I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

> >

> > The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

>

> Good choice. I'm not sure how old you are but the way golf is headed I'm putting money on it that one day in my lifetime I will see them build courses that are on active volcano's. Course design will definitely be like Golden Tee by then. Its getting very very silly to be honest with you.

 

I'm older than I look lol ...

 

Well there has been a movement the last 20 years to build more naturalistic golf courses. We will see.

[Irishman1979]

> @LICC said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

> > > >

> > > > I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

> > >

> > > The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

> >

> > Good choice. I'm not sure how old you are but the way golf is headed I'm putting money on it that one day in my lifetime I will see them build courses that are on active volcano's. Course design will definitely be like Golden Tee by then. Its getting very very silly to be honest with you.

>

> I'm older than I look lol ...

>

> Well there has been a movement the last 20 years to build more naturalistic golf courses. We will see.

 

In your opinion if you had to name one guy, who is the most extreme course designer in the industry right now?

[geochitown]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @VNutz said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > @VNutz said:

> > > > > Partly because of all the bitching and moaning by guys like Ogilvy and Mickelson after the redo. And for all of that complaining about it being too hard, Tiger went out and shot -19 the first event post redesign.

> > > > >

> > > > > But primarily IMO because it's a good, perhaps great course, but not US Open worthy IMO. It lacks the wow factor that many of the courses the USGA has chosen the past 10 years have. Would have made for a fitting US Open course in the mid 90s but not so much today.

> > > >

> > > > Do you believe that the course could host a PGA championship?

> > > >

> > >

> > > I think it's more suited to host a PGA Champ than a US Open, but even that I'm not certain about anymore. The redesign seems to have taken the course down a peg or two in the national scale in the minds of most. And as stated above, it's very much a politics thing with the USGA, and quite often when a course goes the way of the PGA it doesn't get back to a USGA event. It was Jemsek's dream to land a US Open, I'm not sure the family would "settle" for a PGA now. If only the 97 US Am didn't get so much rain, we might not be having this conversation.

> >

> > I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

>

> Butler National is the same kind of golf course and they always have said it would be a perfect venue if they allowed women to host the U.S. Open.

>

> Lets be honest, Cog HIll's redesign is just tough golf, thats it. It forces you to hit solid shots and penalizes you if you miss fairways and greens on the wrong side. It is a perfect course to host the U.S. Open and I'm not sure why everyone hates the place. The course is much more challenging than it was before Jones got a hold of it. Plus the practice facility is perfect for the tour and the course is set up perfectly for spectators as the property is gigantic.

>

> The Chicago area is a big market, loves golf, and hasn't had a regular tour event since the Western. If Cog Hill ever gets another tour event I believe it more than likely may be the Champions tour. If you remember the guys on that tour now are the same guys you would have seen in the Western Open when it was in Lemont back in the 90's and early 2000's. Chicago hasn't hosted a Champions tour event in years.

>

> If not the Champions tour, then the next option is taking the Korn Ferry tour and putting together Cog Hill as a new venue. Those guys could easily handle it and you could tip them out if needed.

>

>

 

When Cog lost the Western/Cialis/BMW events, the PGA went north to Lake Forest (Conway Farms), Champions Tour has played Stonebridge (in Aurora) and more recently some north shore private clubs, Exmoor, North Shore?.

Korn Ferry is running with the Evans Scholars as sponsor at the Glen Club after a couple of years at Ivanhoe.

 

The Western Open used to be played at Butler (late 70's?). It was the first golf tournament I ever attended (I was 8-10 years old).

 

Chicago just doesn't seem to have compelling golf courses for the PGA,

Enter Jackson Park?????

 

 

[LICC]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

> > > > >

> > > > > I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

> > > >

> > > > The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

> > >

> > > Good choice. I'm not sure how old you are but the way golf is headed I'm putting money on it that one day in my lifetime I will see them build courses that are on active volcano's. Course design will definitely be like Golden Tee by then. Its getting very very silly to be honest with you.

> >

> > I'm older than I look lol ...

> >

> > Well there has been a movement the last 20 years to build more naturalistic golf courses. We will see.

>

> In your opinion if you had to name one guy, who is the most extreme course designer in the industry right now?

 

Hard to say. Doesn’t seem to be any Mike Stranz type out there. Maybe McClay Kidd.

[Dancin]

> @LICC said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > The US Open hasn't been to Baltusrol in over 25 years. I don't think many consider it to be one of the most highly regarded US Open venues. I guess it comes down to, if you have a selection of courses that are both challenging and have compelling features, why pick one that doesn't?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I would absolutely love to see the US Open go back to the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Such a great golf course.

> > > > >

> > > > > The PGA Championship is being played there in 2028.

> > > >

> > > > Good choice. I'm not sure how old you are but the way golf is headed I'm putting money on it that one day in my lifetime I will see them build courses that are on active volcano's. Course design will definitely be like Golden Tee by then. Its getting very very silly to be honest with you.

> > >

> > > I'm older than I look lol ...

> > >

> > > Well there has been a movement the last 20 years to build more naturalistic golf courses. We will see.

> >

> > In your opinion if you had to name one guy, who is the most extreme course designer in the industry right now?

>

> Hard to say. Doesn’t seem to be any Mike Stranz type out there. Maybe McClay Kidd.

 

Jim Engh but that might be more because he made his name building courses on properties viewed as too extreme for golf and turned down by other architects. Even when given more normal properties he does some crazy stuff.

[AC168]

I played after the redo (never before). Thought it was lousy but easily fixable. Olympic Club and Baltusrol aren’t particularly interesting, but better than Cog Hill. Fixing up Cog Hill could make it in the same league sort of, but Medinah and Erin Hills are ready to go without fixing.

[SCalGolfer]

Dubs dread is a nice track but it's not US Open caliber. For midwest venues I would go Oakland Hills all day long.

[Roadking2003]

> @LICC said:>

> I've never played it, but my sense is that other than it being difficult, there isn't anything compelling enough about the course. No oceanfront views, no grand scale rolling property. Just a hard slog of a course.

 

I played it once. It's not memorable at all. But neither are several other courses that some people rate highly like East Lake.

[Schley]

The course served it's purpose for a long time as host of the Western Open. When Olympia Fields got the US Open in 2003 that got them thinking about what they needed to do to get one other than asking. Rees Jones unveiling has some questionable greens and a few bunkers that rubbed the tour players the wrong way. From there they never recovered and were even dropped from the Western/BMW rotation altogether. Now it wasn't entirely fair as IMO the PGA royally screwed up a great 4th of July tradition of the Western Open at Cog Hill each year which drew wonderfully absconded with the tournament via moving it to the Fedex cup and then rotating it and finally not coming back. The Jemsek's were a little stubborn about some of the criticisms after Jones redo which didn't help I'm told. They stood behind Rees Jones's work and said Rees will do the renovations on the renovations which didn't help as well. I love the US Open at public courses personally, but this wasn't a muni like Bethpage/Torrey Pines, it is privately owned by the Jemseks so that as well took it down a notch I think in the USGA's eyes.

[Argonne69]

Dubs lost the BMW primarily because of its location in the southwest suburbs. There are no corporate headquarters in the area. Conway Farms was close to numerous corporate campuses.

 

[Irishman1979]

Like mentioned above, the Western open at Cog Hill was such an amazing experience. Being the week of 4th of July it was the best regular tour event each year with one of the strongest fields if not the strongest of any tour event during the season outside of a major. The attendance was the strongest I have ever seen or been to in person, it was a huge party each and every year since of when it took place. Players like Mickelson, Woods, Els, Faldo, Norman, the list could go on and on of hall of famers who came to play in the Western each summer.

 

You must remember that at one time the Western was a major and it built such a strong history over the years. The PGA tour should have never turned it into the BMW, that was an extremely bad decision. They could have easily kept the Western on the schedule the week of 4th of July and had the BMW as a new event in the fall.

 

Chicago is such a strong market that they could have had two tournaments in one year if needed which would have had tons of people attending if in fact BMW wanted an event in Chicago as well. There was no reason for the PGA tour to do what they did as they easily could have made sure the Western stayed on the schedule. Rotate the BMW to different locations every year which they do now anyway.