Power on the PGA Tour......

[Titleist99]

> @LICC said:

> > @clevited said:

> > I think the OP is trying to point out the inconsistencies regarding the reasons people think courses can't be played anymore. Or maybe I am incorrect but that was the jist I got. Some say too short, but then there are clearly courses that are as short or shorter that play more challenging and get a lot of praise. There are people that chime in and say, yeah but, they had to grow the rough and increase the stimp to keep it near par. Well then you are saying that par is the reason the courses lengthened, because it is viewed as bad that players shoot good scores relative to par?

> >

> > It is all opinion on what of golf anyone wants to see. Many argue length isn't important and that par is just a number. There are multiple ways to protect par if you want. There are courses that imo, were better designed to stand the test of time, there are courses that did not and are in some peoples opinions, being destroyed.

> >

> > I would really love to see people list their courses they think cannot be played anymore on the tour and give your best argument as to why it cannot be played. I don't think saying its too short, or because of par are very detailed or good reasons alone. Seeing some more people elaborate on that would be great I think.

>

> The courses I listed are too short to pose an interesting enough challenge to a Tour pros. Watching consistent sub-65 rounds because every par-4 is a wedge in and every par-5 is an expected birdie is not compelling for many golf fans, especially if you are talking majors.

 

You listed Chicago Country Club on your list of old courses that they won't be holding a major championship again due to PGA TOUR power...sad seeing as how the last major championship was held there in 1911.

[Bad9]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Bad9 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > >

> > > > > The cool thing about this thread is it asks a specific question. There have been some answers, but I don't think any (mine included) have been definitive. IDK if someone can come up with a list of venues that have been excluded solely due to lack of length. There are a lot more factors at play. Check out the picture of #16 Pasatiempo above. I don't see a lot of room for grandstands, lol.

> > > >

> > > > Infrastructure is a proper response. Some venue just don't have the room for parking grandstand etc... Some venues member just don't want to give up their golf course (most are private) . What I'm not hearing is "The golf course is to short".

> > > >

> > > > People have not rendered anything but lip service when I ask for specific courses....I get crickets,

> > >

> > > I’d add the venue stipulation to the OP. I was compiling a list that didn’t include “because lack of parking. “. You had originally just ask about the players. Not the traveling circus too. I personally think that with today’s massive TV deals they could afford to have 2-4 events a year without many spectators , TV only wouldn’t kill the tour a couple times a year.

> >

> > I understand what you are saying but I would bet that they do not want to televise a sparsely attended, pro event. Same reason they don't like to show half empty baseball and football stadium during games.

>

> Yea. I get that too. Maybe no viewers would look better ?

>

> I just think that some of the really old courses would be of great interest to ME personally while watching on tv. I can’t be the only one that would pay to watch a tour event at say Chicago CC, Charleston CC, or prestwick ?

 

Sadly I don't think there's enough of us that would watch to make it happen.

[gvogel]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @clevited said:

> > > > > > I think the OP is trying to point out the inconsistencies regarding the reasons people think courses can't be played anymore. Or maybe I am incorrect but that was the jist I got. Some say too short, but then there are clearly courses that are as short or shorter that play more challenging and get a lot of praise. There are people that chime in and say, yeah but, they had to grow the rough and increase the stimp to keep it near par. Well then you are saying that par is the reason the courses lengthened, because it is viewed as bad that players shoot good scores relative to par?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It is all opinion on what of golf anyone wants to see. Many argue length isn't important and that par is just a number. There are multiple ways to protect par if you want. There are courses that imo, were better designed to stand the test of time, there are courses that did not and are in some peoples opinions, being destroyed.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I would really love to see people list their courses they think cannot be played anymore on the tour and give your best argument as to why it cannot be played. I don't think saying its too short, or because of par are very detailed or good reasons alone. Seeing some more people elaborate on that would be great I think.

> > > > >

> > > > > The courses I listed are too short to pose an interesting enough challenge to a Tour pros. Watching consistent sub-65 rounds because every par-4 is a wedge in and every par-5 is an expected birdie is not compelling for many golf fans, especially if you are talking majors.

> > > >

> > > > LOL!! It is obtuse statements like this with no facts that makes one question credibility even though the statement is largely opinion...…….but I digress.

> > >

> > > Says the person who thinks a 6,500 yard course would hold up as a major venue. I think you should look in the mirror when calling statements obtuse ...

> >

> > Exactly.

> >

> > Harbor Town is around 7,000 yards from the tips, and players such as Rory McIlroy and Brooks Koepka won't play it because it can't be exploited by their superior driving distance. 6,500 yards is a joke for the tour.

>

> Sound smart to me. What's your point? Major tournaments should do the same thing.

 

My point? Please read my post about the relative value of different skills for championship golf, above.

[Titleist99]

> @gvogel said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting. I think every course on that list is long enough to host a stroke play event.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo, at 6500 yards, hosts the Western with top DI players who bomb it. I played it the week before the tournament this year, and it was playing tough. I think only 13 players in the field were under par after three rounds. -3 got you a T7.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big difference when it comes to the Tour. 6 par-4s under 400 yards. A par-5 at only 500 yards. Half these guys would be at 5-under every round on these holes alone.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha! I'll go out on a limb and guess you've never played it. First, 6500 yards on the West Coast (the actual coast) isn't equivalent to 6500 yards on the East Coast. Not even close. Second, there's a bit more to the course than the length. If it had the room to host a PGA Tour event, I would bet my house that it wouldn't be the lowest winning score relative to par on tour.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are really stretching on that one! These guys hit it really far and dial in their wedges really close on either coast. Whether it would be the lowest score to par on the whole Tour or not isn't the deciding factor. Whether it has enough length to provide enough of a challenge to be a respectable PGA Tour event is the question.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. Still, I think it would hold up just fine because it's a great design. It's wild to see certain classic courses still be able to challenge elite level players, and others have to resort to massive changes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A Sunday pin on #16 at Pasatiempo would be incredible to watch. At 387, it would be iron-wedge, for sure, but that's not the challenge of the hole. If you'd ever tried to clip one off that downslope a precise distance, or be facing almost certain three-putt, you'd know what I'm talking about. Mackenzie's favorite hole on his favorite US course.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice Post......you get the gist of the thread. Just putting that out there because the thread wreckers are coming....LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Meaning what? I thought @"Ashley Schaeffer" and I had a good discussion on this with good points raised by both of us. Of course, my facts and analysis may counter your view, so let your freakout begin ... LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Totally different discussion.....I simply asked for the names of the venues that a major tournament can't be played due to the power game PGA TOUR and explain why? That shouldn't be to hard for anyone with average intelligence......

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > No, as usual, you didn't ask for anything even close to that. Pray tell where in the original post (goalposts, lol, which have been moved yet again) you were asking about hosting major tournaments.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Well, the goal post is always on roller.....Just want to know the name of the obsolete golf course that is taken out of the rotation for major tournaments due to the power game of the PGA TOUR. easy peasy…….Some times it's not due to players length,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Your original question didn’t ask about the rotation for majors. It just asked about courses not long enough for Tour pros. Which I gave a list. If you are now just asking about major rotas, that question is not as relevant because many courses have spent lots of money to lengthen in order to stay feasible for majors.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Some say that the tour, with it's power game is making the old classic courses obsolete.....I simply want to know which courses and why....

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > >

> > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > >

> > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > >

> > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> >

> > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

>

> As I have stated before, when a course becomes so short that it becomes largely a drive and pitch course, the balance of skill that a player requires to shoot the lowest score shifts strongly toward short iron play, pitching and putting. Heck, you might as well play the tournament on a good par 3 course. But most golfers and golf spectators will say that such a course, a good par 3 course, is not proper golf. So the argument shifts back to how long does a course need to be to be a proper test for the golfers - especially the best tour players.

>

> We are having that discussion. And most knowledgeable golfers and golf fans can easily see that the Old Course becoming obsolete through greater distance. You say no; but golf writers have asked the question, so it must be a topic of conversation within the golf community.

 

That is the discussion...……..but when you say that a courses is to short you have to follow up with why you think that. If Pebble Beach can host a major any course can.

[bladehunter]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting. I think every course on that list is long enough to host a stroke play event.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo, at 6500 yards, hosts the Western with top DI players who bomb it. I played it the week before the tournament this year, and it was playing tough. I think only 13 players in the field were under par after three rounds. -3 got you a T7.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big difference when it comes to the Tour. 6 par-4s under 400 yards. A par-5 at only 500 yards. Half these guys would be at 5-under every round on these holes alone.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha! I'll go out on a limb and guess you've never played it. First, 6500 yards on the West Coast (the actual coast) isn't equivalent to 6500 yards on the East Coast. Not even close. Second, there's a bit more to the course than the length. If it had the room to host a PGA Tour event, I would bet my house that it wouldn't be the lowest winning score relative to par on tour.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are really stretching on that one! These guys hit it really far and dial in their wedges really close on either coast. Whether it would be the lowest score to par on the whole Tour or not isn't the deciding factor. Whether it has enough length to provide enough of a challenge to be a respectable PGA Tour event is the question.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. Still, I think it would hold up just fine because it's a great design. It's wild to see certain classic courses still be able to challenge elite level players, and others have to resort to massive changes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A Sunday pin on #16 at Pasatiempo would be incredible to watch. At 387, it would be iron-wedge, for sure, but that's not the challenge of the hole. If you'd ever tried to clip one off that downslope a precise distance, or be facing almost certain three-putt, you'd know what I'm talking about. Mackenzie's favorite hole on his favorite US course.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice Post......you get the gist of the thread. Just putting that out there because the thread wreckers are coming....LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meaning what? I thought @"Ashley Schaeffer" and I had a good discussion on this with good points raised by both of us. Of course, my facts and analysis may counter your view, so let your freakout begin ... LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally different discussion.....I simply asked for the names of the venues that a major tournament can't be played due to the power game PGA TOUR and explain why? That shouldn't be to hard for anyone with average intelligence......

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > No, as usual, you didn't ask for anything even close to that. Pray tell where in the original post (goalposts, lol, which have been moved yet again) you were asking about hosting major tournaments.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Well, the goal post is always on roller.....Just want to know the name of the obsolete golf course that is taken out of the rotation for major tournaments due to the power game of the PGA TOUR. easy peasy…….Some times it's not due to players length,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Your original question didn’t ask about the rotation for majors. It just asked about courses not long enough for Tour pros. Which I gave a list. If you are now just asking about major rotas, that question is not as relevant because many courses have spent lots of money to lengthen in order to stay feasible for majors.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Some say that the tour, with it's power game is making the old classic courses obsolete.....I simply want to know which courses and why....

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > > >

> > > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> > >

> > > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

> >

> > As I have stated before, when a course becomes so short that it becomes largely a drive and pitch course, the balance of skill that a player requires to shoot the lowest score shifts strongly toward short iron play, pitching and putting. Heck, you might as well play the tournament on a good par 3 course. But most golfers and golf spectators will say that such a course, a good par 3 course, is not proper golf. So the argument shifts back to how long does a course need to be to be a proper test for the golfers - especially the best tour players.

> >

> > We are having that discussion. And most knowledgeable golfers and golf fans can easily see that the Old Course becoming obsolete through greater distance. You say no; but golf writers have asked the question, so it must be a topic of conversation within the golf community.

>

> That is the discussion...……..but when you say that a courses is to short you have to follow up with why you think that. If Pebble Beach can host a major any course can.

 

Please re-read his first several lines. The “ why” is there. But you know that already.

[LICC]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

 

> > > > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > > > >

> > > > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> > > >

> > > > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > > > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

> > >

> > > As I have stated before, when a course becomes so short that it becomes largely a drive and pitch course, the balance of skill that a player requires to shoot the lowest score shifts strongly toward short iron play, pitching and putting. Heck, you might as well play the tournament on a good par 3 course. But most golfers and golf spectators will say that such a course, a good par 3 course, is not proper golf. So the argument shifts back to how long does a course need to be to be a proper test for the golfers - especially the best tour players.

> > >

> > > We are having that discussion. And most knowledgeable golfers and golf fans can easily see that the Old Course becoming obsolete through greater distance. You say no; but golf writers have asked the question, so it must be a topic of conversation within the golf community.

> >

> > That is the discussion...……..but when you say that a courses is to short you have to follow up with why you think that. If Pebble Beach can host a major any course can.

>

> Please re-read his first several lines. The “ why” is there. But you know that already.

 

"If Pebble Beach can host a major any course can." Ugh. This is now theatre of the absurd. If Pebble can host a major, then another course 500 yards shorter and not right on the water and without the same propensity for winds can, because, Pebble can, or something ...

[ebrasmus21]

It’s because of Rory’s fitness level.

 

I’ll show myself out.

[bladehunter]

> @ebrasmus21 said:

> It’s because of Rory’s fitness level.

>

> I’ll show myself out.

 

Lol. You rabble rouser you !

[ebrasmus21]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @ebrasmus21 said:

> > It’s because of Rory’s fitness level.

> >

> > I’ll show myself out.

>

> Lol. You rabble rouser you !

 

Couldn’t help it ;)

 

I’ll cast a vote for Pacific Dunes. Spectacular course but on a calm day I bet the PGA scoring average on that course would be 67.

 

Different score with Gail winds.

[mahonie]

The question I find myself asking is not which courses are now obsolete, but which of the modern PGA Tour are actually interesting to watch? Sky’s highlights programmes boil down to a couple of ‘bombs’ artfully picked out with TopTracer (especially if they find water or the cart path) and any putt holed from more than 20 feet...even if it’s for a double. They don’t even show the stiffed wedge shots anymore, they just show the subsequent putt.

 

Harbour Town is great and Augusta for its history are the only ones that stand out...the others just merge into one.

[bigred90gt]

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting. I think every course on that list is long enough to host a stroke play event.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo, at 6500 yards, hosts the Western with top DI players who bomb it. I played it the week before the tournament this year, and it was playing tough. I think only 13 players in the field were under par after three rounds. -3 got you a T7.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big difference when it comes to the Tour. 6 par-4s under 400 yards. A par-5 at only 500 yards. Half these guys would be at 5-under every round on these holes alone.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha! I'll go out on a limb and guess you've never played it. First, 6500 yards on the West Coast (the actual coast) isn't equivalent to 6500 yards on the East Coast. Not even close. Second, there's a bit more to the course than the length. If it had the room to host a PGA Tour event, I would bet my house that it wouldn't be the lowest winning score relative to par on tour.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are really stretching on that one! These guys hit it really far and dial in their wedges really close on either coast. Whether it would be the lowest score to par on the whole Tour or not isn't the deciding factor. Whether it has enough length to provide enough of a challenge to be a respectable PGA Tour event is the question.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. Still, I think it would hold up just fine because it's a great design. It's wild to see certain classic courses still be able to challenge elite level players, and others have to resort to massive changes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A Sunday pin on #16 at Pasatiempo would be incredible to watch. At 387, it would be iron-wedge, for sure, but that's not the challenge of the hole. If you'd ever tried to clip one off that downslope a precise distance, or be facing almost certain three-putt, you'd know what I'm talking about. Mackenzie's favorite hole on his favorite US course.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice Post......you get the gist of the thread. Just putting that out there because the thread wreckers are coming....LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Meaning what? I thought @"Ashley Schaeffer" and I had a good discussion on this with good points raised by both of us. Of course, my facts and analysis may counter your view, so let your freakout begin ... LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Totally different discussion.....I simply asked for the names of the venues that a major tournament can't be played due to the power game PGA TOUR and explain why? That shouldn't be to hard for anyone with average intelligence......

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > No, as usual, you didn't ask for anything even close to that. Pray tell where in the original post (goalposts, lol, which have been moved yet again) you were asking about hosting major tournaments.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Well, the goal post is always on roller.....Just want to know the name of the obsolete golf course that is taken out of the rotation for major tournaments due to the power game of the PGA TOUR. easy peasy…….Some times it's not due to players length,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Your original question didn’t ask about the rotation for majors. It just asked about courses not long enough for Tour pros. Which I gave a list. If you are now just asking about major rotas, that question is not as relevant because many courses have spent lots of money to lengthen in order to stay feasible for majors.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Some say that the tour, with it's power game is making the old classic courses obsolete.....I simply want to know which courses and why....

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > >

> > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > >

> > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > >

> > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> >

> > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

>

> It would be obsolete for majors. Look, you tried to come up with some scenario that you thought was intelligent and would prove your point, and it backfired on you badly because I brought realistic analysis and views to this discussion. So now you are lashing out again. Maybe for your own good you should take a breather.

 

The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

 

Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

 

Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

 

[jonsnow]

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @clevited said:

> > > > I think the OP is trying to point out the inconsistencies regarding the reasons people think courses can't be played anymore. Or maybe I am incorrect but that was the jist I got. Some say too short, but then there are clearly courses that are as short or shorter that play more challenging and get a lot of praise. There are people that chime in and say, yeah but, they had to grow the rough and increase the stimp to keep it near par. Well then you are saying that par is the reason the courses lengthened, because it is viewed as bad that players shoot good scores relative to par?

> > > >

> > > > It is all opinion on what of golf anyone wants to see. Many argue length isn't important and that par is just a number. There are multiple ways to protect par if you want. There are courses that imo, were better designed to stand the test of time, there are courses that did not and are in some peoples opinions, being destroyed.

> > > >

> > > > I would really love to see people list their courses they think cannot be played anymore on the tour and give your best argument as to why it cannot be played. I don't think saying its too short, or because of par are very detailed or good reasons alone. Seeing some more people elaborate on that would be great I think.

> > >

> > > The courses I listed are too short to pose an interesting enough challenge to a Tour pros. Watching consistent sub-65 rounds because every par-4 is a wedge in and every par-5 is an expected birdie is not compelling for many golf fans, especially if you are talking majors.

> >

> > LOL!! It is obtuse statements like this with no facts that makes one question credibility even though the statement is largely opinion...…….but I digress.

>

> Says the person who thinks a 6,500 yard course would hold up as a major venue. I think you should look in the mirror when calling statements obtuse ...

 

Do these pants make me look obtuse?

 

Do they make me look obsolete?

[gvogel]

> @mahonie said:

> The question I find myself asking is not which courses are now obsolete, but which of the modern PGA Tour are actually interesting to watch? Sky’s highlights programmes boil down to a couple of ‘bombs’ artfully picked out with TopTracer (especially if they find water or the cart path) and any putt holed from more than 20 feet...even if it’s for a double. They don’t even show the stiffed wedge shots anymore, they just show the subsequent putt.

>

> Harbour Town is great and Augusta for its history are the only ones that stand out...the others just merge into one.

 

I would say Riviera is another. Yes, it has a very special driveable par 4, but it also plays longer than its yardage because of the grass and climate.

[gvogel]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting. I think every course on that list is long enough to host a stroke play event.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo, at 6500 yards, hosts the Western with top DI players who bomb it. I played it the week before the tournament this year, and it was playing tough. I think only 13 players in the field were under par after three rounds. -3 got you a T7.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big difference when it comes to the Tour. 6 par-4s under 400 yards. A par-5 at only 500 yards. Half these guys would be at 5-under every round on these holes alone.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha! I'll go out on a limb and guess you've never played it. First, 6500 yards on the West Coast (the actual coast) isn't equivalent to 6500 yards on the East Coast. Not even close. Second, there's a bit more to the course than the length. If it had the room to host a PGA Tour event, I would bet my house that it wouldn't be the lowest winning score relative to par on tour.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are really stretching on that one! These guys hit it really far and dial in their wedges really close on either coast. Whether it would be the lowest score to par on the whole Tour or not isn't the deciding factor. Whether it has enough length to provide enough of a challenge to be a respectable PGA Tour event is the question.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. Still, I think it would hold up just fine because it's a great design. It's wild to see certain classic courses still be able to challenge elite level players, and others have to resort to massive changes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A Sunday pin on #16 at Pasatiempo would be incredible to watch. At 387, it would be iron-wedge, for sure, but that's not the challenge of the hole. If you'd ever tried to clip one off that downslope a precise distance, or be facing almost certain three-putt, you'd know what I'm talking about. Mackenzie's favorite hole on his favorite US course.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice Post......you get the gist of the thread. Just putting that out there because the thread wreckers are coming....LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meaning what? I thought @"Ashley Schaeffer" and I had a good discussion on this with good points raised by both of us. Of course, my facts and analysis may counter your view, so let your freakout begin ... LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally different discussion.....I simply asked for the names of the venues that a major tournament can't be played due to the power game PGA TOUR and explain why? That shouldn't be to hard for anyone with average intelligence......

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > No, as usual, you didn't ask for anything even close to that. Pray tell where in the original post (goalposts, lol, which have been moved yet again) you were asking about hosting major tournaments.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Well, the goal post is always on roller.....Just want to know the name of the obsolete golf course that is taken out of the rotation for major tournaments due to the power game of the PGA TOUR. easy peasy…….Some times it's not due to players length,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Your original question didn’t ask about the rotation for majors. It just asked about courses not long enough for Tour pros. Which I gave a list. If you are now just asking about major rotas, that question is not as relevant because many courses have spent lots of money to lengthen in order to stay feasible for majors.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Some say that the tour, with it's power game is making the old classic courses obsolete.....I simply want to know which courses and why....

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > > >

> > > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> > >

> > > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

> >

> > It would be obsolete for majors. Look, you tried to come up with some scenario that you thought was intelligent and would prove your point, and it backfired on you badly because I brought realistic analysis and views to this discussion. So now you are lashing out again. Maybe for your own good you should take a breather.

>

> The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

>

> Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

>

> Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

>

 

Fortunately for the winning score being even lower, it was quite windy one of the four days. If there is no wind there, it is a pushover. -15 for a major championship is quite low, in and of itself.

[LICC]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Hawkeye77 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And surprise, back to the same old stuff as before - it was done to death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean that you won't be posting in my thread again? Hope so !!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept. I can't think of a single golf course that is too short to host a competition where the lowest number of strokes wins.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When in fact most all of the tour golf courses are insufficient in length to test the world's best players.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm taking this as well-known courses that wouldn't be able to provide a decent challenge for a PGA Tour event. Just looking at the Golf Digest Top 200 US:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cypress Point

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fishers Island

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crystal Downs

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pacific Dunes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camargo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maidstone

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Essex County

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Myopia

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Montecito

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Creek

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eastward Ho!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St. Louis

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fox Chapel

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fairfield

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting. I think every course on that list is long enough to host a stroke play event.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pasatiempo, at 6500 yards, hosts the Western with top DI players who bomb it. I played it the week before the tournament this year, and it was playing tough. I think only 13 players in the field were under par after three rounds. -3 got you a T7.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Big difference when it comes to the Tour. 6 par-4s under 400 yards. A par-5 at only 500 yards. Half these guys would be at 5-under every round on these holes alone.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha! I'll go out on a limb and guess you've never played it. First, 6500 yards on the West Coast (the actual coast) isn't equivalent to 6500 yards on the East Coast. Not even close. Second, there's a bit more to the course than the length. If it had the room to host a PGA Tour event, I would bet my house that it wouldn't be the lowest winning score relative to par on tour.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are really stretching on that one! These guys hit it really far and dial in their wedges really close on either coast. Whether it would be the lowest score to par on the whole Tour or not isn't the deciding factor. Whether it has enough length to provide enough of a challenge to be a respectable PGA Tour event is the question.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, maybe. Still, I think it would hold up just fine because it's a great design. It's wild to see certain classic courses still be able to challenge elite level players, and others have to resort to massive changes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A Sunday pin on #16 at Pasatiempo would be incredible to watch. At 387, it would be iron-wedge, for sure, but that's not the challenge of the hole. If you'd ever tried to clip one off that downslope a precise distance, or be facing almost certain three-putt, you'd know what I'm talking about. Mackenzie's favorite hole on his favorite US course.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice Post......you get the gist of the thread. Just putting that out there because the thread wreckers are coming....LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meaning what? I thought @"Ashley Schaeffer" and I had a good discussion on this with good points raised by both of us. Of course, my facts and analysis may counter your view, so let your freakout begin ... LOL!

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally different discussion.....I simply asked for the names of the venues that a major tournament can't be played due to the power game PGA TOUR and explain why? That shouldn't be to hard for anyone with average intelligence......

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > No, as usual, you didn't ask for anything even close to that. Pray tell where in the original post (goalposts, lol, which have been moved yet again) you were asking about hosting major tournaments.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Well, the goal post is always on roller.....Just want to know the name of the obsolete golf course that is taken out of the rotation for major tournaments due to the power game of the PGA TOUR. easy peasy…….Some times it's not due to players length,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Your original question didn’t ask about the rotation for majors. It just asked about courses not long enough for Tour pros. Which I gave a list. If you are now just asking about major rotas, that question is not as relevant because many courses have spent lots of money to lengthen in order to stay feasible for majors.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Some say that the tour, with it's power game is making the old classic courses obsolete.....I simply want to know which courses and why....

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I’d say pebble and St. Andrews is your best answers. Neither is more than pitch and putt minus very hard wind. And yes. I know each was always more toothy with wind. But. Both have bunkers designed to guard fairways that are now just being blown over with 3 woods. Neither will get yanked from the rota for historical reasons. But they will provide some embarrassing scores of the wind doesn’t blow.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > For a poster that don't understand the thread you sure posted a wonderful post....You happen to mention two of the most iconic courses in the world and major Tournaments are still contested on both. Neither course is overly long and depends on the winds to protect them, yet both are totally relevant today. My objective is to dispel the myth that the old courses are becoming obsolete and major tournament can't be held there due to modern players power ,be it for what ever reason...… that's why I'm trying to look at the old courses that hosted Major Tournaments in the past and determine which may have other reasons for not being in the rotation....

> > > > > > > This is not a driver thread....I personally believe that driving is overrated and that a touring pro needs a total game to be successful. I personally believe that the game of golf is fine and no course is obsolete...Power just sell tickets.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Both of those courses had to change to significantly lengthen at substantial cost to stay barely long enough to still be viable major venues. Pebble added 200 yards from what it was just nine years ago. The Old Course is over 7,300 yards now. They are examples that are contrary to your premise.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > From Golf Digest: "Action was taken. As has already been the case in 2015, the 2021 Open at St. Andrews will see players driving from tees located on the Old Course, the New Course, the Eden Course, the Himalayas putting course and, in the case of the previously fearsome Road Hole, a field to the right of the 16th fairway. Take that aforementioned stroll round the Old and the walks between the previous green and the next tee amount to more than 1,000 yards. And that is only half way. After the often long (and annoying) walk back and to the right at many holes, that yardage must be retraced just to get back to where the tee used to be."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Right there you are wrong they didn't have to do anything.....they wanted to that. Evolution is part of the game. Distance off the tee has only increased 40 yards in 40 years.....That's a fact.

> > > > > I'll just leave it right there....

> > > >

> > > > They wanted to do that because the courses would be obsolete if they didn't. Maybe you wouldn't mind seeing wedge shots on every par-4, but many golf fans would not like to see major courses played that way. 40 yards on 14 holes (non-par 3s) is 560 yards. And that is not factoring in the increases in distance for irons.

> > >

> > > LOL!.....This has to be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said and that's saying something.....If St. Andrews never change in next 100 years it will never be obsolete..

> > > The fact that you think they would have to change all 14 driving hole because driving has increased 40 yard in 40 years is down right scary....

> >

> > It would be obsolete for majors. Look, you tried to come up with some scenario that you thought was intelligent and would prove your point, and it backfired on you badly because I brought realistic analysis and views to this discussion. So now you are lashing out again. Maybe for your own good you should take a breather.

>

> The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

>

> Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

>

> Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

>

 

I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

[bigred90gt]

> @LICC said:

> > @bigred90gt said:

> > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> >

> > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> >

> > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> >

>

> I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

 

In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

 

Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

 

[bscinstnct]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > >

> > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > >

> > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > >

> >

> > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

>

> In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

>

> Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

>

 

Last 5 Masters winners,

 

Tiger

Reed

Sergio

Willet

Spieth

 

All under 300 yard average drivers.

 

 

 

 

[LICC]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > >

> > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > >

> > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > >

> >

> > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

>

> In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

>

> Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

>

 

It was more like 400 yards shorter in 1990. Play that length today and winning scores would be 25 under.

[LICC]

> @bscinstnct said:

> > @bigred90gt said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > >

> > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > >

> > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > >

> > >

> > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> >

> > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> >

> > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> >

>

> Last 5 Masters winners,

>

> Tiger

> Reed

> Sergio

> Willet

> Spieth

>

> All under 300 yard average drivers.

>

>

>

>

 

Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

[Ghost of Snead]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > >

> > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > >

> > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > >

> >

> > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

>

> In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

>

> **Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.**

>

 

If it isn't, why did ANGC buy land back of Amen Corner from Augusta CC in 2017 and agree to pay for a re-route of ACC's 9th hole ?

[bscinstnct]

> @LICC said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > >

> > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > >

> > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > >

> > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > >

> > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > >

> >

> > Last 5 Masters winners,

> >

> > Tiger

> > Reed

> > Sergio

> > Willet

> > Spieth

> >

> > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

 

None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

 

 

[LICC]

> @bscinstnct said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > > >

> > > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > > >

> > > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Last 5 Masters winners,

> > >

> > > Tiger

> > > Reed

> > > Sergio

> > > Willet

> > > Spieth

> > >

> > > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

>

> None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

>

>

 

And ... so what?

[LICC]

> @"Ghost of Snead" said:

> > @bigred90gt said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > >

> > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > >

> > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > >

> > >

> > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> >

> > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> >

> > **Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.**

> >

>

> If it isn't, why did ANGC buy land back of Amen Corner from Augusta CC in 2017 and agree to pay for a re-route of ACC's 9th hole ?

 

I don't understand why some people bury their heads in the sand when it comes to the effect the massive distance increases have had on the Tour.

[bscinstnct]

> @LICC said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > > > >

> > > > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > > > >

> > > > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Last 5 Masters winners,

> > > >

> > > > Tiger

> > > > Reed

> > > > Sergio

> > > > Willet

> > > > Spieth

> > > >

> > > > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

> >

> > None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

> >

> >

>

> And ... so what?

 

 

So...you realize that the 2019 Masters winner

 

Was shorter than the 1997 Masters winner.

 

Right?

 

; )

 

[Titleist99]

> @LICC said:

> > @bigred90gt said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > >

> > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > >

> > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > >

> > >

> > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> >

> > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> >

> > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> >

>

> It was more like 400 yards shorter in 1990. Play that length today and winning scores would be 25 under.

 

Can't wait for you to present the facts to back that drivel up.....LOL!

[mahonie]

> @bigred90gt said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > >

> > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > >

> > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > >

> >

> > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

>

> In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

>

> Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

>

 

The weather was perfect and Faldo was the best player in the world by miles in 1990...he was probably the best player ever at manipulating a ball around the course. No 3-putts all week and only found a bunker on the 4th hole of the 4th round. He won by 5 and at a canter...and St Andrews was the shortest it had played since 1964.

[LICC]

> @bscinstnct said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Last 5 Masters winners,

> > > > >

> > > > > Tiger

> > > > > Reed

> > > > > Sergio

> > > > > Willet

> > > > > Spieth

> > > > >

> > > > > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

> > >

> > > None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > And ... so what?

>

>

> So...you realize that the 2019 Masters winner

>

> Was shorter than the 1997 Masters winner.

>

> Right?

>

> ; )

>

 

And the 2019 winner was hitting driver lots more than the 1997 winner who hit 3-woods off the tee lots more often. ; )

[Titleist99]

top 20 in driving distance this year...…..take notice of the accuracy: Tony Finau 55% ……...of the top 21 only 3 with major championships. I think that our classic courses are safe from these world beaters.

 

Expanded I Statistics

RK PLAYER AGE YDS/DRIVE DRIVING ACC. DRVE TOTAL GREENS IN REG. PUTT AVG. SAVE PCT.

1 Tony Finau 30 335.0 55.5 1 69.4 1.753 44.4

2 Cameron Champ 24 333.0 56.1 2 69.8 1.778 52.6

3 Ryan Palmer 43 326.1 65.2 3 75.5 1.742 41.2

4 Keith Mitchell 27 325.8 64.0 4 67.8 1.787 57.9

5 Ryan Brehm -- 324.6 41.1 5 68.1 1.786 43.3

6 Brooks Koepka 29 324.3 64.3 6 69.4 1.780 60.0

7 Danny Lee 29 324.0 57.3 7 70.7 1.747 63.6

8 Matthew Wolff -- 323.9 57.9 8 72.2 1.808 28.6

9 Bubba Watson 41 323.7 60.4 9 69.0 1.782 50.0

10 Jason Kokrak 34 323.1 60.9 10 71.8 1.823 59.1

RK PLAYER AGE YDS/DRIVE DRIVING ACC. DRVE TOTAL GREENS IN REG. PUTT AVG. SAVE PCT.

11 Gary Woodland 35 322.3 72.6 11 77.3 1.760 54.2

12 Kurt Kitayama 26 322.0 45.2 12 69.4 1.760 28.6

13 Tyler McCumber -- 321.7 51.6 13 65.4 1.788 35.3

14 Grayson Murray 26 321.7 53.2 14 62.1 1.740 36.8

15 Kevin Tway 31 320.0 48.8 15 66.4 1.740 46.2

Patrick Fishburn -- 320.0 42.9 15 61.1 1.727 80.0

17 Viktor Hovland 22 319.8 68.9 17 73.6 1.755 52.4

18 Harold Varner III 29 319.2 63.0 18 72.8 1.729 37.5

19 Byeong-Hun An 28 318.6 54.2 19 69.4 1.707 55.8

20 Scottie Scheffler 23 318.6 60.7 20 75.3 1.753 43.8

RK PLAYER AGE YDS/DRIVE DRIVING ACC. DRVE TOTAL GREENS IN REG. PUTT AVG. SAVE PCT.

21 Matt Jones 39 318.5 60.7 21 74.2 1.722 64.0

22 Patrick Cantlay 27 318.3 67.0 22 81.3 1.718

 

[RobS14526]

> @LICC said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > > @LICC said:

> > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Last 5 Masters winners,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Tiger

> > > > > > Reed

> > > > > > Sergio

> > > > > > Willet

> > > > > > Spieth

> > > > > >

> > > > > > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

> > > >

> > > > None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > And ... so what?

> >

> >

> > So...you realize that the 2019 Masters winner

> >

> > Was shorter than the 1997 Masters winner.

> >

> > Right?

> >

> > ; )

> >

>

> And the 2019 winner was hitting driver lots more than the 1997 winner who hit 3-woods off the tee lots more often. ; )

 

And both the 1997 winner and the 2019 winner believe that the ball should be rolled back. ;-)

[bladehunter]

> @RobS14526 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > > > The last time the Open was at St Andrews the winning score was -15 after 4 days. That is -3.75/day average for the week. So, 68.25 scoring average over 4 days won the tournament.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Hardly an obsolete test in my opinion. And it was won by one of the shorter hitters on tour. He was T148 out of 184 players at 282.2 yards for the season.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Can you please elaborate how it would be obsolete if they do not lengthen it any more? What is your criteria for making it obsolete?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I didn't put St. Andrews on the list of courses that are too short. But that is because they lengthened it in creative ways. Putting tee boxes on the adjoining courses and an off-course field in order to keep the course challenging shows that its normal setup would be obsolete for the expectations for a major.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > In 1990 Nick Faldo won it with a score of -18. Before it was lengthened, before the “horrible for the game” technological advances were made, on a course that was only 300 yards shorter. He did it with an average driving distance of 249 yards.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Driving distance just isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Last 5 Masters winners,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Tiger

> > > > > > > Reed

> > > > > > > Sergio

> > > > > > > Willet

> > > > > > > Spieth

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > All under 300 yard average drivers.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Tiger was averaging over 300 for the year prior to the Masters. He dropped significantly after he won (which seems related to his knee and back problems). Sergio also averaged over 300 the year he won. Patrick Reed was at 298 the year he won.

> > > > >

> > > > > None of them even in the top 50 in driving prolly.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > And ... so what?

> > >

> > >

> > > So...you realize that the 2019 Masters winner

> > >

> > > Was shorter than the 1997 Masters winner.

> > >

> > > Right?

> > >

> > > ; )

> > >

> >

> > And the 2019 winner was hitting driver lots more than the 1997 winner who hit 3-woods off the tee lots more often. ; )

>

> And both the 1997 winner and the 2019 winner believe that the ball should be rolled back. ;-)

 

True true True. Lol.