Last year I went on a rant on how the USGA setup was very poor. While I've heard and read comments on how the USGA set up Pinehurst made the players shot defensively, no one I've heard has been quoted what I would call a complaint. The comments have been what I would classify as observations, not complaints.
The rough is uniform, greens are difficult, but not over-the-top and players are still hitting a lot of drivers on the holes where they should - sometimes the USGA takes the driver out of the bag, but not this year. No half dead, baked out greens, no ridiculous pin placements, just a very tough, but emensely fair for players of this caliber. I've think they learned their lesson from last year.
So far, I've enjoyed this Open - very tough, but fair (again, for players of this caliber). Hopefully, I haven't spoke to soon.
I don,t see what is wrong with making the best players in the world have to really go out and play to their very best, both mentally and phsically, surely no one wants to see 20 under winning one of the greatest sporting events in the world.
When I played "Nasty Carnoustie" and I managed par on one of the really difficult holes I really felt good about myself as I watched the very best have to really think and play great on that same hole in 99
You've got a guy sitting at 3-under right now. Two others at Even par. I honestly think they've given the guys a break by watering the greens just a little bit. They could have made this course Carnoustie-crazy if they wanted to. But you make mistakes, you make bogeys. Reason why so many guys are struggling is because they're not making putts. How many chances did we see from Vijay and Tiger the last two days.
The USGA setups at Pinehurst have been top-notch both times. In between they've had some dubious events due to either their own mistakes (Bethpage in 2002 when a lot of guys couldn't reach #10 or #12 fairway) or Mother Nature getting involved a bit (last year), but they've definitely got this one right. Early on today it appears as though the early holes at least are reasonable...guys can shoot under par today (JP Hayes is -2 thru 1 after holing his second shot at the first!! ) but if they're a little off, the course will get them. I think Retief will play smart golf today and realize that a 72 will get it done...and that's what he'll do, finishing as the only guy under par and a 3 shot win.
I would really like to see Toms or Tiger or one of the so called "no names" make a charge and possibly one of them be down one stroke on the back nine and it be a classic back nine on Sunday at the Open.... I really dont like watching runaway tournaments...
I think this was the finest set-up I've ever seen for a U.S. Open. And you can give all the credit for that to the course, itself. The No. 2 course at Pinehurst is so great...so well conceived...that the USGA really didn't have to do much in order to make it play as wonderfully as it did. It's the finest course in the current American major championship rotation.
Just wanted to add my ditto to droggy's and card's comments. This was one of the best and fairest tests of golf the USGA has put on for the Open in recent years. They certainly redeemed themselves for last years' fiasco. Well struck shots were rewarded, the rough was actually penal. I'd love to play this place. Great job by all involved.
As much as I rail against the USGA I have to admit they got this one right. I just hate the fact that the winner shot par. That will just re-affirm the USGA's theory that Par is a magic number to be defended at all cost.
June 19th, 2005, 07:21 AM
) but if they're a little off, the course will get them. I think Retief will play smart golf today and realize that a 72 will get it done...and that's what he'll do, finishing as the only guy under par and a 3 shot win.
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
