Pebble beach/Shinnecock Maybe Too short for a Major
These two courses are under 7000 yards. Without the wind, these couses are defenseless for a U.S. Open. Pebble Beach has survived the last two times only because of the wind. Shinnecock did only because of 3rd round winds and the USGA letting the greens get out of hand in the final round(the infamous 7th and the worse 10th -- par 4 with players hitting wedge but scoring average of 5.02 in last round).
If there is no wind at Pebble in 2010, expect the winning score to be double digits provided the USGA doesn't tricken the course. The cut might even fall at under par there as well. Tiger's -12 record might even be threatened if there's four days of calm conditions if the USGA doesn't let the greens die like at Shinnecock.
These two courses are under 7000 yards. Without the wind, these couses are defenseless for a U.S. Open. Pebble Beach has survived the last two times only because of the wind. Shinnecock did only because of 3rd round winds and the USGA letting the greens get out of hand in the final round(the infamous 7th and the worse 10th -- par 4 with players hitting wedge but scoring average of 5.02 in last round).
If there is no wind at Pebble in 2010, expect the winning score to be double digits provided the USGA doesn't tricken the course. The cut might even fall at under par there as well. Tiger's -12 record might even be threatened if there's four days of calm conditions if the USGA doesn't let the greens die like at Shinnecock.
Just a couple of things, "defenseless" is an irresponsible term to use. Great courses hold up over time that is what ultimately earns them respect. I don't know what 'tricken' means and lastly, Tiger's record is nowhere near in jeopardy. His record, with respect, to who he is chasing, Jack Nicklaus is lacking, but 2000 at Pebble Beach is the single greatest four rounds of golf without question. In terms of sports, likely the most dominating, EVER. Your estimation is, if not foolish, completely unbalanced. Not to mention, no wind on the Monterey Peninsula in June? Honestly, what you really don't understand is an architect's understanding of weather conditions. While, I am true fan of the Masters, there is no test like the US Open and even par is always a good score, check your stats on that one.
Just a couple of things, "defenseless" is an irresponsible term to use. Great courses hold up over time that is what ultimately earns them respect. I don't know what 'tricken' means and lastly, Tiger's record is nowhere near in jeopardy. His record, with respect, to who he is chasing, Jack Nicklaus is lacking, but 2000 at Pebble Beach is the single greatest four rounds of golf without question. In terms of sports, likely the most dominating, EVER. Your estimation is, if not foolish, completely unbalanced. Not to mention, no wind on the Monterey Peninsula in June? Honestly, what you really don't understand is an architect's understanding of weather conditions. While, I am true fan of the Masters, there is no test like the US Open and even par is always a good score, check your stats on that one.
Defenseless is Medinah in 1990 or St. Andrews in 1990 or even 2000. I agree that Pebble Beach will probably have at least one day of wind, and I am not diminshing Tiger's accomplishments. I thought they were fantastic. However, if Pebble Beach has the same conditions as in 1982 (4 days of fairly calm weather), it is vulnerable to low scoring. That is what I call defenseless. I am saying Pebble Beach needs the wind, or it won't be a USGA type course.
I agree, wholeheartedly. Shinnecock is the no-brainer. It is much too short for today's championship game. It features just two par 4's over 460 yards, but the 474-yard 6th tends to play downwind and features a tumbling fairway which propels drives even further. Very few long irons were used in the 2004 U.S. Open.
In my opinion Pebble Beach is not a U.S. Open course. The greens are far too small to justify 24-yard wide fairways and 6" rough. The USGA set-up tends to strangle the course and mask it's charms. Pebble Beach is actually a scoring course. Furthermore, I feel the inward nine desperately needs another long par 4.
If the US Open only exists to provide penal rough and winners scoring below -10 , then someone needs to revisit th epurpose of the tournament.
Unless someone shoots - 20 ,what's the problem?
Pebble Beach without wind is not eay, but with wind it is a fair test. It rarely has 4 days without some wind , and wind is an integral part of challenging top golfers. You can not avoid the weather!
If there is no wind at Pebble in 2010, expect the winning score to be double digits provided the USGA doesn't tricken the course. The cut might even fall at under par there as well. Tiger's -12 record might even be threatened if there's four days of calm conditions if the USGA doesn't let the greens die like at Shinnecock.
I don't get how you came up with this one...even under normal conditions for the Pebble Beach event, guys aren't lighting that course up, so I don't see how it would get any easier under US Open conditions. Tiger's -12 was one of the greatest displays of golf we'll ever see, so maybe it's easy to forget that no one else broke par that week, despite the shortness of the course. If the rough is up and the greens are fast as the USGA typically has them, I think we'll get a normal US Open winning score...somewhere between E and -4.
IMO between -8 and -12 is about the right winning score for a golf tournament, as long as there are a few guys in contention. The winner should beat the field and the course over the four days.
I enjoyed seeing everyone struggle at Shinnecock, although it was a bit ridiculous. Making par a brilliant score for the sake of USGA/R&A machismo is pointless.
Shinnecock held up pretty well 2 years ago. Only two players finished under par. You don't need to make a course long to make it challenging. Shinnecock may be short, but it's high rough, roll-offs around the greens, elevations from the fairway to the green and the wind that usually blows off of Long Island makes it a tough course. In 2004, the first couple days the course played pretty soft and still only about 7 or 8 players were under par after two days. Then on the weekend the hard greens made it a test of survival, which Goosen won, and he didn't really survive, he won. He played fantastic.
Shinnecock too short? I remember #7 was killing players at the US open. You shave any green and the fringe on a hilly green and distance stops being an issue. The winning score that year wasa 1 under.
Shinnecock too short? I remember #7 was killing players at the US open. You shave any green and the fringe on a hilly green and distance stops being an issue. The winning score that year wasa 1 under.
Actually, it was 4-under. The course killed everyone, exept Retief Goosen, who played absolutely flawless on the weekend. Mickelson played great, too, until the 17th hole on Sunday. But outside of those two, I believe the 3rd best score was +1 or +2. It was brutal. I remember Billy Mayfair had a 25-foot putt on the 7th hole and tapped it, and it rolled all the way off into the bunker.
Shinnecock held up pretty well 2 years ago. Only two players finished under par. You don't need to make a course long to make it challenging. Shinnecock may be short, but it's high rough, roll-offs around the greens, elevations from the fairway to the green and the wind that usually blows off of Long Island makes it a tough course. In 2004, the first couple days the course played pretty soft and still only about 7 or 8 players were under par after two days. Then on the weekend the hard greens made it a test of survival, which Goosen won, and he didn't really survive, he won. He played fantastic.
It played fairly easy in the first to rounds. In the third round, it wad windy, but fair except for the 7th. The big mistake they made was not watering the greens after the third round. There was hardly any wind and the scoring average was almost 79 (+9) because the USGA went overboard in making the scores high. Without the trickery, I guess -6 would have won and 6 or so players would be under par.
April 10th, 2006, 09:10 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
