PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
Bitching about the course is the same as bitching about the altitude in Provo. Doog shit
Gary Player on Chambers Bay: 'One of the worst golf courses I've ever seen'
- Thread starter DerekJohnson
- Start date
I said no racist crap.
It's not even in Tacoma, but still.
PostGameOrangeSlices
Well-known poster
It was less than two decades ago. UP, Lakewood, Fircrest are pretty much still Tacoma
Tacoma superiority guy...
Tequilla
Active poster
I would say the same thing about any course that the USGA picked. It's the national championship ... it's supposed to be hard and not your garden variety tournament where the winning score is -15.
The greens are what you make of them. They aren't perfect. But rarely are greens perfect on the West Coast. I can go to any course in the area, hit a putt from 5 feet, and if I don't hit it perfectly I'm at the mercy of the grass as to whether it goes in. Firm, confident strokes on the green will go in regardless of the greens.
Dustin Johnson didn't miss either of his last 2 putts because of the greens. There was a player that I saw put something on twitter either last night or this morning that said that he didn't miss a single putt inside 5 feet all week.
Was this course tricked up to the point that it was unfair? Not at all. -5 is a solid winning score. At no point did the course get away from the USGA. That's really the biggest concern.
If you go into the history of the US Open in the last 10-15 years, there's what happened at Shinnecock Hills where they lost at least one of the greens. There have been times in the past that the 18th hole at The Olympic Club where the hole was unplayable with where they put the flag.
The whole point of the setup with the US Open is to reward players for well thought out and executed shots and to punish them for their mistakes. Chambers identified that.
And forget any bias that anybody in the Northwest could have about the course, the fact of the matter is that the results speak for themselves. The US Amateur produced #1 and #2 ranked amateurs in the world in 2010. The #2 player in the world won this year. The Top 10 of the leader board looked like a who's who of golf and was representative of the top players in the world. Even one of our top complainers, BillyHo, finished in the 20s for the tournament ... and he's ranked 20th in the world. You could argue that he was properly identified.
The greens can be improved upon. I suggest that they will be improved on between now and the next USGA event at Chambers (which if I had to guess would be either a US Women's or US Senior's Open) sometime in the 2019-2021 time period. The US Open will most likely be back in about 10-12 years. They will be updated between now and the next event, and then used as a testing ground for the next US Open. You'd also be an idiot to not think that some of the setup this week (including areas where they softened the course compared to normal championships) was not in direct response to the greens and the way the course was playing. I was shocked that 18 was a par 5 ... but it was the correct, and right call.
The greens are what you make of them. They aren't perfect. But rarely are greens perfect on the West Coast. I can go to any course in the area, hit a putt from 5 feet, and if I don't hit it perfectly I'm at the mercy of the grass as to whether it goes in. Firm, confident strokes on the green will go in regardless of the greens.
Dustin Johnson didn't miss either of his last 2 putts because of the greens. There was a player that I saw put something on twitter either last night or this morning that said that he didn't miss a single putt inside 5 feet all week.
Was this course tricked up to the point that it was unfair? Not at all. -5 is a solid winning score. At no point did the course get away from the USGA. That's really the biggest concern.
If you go into the history of the US Open in the last 10-15 years, there's what happened at Shinnecock Hills where they lost at least one of the greens. There have been times in the past that the 18th hole at The Olympic Club where the hole was unplayable with where they put the flag.
The whole point of the setup with the US Open is to reward players for well thought out and executed shots and to punish them for their mistakes. Chambers identified that.
And forget any bias that anybody in the Northwest could have about the course, the fact of the matter is that the results speak for themselves. The US Amateur produced #1 and #2 ranked amateurs in the world in 2010. The #2 player in the world won this year. The Top 10 of the leader board looked like a who's who of golf and was representative of the top players in the world. Even one of our top complainers, BillyHo, finished in the 20s for the tournament ... and he's ranked 20th in the world. You could argue that he was properly identified.
The greens can be improved upon. I suggest that they will be improved on between now and the next USGA event at Chambers (which if I had to guess would be either a US Women's or US Senior's Open) sometime in the 2019-2021 time period. The US Open will most likely be back in about 10-12 years. They will be updated between now and the next event, and then used as a testing ground for the next US Open. You'd also be an idiot to not think that some of the setup this week (including areas where they softened the course compared to normal championships) was not in direct response to the greens and the way the course was playing. I was shocked that 18 was a par 5 ... but it was the correct, and right call.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
The winning score was 275, but still.
CuntWaffle
New Fish
I don't care if scores are low or high it's all relative. If you make it in 4 strokes it doesn't fucking matter if it is a par 4 or par 5.
The course looked like absolute shit like they aren't able to afford water for sprinklers.
The course looked like absolute shit like they aren't able to afford water for sprinklers.
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
@Meek, true !11!?!?!
HeretoBeatmyChest
New Fish
The putting average for the tournament was 4 putts per round higher than the average on tour. Thats 16 strokes. I thought it was a great tournament with a spectacular finish. Probably as good as seen in a major in recent years. However the greens were a fucking disaster. Nothing to do with alleged poor putting strokes Tequilla.
The US Open will be coming back, according to a reporter on the golf channel. But he said the USGA was very upset about the greens. That will have to be fixed and also the fan experience improved according to the USGA. Fans couldn't get close to the players nor could they follow a group around the entire course, unlike at most events.
Luckily, fan support was huge as all the merchandise sold out, tv ratings were really good and there were tons of volunteers for the event. Otherwise, it would have been a one time thing.
The US Open will be coming back, according to a reporter on the golf channel. But he said the USGA was very upset about the greens. That will have to be fixed and also the fan experience improved according to the USGA. Fans couldn't get close to the players nor could they follow a group around the entire course, unlike at most events.
Luckily, fan support was huge as all the merchandise sold out, tv ratings were really good and there were tons of volunteers for the event. Otherwise, it would have been a one time thing.
CuntWaffle
New Fish
I didn't even realize the course had greens since you could tell the difference between the greens and the fucking fairway.
ThomasFremont
New Fish
The heat is Tempe and the altitude in Provo are the same for both teams.
End this fucking discussion.
End this fucking discussion.
Tequilla
Active poster
Couple of things since this bored is clearly showing a lack of Butler Cabin knowledge:
1) The USGA is on a kick about brown being the new green and building sustainable golf courses that are friendly on the environment. Many courses today use recycled water as their water sources and there have been significant technological improvements that have been made in intelligence about watering patterns to get no more water on the course than needed. It's spun as an environmentally friendly thing (which it is), but in the long run, it will save $$$ for courses which can be the difference between some courses making it and not.
2) If you look at almost every single US Open, by the weekend it gets baked and browned out. Chambers was no exception. This wasn't because Chambers sucked ... it's standard USGA.
3) Citing number of putts per round is an unsophisticated FS stat that doesn't even come close to explaining what happened. It's like saying that there were more 3 putts than normal at the US Open this week and concluding that it must have been the greens fault. I can't find the stats online so you'll have to take my word for it, but I guarantee you that the GIR rates this week far surpassed typical US Open rates. When GIR rates go up, the number of putts tend to go up. The putts per GIR this week at the US Open was all inline with the same metrics at prior US Opens. The big difference is that in most US Opens there are more missed greens which leads to more chips/pitches which leads to lower putts. At Chambers, you got bigger greens leading to more putts.
4) The USGA was the group responsible for the greens. They rebuilt a few of them and most weren't problems for them PRIOR to the tournament. They will be fixed for future tournaments to be sure. This was the first time a professional tournament was held on the course, there was bound to be areas for improvement.
5) The fan experience is what it is. They could find ways to mellow the ground in areas and allow for more fan friendly experiences. That being said, walking the course for a large number of patrons isn't going to happen. The course isn't an easy walk. It's unrealistic to have a large number of people walk 10+ miles and follow a group. One of the big problems about attending tournaments in person is that you are often stuck with only a view of a very specific part of the action. From what I understood, the stands did a good job of allowing action across multiple greens/tees and had the ability to enhance the typical experience. Most of the complaining that I heard came from non fans ... I haven't heard much coming from the fans.
1) The USGA is on a kick about brown being the new green and building sustainable golf courses that are friendly on the environment. Many courses today use recycled water as their water sources and there have been significant technological improvements that have been made in intelligence about watering patterns to get no more water on the course than needed. It's spun as an environmentally friendly thing (which it is), but in the long run, it will save $$$ for courses which can be the difference between some courses making it and not.
2) If you look at almost every single US Open, by the weekend it gets baked and browned out. Chambers was no exception. This wasn't because Chambers sucked ... it's standard USGA.
3) Citing number of putts per round is an unsophisticated FS stat that doesn't even come close to explaining what happened. It's like saying that there were more 3 putts than normal at the US Open this week and concluding that it must have been the greens fault. I can't find the stats online so you'll have to take my word for it, but I guarantee you that the GIR rates this week far surpassed typical US Open rates. When GIR rates go up, the number of putts tend to go up. The putts per GIR this week at the US Open was all inline with the same metrics at prior US Opens. The big difference is that in most US Opens there are more missed greens which leads to more chips/pitches which leads to lower putts. At Chambers, you got bigger greens leading to more putts.
4) The USGA was the group responsible for the greens. They rebuilt a few of them and most weren't problems for them PRIOR to the tournament. They will be fixed for future tournaments to be sure. This was the first time a professional tournament was held on the course, there was bound to be areas for improvement.
5) The fan experience is what it is. They could find ways to mellow the ground in areas and allow for more fan friendly experiences. That being said, walking the course for a large number of patrons isn't going to happen. The course isn't an easy walk. It's unrealistic to have a large number of people walk 10+ miles and follow a group. One of the big problems about attending tournaments in person is that you are often stuck with only a view of a very specific part of the action. From what I understood, the stands did a good job of allowing action across multiple greens/tees and had the ability to enhance the typical experience. Most of the complaining that I heard came from non fans ... I haven't heard much coming from the fans.
Last edited:
Chambers is a great course with a great setting. Just fix the greens and get some fucking sprinklers. It could have, and should have been a lot better.
Tequilla
Active poster
The sprinklers work just fine ... I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that brown is what the USGA wants and has every single year. By Sunday it's almost always brown to some degree. This year moreso than normal ... a lot of that has to do with the fescue that was on the course.