or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Good Idea - Back-to-Back U.S. Opens?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Good Idea - Back-to-Back U.S. Opens?

Poll Results: Is it a good idea to play the Men's Open and Women's Open back to back on the same course?

 
  • 38% (7)
    Yes
  • 11% (2)
    No
  • 50% (9)
    Let's wait and see
18 Total Votes  
post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

Village of Pinehurst

2014 US Men's & Women's Open

 

Only five months away and the course and Village are very busy with preparations. All the major sponsors will be here Jan 21 to pick their tent locations and finalize all the final details.

 

All the hotel rooms in the area are totally booked, many of the hotels in Raleigh are sold out as well.  Tickets seem to still be available from the USGA for both the Men's and Women's Opens.

 

The interesting thing to appreciate is that Pinehurst is a very small place with only 12,000 or so residents.   The Open's will likely bring over 350,000 visitors to the area.   It will be a great time, but housing, parking and all the little details are not to be taken for granted. 

 

I am a resident and would like to offer my help to anyone trying to make the trip with information relating to housing, ticketing, parking or any other questions anyone has. 

 

It is not too soon to be making plans!

post #2 of 14

I voted yes to your poll. It will be interesting to see a) how the set up differs and b) how performances compare between the men and the women.

post #3 of 14
Depending on the weather, it could be a great idea, or a huge disaster. In 99, the weather for the Open in Pinehurst was unusually cool. If that happens, the course should be fine. It probably has a better chance of being hot and sunny that time of year, and if that happens, the playing conditions could be tough. Regardless of the course conditions, I would think that the economic impact in the Sandhills area would be great.
post #4 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by geauxforbroke View Post
 

I voted yes to your poll. It will be interesting to see a) how the set up differs and b) how performances compare between the men and the women.

 

I bet they tame it WAY down for the women.  Although they'll try to make a positive comparison, it just won't be possible because it'll be a completely different course.

 

I'd really like to see the identical set-up, with just the tees moved up appropriately.  Never gonna happen though.

post #5 of 14

I think it's a risk. If two people have an 18-hole playoff the women will have one less day to practice. Heck, if they had bad weather, the women could be pushed back two days with a Monday finish and an 18-hole playoff.

 

Fortunately they'll be able to slow the greens down and just let them grow (and recover, so they can live). It may be depressing to the women to see the fact that the men have almost literally 10x the grandstands and things than they need (I've been to both men's and women's U.S. Opens at Oakmont - where you think seating should be for the women after going to the men's… it's not.).

post #6 of 14

My uncle lives in Pinehurst . Played # 2 in November  , , Good experience  , sank my first 4 putts from 15 feet . That was it . Would like to play in spring ,, but # 2 was way too tough . Can't imagine how crowded the area will be . Was surprised how small the Village area is , traffic could be tough .

post #7 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

I think it's a risk. If two people have an 18-hole playoff the women will have one less day to practice. Heck, if they had bad weather, the women could be pushed back two days with a Monday finish and an 18-hole playoff.

 

Fortunately they'll be able to slow the greens down and just let them grow (and recover, so they can live). It may be depressing to the women to see the fact that the men have almost literally 10x the grandstands and things than they need (I've been to both men's and women's U.S. Opens at Oakmont - where you think seating should be for the women after going to the men's… it's not.).

 

I imagine they're going to cut down the rough quite a bit too.

 

Question.  As they adjust the lengths of the holes, do they do it so the women are driving to the same general area that the men were, or do they adjust so that the women have the same approximate club for their approach that the men did?  If it's the latter, will they re-contour the fairways too?  Heck, do you think that they'll do that regardless?

post #8 of 14

I voted Let's wait and see.  If the course is beat up, it may affect the women.

post #9 of 14

I voted to wait and see. Sometimes the women are underestimated, but I agree with boogielicious, in that, the determining factor will be the course itself. Only those who have worked on an open course can attest how beat up it will be after a men's open is complete. Will Pinehurst #2 be able to recover fast enough for the second week? To me, the only way that Pinehurst will be playable for the Women's Open, is for the USGA to tame the conditions for the men. Will that actually happen? Who knows? So, let's wait and see how the USGA manages course conditions.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

It may be depressing to the women to see the fact that the men have almost literally 10x the grandstands and things than they need (I've been to both men's and women's U.S. Opens at Oakmont - where you think seating should be for the women after going to the men's… it's not.).

 

Good point.  I guess a question to consider is whether or not the USGA will take down some of the grandstands and corporate tents between the end of the men's and the beginning of the women's open, as not to give the impression of a lesser tournament compared to the men. Then again, I guess that camera angles can accommodate the discrepancy in crowd size.
 

I caddied in the 1992 Women's Open at Oakmont and attended the one in 2010, as well as being at every Men's Open at Oakmont since 1983. Fact: the women's crowds are only a fraction of the men's opens. Depressing? That might be, but mostly for those who want to see equality between men's and women's golf.  Most golf savvy people understand why there are smaller crowds, so there is no need to get into that in this thread.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
 

I bet they tame it WAY down for the women.  Although they'll try to make a positive comparison, it just won't be possible because it'll be a completely different course.

I'd really like to see the identical set-up, with just the tees moved up appropriately.  Never gonna happen though.

 

You are probably right. The course will be set up differently, and the reason, felt by many people, is so that they do not embarrass the women.

 

At first glance, if you look at the numbers from Oakmont's latest opens, the winners, Cabrera (+5) and Creamer (-3), had a huge discrepancy in their scores, as well as the scores for the entire field in favor of the women's golfers. But, when you look at the fact that the men played at par 70 and the women at par 71, then the disparity is not as great. (For the men #9 was a par 4 - for the women a par 3.)

 

I did feel that the prime reasons for this difference in scores at Oakmont were the rough and the tee placements. As for the rough, having walked the course both before and after both opens, I can attest that the men's was considerably tougher. But a bigger factor in the scoring difference, in my opinion, was the placement of the men's tees. From the men's tees at Oakmont, the golfers had a much less margin of error in the placement of their tee shots compared to the women golfers. This led to considerably longer approach shots from less desirable lies. Even though the USGA only had the women's greens slightly slower than the men's at OCC, the strokes accumulated because the men's approach shots came from these longer distances made them much more unlikely to end up either on the green or within a reasonable birdie distance.

post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
 

 

I imagine they're going to cut down the rough quite a bit too.

 

Question.  As they adjust the lengths of the holes, do they do it so the women are driving to the same general area that the men were, or do they adjust so that the women have the same approximate club for their approach that the men did?  If it's the latter, will they re-contour the fairways too?  Heck, do you think that they'll do that regardless?

 

I'm not a super but I believe they have to cut down the rough in stages to keep it healthy. They can't just chop it down. I wonder how much time this takes and if they even can cut it down in time for the women. 

post #11 of 14

Speaking of grandstands.  Do they kill the grass they are covering?  If the stands and tents are up for two weeks, it may wreak havoc.

post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foursum Golf View Post

I'm not a super but I believe they have to cut down the rough in stages to keep it healthy. They can't just chop it down. I wonder how much time this takes and if they even can cut it down in time for the women. 
There was not very much rough in the two previous opens. I believe that a lot of grass was removed during the most recent renovation, and it was replaced by sandy areas with wire grass. I might be wrong, but I heard they went back to single row irrigation, so even if there was rough, they couldn't get enough water to it to make it long and thick. That course is defended by the greens complexes, not the rough.
post #13 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foursum Golf View Post
 

 

I'm not a super but I believe they have to cut down the rough in stages to keep it healthy. They can't just chop it down. I wonder how much time this takes and if they even can cut it down in time for the women. 

Not sure how much rough there is but they could get a couple mowings on it to bring it down a little

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogielicious View Post
 

Speaking of grandstands.  Do they kill the grass they are covering?  If the stands and tents are up for two weeks, it may wreak havoc.

Yes iy will mess the grass up a bit but they know this and except it.

 

Fairway margins will stay the same there is no way the could reshape them.  they will slow the greens a bit by watering them thats if they still have grass on them US Open greens are pretty beat up after the event usually.

post #14 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by caniac6 View Post


There was not very much rough in the two previous opens. I believe that a lot of grass was removed during the most recent renovation, and it was replaced by sandy areas with wire grass. I might be wrong, but I heard they went back to single row irrigation, so even if there was rough, they couldn't get enough water to it to make it long and thick. That course is defended by the greens complexes, not the rough.

 

Agreed, which is what make it such an interesting event.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Good Idea - Back-to-Back U.S. Opens?