Jump to content
IGNORED

US Womens Open @ Oakmont


Note: This thread is 4036 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Looks like the girls will have some "fun" on this course.

Par 3 8th 252-225 (if they really set it to 252 most of them wont even reach with a driver)
Par 5 12th 602
Par 4 15th & 18th ~ 440

The rough seems to be very juciy, anybody has an idea about the greens (hard/soft?).

I doubt the USGA will make it too easy for the ladies, when Cabrera clinched the title with 5 over back then. So my guess is, lots of bogey golf coming up this weekend. What´s your opinon on the winning score?
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Here's what we do know: when Oakmont hosted the ladies before, in 1992, even par was the winning score. The course was playing as a par 70 then (par will be 71 this year), and the removal of most of the property's trees since then have drastically changed the nature of the course. Only two Women's Opens in the last quarter-century have been won with a score over par.

The difference between the winning scores in the 1994 and 2007 men's Opens was six strokes. Using the same metric, the low 72-hole score for the ladies should be around 286, or 2-over-par.

The big question is whether the new women's number one, Cristie Kerr, can put up a performance anywhere near her effort at the LPGA Championship a couple of weeks ago. She has won this championship once before, and is the last American winner of our national title.

On a side note, two weeks between majors seems a little sudden to me. Then again, the Champions Tour will have two majors on two continents in successive weeks at the end of this month.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Found out that the greens are running around 14 - which seems to be very very very fast for LPGA standards.

On a side note, two weeks between majors seems a little sudden to me.

Thats kind of strange indeed - their schedule looks like swiss cheese - sometimes you wonder if the LPGA still exists, but they cant manage to seperate the majors in a timely fashion...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the girls will have some "fun" on this course.

I doubt that they'll set up a par 3 at 252 yards, that'd be the equivalent of setting a men's par 3 at about 275 or more wouldn't it?

Still, even at 225 there'll be a lot of BIG numbers on that par 3.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that they'll set up a par 3 at 252 yards, that'd be the equivalent of setting a men's par 3 at about 275 or more wouldn't it?

There used to be a 300+ yards par 3 on a course that hosted a US Open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found out that the greens are running around 14 - which seems to be very very very fast for LPGA standards.

I saw that too. Paula Creamer said on twitter that they were stimping at 13.9. I don't think I've ever seen a LPGA event with greens anywhere close to that fast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kay Cockerill thinks there will be some 100's out there and +10 or 12 could win it. Brutal. Can't wait to watch though. I'd love to see Christie play well again and if Wie is on with the driver/irons, she'll be tough. Hitting shorter irons to those greens could be quite an advantage...
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michelle Wie is already out of it - +8 after 8 holes. Chrities performance really was pretty stellar and since she isnt the shortest and a good putter, she might have a good chance.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michelle Wie is already out of it - +8 after 8 holes. Chrities performance really was pretty stellar and since she isnt the shortest and a good putter, she might have a good chance.

I almost feel bad for Michelle Wie. The girl was sooo hyped coming out and has been absolutely mediocre as an LPGA player.

As for Oakmont, it sounds like the ladies are playing on a big boy layout. I'm not sure how I feel about that??? Doesn't the LPGA have input into how the course is set up? Are they intentionally trying to embarass their players?
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Oakmont, it sounds like the ladies are playing on a big boy layout. I'm not sure how I feel about that??? Doesn't the LPGA have input into how the course is set up? Are they intentionally trying to embarass their players?

No they don't. It is all the USGA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Oakmont, it sounds like the ladies are playing on a big boy layout.

First of all, Oakmont as it is setup is not a "big boy" layout. They shortend it, and yes it has difficult rough and fast greens, but hey, we are talking golf here, right? Not pitch&putt;? And maybe if the LPGA would stop playing on those boring 6000y superwide fairways no rough easy setups, more people would watch.

Regarding Michelle Wie, i cant feel sorry for her, just look at her arrogant behavior on the course. She reminds me a bit of Sergio Garcia, just worse, and with this kind of attitude its hard to have success.
Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, Oakmont as it is setup is not a "big boy" layout. They shortend it, and yes it has difficult rough and fast greens, but hey, we are talking golf here, right? Not pitch&putt;? And maybe if the LPGA would stop playing on those boring 6000y superwide fairways no rough easy setups, more people would watch.

She reminds me more of Serena Williams - minus all the winning everything in sight of course.

PS. I'm pulling for Angela Stanford and Suzanne Petterson - or one of the other usual suspects on tough courses. Kerr of course.
Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, Oakmont as it is setup is not a "big boy" layout. They shortend it, and yes it has difficult rough and fast greens, but hey, we are talking golf here, right? Not pitch&putt;? And maybe if the LPGA would stop playing on those boring 6000y superwide fairways no rough easy setups, more people would watch.

I'd classify a 252 yard par three and greens running at 14 as "big boy" but that's just me.

Apparently you missed the tournament at Locust Hill where the fairways are about 30 yards wide and the rough is 6 inches deep. I've played there several times, it's BRUTAL if you miss a fairway.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 4036 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • I'm taking way too long to write up my thoughts on the courses, but in the meantime… I'm going to focus on this stuff about LLB… FWIW Lawsonia is like $65 or something, while LLB was $100 to $125. I think everyone else who went would vote 8-0 the opposite way. LLB is absolutely a target golf course. There's really very little thinking to go around. Where you hit it should be pretty obvious on most every tee, and you're often punished for a miss. It has nowhere near the "areas to miss" as Lawsonia. I mean, are you sure you didn't confuse the two courses, Colin? 🙂 Yeah, I just… I don't know what to say to that. But I did have a bit of a theory I wanted to run by you… Could it be that Lawsonia's "fescue" areas were a lot like CA desert areas, and you've never really played much "parkland" golf courses like LLB tends to be (trees, deep bunkers, etc.)? So maybe you liked LLB more because it's unlike anything you've ever really seen, while those of us from PA, etc. are used to parkland golf courses. LLB is not architecturally all that interesting, IMO. Agree to disagree it's "important" at all. Especially since four of us walked. Every ball there is going to end up in like three places. We have different definitions of "target golf," man. All par threes tend to be "target golf." You're hitting the green. But, I'm curious about how much you liked LLB because of the possible "difference" from the courses you play a lot now.
    • I skimmed it, so I can't say for sure, but my initial reaction:
    • @imsys0042 just @ David next time.
    • Shot 85, 41/44. Lost 3 balls on two water holes but cleared one.  Overall a decent round for me.  Two 7’s on the card 😡. Hooked up with another single and had an enjoyable day.   Question though.  How does humidity affect distance? I find I have to club up. The ballflight looks right but when the ball lands its short.  
    • Day 580 - July 30, 2021 Played nine (actually ten) holes with Natalie this morning before she went to the range for 30 minutes.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. amgolfer
      amgolfer
      (37 years old)
    2. At least 7 handi-andy
      At least 7 handi-andy
      (30 years old)
    3. MSDOGS1976
      MSDOGS1976
      (67 years old)
    4. Rob Lane
      Rob Lane
      (62 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...