Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
barmoreb

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

0  

  1. 1. Is it a good idea to play the Men's Open and Women's Open back to back on the same course?

    • Yes
      7
    • No
      2
    • Let's wait and see
      9

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

14 posts in this topic

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!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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 .

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.

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.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Advertisement
Advertisement


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • These are myths that I hear a lot. Some are just eye rolling trivia but some can hurt. 1. Tour pros continuously vary their shot shape based on hole demand. Not true. They have one predominant shot shape they play almost all the time. Only when in jail or extreme condition do they actually try anything out of their comfort zone - which is smaller than most folks think. 2. Tour pros are like swing doctors. They know everything there is to know about the golf swing. Nope - they are simply phenomenal listeners and executors. 3. You must understand the swing in it's entirety to learn and become better - Yeah, good luck on that path.   4. To have lag just hold the angle of the shaft to forearm until impact. - Lag is a result of good mechanics and club position and path. Can't force it. 5. You must have a superlight grip pressure (2-3 on a scale of 1 to 10) to hit good shots. - While white knuckling is just bad, you do need more grip pressure than you think.
    •   The problem is the twitter length version, get it as close to the hole as possible, is easy to read as, hit the longest club.  Really the argument in LSW (backed by stats), is around a multi-faceted risk assessment.  Simplifying less than the twitter version, hit it as far as possible without bringing "too much" risk into play.  The long version is basically a law of total probability argument, where you assess the probability of various outcomes with each current shot choice, and weight them by the average shots to hole out given each outcome, and choose the lowest. For example, you're sitting at 250 on a par 5.  You go through the potential outcomes of an 8i and 3i and estimate average shots to hole out from each: on target, slightly off target, chunk, blade, in jail, in hazard, open look but super penal rough, OB, whatever.  Then you think about the chances of these outcomes, and calculate the total expected score from each choice. The point in LSW is that you can't go through a bunch of equations for every shot, but if you're accurate about your average shot dispersions across clubs, then the typical bogey or better golfer is often overestimating the increase in risk from going for the longer shot, and underestimating the decrease in expected number of shots to hole out from getting it closer. The rule of thumb is that if there's not something in the layout that is a big risk at the longer distance but not at the short one – so in your case lateral hazard or big fairway thinning or big fairway bunker or much or penal rough or the like that starts at 75 yards out – then generally your lower expected total score is from hitting the longer club.  The strokes you lose when you do hit an errant long iron but wouldn't have hit an errant short iron are more than made up for by the strokes you gain from having an approach half as long when you don't hit an errant shot. Of course, it's always case by case and player by player.
    • I've been working on changing that for two years!
    • If this is true, then club fitting would be purely entertainment also and make no difference.  We could all use different clubs every time we played with no measurable effect on our score.  I'm not so sure all the time, money and effort that has gone towards studying the benefits of club fitting and developing custom club programs and fitting carts and training techs how to conduct a club fitting session would have been spent if it's all just "entertainment". Now, will there be a huge difference between the e6 and e7 for the average player?  No.  They are both 3 piece distance balls with the same type of cover, so the differences are not huge.  Noticeable, but not huge.  The difference between an e6 and a Pro V1 though will be dramatic.  And the number of players that played the Pro V that have been recommended the e6 are in the tens of thousands.  Not only is there a difference in the performance of those balls, but when you factor in the tendencies of the player the results can be substantial.  If a 10-15 yard gain won't have any affect on the average player's score, then you wouldn't mind if you had to give up 10-15 yards of distance off your drives and 5-7 off your irons, correct?  How would it affect your score if you had to tee off 25 yds  further back on every hole?  I'm guessing it would cost at least a couple of shots. Can @iacas shoot 75 with his wife's clubs?  Probably.  That doesn't mean that the equipment doesn't matter.  He would certainly need to make adjustments in his swing to hit them, which is hard to repeat precisely, so it would limit him from playing his best.  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dragondrake
      Dragondrake
      (57 years old)
    2. Mistabigevil
      Mistabigevil
      (36 years old)
    3. Taylor56
      Taylor56
      (61 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon