Jump to content
IGNORED

2015 U.S. Open at Chambers Bay Discussion Thread


nevets88
Note: This thread is 3187 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

An article with some interesting and insightful stats about the greens at Chambers Bay:  http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/one-more-thing-about-the-green.html

I read that yesterday too, and have been trying to figure out if you can really conclude anything from it.  I feel like I read somewhere on TST, and perhaps even several pages back in this thread, a stat saying that GIR average for the field was higher here than most US Opens.  The fact that the course had wider fairways and bigger greens also comes to mind.

Am I remembering that correctly?  And if so, couldn't that, PLUS the fact that the greens had a lot of contours, have as much of an effect, if not more, on each of those stats than the bumpiness of those greens?

If greens are bigger, more are hit, and consequently, the proximity to the hole increases, so it stands to reason that the putting numbers predicated on GIR would also be higher.

The last two stats, however, were not based off of GIR, so he might have something there.  Still, you can't definitively say its more or less to do with the condition of the greens or more or less to do with the size and contours either.  For example, did he 3-putt because he missed a 4 footer, or did he 3-putt because he left his first putt 13 feet short?

I feel like the only real telling stats on the green conditions might simply me to compare make percentages of all short length putts versus other US Opens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac62 View Post

An article with some interesting and insightful stats about the greens at Chambers Bay

Quote:
First, let’s look at the granddaddy of putting statistics, putts per green in regulation . Generally, when tour players hit a green in regulation they take less than two putts most of the time.

Move over granddaddy, Strokes Gained Putting has taken over as the best putting stat :)

Quote:
That’s the third highest that number has been in history. Only Oakmont in 2007 (1.933)

Can someone say, putting massacre at Oakmont 2016 ;)

Quote:
But at Chambers Bay a player three-putted a relatively absurd 8.58 percent of the time. The average for U.S. Opens from 1997-2014 was 4.84. The only year that comes close to Chambers Bay’s number is Oakmont in 2007 at 7.22.

So they basically are saying that Oakmont had a historically high 3-Putt % in 2007 and I didn't hear anyone complaining about those greens.

Umm, maybe they have something else in common. Both courses have very large, fast, undulating greens.

Was their some poor greens, yea. I might be able to say that it was more due to the fact the greens were very undulating than how bumpy they were. If the common link between the two highest 3-putt % ratings in US Open is they both have large, fast, undulating  greens.

I could say that 1.36% of the 3-Putting was due to the bumpy greens. Not really that bad.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

Charlie Rose: Jaime Diaz and John Feinstein on the US Open. I watched because I'm suffering from post USO withdrawal, but wow, I really didn't enjoy it very much as I felt they really didn't say anything I didn't already know. And Feinstein with the short game is the most important aspect of the game. Rose needs to find fresh faces to interview.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/809649

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I read that yesterday too, and have been trying to figure out if you can really conclude anything from it.  I feel like I read somewhere on TST, and perhaps even several pages back in this thread, a stat saying that GIR average for the field was higher here than most US Opens.  The fact that the course had wider fairways and bigger greens also comes to mind.

Am I remembering that correctly?  And if so, couldn't that, PLUS the fact that the greens had a lot of contours, have as much of an effect, if not more, on each of those stats than the bumpiness of those greens?

If greens are bigger, more are hit, and consequently, the proximity to the hole increases, so it stands to reason that the putting numbers predicated on GIR would also be higher.

The last two stats, however, were not based off of GIR, so he might have something there.  Still, you can't definitively say its more or less to do with the condition of the greens or more or less to do with the size and contours either.  For example, did he 3-putt because he missed a 4 footer, or did he 3-putt because he left his first putt 13 feet short?

I feel like the only real telling stats on the green conditions might simply me to compare make percentages of all short length putts versus other US Opens.

Yeah, I think the contours overall resulted in a longer average first putt distance. The countour plus the bumpiness probably put a premium on lag putting touch to avoid 3-putts. Spieth may have gained on DJ there, while DJ was gaining on Jordan with long game, but the green contours probably forced him to hit more long putts than he's used to in competition. The longer initial putt distance and lower make percentage was probably an intentional part of the the USGA 'test' to see who could roll with the conditions affecting their expectations of making a score. That said I think Mickelson had a point about differing speeds between greens being a little too much of an adjustment.

Move over granddaddy, Strokes Gained Putting has taken over as the best putting stat :)

Can someone say, putting massacre at Oakmont 2016 ;)

So they basically are saying that Oakmont had a historically high 3-Putt % in 2007 and I didn't hear anyone complaining about those greens.

Umm, maybe they have something else in common. Both courses have very large, fast, undulating greens.

Was their some poor greens, yea. I might be able to say that it was more due to the fact the greens were very undulating than how bumpy they were. If the common link between the two highest 3-putt % ratings in US Open is they both have large, fast, undulating  greens.

I could say that 1.36% of the 3-Putting was due to the bumpy greens. Not really that bad.

I would agree that the larger factor was the longer initial putt distance from approaches caroming a bit due to the undulations.

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator

Sign where DJ hit 5I on 18th. Wonder if there's one for Spieth's 3W. I guess people remember the what if rather than the win more?

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3187 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!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,013 4/6* ⬛🟦🟦⬛⬛ ⬛🟦⬛🟦🟦 🟧⬛🟧🟧🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧 par is good after a double bogey yesterday.
    • I did read the fine print tonight. It said replace with “similar features & function”.  8 yeas ago my purchase had features that today are available on the lower end models and the current version of my model has more “bells & whistles” than what I got 8 years ago.  So I am thinking they honored the agreement and I can’t argue the offer. since getting a credit for the full purchase price all I am really out over the past 8 years was the cost of the extended warranty, which was less than a low end  treadmill would have cost me. now the question is which model to replace with.  I’ll stay with Nordic Track or I forfeit the $1,463 credit so I will get Nordic Track.  And they honored the warranty and were not hard to work with which is a plus.
    • Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them.  This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods.  To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this.  1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered.  2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you.  They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.
    • I never thought of looking at it on multiple purchases like you said.  Yes, the extended may help me on 1 or 2 items but not the other 5 or 6.
    • Day 84 - Forgot to post yesterday, but I did some more chipping/pitching.    Back/neck were feeling better today, so I did a much overdue Stack session. 
×
×
  • 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...