Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nevets88

2015 U.S. Open at Chambers Bay Discussion Thread

Note: This thread is 1564 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!

2,111 posts / 85060 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/so-much-for-a-bombers-paradise.html

Quote:
If you’re limiting your U.S. Open picks to long hitters, think again. Phil Mickelson said after his Tuesday practice round that he’s down to hitting driver on three holes: the 7th, 11th and 14th.

During his Tuesday practice round with Butch Harmon stablemates Rickie Fowler, Brandt Snedeker and Jimmy Walker, Mickelson backed up his assertion by attacking Chambers Bay with his Callaway X Hot 13-degree. What changed? A firmer and faster Chambers Bay than two weeks ago where Mickelson had first sensed distance was a vital commodity.

MickelsonChambers.jpg
(Getty Images)

“Two weeks ago I thought so, but after playing it today I don't think that it matters,” the birthday boy (45) said. “Holes I was hitting drivers two weeks ago, I was hitting 3-woods and even 2-irons. So I don't see it being as critical.”

I may have to amend my pick to win. Looks like the course length might not affect the outcome as much as previously thought.

Share this post


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

I think this course is going to be too difficult for Phil to putt well, it's really been his weakness of late and putting this course is other worldy difficult.

But I'm loving this US Open, it's by far the most intriguing in my memory, the course previews alone are compelling, I can't wait!

You mean 'other worldly difficult' like this?: http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/watch-bubba-watson-make-crazy-putt-chambers-bay.html

Share this post


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

[URL=http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/so-much-for-a-bombers-paradise.html]http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/so-much-for-a-bombers-paradise.html[/URL] I may have to amend my pick to win. Looks like the course length might not affect the outcome as much as previously thought.

They said last night that due to conditions this might actually play as one of the shortest opens in a long time.

Share this post


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

Its gonna be interesting thats for sure. Too many opinions all over the place. People saw greens will be insane. People say they are going to be slow for an open. People saw accuracy is key. People saw fairways are wide and fair. People say short hitters have no shot. Others say drivers will have 50 plus yard roll outs each time. Too many opinions all over the place lead me to be nervous for this venue and side with the top tier talent to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw some putts on these greens and they didn't bounce at all. They just look blotchy. I will post some pics tomorrow if I get anything good during the practice round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In-truth this is one of the most open, and most anticipated US Open's for a long while.  These conditions are sure to play to the strengths of some European Tour regulars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its gonna be interesting thats for sure. Too many opinions all over the place. People saw greens will be insane. People say they are going to be slow for an open. People saw accuracy is key. People saw fairways are wide and fair. People say short hitters have no shot. Others say drivers will have 50 plus yard roll outs each time. Too many opinions all over the place lead me to be nervous for this venue and side with the top tier talent to win.


Agree, all those different opinions shows that nobody really seems to know what is going to happen or what is needed to win. Should be interesting to see who deals best with all those uncertainties.

Share this post


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

They said last night that due to conditions this might actually play as one of the shortest opens in a long time.

I think if it plays shorter, I'm going to have to go with Henrik Stenson and his 3w to take it. If he gets even remotely hot with the putter he'll be at the top of the leaderboard IMO. Then again, this is the US Open at a very crazy course, he could just as easily miss the cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article on weather for Chambers Bay

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2015/6/16/chambers-bay-weather-secrets.html

Thanks to reader Tobin for this Cliff Mass weather blog post on how typical this week's weather is for this time of year. He also touches on the microclimates at Chambers Bay as well as a tournament day forecast.

Anyone walking the course and paying atention will be fascinated by the temperature difference between the Puget Sound adjacent holes and those up the hill. The item explains that and more. And suggests rain gear Friday just in case.

The meteorology of Chamber's Bay is heavily influenced by the nearby Sound, which substantially moderates the temperatures year round.   The course also slopes down to the Sound (see picture above and map below).  As a result of these two factors, the lower holes tend to be cooler and windier, getting air coming off the nearby water.   The wind can pick up a bit during the late afternoon as the southern part of the Sound Breeze reaches the course. During the evening, as the land cools, there is a tendency for air to drain downward towards lower elevation.

Share this post


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

I'm going with some International, probably from EU.  Y?  More familiar with strange lay-outs, weird fairway bumps and pot bunkers, putting from 40 yards off green, familiar with tee shots with can't -be- seen landing zones....etc.

Who?  Some Frenchy, maybe VDubuisson. He looks good on the screen and he's not too talkative (my favorite kind of guy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm borrowing this from someone else:

Quote:
Pretty interesting comments from Rory and Tiger today in their press conf's...

Rory said he was excited to get back to "swinging normally" and specifically cited putting Royal County Down in the rear view mirror as key so he doesn't have to hit a bunch of "half shots" and run the ball on the ground, etc... Went on to say he thought his ability to fly a high shot to a spot, and use spin to stop it, would be a big advantage this week.

Tiger was asked about how his design work affected his evaluation of strategic options at Chambers Bay and he went on to say links golf was his "favorite" way to play and he loved having the option to run the ball up and keep it on the ground, etc... Further said giving folks the on the ground running option in his designs was key in the effort to make sure all levels of player have a chance to enjoy their round of golf on his courses.

Share this post


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

Some amateur was just shown on GC "dribbling" his golf ball along the fairway. Legitimately bouncing the golf ball. Bahahaha. This is gonna be weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some amateur was just shown on GC "dribbling" his golf ball along the fairway. Legitimately bouncing the golf ball. Bahahaha. This is gonna be weird.


That wasn't really dribbling. He was throwing the ball at the ground and then catching it (lower, but still higher than you'd expect) before spiking it down again.

It's firm. That's for sure…

Share this post


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

They said last night that due to conditions this might actually play as one of the shortest opens in a long time.

If this is true, I may have to rethink Tiger's chances. If he doesn't need to hit the driver at all, he may actually have a good shot to win this. EDIT: Good thing I didn't take Eric's bet.

Share this post


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

So they have little white dots spaced around to outline where the greens start. Wonder if this will cause some mental errors and cleaning balls when it really is not inside/on the actual green? It really is hard to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the green surfaces look a little crappy. Don't know if it's the camera angle or what, and I didn't see a putt roll over the specific areas that did look crappy, but I hope they're not playing lumpy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 1564 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.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2019 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
  • Posts

    • I thought about this a while, and then had an epiphany last night.  Without a perfect test, the answer is almost definitely no. It's a fairly simple statistical calculation called Bayes' Theorem. The end result is that you'll end up preventing more people from driving when they aren't drunk than preventing drunk drivers. I'm going to plug in numbers, but since I'm (likely correctly!) assuming drunk driving is a rare event, the numbers don't really matter that much. I'm also going to assume the test is extremely accurate. Let's say that in 1/10,000 car trips, the driver is too drunk to legally drive. This is probably an underestimation by a factor of 100, if not more, if you think about how many car trips there are in a day. Let's assume that the when the test is positive, the driver is drunk 99.9% of the time. And then assume that when the test is negative, the driver is sober 99.9% of the time (in other words, if the test is negative, the driver is drunk 0.1% of the time). We can use this to plug in probabilities for each event. Probability that a driver is drunk: .0001 Probability that a driver is sober: .9999 Probability that a drunk driver gets a positive test: .999 Probability that a drunk driver gets a negative test: .001 Probability that a sober driver gets a positive test: .001 Probability that a sober driver gets a negative test: .999 Bayes' Theorem applies here. It says: The probability that someone is drunk driver given a positive test is equal to the probability of a drunk driver gets a positive test times the probability of a drunk driver; that divided by the following: the probability of a drunk getting a positive test times probability of a drunk driver plus the probability of sober driver getting a positive test times the probability of a sober driver. In mathematic terms (DD=drunk driver; SD = sober driver; + = positive test): P(DD | +) = (P(+ | DD)*P(DD))/((P+ | DD)*P(DD)+P(+ | SD)*P(SD)) Plug in the numbers: P(DD | +) = ((.999)*(.0001))/((.999)*(.0001)+(.001)*(.9999)) P(DD | +) = .0908 In other words, the probability of a drunk driver given a positive test is only 9%. Meaning that out of a 100 people that test positive under this test, 91 of them would actually be sober. Because the test is imperfect and drunk driving is rare, it's going to impact more sober drivers than drunk drivers. Even if the test is 99.99% accurate and as a false positive rate of 0.01%, the probability of a drunk driver given a positive test is only 50%. Note that I'm assuming that 1/10,000 car trips is one by a drunk driver. If you assume 1/100,000 car trips are by a drunk driver, the probability of a drunk driver given a positive test is 0.9%. (You can also use this calculate to find out the odds that a drunk driver will have a negative test, but I have other stuff to do now...) So, without a nearly perfect test, it's a bad idea for the entire population. If drunk drivers were more frequent, then it would make more sense. Hence, it makes sense for someone who is more likely to drive drunk, and why the current policy probably makes sense. 
    • Hey Ben, good to see you’re still around!   I remember those irons. They’re beautiful! Sorry, I can’t help with the driver though…
    • Sometimes this is called a Telehandler, and sometimes its called a Rough Terrain Fork Lift. It all depends on where you live. 
    • Dragging the handle without the correct wrist movements to go with it can lead to an open clubface at impact. But without a video it's hard to determine the underlying cause of your problem.
    • I'd go with this system over either of those. I have seen automatic braking systems malfunction before and it turns catastrophic in an instant. The incredibly unfortunate part is that automatic braking systems also have a disturbingly high number of ways they can be fooled. The two I have seen personally were leaves covering up the sensor (slammed the brakes on someone in town and caused a collision) and bugs from I-70 covering the sensor (the car locked up and the brakes remained engaged until the sensor covering could be cleaned). As far as GPS-enforced speed limits, this also introduces danger on the roads. It prevents drivers from making effective evasive maneuvers when driving at the speed limit. Malfunctions for this system would also be incredibly dangerous, considering the number one cause of traffic accidents is a differential in speed between the two cars that collided. If one car is limited to 10mph under the speed limit because their GPS glitched out then they just became a sitting duck on the road, though not as bad as the automatic braking malfunction. I'm fine with mandatory safety measures that don't risk lives compared to the alternative of not having them, such as seat belts and air bags. If those fail you may die, but if they fail you are no worse off than you would have been if the safety measures were never installed. I draw the line at mandatory safety measures that will actively risk your safety or life when they fail. Automatic braking systems that will slam the brakes in highway traffic. GPS-enforced speed limits that can hamper evasive maneuvers and cause the same symptoms as automatic braking system failures (if an error displays a limit lower than the true limit). And yes, mandatory BAC interlock devices for law-abiding citizens that can leave them stranded and stuck with a very costly repair bill in the best case scenario and death in the worst case scenario. If we want to talk about personal anecdotes about why it's incredibly important to be able to start you vehicle at any time, I've got the perfect example of how this can risk lives in real scenarios that actually happen. When I was 17 I took the bus with my friends down to the annual Denver Avalanche game and we hung out at the 16th Street Mall afterwards until we caught the last bus back to where our cars were parked. Having parked in opposite corners we parted ways getting off the bus and went to our cars, my friends having no issues driving home. I, on the other hand, had some trouble with starting my vehicle. You see that year the temperature was 15 degrees below zero and my car was an old (1979) Mercedes 240D diesel. Diesel engines don't particularly like the cold, so I cycled the glow plugs several times before trying to start. No dice, so I repeated that. This went on until my car battery died at around 2 AM, and the worst part of it was that stupidly I was only wearing jeans, a t-shirt, and a sweatshirt with no jacket or coat. The buses had finished their schedules and the park and ride was empty (I was the last car) in the middle of nowhere without areas I could take shelter nearby. I was lucky to have a mylar blanket and a comforter in the trunk of my car that I kept there only because my Grandpa insisted I'd need them if I was ever stranded in the cold. I wasn't able to get assistance at my location until 5:30 that morning because it was located in the mountain, a lovely cell phone dead zone. 3.5 hours spent in -15 degree weather with only jeans and a sweatshirt. Even sitting in my car without exposure to wind I would have risked frostbite in 30 minutes or less, and that temperature presents a high risk of hypothermia even with proper winter clothing. While wearing winter clothing at that temperature you'll lose one degree of core body temperature about every 30 minutes, sooner if you have no hat. Below 95 degrees (2 hours) is the beginning of hypothermia, below 93 degrees (3 hours) is when amnesia sets in. Profound hypothermia is 90 degrees (4.5 hours) and you'll find yourself no longer even shivering to keep warm. At 86 degrees (6.5 hours) your heart starts to pump arrhythmically. At 85 degrees (7 hours) you'll rip off your clothes for your final minutes of life. Those times are for proper winter clothing. When an ignition interlock device fails, it WILL kill people in the mountains every single year. People who went camping, skiing, hiking, or hunting and get back to their car in the evening only to have it refuse to start. Cell service is sparse at best in these areas, meaning only those prepared with extra blankets/gear and the ability to start fires will survive through the night without heat from their vehicle. I say when, not if, because the failure rate will be above 0%. 15 million new cars are sold each year, and if the failure rate is 0.01% annually then you'd see 1,500 failures in the first year, growing by another 1,500 every year and providing 1,500 more opportunities to kill in either what was described or other scenarios. This is exactly why using emotional arguments is dumb, because realistically the number of deaths would be small but a personal anecdote carries additional weight. The point is that any deaths that directly result from a safety device are unacceptable even if that safety device may save lives in other circumstances. Trading lives of innocent and law-abiding citizens because of a small number of criminals is morally reprehensible on every level.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Edsland
      Edsland
      (65 years old)
    2. KingHack82
      KingHack82
      (37 years old)
    3. snowbeast
      snowbeast
      (32 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...