2016 U.S. Open at Oakmont Discussion Thread

[Natural Patrick]

Congrats to DJ, well deserved. More congrats to Jason Dufner. He won me $50 for finishing in the top 10

Edited June 20, 2016 by Natural Patrick

[iacas]

I wagered $320 and won $410. Not the best week for me, but continues my streak of coming out on the positive end of things.

I didn't wager any money on Tony Finau.

[GolfLug]

Yay for DJ. I can taste the sweetness of redemption of a man that has been robbed time and again. It's funny no matter what happens DJ always sounds like a nonchalant stoner. In a cool way. On the outside the dood never gets overly angry, upset or overly joyful about ANYTHING... .

[Aguirre]

I do agree the rule is better now but they have to make the call on the course and stick with it.  There cannot be this "we'll discuss after the round" bullshit. You see all those tents at Oakmont?  They are there because people are watching a sporting event.  I'm watching on television and I don't know what the ****ing score is. The USGA is annoying. 

I'd literally pay, I don't know, something like $500 to never hear David Fay's voice again.

[Gunther]

Wow, just went through my Twitter feed, which isn't extensive, but Tiger, Rory, Jordan, and Rickie, are not happy with the USGA for letting DJ play rest of round with that over his head. And, all agree, shouldn't have been a penalty in the 1st place (which I said here earlier).  Great mental strength ofor DJ to overcome it.

[Aguirre]

I probably should have agreed that it was unfair to DJ as well in my previous post. 

Imagine what could have happened with this "we'll have a discussion" bullshit. Imagine he finishes one ahead, they have the discussion, and since he still insists that he didn't cause the ball to move, no penalty stroke is assessed, and he wins.  The USGA with their 'opinion,' would have set up DJ to face vicious talking head criticism about whether or not he's a cheater.  

And, of course, the fact that he doesn't know what his score is on the most important nine holes of his career.

[mvmac]

Watched the interview with Brandel/Frank and the rules guys and I got a better picture of what went on.

The USGA was in a tough spot, Dustin wasn't clear on the specifics of the rule and the USGA wanted to get it right. Dustin seemed mostly concerned that he didn't address the ball, which to him meant he wasn't responsible for moving it. That's not the rule though, you can cause the ball the move without addressing it (which is what happened). After he grounded his club the second time he lifted the putter to address the ball and it moved, so because of the timing it was more than likely that the act of grounding the putter caused the ball to move.

The USGA eventually got the ruling right but obviously messed up with the process. You can't have a player in "limbo" with with 6-7 holes to play that doesn't know where he stands, same thing with the rest of the guys in the hunt. At the same time you can't stop play to explain the rule to Dustin and check the video. Like @iacas said, they should have assessed the penalty on the spot with an opportunity to discuss it after the round.

I think what would have frustrated me the most as a player was that the referee for the group made a decision and then it changed to "pending further review". I understand why they reserve that right and I get the USGA wanted to do what's right in fairness for the field but there needs to be some "finality" to things so the player can move on. 

lol just heard Dustin say he still doesn't understand the rule.

[Aguirre]

As I've said before, my brother-in-law works at Oakmont in a fairly important job. One story from him so far (I'll try to get more later):

Carl Hagelin and Patric Hornqvist (two important pieces in the Penguins winning the 2016 Stanley Cup) were at the course Friday and got hammered. One of them puked in the clubhouse and over the balcony of one of the patios. They were being loud and belligerent and were asked to leave. Afterward, they promptly called the GM a pu**y and had to be escorted out by state police.

My brother-in-law also met Phil Mickelson and said he was super cool to him.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Aguirre

[newtogolf]

13 minutes ago, mvmac said:

Watched the interview with Brandel/Frank and the rules guys and I got a better picture of what went on.

The USGA was in a tough spot, Dustin wasn't clear on the specifics of the rule and the USGA wanted to get it right. Dustin seemed mostly concerned that he didn't address the ball, which to him meant he wasn't responsible for moving it. That's not the rule though, you can cause the ball the move without addressing it (which is what happened). After he grounded his club the second time he lifted the putter to address the ball and it moved, so because of the timing it was more than likely that the act of grounding the putter caused the ball to move.

The USGA eventually got the ruling right but obviously messed up with the process. You can't have a player in "limbo" with with 6-7 holes to play that doesn't know where he stands, same thing with the rest of the guys in the hunt. At the same time you can't stop play to explain the rule to Dustin and check the video. Like @iacas said, they should have assessed the penalty on the spot with an opportunity to discuss it after the round.

I think what would have frustrated me the most as a player was that the referee for the group made a decision and then it changed to "pending further review". I understand why they reserve that right and I get the USGA wanted to do what's right in fairness for the field but there needs to be some "finality" to things so the player can move on. 

lol just heard Dustin say he still doesn't understand the rule.

In this case acting ignorant is an advantage for DJ.  If you ground your putter and the ball moves, it's likely that you caused it to move unless there's a significant wind that can be blamed.  On greens that fast you have to be extra careful.  I'm glad he wasn't penalized but the USGA didn't handle it well.  

[Fourputt]

15 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

In this case acting ignorant is an advantage for DJ.  If you ground your putter and the ball moves, it's likely that you caused it to move unless there's a significant wind that can be blamed.  On greens that fast you have to be extra careful.  I'm glad he wasn't penalized but the USGA didn't handle it well.  

He was penalized.

[Shindig]

3 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

 

@Shindig, I believe you missed @bmartin461s contest post because he was DJ at -3 I believe.  But yeah, nobody had a lower score predicted than @phillyk that I saw.  Congrats to both (if I'm right)!!

You are correct.  I owe @bmartin461 an apology.

Unrelated to what I'm quoting, but I was thinking of this as I drove home today.  In the 1958 Masters, Palmer was given one rule interpretation at a par-3, and ended up with a 5 being recorded.  A few holes later, it was determined that he was correct, and his score became a 3 (he played two balls because the procedure was in doubt).  One other competitor that was in the hunt (I want to say Ken Venturi) complained that the change in score was a problem for him.

The point isn't to say the rules officials are anything except human, and the goal of getting it right, rather than quick, isn't a new one, and overall, I think works well.  

[Golfingdad]

51 minutes ago, mvmac said:

they should have assessed the penalty on the spot with an opportunity to discuss it after the round.

I think what would have frustrated me the most as a player was that the referee for the group made a decision and then it changed to "pending further review". I understand why they reserve that right and I get the USGA wanted to do what's right in fairness for the field but there needs to be some "finality" to things so the player can move on.

Did they explain why 34-2 doesn't apply to this?

 

[mvmac]

55 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Did they explain why 34-2 doesn't apply to this?

No, that wasn't brought up.

[natureboy]

6 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

I think I do.  And I also agree with what Steve Flesch said.  I see no evidence that DJ caused that ball to move.  It moved towards his putter when his putter was in the air behind it (and there appears to be not a breath of wind out there either) so what could he have done to have caused it to roll towards his putter?  I just don't see it.

He didn't touch it with the putter. It was when he set / dropped / tapped the putter lightly on the ground. The miniscule vibrations from this dislodged the ball from the blade of grass or two that was holding the ball up on a very slick green.

5 hours ago, boogielicious said:

30th best putter wins the US Open. Go figure. 

True, but what rank would he have had a few years ago? More like Vijay? Being a slightly better than average putter doesn't erode as much of his long game advantage.

5 hours ago, colin007 said:

If gravity did indeed cause the ball to move, how could DJ prove that? If the onus is on him to prove that he didn't cause it to move, how can he possibly do that if it truly was caused by gravity (which I do believe was the cause)?

The issue with the rule to me is the different ruling with the French guy. The delay in timing doesn't necessarily create appreciably different causes to the ball moving. With the greens as fast as they were (~15 per the Golf Channel), the simple fact of being close to the ball with your static body weight (with some shifting) and resting the putter on the ground behind the ball for a certain length of time was probably the cause for the French guy, but those don't show up as obvious 'causes' on a video.

4 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

Except that gravity did not change.

The ball had been motionless. One of the things that did change was him touching the toe of his putter to the ground, just before the ball moved.

I agree that was the likely cause, but see my response to Colin above.

4 hours ago, alleztom said:

Would SG here be slightly different - given the penal nature of the rough? Or is that taken into consideration with the rest of the field. Would there be a greater penalty for inaccurate driving (or greater reward for long accurate driving) because of the 'US Open' setup? Also DJ's T2G strokes gained are otherworldy here.

Don't know for sure, but Broadie typically uses his multi-year Shotlink baseline. No Shotlink at Majors. I think the rough is definitely more penal in expected strokes than the average tour event. Just look at the pre-tournament comments by players, and discussion of change in tee strategy. Broadie might do an 'on the fly' rough adjustment based on scoring as it happens, but I'd doubt it as the sample would probably be a bit small for his comfort. So it's quite possible that DJ's SG Driving was even better than indicated.

3 hours ago, Fourputt said:

Not only what the player was doing but was there any other agency that could have been the cause of the movement.  In this case, it is possible that the greens conditions could have been deemed the cause, but the rules committee chose not to consider that.  

What I saw in the clearest video cut was that DJ did not touch the ball or the ground at the moment that the ball moved.  There was no wind and the ball was not lying on one of the nasty slopes.  At that point it becomes a judgement call, and the committee judged that there was no outside influence that could have moved the ball, therefore DJ was the default cause.  Thankfully it did not affect the ultimate outcome.  

I agree on the conditions being at least a contributing cause. I don't think lightly grounding the putter should be something that incurs a penalty. With slick green conditions should players have to worry about how carefully the step toward the ball or how long they stand near it? Sure everyone is facing the same conditions, but that would seem to be an unwanted distraction from actually playing the game.

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

In this case acting ignorant is an advantage for DJ.  If you ground your putter and the ball moves, it's likely that you caused it to move unless there's a significant wind that can be blamed.  On greens that fast you have to be extra careful.  I'm glad he wasn't penalized but the USGA didn't handle it well.  

How careful is it reasonable to expect players to be? Do we want to see lots of players in future tiptoeing up to / around their ball after this situation in future Majors? Wouldn't that serve to make the conditions rather than the actual play too much of a focus?

Edited June 20, 2016 by natureboy

[Aguirre]

The USGA has their own version of Shotlink. I don't know if those numbers are available somewhere.  I know they have this because I had conversations with people operating the technology on #2 yesterday.

My cousin and I, along with other spectators, were helping them identify who hit what ball.  

Edited June 20, 2016 by Aguirre

[natureboy]

6 minutes ago, Aguirre said:

The USGA has their own version of Shotlink. I don't know if those numbers are available somewhere.  I know they have this because I had conversations with people operating the technology on #2 yesterday.

My cousin and I, along with other spectators, were helping them identify who hit what ball.  

Good bit of info. Thanks for sharing. Wonder if the accuracy of their data collection is comparable with the Shotlink system?

What the USGA may lack is a multi-year baseline of expected score by location on the course? That's a key part of Broadie's system on the PGA tour, but all the performances would be measured with the same yardstick so it's probably quite accurate, maybe just a bit less than for PGA events. 

Edited June 20, 2016 by natureboy

[Aguirre]

7 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Good bit of info. Thanks for sharing. Wonder if the accuracy of their data collection is comparable with the Shotlink system?

What the USGA may lack is a multi-year baseline of expected score by location on the course? That's a key part of Broadie's system on the PGA tour, but all the performances would be measured with the same yardstick so it's probably quite accurate, maybe just a bit less than for PGA events. 

I can't speak to that accuracy but I think your thought process is probably correct.

We were just past where most players were laying up, so my guess is 220 yards from the tee.

I said at one point, "That was Lee Westwood."

The guy said, "How do you know?"

And then I knew this "shotlink" dude didn't watch a lot of golf, because you can identify Westwood's swing from a long way.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Aguirre

[natureboy]

13 minutes ago, Aguirre said:

I can't speak to that accuracy but I think your thought process is probably correct.

Did it look like the guy had a GPS unit? If they also had a base station on site (likely), then they would have very precise location data.

Likely had something similar to the Shotlink laser sights used for distances on the greens.

Westwood also has a pretty distinctive physique relative to most other tour players.

Edited June 20, 2016 by natureboy