Tiger On Augusta: Interesting, Very Interesting

Translation: yuck, very yucky.

Amazingly (or is frighteningly), I read all of Tiger's press conferences and continue to marvel at his ability to answer the same questions over and over again. He's also become quite good at acting like he's enjoying some lame question about a player he's played with twice. And he can be so positive when talking about a course he probably thinks is mediocre at best.

So I think it's safe to say--lacking much in the way of complimentary talk--that this is a not-so-flattering assessment of Augusta:

Tiger at Bay Hill:

Q. Speaking of The Masters, now that you've had a chance to play the course firsthand, what do you think of the changes?

TIGER WOODS: Interesting, very interesting.

 Hey, at least he didn't say it was the best of its kind! Sorry, continue...

I didn't hit enough club to No. 4. I needed wood to get to 4. 7 is certainly changed. It's a totally different hole now. 1 is 300 yards just to get to the bunker now. If we get any kind of cool north wind like we have today, you won't be able to see the flag. You won't be able to see the green. Some of the changes are pretty dramatic and certainly going to be very interesting if the wind ever blows.

Q. Do you think they accomplished (inaudible)?

TIGER WOODS: I've talked to some of the older guys who played there back in the '50s, '60s and '70s and they never had to hit wood into 4 before, but you'll see a lot of guys hitting wood in 4 this year.

Q. What do you think will happen if there's rain?

TIGER WOODS: It will be brutal because now you're hitting some really long clubs into the holes. Again, we haven't seen the greens hard and fast either. With the rain, with or without rain last year, we were thinking in the practice rounds that over par is going to win the tournament. If you can keep it around even par, you're going to win it easily.

So, you know this, year, if it stays dry, probably the same thing.

Q. Did anyone ask you about Jack's comments, and do you agree that there's only ten or a dozen or so guys that are capable of winning because of the changes, because of the length?

TIGER WOODS: It eliminates a lot of guys, yeah. If you hit it low and rely on your game that way to get the ball out there and hit your irons not so high, if you have a flatter ball flight, you're going to be struggling there.

Q. If even par were to win there, is it a shame in a sense that you guys already have a U.S. Open?

TIGER WOODS: It's just different. I think it they should get rid of that second cut and get rid of and bring the pine needles and the pine trees back into play. But they see it differently than a lot of us do as players.

I remember pulling that ball off the first tee and it's going straight through the pine trees. Now you have a chance of it stopping in that second cut. They think it's harder to play out of that than it is out of the trees.

Q. Ernie was saying how The Masters used to be most fun major and now it's become the toughest, do you think it has gotten up to that?

TIGER WOODS: Without a doubt, it's gotten so much more difficult now. With the added length, with those greens being the way they are, it just makes it so hard out there. You're hitting clubs that, granted, they are trying to get you to hit clubs like the older guys used to hit, and yeah, but the greens were not running at 13 on the Stimpmeter either. So it just makes that much more difficult now.

With the speed of these greens now, each and every year, it all depends if they are firm. I mean, if they are firm, that golf course is probably the most difficult golf course you'll ever play.

Q. Could you have imagine them dialing some of those changes back a little bit, get rid of the rough or move the tees forward a little bit?

TIGER WOODS: They may move tees around. I think that's what they did with some of the tee boxes. Like on 4 and 7, they are really long tee boxes, so they have the ability to move it around and play with the tee markers a little bit. Because if you get soft, yeah, you can go ahead and move the tees up a little bit and give the guys a chance. So I think that's one of the smart things they have done. 

More Setup Flexibility...

In his latest Golfonline column reviewing the West Coast Swing, Peter Kostis makes this comment:

Speaking of course setups, the PGA Tour needs to give more leeway to the field staff at each tournament to respond to competitive realities and alter the way a course plays. Right now the 54-hole lead is critical! At Pebble Beach, Luke Donald was six shots behind co-leaders Aaron Oberholser and Mike Weir after 54 holes. But the way Pebble was set up that Sunday, with super-difficult pin positions and tees pushed back, there was no way someone was going to shoot a 64 or 65 to make a late charge. That wouldn’t be the case if the PGA Tour field staff had more flexibility. That’s why I love the setup on Sunday at the Masters. If you are playing well, the course can be had and even a six-shot lead isn’t safe.

So what does this mean about the PGA Tour field staff needing more flexibility?

Just typing out loud here, but it sure sounds like Kostis has talked to some of the field staff and that the directive for the Sunday anti-birdie setups is coming from above (that narrows it down to about 400 overpaid VP's!).

Why would those running an entertainment vehicle like the PGA Tour think that a full security lockdown of the hole would make final rounds more fun to watch?

Do they just not get it?

Or is there something else at play here with scoring averages and the technology debate?

Hawkins Blog

John Hawkins' new Golf Digest blog is evolving nicely. After several fine but pre-packaged feeling posts from La Costa, his latest dispatch from Doral is the best yet. It's just the kind of on-site, insider look that could make blogging from events a huge hit for the online golf sites.

In it, he looks at the mysterious drenching of Doral before the first round.

Birdies...They're A Good Thing

I don't know about you, but I sensed that special buzz when watching Doral today. The buzz so often lacking these days on the PGA Tour with anti-birdie setups.

Yes, the golf was compelling in spite of the wild driving and widespread low scoring that has the leaderboard still bunched.  Yet the reaction to the low scoring was all too typical.

''I normally like golf courses where 10, 12 under wins tournaments,'' Rich Beem said, "because I think making par, being rewarded with par should not be a bad thing. It's a good thing. Obviously, when the wind is not up and the greens are soft around here, the golf course plays pretty easy, as you can see.''

Thankfully Armando Salguero in the Miami Herald put Beem's comments into perspective.

And that begs this question: So what?

What's wrong with a course that doesn't become the story, but instead allows the golfers to provide the drama? What is wrong with watching the world's great players post scores and make shots that reflect their status?

Phil Mickelson, among those holding Tiger by the tail in a first-place tie, was the one voice of dissent -- and reason -- when asked about the plunging scores.

''I love the way they have set this course up,'' Mickelson said. ``So what if we see birdies. I think that's great. I think it makes for some spectacular and exciting golf.''

Indeed, the Blue Monster would have more teeth if the greens had not been watered so often this week, or if the wind, which notoriously kicks up in early March, were not absent.

But even if the wind doesn't blow, this tournament is a breath of fresh air when compared to the merciless 2004 U.S. Open at Shinnecock, where golfers and their scores were left strewn on the course like so many divots.

''That's no fun to watch, either,'' Mickelson said.

Sahallee Blues

Blayne Newnham, writing about Sahallee deserving another major in the Seattle Times:

There is concern the PGA Championships have outgrown Sahalee and Seattle, that the 27 holes isn't big enough to do the corporate tent thing, that there isn't room for enough spectators, that Seattle has shown less than robust corporate support.

Concern, too, that the course isn't big enough to handle 350-yard drives.

After the PGA in 1998, Kerry Haigh, the director of tournaments, was asked about the tightness of Sahalee's fairways limiting the use of the driver among players.

"It was their choice and it made for long iron shots to the greens," he said. "Some players hit more drivers than others, and none of them, as far as I know, complained."

The PGA of America wanted to expand its horizons, it wanted to bring the tournament to the Northwest.

It found a different and spectacular course, one that could quiet technology with nature.

Or, someone could quiet technology by actually regulating it? Nah, that makes too much sense!

Tall Rough Holes at Winged Foot

In analyzing Steve Elling's story on the plans for longer anti-birdie rough at Winged Foot, I promised photos.

No. 6 at Winged Foot (click image to enlarge)I'm not sure what exactly to say when looking at these shots of the wonderful par-4 6th and the equally neat par-4 11th. Both have already been stripped of their original strategic charm due to the super-narrow setup leftover from the U.S. Amateur. And this is before the extra tall rough is harvested this spring.

But here's what I'd ask you to consider when looking at these wonderful Tillinghast holes, two of which will not see the new "tiered" rough, but instead, tall stuff designed to reduce red scoring.

Looking at the photos, think of yourself being able to carry the ball 310-340 off the tee in warm weather. Would you try to lay up within these narrow fairways or simply try to drive it as close as possible to the green? 

Drives of that distance will bring you within flip wedge range of the green, if not on the green or in surrounding bunkers.
No. 11 at Winged Foot (click on image to enlarge)

In the photo of No. 6, note all of the rough leading up to the leftside fairway bunker. I'm not positive, but I suspect this was meant as a handy little lay-up area to access hole locations tucked behind the front right bunker. I know, that strategy stuff...back when people were allowed to use their brains in the game.

And the narrow fairway on No. 11 is ironic since some width would expose the wonderful rolls and tilt that would take misfires away from the centerline, and toward areas where approach shots would be blocked out by trees. (Hint USGA, that means likely leading to bogies!)

"They've Cashed Our Check"

Len Ziehm reports the news I know you've all been anxious to hear, Cog Hill has retained the Open Doctor. This may just be the cure for my acid reflux.

Cog Hill owner Frank Jemsek had been in negotiations with Jones and his staff for nearly a year in Jemsek's efforts to make the Western Open site a suitable U.S. Open venue. Jones associate Greg Muirhead visited Cog Hill last July before Jones toured the course with Jemsek on Oct. 11. Jemsek revealed during last weekend's Chicago Golf Show that negotiations were successful.

"They've cashed our check,'' said Jemsek, who said work will begin on a limited basis after this year's Western, which ends July 9.

Jones was traveling and unavailable for comment Tuesday, but he noted after his original tour of the course that bunkers will get primary attention during the renovation. Many will be moved and some deepened.

The heart of the renovation will be on Dubsdread's last four holes. No. 15, which plays as a short par-5 now, will become a long par-4 with new tees shortening the hole.

You know, I think we should just eliminate par-5s until we get all birdies out of the game! Oh, sorry...

Nos. 16 and 18, both par-4s, will be lengthened with green-side hazards accentuated. And the par-4 17th, deemed much too easy by Jones, will be completely rebuilt with the green reduced and bunkers added.

Longer Rough For Shorter Holes

Steve Elling writes about the USGA's new "rough" policy that will debut at Winged Foot this June.

Under the new plan, the length of the grass will increase in inverse proportion to the misfire. Sort of like serving detention, the punishment for bursts of wildness will indeed fit the crime.

Moreover, the rough heights will be adjusted depending upon the length of the hole, which means missing a fairway by a few yards on a 495-yard par-4 won't be as bad as hitting it sideways on a shorter two-shot hole.

And an early candidate for line of the year followed by the details:

Heck, the USGA will be cultivating more gradients of grass than all the hippies in Humboldt County, using everything from tweezers to a scythe to trim the various stages of rough:

1. The fairway cut will be trimmed to the usual firm-and-fast length of a quarter-inch or thereabouts. It will look like indoor-outdoor carpet by comparison to what's framing it.

2. The light, 6-foot-wide swath of transitional rough between the fairway and the heavy stuff will measure about 1 1/3 inches in height, the usual standard.

3. Here's the real change. The grass for the next 10-12 feet will be cut to a height of 3-4 inches. Players hitting a ball into this area have a fair shot at reaching the green.

4. This is the heavy stuff, the type of rough where a guy can't see his socks, much less his shoes. It will measure six inches in depth and cover the remainder of the area to the gallery rope.

Fairness is at the grassroots of the decision. Those who barely miss the fairway won't be penalized as harshly as those who miss by a mile. Meanwhile, it lessens the chances that players who hit the wildest shots will land in sparse areas, as was formerly the case at times.

Big improvement, right? This should end the madness of players missing a fairway by 4 yards and having no shot.

But, as Elling writes, there are "a couple of important caveats."

There will be no intermediate rough, only the long 6-inch type, on short holes such as the par-5 fifth (515 yards) and the par-4 sixth (321 yards) and 11th (396 yards). So it could be argued that the biggest hitters will nonetheless enjoy an advantage, since they'll face the graded rough on the longest holes. They can belt away with a driver as long as the misses are moderate.

Ah, yes. Flogging may actually be rewarded with the tiered concept. But that's not Mike Davis's fault, that's the fault of past committees who ignored the equipment issue.

So we will see the tiered concept on most the holes, except on the ones where birdie is more likely to be made.

If the USGA owned Fenway Park, would they automate the Green Monster to move up when the bombers come to the plate? 

It would be like Notre Dame Stadium harvesting rough to slow down Reggie Bush? (Wait, that happened, bad example.)

Mike Davis's concept of tiered rough is introducing more equity into a setup situation that has long been awkward, if not downright goofy. But then, it's as if somene higher-up is suggesting a way to eliminate red numbers on holes where they are most likely to occur, therefore completely contradicting the concept of more equity introduced with the tiered rough.

Here's the funny part and where the USGA shows that it has not fully grasped why flogging occurs. If the rough is the same throughout on these three shortish holes--a nasty 6 inches let's say--and the fairway is a silly 21-yards wide (sad, but true), then why not take your chances and drive as far down the hole as possible?

If you are going to wedge out, you might as well do it as close to the green as you can?  How many players have said this...Tiger, Phil, J.B., etc...

I'll post some photos later and you can be the judge whether a lay-up or launched tee shot would be the wiser option. I know you can't wait. 

Rough Justice?

Adam Barr at TheGolfChannel.com questions the use of rough in golf. He kindly mentions Lines of Charm as the inspiration for his column.

Final Round Hole Locations

Another week, another bordering-on-silly final round setup. Reviewing the tape after hearing Gary McCord's raised-eyebrow comment about some of the hole locations, I went looking for any player comments on the setup.

Rory Sabbatini: 

"Obviously, the greens were a lot firmer today, they had some pretty amazing pin positions out there," Sabbatini added. "A couple of them I'm still bewildered at, but, you know, they made the course definitely tougher for us today." 

Now, not to take away from Arron Oberholser's win, because it was well deserved and he is a huge talent (not to mention the kind of character the Tour needs more of).

But I noticed while listening to the audio and staring at the dolphins going by that there were very few cheers, and seemingly fewer opportunities for anyone to post a few birdies in a row.

I know this has been asked here many times, but why can't we let the U.S. Open be its own thing. Why is the PGA Tour turning Sunday's into train wreck days instead of letting the players create a little more to cheer about? 

Anti-Flog Rough, Vol. 2

Blue Blazer said I left out something on the Anti-Flog Rough post. That's where I pointed out the silliness of the USGA trying to grow rough to different heights depending on the hole.

Apparently the theory goes that taller rough on shorter holes will somehow negate the advantage of long hitting floggers, even though it's on the long par-4s where the dump-and-chase approach works best. 

I suggested that it is a peculiar idea for the USGA to be manufacturing lies (of the playing surface variety) even though the organization has admirably been a proponent of "play it as it lies."

Then there's the idea that the USGA, which has denied altering course setups to counteract the benefits of  equipment deregulation, is actually doing exactly what it denies by using different rough for different holes idea. They appear to be trying to counteract changes in the game.

But Blue Blazer thought I should have also pointed out that the USGA has gone to great lengths to improve the consistency of conditions throughout its Open courses: same green firmness, better bunker sand consistency, etc... and here they are actually forcing inconsistency into the setup equation. 

Why? It seems the only logical conclusion one can draw is that this is an effort to eliminate flogging, a symptom caused largely by modern equipment and ridiculously narrow fairways.

So, can anyone think of a way that super high rough on a short par-4 like the sixth at Winged Foot somehow enhances strategy or rewards skill that a normal setup would not?

Anti-Flog Rough?

Back in May when Sports Illustrated threw me in a room with David Fay, Brad Faxon and Larry Dorman to discuss the state of the game, Fay said it was his hope that the rough at Winged Foot would be 8 inches on certain short holes.

This, apparently to deal with the flogging mindset that became even more widely practiced at Pinehurst just a few weeks following the roundtable.

So in reviewing Jim Achenbach's recent column on Walter Driver, I found this perplexing:

Driver also would like to be seen as an innovator, so a major change in the famous U.S. Open rough apparently will be seen in his first year as president. Driver was chairman of the Championship Committee before becoming USGA president, and his fingerprints already are all over the U.S. Open. After the USGA lost control of course conditions at Shinnecock Hills in the final round of the 2004 Open, Driver wrote a collection of course setup guidelines that were successfully adopted at the 2005 U.S. Open and will be followed at all future U.S. Opens.

Mike Davis, senior director of rules and competitions, outlined the changes in the rough by saying that for the first time the U.S. Open rough will not be a uniform height. Davis indicated that the primary rough probably would be higher on short par 4s and lower on long par 4s.

Now, for the moment I'm going to disregard the fact that growing rough at higher heights on shorter holes only reinforces the idea that the USGA is obsessed with preventing red numbers.
 

And I'm going to ignore how disturbing it is that the USGA, obsessed (and wonderfully so) with "play it as lies" golf, is working so hard to manufacture lies. (No pun intended.)

After all, course setup staffer Mike Davis is one of the real bright hopes within the USGA. He and Tim Moraghan got Pinehurst through the '05 Open despite the meddling of Tom Meeks and Lord knows who else.

And I like the staggered rough cutting concept that Davis has introduced because it has eliminated the ridiculousness of drives just missing fairways finding heavy rough, while tee shots further off line find less penalty. Davis also does not seem pre-occupied with the winning score hovering around par, as some are.

However, last I looked, flogging really separates the bombers from the shorter hitters on the long par-4's, not on the shorter holes where the USGA plans to grow more rough.

So with shorter rough on longer holes, it would seem that the players will only be that much more encouraged to flog it off the tee to get that flip wedge approach.

Apparently, the USGA doesn't see it that way...

The theme here is easy to decipher: The USGA does not want long hitters to be able to exploit shorter par 4s by bombing their drives with impunity somewhere close to the green. Some kind of remedy needs to be found, Davis indicated, and variable rough may be one answer.

"I Have A Theory"

It'll never be confused with Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" proclamation, but the mid-fourth round car wreck at Torrey Pines prompted Gary McCord to note that the play looked "like my buddies at home," which then had Peter Kostis announcing "I have a theory, I have a theory."

You keep building golf courses like this thing and you're going to breed a generation of 6'5" 240 pound golfers where power is everything. This golf is brutal...

Bobby Clampett chimed in at this point to remind us that the course is 7,600 yards at sea level, so we didn't get to hear Kostis expand on the theory. 

So, was he...

A) Going to say that the architects and developers are to blame for the current state of course setup and the way golf is played (flogging/ugly)?

B) Going to say that architects are to blame for the power game? 

C) Going to say that the emergence of 6'5" 240 pound players is the result of equipment that provides significant benefits for those who are taller and stronger? 

I'm guessing answer was NOT (C). So let's add architects to the better athletes/agronomy/workout programs/grooves/loft etc... rationale for doing nothing that might impact the sacred ball-driver synergy.

Rees-toration of a Rees-toration?

I can't keep up with all of these brilliant modern classics going under the knife.

First we had Best New Remodel of Best New's, and now we have Rees Jones renovating his own Rees-torations. A Rees-Rees-toration? Or a Ree-ees-toration? Eh, either way, thanks to reader Frenchie for this from PGA.com.

Atlanta Athletic Club is turning Rees loose on their Highlands Course...again. He apparently didn't make it forgettable enough prior to the 2001 PGA Championship, so he's back to install more tees, more 2-d bunkering and more nonsense just in time for the 2011 PGA.

 --All fairway and greenside sand bunkers will be reshaped and made deeper, with new drainage and bunker sand installed.

--The locations of all greenside bunkers will be studied in detail to promote variety and develop more challenging approach shots and hole locations. When reshaped, all greenside bunkers will be shifted closer to the adjacent putting surface.

To promote variety? Hmmm...guess that monotonous left bunker/right bunker thing made every hole bleed together? Shocking.

--Fairway mowing patterns will shift closer to the edge of each renovated fairway bunker.

--All fairways to be regraded and drainage to be installed.

--All tees, collars, approaches, green surrounds that are cut at fairway height and fairways will have Diamond zoysia grass.

All of the holes will undergo some revision, although the greens will not be rebuilt. Most holes will have a new championship tee built, adding length to nearly every hole.

Length? It was plenty long enough in 2002...what happened?

Clayton on "Championship" Issues

Mike Clayton, writing for The Age (thanks to reader Graeme):

In Australia, we have nearly always played our best events on our best courses, but in America and Europe, commercial considerations usually win out over the quality of the golf course.

How dare he! Of course, it's true.  And my favorite line:

Rough is a curse that clever design should be able to do without and we should take no notice of what we see from America on our televisions. It is moronic and one-dimensional to think the game is better when it is played from long green grass.