"It also is likely that there will be less of a need for long, punitive rough."

There is a USGA.org Q&A with president Jim Vernon about the state of the USGA and his first year in office. I liked his answer on the groove rule change, which could be the first time I've seen someone from the USGA suggest that it could lead to less rough.

How do you expect the rules changes concerning grooves to impact how courses are set up for tour-level and championship competitions?

Vernon: For those setting up courses for players of this level, I think you’ll see a whole array of opportunities. If you look at the PGA Tour, the major championships, or the European Tour for that matter, you’ve seen a trend over the past 15 years showing hole locations have gotten closer and closer to the edge of the green each year, and that won’t need to be as much the case anymore. The rules changes may well reopen greens to some different hole locations that will still reward accuracy, but you won’t have to put it three or four paces from the edge of most of your greens. It also is likely that there will be less of a need for long, punitive rough. 

"[The rough] is five inches long. Why brush it back at us?"

Paul Mahoney reports on Lee Westwood's scathing post round criticism of the Oakland Hills course setup. On site sources say the rough had been trimmed but it also seems the raking we spotted last week was taken to a new extreme. At least according to Westwood.

"The course is 7,500 yards long, the greens are firm, and the pins are tucked away," Westwood said of Oakland Hills (official yardage: 7,395). "They are sucking the fun out of the major championships when you set it up like that. The fairways are narrow, and unfortunately if you miss the semi [rough] by a foot you are worse off than if you miss by 20 yards. I asked my partners [Geoff Ogilvy and Zach Johnson] if I was out of order, and they said 'No, if you are slightly off-line, you are crucified.' It is too thick around the greens as well. It takes the skill away from chipping."

Comparing Thursday's conditions to the practice rounds, Westwood wondered if the PGA had dispatched an army of workers overnight to "brush back" the rough, changing its direction so that the blades point toward the tees, instead of toward the greens.

"I can't think of a reason why they would do it other than to irritate the players," said Westwood, whose round included five bogeys, one double-bogey, and no birdies. "[The rough] is five inches long. Why brush it back at us? It makes no sense. People want to see birdies, and they have not seen me make any. I can't see anything wrong with being 9- or 10-under-par for the week."

Part of me wonders if the setup is really that extreme, or perhaps the players have become so enamored with Mike Davis's layered rough cuts that the old style setup looks that much more ridiculous? Maybe...

Westwood said that the PGA should have followed the USGA's lead at Torrey Pines, which was not the punishing setup often seen in the U.S. Open. "You have to reward the accurate players like they did at the U.S. Open," he said. "[That] was set up perfectly. It rewards accuracy and penalizes you if you are off-line. I didn't see that today."

Update on 2008-08-08 03:53 by Geoff

In John Hopkins' report, he implies the rough ploy was a mowing in only the direction toward the tee, as Augusta National does with its fairways so that its members who also happen to be on the Executive Committee don't have to do anything about distance!.

While mowing fairways back towards the tees to bring balls to a halt sooner has been fashionable since it first appeared at Augusta a few years ago, the practice of doing the same to the rough is surely unnecessary.

"I couldn't reach four fairways. You have to use common sense and they didn't. They put themselves in the league of the USGA at Shinnecock."

Steve Elling on the early massacre at Birkdale:

Despite assurances that the weather would be taken into account during the setup, the tees on several key holes playing into the wind weren't adjusted, causing as many complaints as bogeys. Specifically, players said that the par-4 Nos. 6, 11 and 16 were not reachable in regulation, even with 3-wood approach shots.

It used to be that the U.S. Golf Association was reputed as the most sadistic organization in golf, though their reputation has softened in the past couple of years. Not to worry, because the Royal & Ancient rushed to the fore to fill the Draconian, dunderheaded void.

American veteran Jerry Kelly called it the biggest gaffe he'd seen at a major, including the controversial 2005 U.S. Open at Shinnecock Hills, where play had to be suspended after a green became sun-scorched and unplayable.

"Worst course setup I've ever seen," said Kelly after finishing with an 83. "I couldn't reach four fairways. You have to use common sense and they didn't. They put themselves in the league of the USGA at Shinnecock."

Hey, is there an echo in the room?

"If it had been run by the European Tour, the tees would have been pushed forward a little bit," said overseas veteran Graeme Storm, who shot 76. "It's hard enough to hit the fairway, much less reach them."

Wednesday Open Clippings: 17th Green Edition

It's only Tuesday and Mt. St. 17th-Green-At-Birkdale is about to erupt. Just imagine the possibilities when the tournament starts and the wind blows!

Before we get to the articles and after a lengthy search (because Lord knows we need more photos of guys hitting out a bunker), I finally found a shot of the 17th green in Golfweek's roster of images from Tuesday (the volume lowering tool is in the lower right).
No. 17 at Birkdale, courtesy of Golfweek (click to enlarge)

....we have several fine stories full of all sorts of rich, compelling and incriminating detail.  Here's John Huggan quoting Geoff Ogilvy:

"If Birkdale were a one-hole course this green would be out of character with the rest of the course. It's out of character with the land; it's out of character with the hole.

"You can see from 250 yards away that something has gone wrong. Sadly, it could be a decisive factor in who wins the championship. You could get some really crazy putts going on there. Funky bounces, too. A guy could hit a great shot in and see his ball take a really weird kick left or right. It's fine to have a tough green, but it has to look right. It just doesn't fit the spot that it is in, or the hole that it is on, or the rest of the course."

But other than that...Huggan also shares this from Robert Allenby:

"The problem is that whenever they try to change these great courses, they always stuff it up by doing something like that. You can argue they do these things because of how far the ball goes these days, but this has nothing to do with that. It's a mess that has obviously been made by someone who doesn't know how to design golf courses. He's built a green that isn't even close to the other 17. It's just stupid. If they revisit it after the championship I hope they use someone else."

So Huggan went to the vision behind the green and well, Martin Hawtree probably didn't help matters with either the players or his architectural Godfather Peter Dawson:

"In previous Birkdale Opens the 17th had been the easiest or one of the easiest holes," said Hawtree, who will lay out Donald Trump's proposed new course near Aberdeen should the present public inquiry into the project give the go-ahead. "So it needed stiffening.

I will spare you a Viagra joke here. Continue...

We moved the green back to the point where the front of the new green is where the back of the old one was. Then we added another tier. In my original concept of the hole there was nothing at the back of the green. The two big dunes there create an amphitheatre effect so I felt that the green should run on into a hollow at the rear. I wasn't allowed to do that though; the R&A wanted spectator mounds. So now the green forms too much of a bowl shape.

"I'm taken aback by the depth of the reaction. It was a weak hole and demanded something be done. I have heard that the club want to redo the green complex after the Open. I'd be more than happy to move the mounds at the back and create my original idea."

Just guessing by the comments, the lack of a rear hollow seems to be the least of the problems here.

Mike Aitken in the Scotsman talks to the other culprit behind this mess, R&A Executive Secretary and in-house architect Peter Dawson:

"Well, this has caused a little bit of controversy," he said. "And, as a result of that, I'd like to say a few things about it. It's a par 5, so it's not as if we're expecting the green to be hit at with long irons. It's a green the pros are accustomed to facing on many of the courses they play.

"If you look at Augusta, there are probably 18 more sporty greens than this one."

Lee Westwood echoes some of his fellow competitors' concerns about the 17th green, which is described in the official course guide as a "tiny, two-tier target with extreme undulations".

"I think everybody has accepted that something has gone wrong with it," said Westwood. "It's just out of character with the rest of the course, (let's] basically leave it at that.

"It's not to the standard of the rest of the greens. The rest of them are brilliant."

Bloomberg's Michael Buteau also looked at the 17th green and shares this from Steve Stricker:

"You wish they'd just leave them alone because they're good for a reason,'' said Steve Stricker, the No. 8-ranked player. ``They've withstood the test of time, equipment and everything else.''

Buteau also shares the same excuse reply from Dawson and I thought by printing it again it would make sense, but it still does not.

Dawson said organizers weren't expecting many golfers to attempt to land their second shots on the putting surface.

``It's not as if we're expecting the green to be hit at with long irons,'' he said. ``We're aware that it's a green that could get away from us if we're not careful. We'll have to see how it goes.''

So if the green could be "hit at" with long irons, that would make it better or even worse? I really need Peter's book of design guidelines to help here, because I think he's really onto something.
Competitors such as Stricker said they wish they could roll back the clock.

James Corrigan files an excellent look at the controversy, also ends the piece with his breakdown of the "12 to follow" at Birkdale. But first, his take on the 17th green, using overheard player comments:

One labelled it "a sloping mess of mounds" while another concluded that it looks as if it's "contracted a severe case of mumps". Even those not totally anti the mogul run have agreed that it is not in keeping with the other greens that have help confirmed Birkdale's reputation as the finest and fairest course in England. In Westwood's opinion they should unload the shovels and start again. That is exactly what the members are planning. But perhaps not before next Monday.

Jack Nicklaus played here in April and was aghast. "You've got one of the greatest golf courses in the world, and they changed 16 holes because of a stupid golf ball," said the 18-time major champion. "That is just ridiculous."

Okay, how did I miss one of the best quotes ever? Where did he say this? Please readers, guide me!

Nicklaus was speaking for an ever-growing number who believe that the authorities should have placed limits on how far the modern golf ball travels. They failed to act, however, and now the only defence they appear to have to protect the dignity of old courses is either course lengthening or course toughening. Or in the case of the 17th, both. On occasions, the powers that be have gone overboard like at Shinnecock Hills at the US Open in 2004 when the greens were quick to the point of unplayable. The R&A is blessedly not the United States Golf Association and is not about to let their stubborn mistakes re-occur here. But they have created an eyesore. Slam, bam in the middle of golfing beauty.

I'm not sure about the USGA reference, since they didn't create the 7th green at Shinnecock. It's one thing go blunder a set-up, because with a little bad luck, bad planning and a steep green, anything can happen. But to make a mess of things before you even set the course up takes a special talent that takes things to an entirely different level.

This is yet another reminder as to why governing bodies should not design golf courses, particularly when it's in response to their own (continued) inability to regulate equipment.

"Our rules officials have finally realized that — duh! — course setup has a lot to do with pace of play."

As always I enjoyed the pre-Open Championship insights from SI's anonymous tour pro (thought it would be nice if he'd actually seen Birkdale!), including this on the relationship between PGA Tour course setup and slow play.

No doubt I'm wasting my time talking about slow play. One veteran told me that we had the same discussions 25 years ago. The Tour is trying to identify the slower players and work with them to get faster, but in the end we're probably only talking about picking up 15 minutes a round. Is that a big deal? Probably not.

Yes it is!

One thing I like is that the Tour is going to use ShotLink to tell us how long we take for each shot. Certain players who are slow and don't know the average time spent on a particular shot need to be made aware. Our rules officials have finally realized that — duh! — course setup has a lot to do with pace of play. It's not only the players who are slow. When you play a 510-yard par-4 with a semi-island green, you're going to take a while. It seems obvious, but apparently our officials didn't think of it. At some tournaments, like the Memorial, the setups are getting out of control. Guys don't want to play a U.S. Open-style course two weeks before the Open. What Jack Nicklaus had this year at the Memorial was way worse than Torrey Pines. Jack and Arnold Palmer, who's growing serious rough at Bay Hill, may want to have major-championship conditions, but they're in danger of winding up with bad fields. Six-inch rough, furrowed bunkers, greens running at 14 — some guys are going to think twice before coming back.

Good.

Reader Greg noted there was one problem with another the mystery pro's comments.

The Tour thinks that putting San Antonio in Atlanta's spot was a terrific swap because Valero is a great sponsor and that we might have a Texas swing: the Nelson, Colonial and San Antonio in successive weeks. The problem is that LaCantera, the Texas Open venue, is awful. None of the top players would tee it up there in the fall, and they won't play there in May, either. Anytime you can see a roller coaster and a Ferris wheel from a tee box — you can actually hear the people on the rides screaming in the background — that's a red flag. Has any great course ever been built next to an amusement park? Until the new TPC San Antonio is finished [in 2010], I don't see top players remembering the Alamo.

Technically, Pine Valley's next door neighbor is an amusement park too. But we understand his point.

“It’s a one-dimensional hole"

Thanks to reader Chris for this AP note on Fred Funk and Congressional's 6th hole.

When a par 5 become a par 4, the result can be, in the words of Fred Funk, “downright stupid.”
 
No. 6 at Congressional Country Club is this week’s prime example. It is listed as 518 yards for the AT&T National—the third longest par 4 on the PGA TOUR so far this year—and the large water hazard around the right front of the green makes it even more daunting.
 
“I don’t like their mentality with that hole,” said Funk, who double-bogeyed the hole to mar his even-par round of 70. “I think it’s downright stupid, actually.”
 
The hole produced one adventure after another during Thursday’s first round. Defending champion K.J. Choi and Jim Furyk both landed in the front bunker yet saved par. Bo Van Pelt’s 40-foot putt provided one of only two birdies among the morning rounds. Corey Pavin, one of the shortest drivers on the tour, had no chance at all: He laid up despite hitting a tee shot that landed in the middle of the fairway.
 
“That green’s designed for a par 5,” said Rich Beem, who parred the hole after missing a 15-foot putt for birdie. “That’s the problem with par 5s turning into par 4s.”
 
“It’s difficult,” added Furyk. “You’ve got to get the ball in the fairway, or you’re going to be struggling.”
 
Choi said he was so concerned about the hole that on Wednesday he practiced the very bunker shot he ended up hitting on Thursday.
 
“It’s a one-dimensional hole,” Funk said. “If you hit the fairway and you’re a long hitter, you can get your shot to fit in there. The shorter hitters are going to have a long, long, long shot in there with a green that’s really designed for a wedge.”

What an interesting contrast in course setup approach we're seeing between the PGA Tour and USGA. (I'm guessing based on what we saw at Torrey Pines that the 2011 U.S. Open tees would be moved up a bit to prevent the situation described above, or perhaps even see the hole played as a par 5.)

"The fact that you've not heard anything should not be construed as meaning there's a problem."

Several interesting items in the USGA press conference at Interlachen where David Fay, Roberta Bolduc and Mike Davis faced the inkslingers who miraculously asked some great questions (offsetting the point missers lobbing stuff about a U.S. Senior Women's Open). After Davis talked at length about Interlachen's design attributes and Brian Silva's restoration work there, he shared this about the bunkers at Torrey Pines:

The bunkers like we have been doing the last few years, we did stir up the bottoms to try to make the bunkers a little bit softer so that the player can't get as much spin. And I was telling somebody the other day, one of the best things I heard at Torrey Pines, it just -- I almost wanted to do a cartwheel is when a player actually said, we were trying to avoid bunkers at Torrey Pines. Because we haven't heard that in who knows how long.

Davis, on driveable par-4s this week at Interlachen and in future USGA course setups:

 You have to have enough risk but you've got to have the reward with it. They have to match. And in fact David and I talked about it before Sunday of Torrey Pines, that I thought it was going to work well for the reasons I kept going through in my mind, but you don't really know. And if only ten players out of the 80 went for it I would call it a failure but I think there was 57 or 56 or whatever that went for it. And it's, you know, there was a blend of scoring.

But when we did it at Oakmont it worked. Because those holes were architecturally set up for it. We did it the one hole at Winged Foot. But, no, we will not force it. So it won't necessarily be a trademark. But I think when you get that opportunity, it's really neat because you do make the players think. And we want -- we don't want this to be gimmicky, but at the same time we want it to be the hardest championship of the year, whether it's the U.S. Girls Junior, the Women's Open, the U.S. Open or the Senior Men's Amateur, but at the same time there's nothing wrong with introducing more risk, reward and making the players think, giving them opportunities, and taking a hole and really saying if you play it great you can make birdie, eagle, but if you don't play it so great, if you try something and don't pull it off you're going to pay the price.

And look at this troublemaker with the killer follow up about those R&A lollygaggers.

Q. David, could we get an update on the groove situation? Wasn't that due for some sort of roll out in January, I think, in theory? Has there been any developments on that front or are we going to have to all change irons?

DAVID FAY: The latest update is there's no update. We are still on track, we hope. There are a number of components that we have to get everything resolved. A number of -- and we're moving ahead on that. But to give you a timetable at this time, it would be premature.

Q. R & A still a part of the equation in getting them signed up for the same time?

DAVID FAY: Well the R & A, it's a change in equipment, a change in any rule will not happen unless both sides support it. Fully. The fact that you've not heard anything should not be construed as meaning there's a problem. It's just that we -- anything dealing with equipment, particularly these days, is complex. You deal with the specifications, manufacturing tolerances, I think that one thing I would say that we have never, at least in my experience at the USGA, researched and done the lab testing and the player testing to the degree that we have with this subject of grooves.

Just not enough for the R&A!

"They kept us on our toes. They kept us thinking. That's what a major championship should do."

An unbylined Scotsman report on European prospects brightening in future U.S. Opens:

One of the reasons why Europe's most illustrious golfers have struggled to emulate the success of Tony Jacklin at Hazeltine in 1970 can be attributed to the one dimensional course set-ups which

In a curious switch of identities, the Masters evolved into the US Open earlier this spring and delivered a tournament where the emphasis on defensive golf made for mostly dull viewing. The US Open in California, on the other hand, presented opportunities for the most positive players to attack over the closing stretch and encouraged the kind of thrilling finale which used to be the copyright of Augusta National.placed a premium on driving accuracy at the expense of short game wizardry.

And...

According to [Robert] Karlsson, who was eighth at Augusta in April, the presentation was resourceful. "I don't think they could have done anything any better," enthused the Swede. "It was in good condition and the way it was set up from tee to green with the mix of tees and pin positions was fantastic."

Mark Zeigler in the San Diego Union Tribune offered this on the varied tee setup, highlighted by the par-4 14th.

"That's the beautiful thing about it," Spain's Sergio Garcia would say later. "They kept us on our toes. They kept us thinking. That's what a major championship should do. It shouldn't be just get there and whack it, which is what Augusta and (The Masters) has turned out to be in recent years."

"It's real compelling golf," said Heath Slocum, who had a birdie en route to a 65. "I think you're giving (fans) the opportunity to see some drama. You hit a good shot, you're rewarded. But if go a little long or plug it in one of those bunkers, you're going to have a hard time making par."

To a man, the players praised it.

Eagle or ice plant?

Australia's Geoff Ogilvy arrived at the 14th tee at 2-over par, three shots off the lead. He stood next to his golf bag, arms crossed, gazing at a red flag dancing in the breeze 267 yards away.

He pulled out a short iron, laid up and two-putted for par.

"If I went back (to No. 14) again," Ogilvy said, "I might have a go at it."

You may recall I reported on Ogilvy's first practice round playing the 14th as well as all other setup matters for the GolfDigest.com Torrey Story blog.

Finally, SI's Michael Bamberger says "the whole move--to bring the Open to Torrey, a true muni, owned and operated by the city of San Diego--was inspired."

He goes on to list the reasons and the hole No. 14 setup is near the top.

"Par always has been irrelevant, and it still is."

Catching up on a few articles I have been wanting to check out and I enjoyed this Doug Ferguson breakdown of the absurdity of the par protection mindset, which seems to be less of a defining USGA trait these days...but still a defining trait of the U.S. Open.

It could have been worse at Torrey Pines.

Rees Jones Jr., who buffed up the course to attract the U.S. Open, was among those who wanted the par-5 18th hole to play as a par 4. With a pond in front of the green, there would have been more gore than glory on the final hole. Davis deserves credit for persuading the blue coats to make it a par 5, which could be the most exciting closing hole at a U.S. Open.

Imagine an eagle on the last hole to win.

"As far as protecting par, I firmly believe the USGA wants to make the golf course as difficult and as testing a golf course as they can without going overboard," Furyk said. "For the best players in the world, that's going to be shooting somewhere around even par. But if it's 5 under or 5 over, I don't think it really matters."

Par always has been irrelevant, and it still is.

"It doesn't matter if it's hard or easy — it's the same for everybody. But is that what we want?"

Doug Ferguson tackles my favorite subject, the increasing difficulty of PGA Tour setups and gets some fresh perspectives from Joe Ogilvie and Davis Love as well as a PGA Tour mandate from the 90s.

The problem is whether the PGA Tour is getting enough variety.

For all the complaining at Memorial, there were birdies to be made. Mathew Goggin made 15 over the first two days, along with his share of bogeys. Even so, Davis Love III has noticed the winning score getting worse in recent years.

"Scores should be going down, not up," Love said. "That's a pretty good indication that it's getting harder. Nobody ever shoots 20 under anymore. And players are a heck of a lot better. The fields are deeper."

Love said the course setup was a major topic at the players' meeting last month in North Carolina. Why are courses so hard? What kind of show can they put on for the fans and a television audience when they're scrambling for par?

And who's idea was this, anyway?

"It's a four-letter word," Steve Flesch said at the Memorial. "And he runs this place."

The mandate actually came from the PGA Tour policy board nearly 20 years ago, with only a few instructions. Firm, closely mown grass on the tees, fairways and greens. Thick, evenly dispersed rough (when growing conditions allow).

The summation of that 1990 document was to have all courses play as difficult as possible while remaining fair. Exactly what that means, of course, is subject to interpretation.

Are course setups getting worse?

In 22 stroke-play events this year, 10 winning scores were higher, 10 were lower and two were the same.

"I don't want to sound like the guy who's 44 and not playing good," said Love, who turned 44 in April and is not playing particularly well. "But it's really hard. It doesn't matter if it's hard or easy — it's the same for everybody. But is that what we want?"

This follows a year in which average birdies were way down from previous years, along with TV ratings, and players began asking if fans might lose interest watching the best in the world hack it around every week.

"I think Phil had the right idea when he said technology has gone two ways," Joe Ogilvie said. "We have better balls, better drivers, better equipment. Johnny Miller talks about equipment almost as much as he talks about himself. But 15 years ago, they couldn't grow rough 10 inches. John Deere makes a hell of a tractor that cuts the greens lower and lower and lower.

"It gets to the point when golf — even for us — gets pretty boring."

Next week is the U.S. Open, where the winning score has been 5 over par the last two years.

Ogilvie believes PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem, the USGA and other golf organizations want courses to be tougher than ever so fans won't think "these guys are good" simply because of the better equipment.

"But at least," Ogilvie said, "they're not saying 'these guys are good' because of HGH."

That last point is definitely a new one. Is Finchem that clever and the field staff really taking such a directive? I don't think so. I'm more inclined to think that it's a combination of host courses raising the bar with thicker, higher rough, the PGA Tour's philosophy that a great tournament is major like (thus, more rough, narrower fairways and high scores) and maybe a slight overreaction to technology.

What do you think?

"Jack (Nicklaus) is the only one who wants this rough, believe me."

Paul Daugherty talks to Steve Flesch about the setup at the Memorial and says the PGA Tour would not set the course up this way if they were in control.

"I'm not a fan of chipping it out every time you miss a fairway," Flesch said. "Or if you hit it in a fairway bunker, chunking it out."

According to Flesch, it wasn't the PGA Tour's decision to make Muirfield Village's 7,366 yards play like an episode of "Man Vs. Wild."

No player came to town this week saying, "Please groove the bunkers and make the rough tall enough to hide rhinos."

Who, then?

"It's a four-letter word, and he runs this place," Flesch said.

Yeow.

"Jack (Nicklaus) is the only one who wants this rough, believe me. This is like going to Bay Hill. It's Arnie (Palmer's) setup" there, said Flesch. "I don't want to cross a line, but ..." Flesch paused here, then continued. What the heck. "It's their tournament, their golf course. Jack can do whatever the hell he wants."

At the beginning of today's telecast, Jack and Jim Nantz had an exchange about the setup where Jack said he was just setting it up the same as always and that the combination of the weather and tour requirements had it this way.

Meanwhile you'll want to check out Doug Ferguson's piece on D.J. Trahan's wild battles with the wretched 18th.

"I think that's a pretty crappy hole," Trahan said while stalking away from the course after shooting a 6-over 78 in Saturday's third round. "But nobody wants to hear that, right? Everybody wants to hear that it's a great hole. But I don't think it is. I think it's unfair and it's ridiculous."

"All they have to do is change out the pins, replace the rakes and take away press parking."

Dave Shedloski reports that the Memorial is like a major. I guess that means wedge out rough, boring golf and long rounds. Oh, and I forgot, rain in the forecast.

Doug Ferguson tells us that Joe Ogilvie is so inspired by the fun setup that he feels everyone should just park their jets in Ohio and stick around.

The U.S. Open starts in two weeks in San Diego, but Joe Ogilvie came up with an environmentally friendly plan. He suggested the second major be contested at Muirfield, so players wouldn't have to travel as far in their private jets.

"You'd save millions of pounds of carbon dioxide in the air, and golf would be a green sport again," Ogilvie said after a 75. "All they have to do is change out the pins, replace the rakes and take away press parking."

I think Joe just wrapped up a future GWAA ASAP/Jim Murray Award with that sympathetic nod to the scribbler's traditional parking arrangement at the Open.