Fourth Ryder Cup Question: Can We All Agree That Harvested Rough Is A Silly And Cynical Stain On A Golf Course?

I know that the horror of great players displaying their skill was problematic for a few cynics who want to see these young, rich, athletic men suffer the indignity of a buried ball in bluegrass for daring to not hit every ball to perfection. However, with essentially no rough at Medinah, we may have just witnessed the most exciting and rewarding three days of shotmaking in modern times.

Oh yes, there were 62s that might have been posted if this was a major, but that's a credit to impeccable greens and silly distances the ball flies. Which is why people harvest four inches of lush stuff along fairways and around greens in the first place: to combat distance increases.

Anyone care to make the case that Medinah would have been a better Ryder Cup venue with high rough lining the fairways and surrounding the greens?

Don't be scared...