The Victor - Gary Van Cynical has scripted the remainder of the year under this header:
Here's How Jordan Spieth Can Win the Grand SlamI'm gonna take a stab at that one and guess that winning the Open Championship and PGA might be involved.... but it's just a guess. Here's his actual logic:
There are two reasons why he’s going to win the Grand Slam this year, even though itseems ridiculous that a 21-year-old would win four majors in one calendar year (something Tiger or Jack Nicklaus never did) and they would be the first four major titles of his career.
One, Jordan Spieth has the clutch gene. He makes big shots and big putts when he has to. Frankly, it was shocking he missed the 15-foot eagle putt on Chambers Bay’s 18th hole—after watching Branden Grace’s putt on a similar line—that would’ve clinched the Open. Even more shocking, of course, was the three-putt double bogey at the par-3 17th after he’d birdied to open a seemingly insurmountable three-shot lead with two to play.
So he made a mistake but that birdie putt at 16 looked and felt exactly what colorful basketball analyst Bill Raftery likes to call “a dagger.”
It's not so much that I disagree, as Spieth does have the ability to summon it when required. But he's also a bit mistake-prone, as the tee shot on No. 17 might show. Do we think he gets through the next two majors without those loose swings costing him? Magic 8-ball says outlook is cloudy...
Two, Jordan (I’d like to dub him Jor-El, the same name as Superman’s father, but it doesn’t feel like it would stick) has entered the Can-Do-No-Wrong-Zone.
Tiger owned that zip code in the early 2000s. Of course, Tiger was maybe the best player we’d ever seen, the most complete player. He got chances and he took advantage of them because he was that good. But other players were griping back then that Tiger had a multi-year run of majors in which he always got the best tee time, always ended up on the best side of the draw, always got the best pairings and got all of the breaks when things did go wrong. Remember the Phoenix fans who moved a boulder for him?
Like at Muirfield in '02? I don't see any reason to demean Tiger's record by implying that luck was a factor... yes, there was griping, but that's what the losers tend to do. And if the best you got is the Phoenix boulder, I don't believe he was even top ten that week.
Ian O'Connor is thinking Grand Slam as well, though based on this logic:
If Spieth won on raw talent and precision at Augusta, he proved Sunday he can win a big one on blood and guts, too, just like Rory McIlroy proved he could do at the PGA Championship last year. Spieth also proved he can win a major on a links course (or at least a close facsimile of a links course); he'll take his next two cracks at the Open Championship at St. Andrews and then the PGA at linksy Whistling Straits.
But it was the fight he showed against the field and the treacherous Chambers Bay greens, a fight he won with B-game execution that told any right-minded witness that Spieth is very capable of matching Woods' remarkable Tiger Slam (three straight majors victories in 2000, followed by another Masters title in 2001), and putting a cherry on top by squeezing his into a single season.
Usually the guy that wins does so looking like he'll never lose, and my role is to talk Joe Passov back to Planet Earth. In this case Jordan won looking like he needed to fight to make the cut, and that is impressive as O'Connor notes. But the kind of luck in evidence yesterday is unlikely to keep repeating itself, so let's all take a deep breath... In my lifetime Arnie, Jack and Tiger went to Scotland having won the Masters and U.S. Open, and all three came up short. Do we really think Jordan is better, especially at age 22, than those guys?
Oh, and Whistling Straits is in no way linksy...can we stop with this? Yes, there's a lake nearby...get over it.
The Venue - It's hard for me to recall a significant golf tournament where the venue was as much a part of the story as this one... the historical precedents would be Hazeltine in 1970 (anyone know where Dave Hill is these days) or....sheesh, I don't know what else would be in the mix.
We've had weeks where the golf course played poorly such as Winged Foot in 1974, the so-called Massacre, no doubt an over-reaction to Miller's 63 at Oakmont the prior year. We've had specific issues such as the 18th green at Olympic or the 7th green at Shinnecock, but that didn't diminish the worthiness of the venues...
There's actually two separate discussions to be had about Chambers Bay. There's the discussion of the course as U.S. Open venue, the appropriateness of a links course for our national open, the course as an examination of the best players in the world, the spectator experience and limitations, you know, the whole gestalt.
Then there's the greens. Let's set aside our schadenfreude at pampered Tour pros having to play imperfect putting surfaces and catch up on what the boys are doing and saying. First we have the calm, reasoned Billy Horschel on the 6th green:
Here's Billy's comments from after the round:
Now that his U.S. Open was complete, Horschel let loose with a string of complaints about the condition of Chambers Bay this week, specifically the quality of the putting surfaces.
''We're looking for something that's very consistent. Every green is very consistent. And this week they're not,'' Horschel said. ''The only two greens out here that are really good are 13 and 7. And No. 10 is not too bad. But other than that, it's just a very disappointing week to be here.''
Now Billy is a bit on the emotional side, though he did add this for perspective:
Horschel added he understands that fans are not interested in hearing complaints from players but that the conditions of this week needed to be brought to attention. He also brought up the fans and the difficulty in spectators being able to get around the course and close to the action. The course has been roped for safety and not for the ability of fans to clearly see what's happening.
Personally I enjoy hearing some of the players complain, notably that Poulter guy...because that's what he does. Speaking of which, our Ian took a vow of silence during the week (apparently he took some heat for trashing the course before, you know, seeing it). But no sooner had he holed out, than he posted this on Instagram:
I look forward to congratulating the 2015 US Open Champion very soon, I simply didn't play well enough to be remotely
close. This is not sour grapes or moaning or any of that crap. It simply the truth. Mike Davis the head of the @USGA unfortunately hasn't spoke the truth about the conditions of the greens. I feel very sorry for the hundreds of greens staff who spent countless hours leading into this week and this week doing there best to have it the best they could and I thank them for that. But look at the picture. This was the surface we had to putt on. It is disgraceful that the @USGA hasn't apologized about the greens they simply have said. "we are thrilled the course condition this week". It wasn't a bad golf course, In fact it played well and was playable. What wasn't playable were the green surfaces. If this was a regular PGA tour event lots of players would have withdrawn and gone home on Wednesday, but players won't do that for a major. They were simply the worst most disgraceful surface I have ever seen on any tour in all the years I have played. The US Open deserves better than that. And the extra money that they have earn't this year from@FoxSports, they could easily have relayed the greens so we could have had perfect surfaces. Simply not good enough and deeply disappointing for a tournament of this magnitude. I don't like it when people lie on camera to try and save face. And to all you fans that paid good money to try and watch us play golf but couldn't see anything on most holes because it wasn't possible to stand on huge slopes or see around stands, I apologize and I'm sorry you wasted your money traveling to be disappointed. I hope we all learn something moving forward to not have these problems in the future. Happy Fathers Day.
7,5041,750
So how exactly are we to respond when Poults screams "Wolf"? It's Poulter, so my default setting is "Ignore"....
On the other hand, the surfaces seemed to become increasingly bumpy as the week progressed. But it
was a strange week for putting in general, as the players continually noted that they struggled to put enough pace on their putts to hold the line. I can tell you that I saw more putts missed on the low side than I can ever remember...for what that's worth. Fescue greens aren't typically too fast, but these had far more contours and slopes than is typical, or even perhaps that is advisable...the solution for Poa-related bumpiness is to hit your puts firmly, but obviously they were running out on them too much for that strategy.
And Poulter's characterization of the USGA's position is certainly not credible, as Mike Davis acknowledged that they were bumpier than is preferable, which he attributed to the different growth patterns of fine fescue and poa. certain players weren't happy with that response, quite obviously, but we always have issue with Poa on the West Coast in June. I'd like to hear from more reliable folks (and isn't this why Fox hired Gil Hanse) whether these greens were really worse surfaces than those at Pebble and Torrey Pines...
I'm not an agronomist nor do I play one on TV, but controlling Poa is its own art form. Again, I'd like to know from more credible sources whether there's a consensus that the greens Horschel cited had better surfaces, and are those the ones redone after the 2010 Amateur? Perhaps the greens do need to be reseeded a few years before the next Open to avoid the Poa infestation, though that's a heck of an undertaking for a public course...
On the broader question of the suitability of the site, Geoff posted at The Loop his suggestions for a return visit, including this:
- Solve The Grass Issue. With most of the turf having burned up during the Open, the fescues may not be able to handle the heat and strain of a U.S. Open. Poa Annua isn't the answer either. How about some bent in the greens mix to help prevent the understandable player complaints? The USGA has a Green Section and no shortage of cash, maybe they can handle this part.
This is way above my pay grade, but he's also got good-sense suggestions for other tweaks, as well as this dire warning:
Then remind everyone of that epic finish and sit tight, because Chambers Bay will be remembered even more fondly in two years when the U.S. Open heads to the severe, remote and massive Erin Hills.
I also recommend this Jaime Diaz Golf World piece that seems to get it about right. he speaks of Jones' infatuation with elevation changes, which to me is an obviously bad fit with rock-hard fescue turf... But Bobby must have been stung by the Gary Player criticism, because he responded with the old conflict of interest dodge:
“First of all, you have to understand that Gary is a competitor in the design business,” says Jones. “He was a ruthless competitor in his playing days and at times he can be that way in the design business. We compete for jobs all over the world. I can tell you that I’m open to constructive criticism, but to make it personal is something I can’t understand.
Now as to the greens, he had this more substantive comment:
Jones acknowledges that there are issues with many of the putting surfaces. “Some of the greens are not well-laid. The original superintendent used sod when he rebuilt them and there were other grasses that got into the fescue. Number 1 green, the middle of 4 and number 12 in particular are problematic. However, you don’t hear any complaints about the new pure fine fescue greens at 7 and at 13, except that they’re fast. The USGA has learned a lot recently from Castle Stuart in Scotland, which has beautiful fine fescue greens on a similar site. In time, we’d like to see these greens resemble those at Castle Stuart.”
I'll provide a first-hand report on the Castle Stuart greens in a couple of months, but it's the first I've heard that only those two greens are 100% fescue.
The Viewing - I know, I feel your pain.... Let me share a sample exchange from your humble correspondents living room:
Greg Norman (from TV): I'm absolutely speechlessMe: If Only!
I did think there were some things that worked, the increased use of ProTracer, the screen graphics
giving pin and cover yardages (and the location of the pin), and the combination of the two was boss. I'm OK with the Chase Cam (others weren't as kind) as long as it's not overused, as I enjoyed some of the contours it showed, though it was better on fairway than on the greens.
The on-air talent was a decidedly mixed bag, and for some, regrettably including Juli Inkster, I'm not optimistic about improvement. Brad Faxon is head-and-shoulders above the rest to my ear, and I'd love him in the Norman chair (I Know, not gonna happen).
John Strege posts ten suggestions to improve their coverage, and I'll share a couple:
1. Holly Sonders was underutilized and in the wrong role as interviewer. Not a strength. She’d have been better in the role of moderator, as she did for Golf Channel, .and:
7. Lose the big screen television during interviews. We don’t need a picture in a picture, and it made for awkward exchanges between Sonders and her interview subjects.
Golf people seem incredibly well-disposed to Holly, for reasons I'm unable to intuit. But she was hopelessly mis- and/or underutilized and John basically recommends putting her in the Curt Menifee seat. The second point is so true, as it made her turn her back on the camera, which is kind of Broadcasting 101.
6. More Hanse. Adding a course architect, Gil Hanse, to the team was a novel and successful idea, even while recognizing that an architect is not likely to criticize too harshly a member of his own fraternity or their design. But his insights on the course still were a nice addition, and he could have been utilized more during the meat of the telecast, rather in the early hours of it.
So that would be, wait for it, En-Hansing the broadcast.... I thought Gil was surprisingly good, but where was he during the discussion of the greens? Wouldn't a guy that knows grasses be useful?
No comments:
Post a Comment