Monday, June 16, 2025

Weekend Wrap - Chaos Theory Edition

Was that a wild enough Sunday to suit your tastes?  In many ways it was wilder than the finish at Augusta, which involved a deep dive into the dark mind of only the one guy....

As has been our recent practice, we'll let Geoff lede with his Oakmont by the numbers:

Round Four By The Numbers
  • -1: Winning score of J.J. Spaun (66-72-69-72)
  • 5th: U.S. Open champion to finish birdie-birdie on the final two holes of the championship (Ben Hogan, 1953 at Oakmont, Jack Nicklaus, 1980 at Baltusrol, Tom Watson, 1982 at Pebble Beach, Jon Rahm, 2021 at Torrey Pines, J.J. Spaun 2025 at Oakmont)
  • 67: Low final round score by Jon Rahm, Rory McIlroy
  • 7: Rounds under par Sunday
  • 78: Fourth-round score of third-round leader Sam Burns
  • 4:01 p.m.: Play suspended during Round 4 due to dangerous weather in the area.
  • 5:37 p.m.: Restart time.
  • 6:55 p.m.: Five-way tie for the lead (Burns, Scott, Spaun, Hatton, Ortiz
  • 136: Feet of putts made by Spaun over the last six holes
  • 64’5”: Longest putt of the week made (Spaun, 18th hole, fourth round)
  • 40-32: Spaun’s nines making him the first U.S. Open winner since Ouimet to shoot a 40 or more over nine to win
  • 7: Majors won since 2019 by Southern California natives (Woods, Morikawa (2), Mickelson, Schauffele (2), Spaun (1))
I'm thinking that's it's all background music except for that 136' of putts made....

Here's Geoff's take on the outcome:

Oakmont reliably spawns varying degrees of cruel chaos.

For most of a dreary Sunday at Henry Fownes’ inland links, the tenth U.S. Open played at the storied club appeared on track for first ballot entry into the Boondoggle-Adjacent Majors Club.
As the leaderboard bunched and the skies opened up, the 125th had all the makings of a grim major that would stand with other silly-rough, luck-friendly, relentless weeks that snatched victory from some legendary jaws.

We know the type of major: the least unlucky golfer hangs around, plods out a lot of pars, swerves around a few pile-ups, and lifts the trophy while blushing as bluecoats look on, wondering what the hell just happened while vowing that they don’t protect par or that efforts at score manipulation usually backfire.

But as multiple far more accomplished players tripped over a golden opportunity, J.J. Spaun did the unthinkable in brutal conditions and after an opening nine full of horrendous luck: he put the kibosh on any plans to declare the 125th a military grade clunker.

Spaun donated a pair of jaw-dropping closing hole shots for future USGA Museum consideration and is destined to join the greatest in championship lore. The 34-year-old San Dimas, California native birdied his final two holes to overcome very non-SoCal weather to win by two over Scotland’s Robert MacIntyre.

That "Far more accomplished" is a bit of a stretch, as the leaderboard ended up dominated by guys with rather short CVs.  The only prior major winner in the mix was a certain Aussie of a certain vintage, but even there one needs to be careful to avoid triggering words like....well, Lytham.

I'm not the only one using the chaos angle:

Only twenty?  That's a rookie number... As evidenced by his first example:

1. J.J. Spaun‘s horrendous break

 Break?  As in the singular?  

This is the bit that will have folks talking, methinks:

9. A rules kerfuffle

Fifty-four hole leader Sam Burns had made several bogeys and a double but was still just one shot back as he played No. 15, the hardest hole on the course. His drive found the right edge of the fairway. But it was soggy around his ball — unsurprising, given the fairway’s right-to-left slope. Burns thought he should get relief from “temporary water” (AKA casual water). A rules official felt otherwise.

“When I walked into it, clearly you could see water coming up. Took practice swings and it’s just water splashing every single time. Called a rules official over, they disagreed. I looked at it again. I thought maybe I should get a second opinion. That rules official also disagreed,” he said. “At the end of the day, it’s not up to me, it’s up to the rules official. That’s kind of that.”

For your own judgment:

Mea culpa, as Twitter doesn't seem to want me to embed that video of water bubbling up, which you should be able to view here.  On the one hand, I did think there was sufficient water to permit relief, though I've no idea where the drop would have been.  On the other hand, though, it's not like others didn't absorb bad breaks as well.

Geoff also gives us a fine game-story type accounting of Spaun's finish:

Spaun took the U.S. Open lead with a birdie at the par-4 14th but arrived at the short, drivable 17th tied with MacIntyre who had birdied the hole moments before. Asked on Golf Channel’s Live From by Rich Lerner if it was the best tee shot of his life, Spaun confirmed that the 309 yarder, a “nice little cut” that started 15 yards left of a pin deliciously cut to lure aggressive drives, was the best he’s ever hit. Spaun’s Srixon finished just under 18 feet and he gave it an aggressive run, forcing a 3’6” putt for the one-stroke-lead-taking birdie:


With MacIntyre making par at the 18th for the first time all week and sitting in the clubhouse at even par after the USGA decided any playoff would be Monday morning, he watched as Spaun needed a final-hole par to win the U.S. Open. Spaun had missed the fairway so far right on Saturday that he signed a glove for a fan. And he bogeyed the 502-yarder hole in rounds two and three.

Spaun stepped up, hit another left-to-right gem 314 yards down the middle and faced a 190-yard
approach. Spaun pulled it to 64’5” from a cut in the right center of the sprawling green. Playing partner Viktor Hovland arrived at the hole needing a birdie and a Spaun three-putt, but pulled his approach to 66’1”, just outside Spaun’s ball. The “teach” as the cool kids call it, would make a huge difference in the outcome.

“I didn't look at the scoreboard,” Spaun revealed after the round. “I knew based off of what the crowd was saying that I felt like, if I two-putted, I would probably win, but I didn't want to look because I wanted to still -- I didn't want to play defensive. I didn't know if I had a two-shot lead. I didn't want to do anything dumb trying to protect a three-putt or something.”

No problem!

“Viktor helped me a lot,” Spaun continued. “It was a foot left of my line. It's pretty ironic, my first PGA Tour win, almost the same thing happened at the Valero, but Scott Stallings was in a bunker on the last hole, we were in the same group -- the back left bunker -- and I hit my third shot on the back fringe, and I had to literally mark my ball for him to hit the bunker shot. He, same thing, splashed it out, right on my line, and just like fed it down to the hole. It was probably like a 40-footer.

“When I was walking up to 18, I was thinking about that moment. I was like, ‘Oh, my God, like this is meant to be here,’ because this is the same thing that happened to me for my first win.”

Incredibly dramatic, but am I the only one to note that the putt was carrying a bit of speed when it hit the pin?   That 3'6" leave on the prior hole seemed fraught with peril, the come-backer on the final green might have been longer.  

As much as we've all come to hate these guys the last few years, the reactions to Spaun's putt were really quite great.  First Hatton, whose temper was completely off-putting to Employee No. 2, but this shows the sudden change in his expression as he saw Spaun's bomb drop:

Tyrell, more like that, please.

And the Scot that finished just short:

It was only seconds later that Spaun’s 72nd-hole 60-footer somehow found the bottom of the hole — driving a dagger through MacIntyre’s U.S. Open dreams. And only a few seconds more until NBC flashed MacIntyre’s face to a few million people as he grappled with the fact that he’d fallen shy.

Maybe because MacIntyre knew he was one shot short all along. Maybe because he’d tried not to let his U.S. Open dreams get too far. Maybe because he was as surprised as the rest of us. But when the putt fell and the camera camera caught him, Robert MacIntyre did something interesting: He cheered.

The applause lasted maybe five seconds, joined by a hearty laugh and a one-word response — “Wow.” — but it’d happened too suddenly to be anything other than sincere. Spaun had broken MacIntyre’s heart, but in an odd way, he’d also softened the blow.

“He won the golf tournament,” MacIntyre told GOLF.com nearly a half-hour later. “Fair play. I mean, he’s dreamed of it. I’ve dreamed of it. Everyone’s dreamed of that moment. For him to pour in the winning putt, I mean, nothing I can do. Fair play.”

Those two instinctive reactions grew the game more than ten years of Signature Events, if only these over-entitled brats could understand.

Shall we check in with the Tour Confidential gang?

J.J. Spaun won the 2025 U.S. Open, closing with a final-round 72 to edge Robert MacIntyre by two. With five players tied at one over late in the day, are you surprised to see Spaun emerge from this group? What was the difference?

Josh Sens: I never would have picked Spaun to win prior to the tournament. But by the time late Sunday rolled around, he’d played three-and-a-half rounds with the calm demeanor and dead-
eyed driving that are crucial in a U.S. Open. He’d also fought back from a couple of seriously bad breaks. A ridiculously unlucky carom off the flag on 2. An unfortunate bounce off a rake at 4. Compare that to the way Sam Burns let a wet lie on the fairway get under his skin, and you could say the big difference was outlook. Spaun made some poor swings and piled up bogies. But in the end, he didn’t beat himself.

Zephyr Melton: I was certainly surprised in real time, but when you think back to the brutal luck Spaun had to start the day, it’s not as surprising. No one in the field got as much bad luck pre-rain delay, and the stoppage was a good reset. Once he came back out, the bad breaks befell other contenders, and Spaun was able to stay steady.

Josh Schrock: I’m very surprised, especially given how Spaun’s final round started. After the bogey at the first and bad break on the second, I thought he was headed for an early exit. But he didn’t let that rattle him. He stayed in his process and hung around until the rain delay, which allowed him to breathe and reset. Once play resumed, his accurate driving gave him opportunities to rise, and the tee shot on 17 was his major moment.

Jack Hirsh: I agree with Sens, it was the way he shrugged off the bad breaks to start that kept him in it, but it was his putting that won him the tournament. Sure, the tee shots on 17 and 18 were critical, but they would have been irrelevant had he not drained those two long putts on 12 and 14. He gained more than 10 strokes on the field putting despite averaging more than 30 putts around! Wild statistic! Was I surprised he beat out guys like Burns, Scott, Hatton and Hovland? Absolutely! I thought he was done after starting with five 5s, but I guess 55 is a lucky number for Spaun. Awesome major championship finish.

Sure, Josh, none of us would have picked him pre-tourney, but his first three days had me high on his chances for Sunday.  The stoppage of play was a big break for him, though it wasn't like he didn't endure luck going in the other direction those first few holes.

It was a chaotic Sunday at Oakmont, with a lengthy rain delay followed by wet conditions and several players battling for the trophy. Who are you surprised didn’t come through?

Sens: From the start, I thought Viktor Hovland was going to pull it off. He’d been in the hunt in majors so many times, and his all-around game seemed solid the first three days. Funny game. Anyone who tells you they can predict it is lying or fooling themself.

Melton: Adam Scott. It seemed like destiny that his career would get a punctuation mark with a U.S. Open win at Oakmont. Alas, he just didn’t have anything today. A final-round 79 was not what I (or anyone else) expected.

Schrock: It’s Hovland for me. He was the best player at the top of the leaderboard, and I thought he’d be able to pull off the shots under pressure that I assumed would doom Spaun and Sam Burns. Instead, he hit just seven fairways and lost over a stroke on the greens to finish T3. The search continues for Viktor.

Hirsh: It was Scott for me, too. Maybe it’s bias because he is golf’s ultimate gear nerd and I cover gear. Maybe it’s because I was 15 when he won the Masters, and his career was right behind Tiger and Phil for me growing up. Maybe it’s because it’s always fun to root for the 40-year-old in the field of 20-somethings. Scott has been good at closing the deal for much of his career (aside from the obvious exception at the 2012 Open), and this seemed like it would have been a dream-like cap to a hall-of-fame career. I guess I’m happy he proved he still has what it takes. Like 188 mph ball speed at 44? SHEESH.

Denial, it ain't just a river in Egypt.  We were presented with a leaderboard of players that have always struggled down the stretch, then we're surprised when they don't come through under brutal conditions? The wonder is that, given the leaders, that anyone won.

Several players were frustrated by the soggy conditions, which made an already difficult Oakmont even tougher. Do you think the tournament should have been delayed to Monday? Or was the Sunday finish the right decision by the USGA?

Sens: It was the right decision. If play were stopped every time modern Tour pros were unhappy with playing conditions, no event would ever get completed.

Melton: In the words of Scottie Scheffler, it is an “outdoor sport.” Let the boys play.

Schrock: Absolutely the right decision. Let’s see who is the best at getting the ball in the hole when everything isn’t optimized. Tip of the cap to the USGA.

Hirsh: That was fantastic theater. Right decision. Next question.

Let's see if I follow the question.  The organization that told us for a century that the only fair way to settle a tie is an 18-hole playoff (originally thirty-six, by the way) wanted to finish on Sunday?  Wow, who could have seen that coming?  Of course it was the right decision.

Here we veer into more thoughtful territory (though I'll admit that I've skipped their Rory question):

In its 10th time hosting the U.S. Open, Oakmont Country Club allowed just one player to break par and only two players shot 66 or better the entire week. What did you think of the venue for this week? And did it prove to be too hard, not hard enough or just right?

Sens: It’s a great venue. Not the most telegenic of the U.S. Open anchor sites. But it’s my favorite of them. Have you ever seen so many short putts missed by so many great players. The course is a beautiful bear, and the greens are beyond belief in their subtlety and severity – in ways that TV can’t quite capture.

Melton: Perfect difficulty. If every U.S. Open could finish with just the winner finishing under par, I’d absolutely love it. A war of attrition is fun to watch once every year, and Oakmont is the perfect venue for that.

Schrock: This is what the U.S. Open is supposed to be about. A complete mental examination that is about grit and grind, not getting on the Trackman and golfing in a dome. It might not be my favorite U.S. Open venue, but Oakmont always rocks. Had it not been for the rain, the carnage would have been off the charts.

Hirsh: I think the dichotomy of how J.J. Spaun and Sam Burns handled bad breaks was a perfect example of what a U.S. Open should be. Yes, was there some luck involved in whether you could advance the ball out of the ridiculous rough? Sure, but J.J. Spaun put together the best final nine holes at a U.S. Open since Tiger Woods in 2000. You can’t tell me he wasn’t a fitting champion. And it was great theater till the end. All at a course that was short of 7400 yards. We honestly should just have the U.S. Open there every year. Having played it, I know it’s also a blast despite being the most difficult course in the world.

Certainly the comments I heard were embracing the difficulty, even when it veered into silliness.  It feels to this observer like a Back to the Future moment, and the name that keeps popping into my mind is that of Tom Meeks, not a good thing at all.  Mike Bamberger, who I've in the past referred to as the conscience of our game, takes a crack at the meaning of it all, though I'm nit sure he gets anywhere useful:

In this brutally tough U.S. Open lies lesson for the game at large

Strangely, he begins with the B-word:

On the top-100 list of Great Pretentious Terms in Ye Olde Game, bifurcation has got to be in the top five, if not higher. Some notable golf people — Tiger Woods, for instance — have stated their objection to “bifurcation” in golf. In this ridiculous use of the word, it means one set of rules for elite pros, and another for the rest of us. “Let me tell you something,” Fred Perpall, the president of the USGA, said on Friday, as he stood in the shadows of the sprawling Oakmont Country Club clubhouse. “This game is bifurcated.”

If this 10th U.S. Open here, at this gorgeous golfing torture chamber, has proved anything, it is this: THEY DO NOT PLAY THE GAME WE PLAY!

(Please excuse the shouting, but this is getting personal.)

And since they do not play the game we play, and since the playing conditions they require to make 280 a meaningful four-round U.S. Open score have become so absurd, there really is only one solution: a golf ball for them, a few times a year. That’s what Fred Perpall wanted.

“That was our original intent,” Perpall said. “A ball for the elite male professional. But the PGA of America and the PGA Tour shot it down.”

The new ball, the 10-percent-shorter ball, was a compromise.

I would say, a poor one.

Here's the case he makes:

The PGA Tour has become a TV show. If the Tour wants to continue to play with the hot ball in ordinary events, it really doesn’t matter. The other tours, including LIV, the same. Ryder Cup, the same.

But the men’s majors are often played, and best played, at the most storied courses in the world. Their antiquity and history is a huge part of the appeal of these events. Augusta National. Pebble Beach. The Old Course. Royal Portrush, site of next month’s British Open. Oakmont, for sure. A 7,000-yard course, with more finesse demands, would make golf only more popular. I don’t hear any oohing and ahhing over monster drives anymore, at least not like there used to be when Tiger was in his 20s. That’s because everybody is super-human long. It’s not special. Major-championship golf is lesser for it.

It is easy to see officials at Augusta National (home of the Masters), the USGA (custodians of the U.S. Open) and the R&A (the British Open) getting behind such a ball. Maybe the PGA Tour would as well, for the Players Championship. If PGA of America officials, in deference to the organization’s membership, don’t want to get behind such a ball, I can understand that. But it would hurt their marquee event.

“I see this as incremental,” Perpall said on Friday. “We roll out this new ball, we gauge its effect, we go from there.”

I’m not holding much hope for the 2033 U.S. Open at Oakmont. I am more hopeful that the 2042 Open here, and the 2049 Oakmont Open, can be played on a shorter, faster-playing course that does not require so much water and seed and fertilizer and green speed to make 280 a meaningful Sunday-night score.

I'm old enough to remember when Mike and others expected Augusta National to roll out their own ball,  a big ask for one club in Georgia to take on.  

There's only two ways to control elite players, firm and fast conditions and punishing rough (there is a third, controlling the equipment they use, but we can rule that out).  Since the USGA insists on holding Opens in the Northeast in June, we can rule out the former....

But the problem is clear, that deep, punishing rough affects the championships.  If I mention Andy North, will you understand why?  How about my namesake?  There used to be an animal known as a U.S. Open player, and we may not like the resulting leaderboards.  T. C. Chen, anyone?

Let's finish with the TC stuff:

Who won the U.S. Open week without winning U.S. Open week?

Sens: Hmm. I think I’d have an easier time coming up with the guys who had it within their grasp and couldn’t quite put it away.

Melton: Robert MacIntyre! He braved the conditions better than anyone and it damn near earned him a U.S. Open title. He’s one of the more earnest players in pro golf and I can’t help but root for his success. Honorable mention to Carlos Ortiz for earning a career-best major finish at T4.

Schrock: Despite the poor final round, I’m going to say Adam Scott. Like Justin Rose at Augusta, I love seeing uber-talented pros who are past their prime but still love the grind. Scott talked about how winning a second major would fulfill his own self. At 44, with all the money in the world, to still be relentlessly pursuing who you dreamed you’d be is admirable. I hope he gets another major.

Hirsh: I would say Scott or MacIntyre, but since those are taken, I’ll go with Scottie Scheffler. He had a couple of brutal short misses, but ended up having a back-door top-10 with his C game. Feel like he had his B game at the PGA Championship, so really wonder what his A game is looking like right now. Scary for the field!

Other than Oakmont and its greens staff?   MacIntyre is as good as I could do on that one.  I don't think Adam Scott or Sam Burns much enjoyed their flights home.

Finally, what did you learn this week?

Sens: It wasn’t a new lesson but an old one reinforced. At the elite level, in the most pressure cooker of situations, the game is 90 percent mental and 10 percent mental. They all have all the shots. But what matters most is how they cope with the results.

Melton: Oakmont is the hardest golf course on earth. Despite a deluge of rain in the leadup, and a couple proper soakings during the week to soften the course, just one player finished under par. Imagine how high the scores will be if there’s ever a week where it gets baked out and there’s a little wind. Ten over might win the thing!

Schrock: A lot of the game’s elite players are finding their form with one major remaining. Jon Rahm gained strokes everywhere except the greens this week. Same with Collin Morikawa, who led the field in SG: Approach (2.21) but lost it all putting. Brooks Koepka showed signs of life and Jordan Spieth played well outside of a brutal nine-hole stretch on Friday. Rory McIlroy led the field in SG: Driving, which is a good sign given his recent woes. Xander Schauffele was positive in all four strokes gained categories. Scottie Scheffler arguably should have won the tournament if not for a handful of missed putts and an uncharacteristic driving week. Many of the elite are trending (with McIlroy being the big question mark). It all sets up for fireworks at Royal Portrush in a month.

Hirsh: Sens, I like to say that it’s 95 percent mental and the other five percent is in your head. Oakmont is amazing, but I think we already knew that. I think I learned that if you really want to challenge the best players in the world, you have to actually penalize them for missing the fairway. Even with soft greens, Oakmont proved that you can play a reasonable length golf course and still hold up against the best players in the game as long as they are truly penalized for missing fairways and missing fairways in the wrong spots.

I think there are some good answers there, but I think each good answers should also come with an asterisk.  because, while we did enjoy watching them struggle, I have gnawing  feeling that we won't much love too much of a good thing.  I thought many of the best moments were when the lies in the rough were good enough for them to advance the ball, and often they got themselves in trouble as a result.

I have deliberately avoided any discussion of a certain Ulsterman, including holding back one TC panel question.  If the schedule stays clear, perhaps a deep dive there tomorrow?  Hate to promise given my recent attendance issues, but too much there for today.

Have a great week.


No comments:

Post a Comment