PGA Tour: "AT&T Byron Nelson Championship": Notes from the Ballwasher

1).The Dallas/Fort Worth area has endured an untimely monsoon season these past few weeks; the Tour did a great job in getting Colonial playable and completing the tournament on time, despite using "lift, clean and place through the green" for the first time since Turning Stone in 2009 - I was at Turning Stone for that dismal experience, and can only imagine how dire conditions must have been off the fairways and greens at Colonial. TPC Las Colinas, outside Dallas, is apparently saturated and a couple of dryish days won't help much before a recurrence of scattered storms later this week.

2).Well done to Chris Kirk, my one-and-done for the week, at Colonial; it's not the idea I know, but seeing Colonial green and lush reminds one what a beautiful course it can be, a contrast to the brownish hue that normal May conditions can leave it in. Green and lush this week will reportedly be code for sodden conditions meaning that short-hitters like Brendon Todd and Mike Weir, first and second last year, will be at a serious disadvantage if there is no roll. Exceptional fairway woods players of previous generations, guys like Larry Nelson and David Toms, would relish the prospect of par-fours that are only reachable with long irons or hybrids boasting that they can hit 3- and 5-woods straighter than most can hit their long irons. We'll see but the suggestion this week is that the bombers will have an advantage.

3).Good to see Rickie Fowler taking a busman's holiday at RCD this week, but strange that he avoided Quail Hollow, home of his only win before The Players, and Colonial, sponsored by his long-time Crowne Plaza sponsor.
As tagged on to last week's thread, Poulter is resting this week nursing a twinge suffered in the gym, and has added that he'll only play Majors, WGC's and FedEx Play-offs for the rest of the Tour season. For those, including sometimes Poulter himself, that say he's more interested in dosh and bling, this is a curious decision given that he's playing so well; it also hampers his chances of finishing high up in the season-end FedEx cash bonus pool and is a reminder that he's never reached the Tour Championship.
(Freddie Jac, who's having a terrible year, has also withdrawn - he needs to get his act together or it's off to the WTF Finals for him.)

4).Well done also to Colin Montgomerie as he wins the Senior PGA Championship for the second consecutive year; as anticipated two years ago, he does much better at the four-round Champions Tour events than he does in the three-round sprints. Newly popular, presumably because he's such an articulate, egocentric motormouth with the press, he's busy remaking his image and raking in the cash. And he seldom gets heckled by the US crowds either. All looking good for Monty.

5).Lastly, with all the "stuff" that's going down at FIFA, the USGA is having its own series of Sepp Blatter moments.
There is every indication that promises made to the USGA when Chambers Bay was awarded the US Open are not being adhered to, transportation commitments in getting spectators to the course have never materialized.
Now the USGA is advising ticket-holders for next month's tournament, in GolfWorld's words, "to strongly suggest spectators remain in grandstands rather than walk the rugged terrain that will offer some poor viewing from ground level". Don't know about you but, although it's fun to watch groups come through a particular hole, enjoyment of golf tournaments to many of us is following specific groups and enjoying the ups and downs of their rounds. I certainly don't want to park at a par-3 watching an hour's worth of no-names come through on the off-chance I'll get a glimpse of Rory, and nothing more. Bl00dy ridiculous.
And then there's USGA Executive Director Mike Davis's admonition that no-one will walk in, play a couple of practice rounds, "that person's done. Will not win the US Open."
To which Webb Simpson, hardly the cockney rebel of the PGA Tour, sarc'd: "We'll play for second."
And Rory offered: "With the way the Tour is, no-one's going to go out there and play ten practice rounds."    
I love going to Majors, but this is a trip I'm glad never to have fancied taking.
Of all the great venues the Tour could have taken its great Championship to, it's looking more and more as if this is Mke Davis's one-man crusade. The egg on his face that started when Tour pros got their first look at the allegedly eccentric greens and waxed apoplectically about them, is becoming a full-blown Western Omelette with virtually every tournament ingredient being questioned.

PS: Grumpy's game is at RCD this week, but the Byron Nelson looks to be a bit of a lottery. I'd go with bombers who have a history of course success, guys like Bradley, Jason Day (EDIT: Another withdrawal), Dustin Johnson, Leishman and Palmer. But luck of the draw will be such a factor that, just as some of football's best transfers are the ones you don't make, so it may be that all bets should be off until the Tour gets to Muirfield Village next week.

Poulter has played 12 events this season on PGAT.  3 majors and 1 WGC and presumably 3 playoff events will get him to 19 events which is more than he normally plays.

At 711 FE points he is about 275 pts from clinching a spot in the BMW.

Thanks Kwini - always make my Wednesday's a little more enjoyable.

On the U.S. Open I am assuming the leaders in R3 & 4 won't tee off to 10/11pm UK time. A bit of a shame as I do enjoy this tournament sending players over the edge once a year. Remember Bubba having a major strop one year, hacking wildly at the ball, can't remember the course but pretty sure Carbrera won! Dustin having a meltdown at Pebble! Kaymer was great last year but an exciting finish would be good or would happily settle for a Rory procession.

Do you think RCD would be good prep this week or is CB a completely noddy course designed to make players look like a 28 handicap.

Interesting news on Poulter - clearly intent on breaking his U.S. Stroke play duck at a biggie! Got to admire the ambition if nothing else.

Cheers Snap,
I'm guessing your estimate of weekend tee-times is about right - I really think that so few people from outside the Pacific North-West have seen/played Chambers Bay that most of what we hear and read is third or fourth hand, and is perhaps clouded by those who see the glass as half empty or have some sort of hidden agenda. But the USGA's Mike Davis is certainly saying all the wrong things - which is bound to make one wonder why they chose CB in the first place. And to be concerned that Erin Hills, in deepest Wisconsin, might be more of the same in two years' time.
But hopefully it'll be alright on the night. And it will be "night", on the East Coast here (late evening anyway) as well as in Hook.

Kwini - thanks for write up and thought provoking points.
Met a chap last week who has actually been to Chambers Bay - was due to play it but weather intervened and course closed. He did get to walk the course, and thought it "amazing" Time will tell whether that is good amazing, or the opposite! Think I've become a bit old fashioned and reckon courses should serve their time before getting a gig like US Open, and that means more than one U.S. am! It is after all along with The Open Championship, Australian Open and French Open one of my majors. I can still find a place for South African, and one in Far East as it would be good to have 6 majors! Hey ho!

I'm looking forward to Chambers Bay, puligny, especially from the comfort of my armchair with nurses plying me with vino as I take my traditional Fathers Day "off"!
I haven't heard anything especially critical about the layout or routing, just the greens - but I should have added in response to Snap Hook's note that I don't know whether RCD will be a good trial run for CB but Chambers Bay is definitely about 5% longer and I've read inferences that only bombers need apply. But ultimately course length is irrelevant if the tournament tees are shuffled around.

PS: Good luck at West Hill & Worplesdon next week . . . . . let us know how you make out

Update on Luke Donald, who may well be shut out of the "Opens": He's just committed for The Travelers at Hartford.
That's the first sign of a revision to his normal schedule as he certainly hasn't played there often, definitely not in the past ten years. But it's a course that should suit him and might motivate him to try some other venues that he might have rated less highly when plying his "champagne" schedule.

Thanks Kwini. Managed a quick snipe round Worplesdon today, and while I get to play it every year in a comp, omg it's good. They know how to run a kitchen as well!
You make sure some of that vino is white, chilled, but not too much so, and from Bourgogne. You know it makes sense!

More likely a cheeky pinot gris or two from the Columbia or Willamette Valleys of the (allegedly) Great, and geographically correct, North-West.
Sorry Bourgogne. Perhaps for my French Open brunch!

While it's not strictly true to say "there's only one North West" you will know what I mean if I say "there's only one North West!" Enjoy it whatever!

There is nothing really wrong with chambers bay. We need to stop listening to professionals as if they know even the first thing about architecture. I am sure there are areas where chambers bay deviates from the architectural ideal but certainly not in the ways any of the pro's think.

It is wide, the greens are a little wacky, so what? That sounds like the basic ingredients for a fun round.

An open invitation to Mac to illuminate us about Chambers Bay.
NB: I'm not inclined to have much patience for explanations that spectators at a national championship are not taken into consideration when awarding Majors in the modern age. But I bet the merchandise tents have prime positions.

A lot of posters get their knickers in a twist when I complain about contrived groupings choreographed by the PGA Tour.
Classic one this week with Justin Thomas and Jordan Spieth grouped (with Brooks Koepka).
What has Justin Thomas done to justify playing with his best mate on Tour at the Tour's invitation?

He has none of the usual credentials to warrant a "featured grouping"; but I'm sure he'll play better (or at the very least get more sponsor exposure) in the company of his BFF. What bullsh1t.

What has Justin Thomas done?  Nothing.  And he doesn't have to.

The PGATour reserves to right to elevate journeyman players to A-Status preferred tee times.

ATT might have even requested it, as Spieth is their marquee player.  IMO, it is wise for PGATour to comply with reasonable Sponsor requests. Remember Sponsors and TV pays the bills, and there is no measurable competitive advantage.

Quite.
Except the last clause. Possibly no "competitive advantage", although one never knows if it's beneficial to play with your best friend rather than, say, Sabbatini or Na. But it's certainly a financial benefit for your sponsor to know he's going to get unearned face time.

Bernie wouldn't approve.

McLaren wrote:There is nothing really wrong with chambers bay.  We need to stop  listening to professionals as if they know even the first thing about architecture.  I am sure there are areas where chambers bay deviates from the architectural ideal but certainly not in the ways any of the pro's think.

It is wide, the greens are a little wacky, so what? That sounds like the basic ingredients for a fun round.

Yeah, we need to start listening to you Mac, after all, you've visited the Doak book in the library and are a "single figure" handicap golfer without a handicap who gets his equipment from jumble sales, why would we care what the pro's say when we've got you to enlighten us?

Did I say I should be the source of architecture information?

Mac,
Thanks for your CB link - don't know that anyone has criticised the course except for the greens. Everything I've read suggests the lay-out tee-to-green is terrific; but lots of eyebrows raised at the green complexes, and I would have thought the pros would be a pretty good judge of them.

But what's the point of a spectator sport if the spectators can't spectate?

We hear all about classic courses that don't have the "infrastructure" for a Major so they're not being considered - it seems fairly clear based upon the comments of the USGA themselves that Chambers Bay will fall well short as far as the public is concerned. Still can't understand why it was chosen.

Kwini

The pro's don't like interesting greens. They would happily putt on boring and easily predictable greens every week, and that's why I would ignore most of what pro's have to say about green complexes. My ideal green would be something modeled on the ladies putting green but the ideal green for a pro would probably be modeled on a snooker table.


If there are spectator and infrastructure issues that is pretty bad planning, but we should not conflate that with the bilge some players are spouting about the playability of the course.

Two entirely separate issues Mac.
One subjective.
The other definitively factual.

Meanwhile, many of the best architects have been top players so don't dismiss everything they say, just take it as one point of view.

What do you consider an "interesting" green Mac?

Super, books have been written on the subject but the first few things that come to mind about an interesting green are;

A green with contouring which provides a challenge to both putting and recovery shots.  

A green which continues to provide intrigue over many plays.  One which requires great thought to master

Allows different methods of recovery.

Appropriate to the rest of the hole and fits in with its surroundings in a natural manner.

Sounds like the very antithesis of the TPC Sawgrass's 17th green.

Mac,
I would add that, for tournament play at least, there need to be at least four distinct areas for the hole to be cut

McLaren wrote:There is nothing really wrong with chambers bay.  We need to stop  listening to professionals as if they know even the first thing about architecture.  I am sure there are areas where chambers bay deviates from the architectural ideal but certainly not in the ways any of the pro's think.

It is wide, the greens are a little wacky, so what? That sounds like the basic ingredients for a fun round.

Mac. Please tell us all about Chambers Bay. It would be interesting hear about the course from someone who has played it and knows it, because to be honest I'd never heard of the course before. Thanks.

McLaren wrote:Super, books have been written on the subject but the first few things that come to mind about an interesting green are;

A green with contouring which provides a challenge to both putting and recovery shots.  

A green which continues to provide intrigue over many plays.  One which requires great thought to master

Allows different methods of recovery.

Appropriate to the rest of the hole and fits in with its surroundings in a natural manner.

So that rules out virtually every green on TOC then?

GPB wrote:What has Justin Thomas done?  Nothing.  And he doesn't have to.

The PGATour reserves to right to elevate journeyman players to A-Status preferred tee times.

ATT might have even requested it, as Spieth is their marquee player.  IMO, it is wise for PGATour to comply with reasonable Sponsor requests. Remember Sponsors and TV pays the bills, and there is no measurable competitive advantage.

When this policy first came out, it allowed the PGAT pretty much a free hand in elevating players to Category 1 pairings at will. IMO it was misused and abused at the beginning with too many elevations, thus the protest from the players was legitimate. In response, the rule was changed to allow for them to elevate only ONE player on a weekly basis, not otherwise eligible for a category 1 pairing. With only one, IMO the chance for abuse is all but negated and I have no problem with it, in fact I like it.

Chambers Bay:  When Davis took over course set-ups from Tom Meeks... I thought his concepts were an incredible breath of much needed fresh air.  Generally still very tough, but I thought very fair.

But since he's taken the helm at the USGA.... IMO something is happening with Davis where he's almost taking on what seems like a "mad scientist" approach to U.S. Opens.  I thought the U.S. Open preview show on Fox last month, and Davis' attitude in particular, was about as bizarre as anything I could imagine.  He came off to me as though he was so freeking full of his evil genius self, and his bag-o-tricks from which to pull to trip up the players at Chambers Bay... all accompanied by grinning "I'm gonna get 'em" laugh and admonishments to the players to follow his plan of preparation for the Open if they fancied themselves a chance...  WTF was that all about?  .  

Bottom line: I don't know WHAT to think about Chambers Bay and how it will play... On one hand we have recently seen the bizarre final round #16th tee placement at Olympic, and the Mistake at Merion...  but on the other hand we have the brilliance of the selection and set-up at Pinehurst.   I dunno man... I just dunno...

On-time departures for the golfers who haven't walked out of Dallas - after all that I hope the tournament (and robo) gets a break from the weather.
Was amazed to see who the all-time money-winner is at the Byron Nelson. Any guesses from those who haven't just read it?


robo, Jaime Diaz is trying to forgive Davis for "ill-advised and likely off the cuff comments", but his classification of the recent Davisisms as "unforced errors" seems to let him off very lightly.
Too bad they can't make the venue selections and then get Kerry Haigh's good old-fashioned Yorkshire commonsense to set the place up.

The mistake at Merion? What was that?

Super

It is time accept you know nothing about golf course architecture. For you to have played TOC as many times as you have and fail to notice that it has one of the best sets of greens in the world is ignorant beyond belief. Meaning you know damn well that it has great greens, or you really do have a very low golf architecture IQ.

raycastleunited wrote:The mistake at Merion? What was that?

The choice of the course to begin with... and the setup once the choice had been made. I LOVE Merion... but lets face it, technology has passed it by and with out the ability to extend it's length, the only way to make it a "test" was to trick it up to the max. And IMO the USGA was up to the task... cutting even narrower than usual ribbons of FW's... in effect making doglegs out of straight away holes... relocating FW's to the extent some FW bunkers found themselves 20 yards into the roughs. IMO the only things lacking were the windmill, gigantic plastic dinosaur and the clowns mouth.

Bottom line... Thank goodness for an iconic 18th hole where we could at least wax poetic between the era's of Hogan to the present day Justin Rose, and of course the attraction of Phil challenging to complete the career grand slam. But let's face it... if weather would have allowed the firm and fast conditions they really wanted... the course would have been virtually unplayable.

Boys - FFS will you stop bickering!!!!!!

robo,
Irony is that at Merion they could have relaxed the torturous set-up a little and let everyone enjoy a great Championship at scores about 2 1/2 strokes per round lower. I thought it was a worthy experiment that they partially screwed up by trying to defend themselves instead of just enjoying the course for what it is.

kwinigolfer wrote:robo,
Irony is that at Merion they could have relaxed the torturous set-up a little and let everyone enjoy a great Championship at scores about 2 1/2 strokes per round lower. I thought it was a worthy experiment that they partially screwed up by trying to defend themselves instead of just enjoying the course for what it is.

EXACTLY Kwini...  If they want to play a classic course, but have to sacrifice many of the elements that made it a classic in an attempt to protect par... then what's the point?

My philosophy is that major championships should no longer be held on classic courses.

This has nothing to do with the classic courses actual ability to hold a decent event that will test the pro's but the perceived short comings of classic venues. Due to perceived inadequacies classic courses are being detrimentally altered.

This is another reason we should not be so quick to dismiss the use of chambers bay (which I haven't played so this opinion might be invalid, ask Ray?) and hopefully venues such as Castle Stuart in the future. In the past I have advocated using trumpton links as an open venue but the ethics of its conception are just too abominable to grant it such an honor.

Mac... It's not that some "classic" layouts aren't still valid, or have the room to expand the course to more modern standards... but Merion was just not one of them.

And I'm not so much dismissing the use of Chamber's Bay or any other new venue... sure I have concerns about CB, but I have no clue HOW it's going turn out... my comments are more directed at what I'm perceiving as some bizarre Mike Davis bent to be as "diabolical" in his set up as he can.... something I perceive as quite different from his prior "tough but fair test of golf" setups he introduced post Meeks.

robo

My last post was just my manifesto for future major sites and not directed at the comments of anyone so far.

Taking Merion as an example however, do you suppose the members are currently enjoying the course as much as the pre US open version?

Should TOC have been altered in recent years?


And as I said, it isn't about whether the classic courses are still valid, it is about whether or not they are perceived to be valid.

McLaren wrote:Super

It is time accept you know nothing about golf course architecture.  For you to have played TOC as many times as you have and fail to notice that it has one of the best sets of greens in the world is ignorant beyond belief.  Meaning you know damn well that it has great greens, or you really do have a very low golf architecture IQ.

Mac, You sound like a theist. Simply because our opinions differ does not mean I know nothing about it.

Let's look at the greens of the old course and see which ones are "interesting"

2, 7, 11, 12 and, 14, 17. That's it. The rest have absolutely nothing to them at all. 2 is only interesting if the flag is top left, 12 only interesting if it's on the top level.

1 - Flat, nothing but the burn to get in the way, and a small berm back left.
3 - Flat, trouble short, but hole is so short and green so big you should never be missing green with approach.
4 - Large green, no real problem chipping from being short, even if you are long, not that bad, green slopes left to right, but not drastically.
6 - same as 3,
8 - Short par 3, flat green, no problem
9, Short par 4, flattest green on course, no real defence, bunkers well back from green, bar one tucked into the rough on left,  can chip/putt from 360 degrees off the green
10 - Pretty flat, slopes from front to back and from right to left, very few pin positions on offer, again short hole which the green can be driven on. No real interest in the green complex here.
13, Biggest green on course (shared with 5), mostly flat, missing short could leave a dodgy chip by a miss left, other than that, hit long and you've got 100 yards of green to chip or putt on.
15. Slopes left to right from shared 3rd hole section, . No real trouble if you go long, short or right,, very rare you are hitting a long club in, one of the easiest holes on the course given the size of the green.
16. Slope at the front and danger of a deep bunker if you are long. OB right, but never gone OB on second shot. Short hole, short iron in. Easy hole, easy green.

I play TOC, not because I find the greens a challenge, not because of the history, but because it's the opportunity to shoot a 66 in a medal. Hit a lot of greens, as you should, and given how true they are, and you're going to hole a lot of putts.
No other course at St. Andrews really gives you shoot a number like that with such large greens and so many driveable, short par 4's or such easy par 3's and 5's.

If the greens were so good, would there not be more drama at TOC? Would TOC Open's not be remembered as the lowest scoring processions that they are?

Now, if you were saying that the greens are interesting based on the way the course intended to play played, i.e the other way round, then yes, the greens would be better, as it is, nope, and whenever I play with a tourist who is there, they've never failed to come off somewhat underwhelmed by the course, even the dewey eyed history sycophants.

Scores were expected to be low in the wet conditions at the Byron Nelson, but nothing ridiculous so far on this par 70 course.

Meanwhile, one-time Dallas resident (and he could still be there for all we've seen of him recently) Anthony Kim has been the subject of an auction offering: At a charity auction in Oklahoma a lucky(?) bidder won a round of golf with Anthony Kim for $24,500.00. Surprised an enterprising media mogul didn't make the bid if only to get a scoop on wtf he's been up to.

Merion East is nearly back to the pre US Open setup. (I played there earlier this month.)

Two major and permanent changes have been the leveling off of the 12th green and some of the fairway to bunker work that Robo alludes to.

The last 5 holes at Merion need(ed) no work (save for the push back tee box on 14) to be world class major championship holes (IMO), but they sure did trick up much of the rest. I mean the need for a driver to an elevated green at #3 on the last day??

The USGA's preoccupation with "protecting par" is something I will never understand.

Anyway, I know nothing about CB except for the pictures and it sure looks interesting.

SR, how dare you suggest what is world class without first consulting Mac and Doak.

SR

Do you think the golf architecture world is wrong about how great TOC is?

Mac - Not sure that was directed to me or Super. I have never been to TOC or St. Andrews. I suspect some of its allure is that it is at ground zero for GCA. That counts for something to be sure. It's like taking the views out of Pebble Beach I suppose ... why would you?

Sorry shotrock, should have been clearer

That was definitely directed at Super.

McLaren wrote:SR

Do you think the golf architecture world is wrong about how great TOC is?

No, I'm saying that we all have different opinions, although considering though I've played it more than the majority of  top pro's and so called "architects" there might be a chance that I know the course an awful lot better than they do, as a local I also have the ability to see through the history and sycophancy and see it as just a course, something they seem incapable of doing without gushing adoration of the place.

There really is NOTHING unique about the greens. You see similar features on every links course thrown up by the coastline formation and maturation over the years, there is nothing that stands out at St.Andrews which isn't available and evident elsewhere and I'm convinced that many people wax lyrical about TOC because it would be sacrilege not to, much like Shooter McGavin in Happy Gilmore talking about Portland, and most other links courses have more holes that would considered to be "interesting" I've already been through every hole and explained why I think there's nothing special about most of the greens. Perhaps you could explain with your limited experience of them what makes them so very beguiling and worthy of tossing over and what you see in them that I've completely missed in my 100+ rounds I've played on it.

As I asked earlier, if the greens are such a masterpiece, why is it that there haven't been any more than a few glimpses of drama in the many times the Open has been held there. Really there hasn't been anymore than Rocca (his own unforced error) and Doug Sanders (bottle crashing) which have made TOC Opens as anything memorable on the greens, otherwise they've been a borefest, and the easy, unchallenging and over-generous greens have to be a contribution to this.

#254

"I'm saying that we all have different opinions"

If you are going to veer in postmodernism this conversation is over.

Mac, you're an idiot. There is no golf course architecture "standard". What makes one green interesting according to some absurd Doak criteria, does not neccessarily make it so.

I listed all the greens and why I thought they weren't so "interesting", yet you've given nothing. Why should anyone care what you think when you haven't even backed up one thing you've said?

If you can't even justify why you think it's so great and can't do anything other than appeal to authority, then whatever you write is simply simpering sycophancy, but then, that wouldn't be anything new with you.

Super

There are some truths about golf course architecture; from an agronomic perspective, measuring the courses impact on the surrounding environment, cost of maintenance, time to play the course etc.

Mac, that doesn't matter a jot. We are talking about whether the greens complex at TOC is "interesting" I couldn't give a flying toss about the impact of the surrounding environment, cost of maintenance etc, as it's irrelevant to this issue.

You claim that TOC sets a green "interesting" benchmark, yet basically all you've done is say "it just is".

I've explained hole by hole why I think there are only 6 holes/greens that meet that criteria, you it seems, don't know the course well enough to pass comment, you appear to be willing to accept (due to authority) whatever someone famous says about it. The lack of interesting holes and greens are borne out by dreary, drudging Open championships and Dunhills.

Think about it this way. Put TOC in Grimsby, change the construction date to 2000 and ask them to do the same assessment on the greens. Do you really think they would be tripping over themselves to lavish praise on it? No, course they wouldn't.

Super

If I took the time to write a detailed account of why I though each green complex at TOC was great would you even properly read it and more importantly is it likely to change your current opinion that TOC is an average course?


I have no time for sentiment and history so your last point is nonsense if that is directed at me.