PGATour Running Commentary - Aug 2020

First topic message reminder :

PGATour Running Commentary- Aug 2020

1. Last week:  Justin Thomas overcame a 4 shot deficit to win the WGC-FEDEX St Jude by three shots over a four players of Tom Lewis, Daniel Berger, Phil Mickelson and Brooks Koepka   Richie Werenski won the Barracuda event, by one point over Troy Merritt.

2. After he won the Memorial, Jon Rahm took the #1 OWGR ranking from Rory, and now after winning the FEDEX, Justin Thomas took the #1 spot.  

3. This week is the PGA Championship, with most of the OWGR Top 100 players in the field.  The tournament venue is at Harding Park, which has hosted two WGC tournaments in the last 20 years.  Here are some finishes by players in this years field:  Woods (1), Garcia (3), Stenson (3), GMac (6), Furyk (15)Poulter (18), Mickelson (29), Scott (29), ZJohnson (43),  The Match play was played at Harding Park in 2015, won by Rory, beating Woodland in finals.  Players advancing to the Round of 16, include Willett, Furyk, Casey, Oosty, Fleetwood, Fowler, Hideki, and Leishman.

4. Only two more tournaments to qualify for the FEDEX playoffs, some notable players that are currently inside the Top 125, but probably have not clinched a spot in the Northern Trust (Tom Lewis (#117), Russell Knox (#120,  Paul Casey (#121), Charl Schwartzel (#123).  Some players just barely outside the Top 125 include Nick Watney, Zach Johnson, Matt Wallace, Shane Lowry, RCB, Sergio, and Justin Rose. Some players that need a big week to get inside the Top 125 include Willett, Dufner, Power, Walker, Stenson

GPB wrote:BDC was actually 7th in driving distance this week.

Behind among others DJohnson, Wolff, Rahm, and Rory.

Is that one of those depends what hole the measurements are taken on things, or is that all drives?


Either way the thing about Brysons strategy that was game changing was that he accepted hitting it in the long stuff because he knew he had the strength to still get his lofted irons to the greens. For me that is where his new technique and physique gave him an advantage over the field. Did Bryson ever fail to get a ball from the rough up to the green?

But we should all just be thankful that Fatprick Reed collapsed.

McLaren wrote:

GPB wrote:BDC was actually 7th in driving distance this week.

Behind among others DJohnson, Wolff, Rahm, and Rory.

Is that one of those depends what hole the measurements are taken on things, or is that all drives?


Either way the thing about Brysons strategy that was game changing was that he accepted hitting it in the long stuff because he knew he had the strength to still get his lofted irons to the greens. For me that is where his new technique and physique gave him an advantage over the field.  Did Bryson ever fail to get a ball from the rough up to the green?

The big hitters are generally pretty conventional golf swings and based on timing. Bdc is more brute force and strength, which probably gives him the advantage out of the thick rough.

McLaren wrote:But we should all just be thankful that Fatprick Reed collapsed.

I think i prefere Patrick.

Shotrock wrote:Ha ... actually I've always been good at picking the wrong golfer.

Rory says Bryson is "taking advantage" of the current game. Brilliant insight.

You can be sure the green coats at Augusta are a bit on edge.

If the fairways are hard at Augusta, what's he hitting into the green on 2? A pitching wedge? Augusta sets up nicely for his preferred draw off the tee and second shots, on the whole (particularly the par 5s). Hard to see how he isn't in contention there!

From watching a lot of US events these past few months, I do wish they'd cut down the rough around the greens, so the ball runs off them rather than guys knowing they can hit it and if it leaks long, it won't roll 10/15 yards off the green, it'll just get stopped by the rough and they have a similar chip shot out everytime. Is it just the way American courses are setup in general across the board?

If players are smashing it and hitting wedge from the rough, is the option to make the courses shorter?

If the shorter hitters are in the fairway but hitting 6 iron they are at a disadvantage. If they are in the fairway with 8/9 iron. It may even things up a bit.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Shotrock wrote:Ha ... actually I've always been good at picking the wrong golfer.

Rory says Bryson is "taking advantage" of the current game. Brilliant insight.

You can be sure the green coats at Augusta are a bit on edge.

If the fairways are hard at Augusta, what's he hitting into the green on 2? A pitching wedge? Augusta sets up nicely for his preferred draw off the tee and second shots, on the whole (particularly the par 5s). Hard to see how he isn't in contention there!

From watching a lot of US events these past few months, I do wish they'd cut down the rough around the greens, so the ball runs off them rather than guys knowing they can hit it and if it leaks long, it won't roll 10/15 yards off the green, it'll just get stopped by the rough and they have a similar chip shot out everytime. Is it just the way American courses are setup in general across the board?

There's no rough at Augusta. I can't see the green coats are going to change that. So I don't think his strength will be an advantage as such, as it probably was at Winged Foot. But the fact that he hits it long with a draw is of course an advantage.

GPB wrote:I think he works harder than anyone in golf.  He was out on the range until well past 8:15 last night.  

Like 8:20?

beninho wrote:

McLaren wrote:But we should all just be thankful that Fatprick Reed collapsed.

I think i prefere Patrick.

Well, at least I think it's refreshing that we have unconventional players battling it out. Reed for being a Fatprick, BdC for being a prick-h.d., and Wolff for dancing with the stars. At least it's not grey in grey.

pedro wrote:

beninho wrote:

McLaren wrote:But we should all just be thankful that Fatprick Reed collapsed.

I think i prefere Patrick.

Well, at least I think it's refreshing that we have unconventional players battling it out. Reed for being a Fatprick, BdC for being a prick-h.d., and Wolff for dancing with the stars. At least it's not grey in grey.

Its good to not like soneone rather then not care. Morikawa won the pga and I was so meh. Bdc wins this and its a talking point.

Anyway irrational hatred is what sport should be about.

The Big Golfer breaking down his Open win.




Also, that bit at the start waiting for his protein shake sponsors drink to arrive was so awkward. Actually the whole press conference was cringy.

A few interesting points of note, he points out the USGA's strategy to favor accuracy with the tight fairways doesn't work and that almost all his gains in length are due to working out.

My course is to hold the 2026 PGA Championship. It's a par 70 and plays about 7,300 yards. Unless something changes (either course or equipment) I look for 25 under to win.

Here is a partial transcript of Bryson's presser

Presser wrote:
Q. Bryson, if the USGA had a debriefing meeting tomorrow morning to talk about how this U.S. Open was won at Winged Foot, what do you think they'd talk about?

BRYSON DeCHAMBEAU: He's hitting it forever. That's why he won. I mean, it was a tremendous advantage this week. I kept telling everybody it's an advantage to hit it farther. It's an advantage. Mark Broadie was talking to Chris Como, and they were both talking about how they just made the fairways too small this week to have it be an advantage for guys hitting the fairway.

So what I mean by that -- let's take an example of you going like a yard wide. Nobody's got the fairway. Okay, length's going to win. You make the fairways too wide, length's going to win. There's like this balance between widths of fairways and where they want to play it and where they're going to try to make you play it.

Seve once quipped (at the 1987 US Open at Olympic) that he wished the USGA would not have any fairways, so everyone would be hitting out of the rough like he is.

BDC is basically saying the same thing above. Big Wide Fairways help the 'inaccurate' driver. Super narrow fairways also help the 'inaccurate' drivers because the accurate drivers are going to miss more fairways than they normally do.

Narrowing fairways the USGA might actually be helping the inaccurate drivers, which seems counter-intuitive and not what the USGA wants to do.

McLaren wrote:The Big Golfer breaking down his Open win.




Also, that bit at the start waiting for his protein shake sponsors drink to arrive was so awkward. Actually the whole press conference was cringy.

A few interesting points of note, he points out the USGA's strategy to favor accuracy with the tight fairways doesn't work and that almost all his gains in length are due to working out.

He talks like a military man. Not very affable. Same way on the course when talking to officials.
And yeah, the Orgain thing is embarrassing. It’s like the alpine skiiers clicking off their ski after crossing the finish line.

Re. fairway widths. I guess you can work with the 1st and 2nd cuts, have broken fairways and add fairway bunkers.

Here's my take: par is just a number.

If you want to make every par 4 under 450 yards a par 3, have at it. I recall Merion took out 8 acres of fairway for the 2013 US Open (and then quickly replaced it). I would never vote for massive changes to my course for a weekend's play from the best players in the world.

Sam Horsfield is currently in the field for Punta Cana.

I wonder if he got a false positive CV19 test that knocked him out of the US Open last week.

Edit: Update: Rob Bolton has reported that Horsfield is out of Punta Cana field.

Hey all.... I've not been around much, but what an eye opening US Open.

Bryson DeChambeau just rewrote tbe script.  Bomb it long as often as you can works just about everywhere now. If a legit US Open set up like Winged Foot can be overwhelmed, any place can.  A recipe others will surely follow. What was interesting, Bryson wasn't even the longest... There were another half dozen or so as long, or very close to as long as he is. But the difference was, Bryson was committed to hitting driver everywhere he could while many of the other long hitters were trying to lay back and play it safe on a bunch of holes. 

I don't know what if anything the USGA or R&A will actually have the nads to do about it. But if they're not going to do something to bring the fairway trouble back into play (bunkers and doglegs), then in the future we're going to be seeing way more of this than ever before. Book it.  

And for guys like Rory... I'd love to see him adopt this strategy. IMO he would benefit by it as much if not more than anybody. And it might even keep him more engaged too...

There’s always the ball, robo. Will they ever do anything about that?

As for Rory, he’d probably need to improve his wedge game first.

pedro wrote:There’s always the ball, robo. Will they ever do anything about that?

As for Rory, he’d probably need to improve his wedge game first.

Re. the ball, I'm not fussed about the distance per se, but the spin separation of the modern balls is too good. Allows drives that are simply tw@tted to go too straight while allowing loads of spin w/ the short irons for control. If there was less spin separation so mishit long clubs had much more sidespin, I think that would make a lot of difference.

Agree that fastest fix to bring back distance is with the ball. It seems logical that if this were to happen, it might happen first at Augusta. I'm guessing the US PGA and the R&A are pretty tight with the equipment manufacturers and the would be pressured to NOT do anything.

navy

The difference between The Big Golfer and the rest of the longer players is that he could still force it out the thick stuff and up to the green. He also missed on the "right" side of the rough almost every time.

beninho wrote:

pedro wrote:

beninho wrote:Golfers you wouldn't want a beer with. BDC, Harris English. Reed. Webb.

English looks like he hates every bit of it.
Not sure Webb drinks beer, and certainly not on Sundays.

I've read Webb is a really nice guy, and I see that. Just not sure if I'd fancy a beer with him.  Actually I'm having second thoughts on Reed, I reckon he could go on a big one.

I’d have a beer with Patrick.

McLaren wrote:navy

The difference between The Big Golfer and the rest of the longer players is that he could still force it out the thick stuff and up to the green. He also missed on the "right" side of the rough almost every time.

If he's snap-hooking instead of drawing, that might make a difference. If he's hitting huge slices, instead of nicely fading it, that might make a difference. They'll still be playing golf we can only dream about, but at the moment it's too much about simply blasting it and knowing that it won't be that bad as well as knowing you'll only have a shortish iron in and that's OK for these guys, even out of heavy cabbage.

How about a heavily tree lined course? It would also be interesting to see what BDeC makes of a links course.

I'm never wrong wrote:How about a heavily tree lined course? It would also be interesting to see what BDeC makes of a links course.

Has he ever managed anything at Harbour Town? Isn't that notoriously tree-lined? I doubt a links would bother him that much, unless he keeps finding pot bunkers off the tee. Although, not sure even he will deal well w/ knee-high grasses in the rough on some of them.

Didn't Jack Niclaus say 50-60 years ago that he would rather be hitting a 9 iron from the rough into the green than a 5 iron from the middle of the fairway. And like BDC, Jack was a big strong boy.

If the wind is up and there are tree lined fairways, safe to say the bomb and gouge would be less effective. But there's a lot more to BDC's game these days than just that, so I look for him contend on many an occasion.

Shotrock wrote:If the wind is up and there are tree lined fairways, safe to say the bomb and gouge would be less effective. But there's a lot more to BDC's game these days than just that, so I look for him contend on many an occasion.

Be interesting to see what Fat Bryson would do at TOC.
He could drive 1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 16 and 18. That's nine under par minimum if he hit them all add birdies on the two par fives and a couple of others and he is easily in the 50's. He'd be flicking a very short pitch into 2,4, 13,15 and 17.

In terms of negating such tactics, its very simple. You don't need to wind back the ball, you don't need to grow rough, you don't need to reduce club capability you simply add OB by way of staked areas in strategic places. At the end of the tournament you pull out the stakes. Job done.
I don't see the point in tinkering with the ball as the long hitters will still hit longer than the short hitters, everyone loses distance but it doesn't even the field at all.

super_realist wrote:In terms of negating such tactics, its very simple. You don't need to wind back the ball, you don't need to grow rough, you don't need to reduce club capability you simply add OB by way of staked areas in strategic places.  At the end of the tournament you pull out the stakes. Job done.

OK if they are on the edge of the course, but I thought "internal OOB" was frowned upon

I'm never wrong wrote:

super_realist wrote:In terms of negating such tactics, its very simple. You don't need to wind back the ball, you don't need to grow rough, you don't need to reduce club capability you simply add OB by way of staked areas in strategic places.  At the end of the tournament you pull out the stakes. Job done.

OK if they are on the edge of the course, but I thought "internal OOB" was frowned upon

Who cares? I've played tons of courses with internal OOB and never thought anything of it.
I suggested it as a very obvious, quick and cheap solution.

That's an interesting thought Super. It truly narrows the landing areas off the tee.

Meanwhile, and in a much weaker event than the US Open, I'm delighted to see Sean O'Hair contending at the moment.

Internal OB doesn't sit well with me at all. It seems to introduce a complete disconnect betweent the course and the plot of land it was built on.


Super, do you even want to see the like of the big golfer penalized for how far and out what lies he can hit the ball?

I would have thought you would quite like the idea that golfers are real athletes.

I have been on this board for nearly 9 years and I have seen predictions of someone shooting in the 50's at the Old Course since I started posting here.

McLaren wrote:Internal OB doesn't sit well with me at all. It seems to introduce a complete disconnect betweent the course and the plot of land it was built on.


Super, do you even want to see the like of the big golfer penalized for how far and out what lies he can hit the ball?

I would have thought you would quite like the idea that golfers are real athletes.

I don't really care how far someone is hitting the ball. I was just offering a simple solution to it that doesn't affect courses, the ball, equipment or increasing swing speeds.

The trouble with hitting it so far especially on American courses is that it is just so bloody boring. It is becoming an even more dreary version of serve and volley. Do we really want to see 20-30 Pete Sampras' at the top of Golf Leaderboards every week?

I prefer seeing shotmaking. Golf is clearly not a game of "athleticism" it's a game of finesse, touch and course management and if we need some internal OOB to bring that back on a few holes, what's the bloody problem?

As for TOC, you could make adjacent fairways OB for a start couldn't you? EG make 17 out of play for the 2nd hole, 3 out of play for the 16th etc. Doesn't have to be everywhere 10 and 9 are obvious plays for this, as the width of a dual fairway negates any difficulty on the hole anyway.

beninho wrote:
The big hitters are generally pretty conventional golf swings and based on timing. Bdc is more brute force and strength, which probably gives him the advantage out of the thick rough.

There was another factor a lot of people seem to miss. BDCs wedges are shafted at 6-iron length. Longer shaft equates to more clubhead speed which is an advantage out of the rough.

Super... internal OB isn't the answer. Might as well add windmills and clown mouths if that's the approach.

Bottom line is length really is the problem.  Golf courses are designed to have difficulty for the tee shot at the turning points in the fairway, and then again for the approaches to the green.  The problem with length overwhelming golf courses is too many players are simply blowing it over the turning point difficulty. so as it is now the only players who are having to deal with those difficult elements are the mid to short length players. There's nothing wrong with length being an advantage, but since the longer hitters are in effect playing an easier course, it's become a disproportionate over advantage.

The cause of this is not just the ball, but IMO the answer is in controlling the ball. Reduce the distance it will fly to bring those turning point difficulties back into play for everybody and it more equals the playing field, and brings back more variety of shot making into the game.

Tennis had a similar problem. As athlete's and rackets got better it became a boring serve game (you mentioned Sampras). So their answer was they slowed down the ball. I don't know why everybody freaks out at the prospect of golf doing the same thing.  It's really not complicated.

I heard McGinley talking about something similar on a podcast a while back which was interesting...said he’d been speaking with Tim Henman (both are members at sunningdale I think) who’d told him that because of the direction tennis was headed with big hitting serve and volley players like Sampras dominating, and as a result making the game less enjoyable/entertaining viewing for spectators, the governing bodies decided they needed to reign in the ball and tried reducing the compression (or whatever’s the tennis equivalent) to counter against the ever increasing power they were seeing. It proved successful and according to Henman, it had been done a number of times since...If I remember correctly he said at least six times after he’d retired.
It would seem to make sense and coincide with the more expansive type of tennis we see today

TM2K wrote:I heard McGinley talking about something similar on a podcast a while back which was interesting...said he’d been speaking with Tim Henman (both are members at sunningdale I think) who’d told him that because of the direction tennis was headed with big hitting serve and volley players like Sampras dominating, and as a result making the game less enjoyable/entertaining viewing for spectators, the governing bodies decided they needed to reign in the ball and tried reducing the compression (or whatever’s the tennis equivalent) to counter against the ever increasing power they were seeing. It proved successful and according to Henman, it had been done a number of times since...If I remember correctly he said at least six times after he’d retired.
It would seem to make sense and coincide with the more expansive type of tennis we see today

Yep... Steve Elkington posted a graphic the other day... Pretty much illustrates where golf was and where it is now. Length is always going to be an advantage. But they should have to deal with the difficulty built in the fairways just like everybody else. Let the big hitter drive it over the left bunker in this diagram if he can. He'll be rewarded if he does (and doesn't go too far left). but if he can't carry the right bunker, that one is still a play and would be a penalty to him if he doesn't keep it left.  



What needs to be done isn't rocket science. The issue in golf that tennis didn't have, is the golf club & ball manufacturers are ready for a war because they think any change (unless it's a change they control) impacts their business.

Golfers, USGA, R/A have been complaining that ball goes too far for over a 100 years.

IMO, rolling back the golf ball will give the longer hitters an even bigger advantage than they currently do.

Make the ball "spinnier" and "bigger". Increase the minimum diameter.

If scoring is too good, why doesn't anyone ever suggest to make the greens bumpier? Make the fairways hairier to get fliers?

/rhetorical

GPB wrote:Golfers, USGA, R/A have been complaining that ball goes too far for over a 100 years.

IMO, rolling back the golf ball will give the longer hitters an even bigger advantage than they currently do.

Make the ball "spinnier" and "bigger".  Increase the minimum diameter.

If scoring is too good, why doesn't anyone ever suggest to make the greens bumpier?  Make the fairways hairier to get fliers?

/rhetorical

It's not about scoring, I've never cared about that. It's about not having to resort to tricked up crap to contain it when effective regulation of equipment/ ball would be a much better answer. I mean seriously you want to grow fairways as short rough & and use modern agronomy to make greens worse? No way. 

I agree with the spinnier ball part of it though. That along with taking some distance off of it would really be ALL that's needed. No need to resort to the trickery and windmills that way. And continuing to regulate the ball just as tennis has done.

robopz wrote:

GPB wrote:Golfers, USGA, R/A have been complaining that ball goes too far for over a 100 years.

IMO, rolling back the golf ball will give the longer hitters an even bigger advantage than they currently do.

Make the ball "spinnier" and "bigger".  Increase the minimum diameter.

If scoring is too good, why doesn't anyone ever suggest to make the greens bumpier?  Make the fairways hairier to get fliers?

/rhetorical

It's not about scoring, I've never cared about that. It's about not having to resort to tricked up crap to contain it when effective regulation of equipment/ ball would be a much better answer. I mean seriously you want to grow fairways as short rough & and use modern agronomy to make greens worse? No way. 

I agree with the spinnier ball part of it though. That along with taking some distance off of it would really be ALL that's needed. No need to resort to the trickery and windmills that way. And continuing to regulate the ball just as tennis has done.

Not just 'spinnier', as there's masses of spin in the short game w/ urethane covers etc already. There needs to be less spin separation for driver vs. wedges. I bet BdC etc couldn't play the game they do w/, say, 1990s tour balata kind of characteristics.

Robo, did you miss my "rhetorical" tag? I am absolutely not suggesting that. Its my way of illustrating the absurdity of blaming technology on low scores. I know you seen the article clippings from years and years ago complaining the ball goes too far. The Haskell ball got blowback when it was introduced

NBS, I think a spinnier ball will make the ball go more crooked, wayward shots would go deeper out of play, behind trees. I think it result in more "fliers" from the rough.

Scoring is Golf's "ultimate" metric. There is a reason why long drive champions like Jamie Sadlowski have not been able to have any success in "real" golf. Hitting the ball long is not a guarantee for success. They have developed a skill set for a small golf niche.

I used to play golf with Vance Randall. WHO? He was a champion in another small niche of golf. He was a PUTT PUTT Champion 50 years ago, voted Putter of the Decade back in the 1960s. I played with him back in the 1980's and he was pretty good golfer, tried Tour School several times with no success.

Just because a player can exploit one part of golf is not an harbinger of success in golf.

Fairway bunkers should be in play for all players and hitting it in the rough should always be a disadvantage. And who says the rough should have the same height on all holes? That should go hand in hand with the fairway bunkering.
I also like the idea of forced carry and landing areas. And internal OOB on some holes sounds fine too me as well.
Yes, long hitters will always have an advantage but that advantage should be reduced vs precision and shotmaking.

McLaren wrote:Internal OB doesn't sit well with me at all. It seems to introduce a complete disconnect betweent the course and the plot of land it was built on.


Super, do you even want to see the like of the big golfer penalized for how far and out what lies he can hit the ball?

I would have thought you would quite like the idea that golfers are real athletes.

I know two wrongs don’t always make a right. But courses aren’t played the way they are designed to be played anyway. So why not introduce internal OOB to fix that?

GPB wrote:Robo, did you miss my "rhetorical" tag?  I am absolutely not suggesting that.   Its my way of illustrating the absurdity of blaming technology on low scores.  I know you seen the article clippings from years and years ago complaining the ball goes too far.  The Haskell ball got blowback when it was introduced

NBS, I think a spinnier ball will make the ball go more crooked, wayward shots would go deeper out of play, behind trees.  I think it result in more "fliers" from the rough.

Yeah, but aren't they at the limit on absolute revs for wedges etc? They need more spin on the longer shots. Agree w/ you that more spin for the longer game would make for difficulty there.

One thing that hasn't been discussed much since Portrush is the CT measurement. (characteristic time).

At the end of 2018-19 season, The PGATour said there would be random testing starting in September of last year.

AFAIK, they only did it for one event, at the start of the 2019-20 season. I have no doubt that most players drivers are out of spec (max 239 microseconds), but within the 18 microsecond tolerance.

Schauffele's driver was out of spec at Portrush and he had to scramble to find another driver.

I am kind of surprised that no testing was done at the PGA Championship or the US Open. If the test can pass GAGE R&R rigor, it should be done frequently. (for which I am skeptical on something that can measure to microseconds)

https://quality-one.com/grr/

GPB wrote:Scoring is Golf's "ultimate" metric.  There is a reason why long drive champions like Jamie Sadlowski have not been able to have any success in "real" golf.  Hitting the ball long is not a guarantee for success.  They have developed a skill set for a small golf niche.

I used to play golf with Vance Randall.  WHO?  He was a champion in another small niche of golf.  He was a PUTT PUTT Champion 50 years ago, voted Putter of the Decade   back in the 1960s.  I played with him back in the 1980's and he was pretty good golfer, tried Tour School several times with no success.

Just because a player can exploit one part of golf is not an harbinger of success in golf.

Christ, just shows how many stupid "sports" Americans can invent. I thought Long Driving was bad enough, now you tell me they have Professional Putters.