Degenerate Gamblers for the US Open

[elvis14]

Thanks guys, there's two things that make this pretty sweet for me. First, I'm really competitive by nature and suffer from all the issues that come with that :-) Secondly, I tend to lose these type of things because I tend to pick guys that I like vs being more analytical. If you look at the team I chose: DJ, Bryson, Matt, Phil, Rickie, Collin, B.Todd

DJ - Picked because he was red not and I felt like an idiot for not choosing him the last time
Bryson - Picked because I like him (the more he gets hated on the more I like him!)
Matt - Picked because I like him (young, talented, non-traditional swing!)
Phil - Picked because I like him
Rickie - Picked because I like him
Collin - Picked because I like him
B.Todd - Picked because I thought he's a good bang for the buck and everyone else didn't have him

Luckily some of the guys I like are getting it done! Picking Phil and Rickie wasn't smart.

mkirsh, thanks for doing all the work to make this happen.

[mkirsh]

Thanks guys, there's two things that make this pretty sweet for me. First, I'm really competitive by nature and suffer from all the issues that come with that :-) Secondly, I tend to lose these type of things because I tend to pick guys that I like vs being more analytical. If you look at the team I chose: DJ, Bryson, Matt, Phil, Rickie, Collin, B.Todd

DJ - Picked because he was red not and I felt like an idiot for not choosing him the last time
Bryson - Picked because I like him (the more he gets hated on the more I like him!)
Matt - Picked because I like him (young, talented, non-traditional swing!)
Phil - Picked because I like him
Rickie - Picked because I like him
Collin - Picked because I like him
B.Todd - Picked because I thought he's a good bang for the buck and everyone else didn't have him

Luckily some of the guys I like are getting it done! Picking Phil and Rickie wasn't smart.

mkirsh, thanks for doing all the work to make this happen.

Always better feeling to win with guys you like! I was giving you credit for being shrewd and calculating on the OWGR points "round down" dynamic - Bryson at 5.89 counts as 5, Wolff at 2.91 counts as 2, etc - but even if someone selected all the best "value" plays your team would still have won.

Also interesting that you like Bryson - he's certainly a polarizing figure. I generally like him - anyone willing to try unconventional things and put in the work that he does gets my admiration, and he certainly will have a lasting impact on the game (both for players and course design/set up). But I'm curious how much long term success someone who is that much of a tinkerer will have. If I set the over/under at 3 career majors, which side would you take?

[elvis14]

Always better feeling to win with guys you like! I was giving you credit for being shrewd and calculating on the OWGR points "round down" dynamic - Bryson at 5.89 counts as 5, Wolff at 2.91 counts as 2, etc - but even if someone selected all the best "value" plays your team would still have won.

Also interesting that you like Bryson - he's certainly a polarizing figure. I generally like him - anyone willing to try unconventional things and put in the work that he does gets my admiration, and he certainly will have a lasting impact on the game (both for players and course design/set up). But I'm curious how much long term success someone who is that much of a tinkerer will have. If I set the over/under at 3 career majors, which side would you take?

In the past I have looked at guys that benefit from the round down but this time I had no idea that Bryson and Matt were in the value bucket :-). Much like real golf, sometimes luck comes into play. For example, yesterday on a par 5, pushed my drive into the trees...kicked out into the fairway. Then I pushed my 4 wood into the trees...kicked out into the fairway. The wankerizer prevents me posting the response from my playing partners.

I like that Bryson does things his own way even if it's not popular and that they are working. As an engineer I appreciate what he tries to do with a round of golf. I 100% understand how people wouldn't like him, however. Ironically I'm more of a feel player myself and I'm not a big hitter at all. A lot of times I like guys that don't win by bombing the ball but Bryson is just so over the top with the distance; he's like a new category for me.

One of the announcers on the golf channel clearly dislikes Bryson and I swear the more I hear that condescending coverage, the more I want Bryson to win!

[Rogue]

Congratulations Elvis14

Is the up coming Master in this season ?

[sagegrouse]

Always better feeling to win with guys you like! I was giving you credit for being shrewd and calculating on the OWGR points "round down" dynamic - Bryson at 5.89 counts as 5, Wolff at 2.91 counts as 2, etc - but even if someone selected all the best "value" plays your team would still have won.

Also interesting that you like Bryson - he's certainly a polarizing figure. I generally like him - anyone willing to try unconventional things and put in the work that he does gets my admiration, and he certainly will have a lasting impact on the game (both for players and course design/set up). But I'm curious how much long term success someone who is that much of a tinkerer will have. If I set the over/under at 3 career majors, which side would you take?

I'm changing my mind about deChambeau. But, if I were honored to play with him, I would close my eyes during his swing -- those aren't the swing thoughts I need. Same with Wolffie -- what is that dipsy doodle? Most golfers use a "waggle," but a "wiggle?"

[rsvman]

The fact that I am in seventh place overall despite not competing at all in the PGA makes me pretty happy. I should've jumped in on that one, but didn't.

[Tripping William]

I'm changing my mind about deChambeau. But, if I were honored to play with him, I would close my eyes during his swing -- those aren't the swing thoughts I need. Same with Wolffie -- what is that dipsy doodle? Most golfers use a "waggle," but a "wiggle?"

I think the story on Wolff is that his swing coach (George Gankas, who is an interesting personality in his own right) asked Wolff to simulate impact (including the clearing of Wolff's left hip) so much and so often that it became Wolff's swing trigger.

[mkirsh]

I think the story on Wolff is that his swing coach (George Gankas, who is an interesting personality in his own right) asked Wolff to simulate impact (including the clearing of Wolff's left hip) so much and so often that it became Wolff's swing trigger.

It started as just a drill, but it worked so he stuck with it as part of his regular swing. Daniel Berger has something similar (with a different coach), which is interesting as his swing is also unconventional, but more inside/laid of vs Wolff who is across the line.

Gankas is very interesting. He has a whole stable of high schoolers and college kids who would be at the top of PGA rankings in terms of ball speeds if they were on tour today. All with different looking swings that generate a TON of speed. The future of golf is going to look a lot like what we saw this past weekend.

[sagegrouse]

It started as just a drill, but it worked so he stuck with it as part of his regular swing. Daniel Berger has something similar (with a different coach), which is interesting as his swing is also unconventional, but more inside/laid of vs Wolff who is across the line.

Gankas is very interesting. He has a whole stable of high schoolers and college kids who would be at the top of PGA rankings in terms of ball speeds if they were on tour today. All with different looking swings that generate a TON of speed. The future of golf is going to look a lot like what we saw this past weekend.

Then we need to change the balls or the clubs --- it is impractical to keep lengthening courses. Who needs 190-yard nine iron shots in the game of golf -- on Planet Earth?

[rsvman]

Then we need to change the balls or the clubs --- it is impractical to keep lengthening courses. Who needs 190-yard nine iron shots in the game of golf -- on Planet Earth?

They can make their courses as long as they want provided they don't add any length to MY golf course. And if they change the balls and/or the clubs, they need to do it only for THEM, and not for US.

There has been discussion about this for decades now. Nicklaus experimented and built a short course on an island somewhere but they give you the balls to play. The balls only go about 2/3rds what a normal ball goes, and the course is about 2/3rds the length of a normal course. I'd be ok with something like that, as well, in the interest of courses not taking up so much real estate and not requiring so much upkeep/water, etc.

But, as you may have guessed already, I'm for bifurcation if they decide to make changes. Now, especially, is not the time to take any distance away from me!

[elvis14]

Then we need to change the balls or the clubs --- it is impractical to keep lengthening courses. Who needs 190-yard nine iron shots in the game of golf -- on Planet Earth?

They could just stop lengthening the courses. Regular players aren't an issue and if the PGA guys score like crazy...let them. By lengthening the courses they make it harder for the long hitters to go super low but they also make it hard for the shorter hitters to compete at all.

[mkirsh]

They can make their courses as long as they want provided they don't add any length to MY golf course. And if they change the balls and/or the clubs, they need to do it only for THEM, and not for US.

There has been discussion about this for decades now. Nicklaus experimented and built a short course on an island somewhere but they give you the balls to play. The balls only go about 2/3rds what a normal ball goes, and the course is about 2/3rds the length of a normal course. I'd be ok with something like that, as well, in the interest of courses not taking up so much real estate and not requiring so much upkeep/water, etc.

But, as you may have guessed already, I'm for bifurcation if they decide to make changes. Now, especially, is not the time to take any distance away from me!

I’m certainly far from an engineer but I wonder if there is a way to effectively create bifurcation without “tournament” vs “non tournament” balls. For instance if golf balls spun like they used to the effect would naturally be greater for those with higher swing speeds, so while everyone would lose some distance, the bombers would lose more proportionally. Either way they can’t keep lengthening courses - too much cost and burden on real estate.

[jv001]

Thanks for letting me play Degenerate Gamblers. I really enjoy games like this. Congratulations to elvis14 for the win. As sage posted, I too am beginning to like Bryson more. He seems to be pretty good young man as well as a terrific player. His game is certainly unique. His putting technique makes me feel uncomfortable just watching him. He looks so stiff but it works for him. Looking forward to the Masters come November. You Georgia guys and gals can let us know how the November weather is that month. I would think it's a little chilly in the am.

[sagegrouse]

They could just stop lengthening the courses. Regular players aren't an issue and if the PGA guys score like crazy...let them. By lengthening the courses they make it harder for the long hitters to go super low but they also make it hard for the shorter hitters to compete at all.

How about creative solutions -- trenches across the fairways at the 300 yard mark (or 320, if you wish)?

When the long-hitting Tiger first played (and won) at St. Andrews, a British commentator said, "If Tiger doesn't win, there should be a stewards inquiry." The pothole bunkers and other obstacles stopped well short of the length of his drives. Since then, St. A's has added bunkers much further down the fairways.

Winged Foot, which has 36 holes, lengthened at least one of the holes last week by adding a new tee back in the fairway of the adjacent course. I also understand from a member that, in the 2006 US Open, there was a mix-and-match, introducing some of the holes from the "other 18" into the championship. I believe that Congressional (also 36) does that as well.

[mkirsh]

How about creative solutions -- trenches across the fairways at the 300 yard mark (or 320, if you wish)?

When the long-hitting Tiger first played (and won) at St. Andrews, a British commentator said, "If Tiger doesn't win, there should be a stewards inquiry." The pothole bunkers and other obstacles stopped well short of the length of his drives. Since then, St. A's has added bunkers much further down the fairways.

Winged Foot, which has 36 holes, lengthened at least one of the holes last week by adding a new tee back in the fairway of the adjacent course. I also understand from a member that, in the 2006 US Open, there was a mix-and-match, introducing some of the holes from the "other 18" into the championship. I believe that Congressional (also 36) does that as well.

Congressional has 2 courses, but only the blue course was used for the 2011 and 1997 opens. The course played as a par 70 in ‘97 as two member par fives were converted to long par 4s for the pros, and notably (and anti-climacticly)
ended on a par 3. In 2011 it played as a par 71, and the par 3 18th hole was re-routed and became the new par 3 tenth so the tournament could end on a par 4 (although the tournament effectively ended on Saturday as Rory was so dominant). 64 open and 76 pga were well before my time. It’s possible holes from the golf course were used for the Kemper / AT&T / Quicken Loans over the years. The blue course is currently undergoing a full renovation to host the ‘31 PGA and ‘37 (formerly ‘36) Ryder Cup (man they plan these things far out - people will be hitting 500 yard drives by then at the rate we are going).

[elvis14]

How about creative solutions -- trenches across the fairways at the 300 yard mark (or 320, if you wish)?

When the long-hitting Tiger first played (and won) at St. Andrews, a British commentator said, "If Tiger doesn't win, there should be a stewards inquiry." The pothole bunkers and other obstacles stopped well short of the length of his drives. Since then, St. A's has added bunkers much further down the fairways.

Winged Foot, which has 36 holes, lengthened at least one of the holes last week by adding a new tee back in the fairway of the adjacent course. I also understand from a member that, in the 2006 US Open, there was a mix-and-match, introducing some of the holes from the "other 18" into the championship. I believe that Congressional (also 36) does that as well.

That's a great post, Sage. There are lots of subtle things they can do to slow down the pros that'll not effect the rest of us. A trench at 300 doesn't effect me at all, for example (that is unless I duff my second shot and it rolls 80 years into the trench).

[mkirsh]

That's a great post, Sage. There are lots of subtle things they can do to slow down the pros that'll not effect the rest of us. A trench at 300 doesn't effect me at all, for example (that is unless I duff my second shot and it rolls 80 years into the trench).

That assumes you are playing the same tees as Tiger, which I would not recommend! If he's playing a 500 yard par 4 and the trench is at 320 so 180 out from the green, when regular humans play the normal tees at 420 that trench is now at 240 from the tee. Golf has natural bifurcation abilities as pros and ams can play different tees. The real contest is between pros and the length of the course - as golfers keep gaining distance, courses can't keep up so there needs to be some governor on the ball speed/distance.

[sagegrouse]

That assumes you are playing the same tees as Tiger, which I would not recommend! If he's playing a 500 yard par 4 and the trench is at 320 so 180 out from the green, when regular humans play the normal tees at 420 that trench is now at 240 from the tee. Golf has natural bifurcation abilities as pros and ams can play different tees. The real contest is between pros and the length of the course - as golfers keep gaining distance, courses can't keep up so there needs to be some governor on the ball speed/distance.

It is not necessary that the touring pros play the same course as the members. Golf generates lots of money; there can be bunkers or barriers or rough created and then removed after the tournament.

I agree with you on "some governor on the ball speed/distance." Nicklaus said the same some time ago. I have also heard that golf ball manufacturers would scream like crazy and start all sorts of law suits. I'll look into when I have time.

[Tripping William]

It is not necessary that the touring pros play the same course as the members. Golf generates lots of money; there can be bunkers or barriers or rough created and then removed after the tournament.

I agree with you on "some governor on the ball speed/distance." Nicklaus said the same some time ago. I have also heard that golf ball manufacturers would scream like crazy and start all sorts of law suits. I'll look into when I have time.

Another option is an adjustment in expectations of what tournament participants (pros and top-shelf amateurs) will shoot in relation to par. Some -- most notably course architect Gil Hanse, at least from an podcast/interview I heard involving him and Ben Crenshaw -- prefer that option over further bastardization of classic golf courses in an effort to keep Even Par as the accepted professional standard. This discussion came up in the context of rumors that Augusta National GC is looking to purchase adjacent property so that they can extend the tee box at 13 farther back. Hanse and Crenshaw were not particularly fond of that idea.

This is not an easy issue.

[cato]

Another option is an adjustment in expectations of what tournament participants (pros and top-shelf amateurs) will shoot in relation to par. Some -- most notably course architect Gil Hanse, at least from an podcast/interview I heard involving him and Ben Crenshaw -- prefer that option over further bastardization of classic golf courses in an effort to keep Even Par as the accepted professional standard. This discussion came up in the context of rumors that Augusta National GC is looking to purchase adjacent property so that they can extend the tee box at 13 farther back. Hanse and Crenshaw were not particularly fond of that idea.

This is not an easy issue.

Perhaps I’m too simple minded, but if the concern is the winner going too low in relation to par, why not just change par? I guess it seems less exciting to take away eagle opportunities by reducing the number of par fives people can reach in two shots, but if lots of players are hitting short irons into the green why not make it a par four?