Golf Thread

[Blakejc]

Why would it be shocking the club they use the most had the biggest impact? Bomb and gouge is old and takes zero strategy. Love watching all of those guys struggle. They are the best players in the world they can handle it.

That’s not how strokes gained works. It measures how much better you are at driving, approach, around the green, and putting than the rest of the field.

And bomb and gouge is very much alive and well. Everyone is chasing ball speed, clubhead speed, and distance because they’ve all realized that A) distance = strokes gained off the tee = lower scoring. Strokes gained will tell you that 320 in the bunker is equal to 270 in the fairway, so why hit 3i and risk being 270 in the rough and really rogered? and B) every course they play has manageable enough rough that the know it won’t kill their approach game. Until this week that is.

 

[That SOB Van Owen]

The answer is probably somewhere in the middle. This definitely wasn’t a true examination all the way through the bag, but it wasn’t all about putting either.

Driving well wasn’t nearly as important. The best finish of the guys who were top 10 SG off the tee was T12th. Would love to know the last time not one of the top 10 drivers all week didn’t crack T10 or better in the tournament.

SG putting all week: JJ was 2nd, cam young was 3rd, McIntyre 4th. SG approach also correlated highly to doing well. Hit greens and make putts.

Those two things were emphasized most this week. Driving less so than usual. My gut tells me they did not want the bomb and gouge crowd to overpower oakmont, but the pendulum swung too far in penalizing that style.

I don’t understand how you can say driving wasn’t important then bitch about how hard the rough was. If you drive well you don’t hit the rough.

 

[Blakejc]

I don’t understand how you can say driving wasn’t important then bitch about how hard the rough was. If you drive well you don’t hit the rough.

The guys who drove it the best didn’t crack the top 10. That’s the whole point.

And to your point of just don’t hit it in the rough, that was an even worse indicator of success at Oakmont. Of the top 13 players in driving accuracy this week, only one cracked the top 19!

 

[That SOB Van Owen]

The guys who drove it the best didn’t crack the top 10. That’s the whole point.

And to your point of just don’t hit it in the rough, that was an even worse indicator of success at Oakmont. Of the top 13 players in driving accuracy this week, only one cracked the top 19!

That’s still incongruent with you bitching about how hard the rough was.

 

[DrinkItIn]

Fairways mattered—Spaun (win), Hatton (T4), Ortiz (T4), MacIntyre (T2) all finished top 20 in fairways hit. But it wasn’t just about hitting it straight. GIR and putting were everything, especially with those brutal greens. Miss the right tier? You're staring at bogey.

This is the U.S. Open—it’s supposed to punish you. Look at the top 20 in GIR: Scott, Henley, McIlroy, Spaun, Hatton, Rahm, Hovland, etc.—they all finished top 20. Fairways helped, but if you couldn’t hit your spots and roll it well, you were toast.

This is how a U.S. Open should be IMO—tough but fair. You have to hit fairways, control your approaches, and actually THINK your way around the course. No fake drama from birdie-fests—just pure shot-making and pressure.

Now if you want to talk about how Burns got totally screwed by not getting relief from his casual water lie, I am all ears.

 

[Blakejc]

That’s still incongruent with you bitching about how hard the rough was.

That’s fair. I didn’t like two things about oakmont then. Not rewarding good driver play and the stupid rough. The two seem to be connected but I honestly am not smart enough about golf data to prove it. That being said…

The penalty of being in the rough at Oakmont was too binary. If you were in it you couldn’t reach the green. The best part of golf - playing and watching - is a great recovery shot. How many of those did we see this week? How many of the great shots we remember from Tiger were recoveries from seemingly impossible positions? This week was certainly a test of golf, just not my favorite test of golf and not the best way to test every facet of one’s game. The strokes gained data bears that out.

 

[Southendzonehusker]

That’s not how strokes gained works. It measures how much better you are at driving, approach, around the green, and putting than the rest of the field.

And bomb and gouge is very much alive and well. Everyone is chasing ball speed, clubhead speed, and distance because they’ve all realized that A) distance = strokes gained off the tee = lower scoring. Strokes gained will tell you that 320 in the bunker is equal to 270 in the fairway, so why hit 3i and risk being 270 in the rough and really rogered? and B) every course they play has manageable enough rough that the know it won’t kill their approach game. Until this week that is.

I understand how strokes gained work. Putting has always been the ultimate equalizer and the one thing you have to do the most of. Saying that it was a putting contest just because you couldn’t watch everyone slap driver as much as you wanted is dumb. Bomb and gouge is alive because no place grows up their rough. Oakmont had everyone that’s chasing ball speed watch on the weekend. It’s the US Open and every year it’s like this. It’s designed to identify the best golfer on the hardest test. If you don’t like that just watch a replay of the PGA championships.

 

[lee_carvallo_12]

Fairways mattered—Spaun (win), Hatton (T4), Ortiz (T4), MacIntyre (T2) all finished top 20 in fairways hit. But it wasn’t just about hitting it straight. GIR and putting were everything, especially with those brutal greens. Miss the right tier? You're staring at bogey.

This is the U.S. Open—it’s supposed to punish you. Look at the top 20 in GIR: Scott, Henley, McIlroy, Spaun, Hatton, Rahm, Hovland, etc.—they all finished top 20. Fairways helped, but if you couldn’t hit your spots and roll it well, you were toast.

This is how a U.S. Open should be IMO—tough but fair. You have to hit fairways, control your approaches, and actually THINK your way around the course. No fake drama from birdie-fests—just pure shot-making and pressure.

Now if you want to talk about how Burns got totally screwed by not getting relief from his casual water lie, I am all ears.

Little inside baseball on the Burns ruling...

Keeping names out of it, the referee assigned to the hole was a long-time experienced USGA committee member from Denver. They made the initial ruling and denied relief. Burns asked for a second opinion, which is given by a rover. The USGA uses rovers from the PGA tour, DP World Tour, and the R&A's top referees for things like pace of play, final decisions on relief, Temporary-Immoveable Obstructions (TIOs), etc. The tour players voiced that they wanted to see familiar faces, not USGA referees, when these types of situations, like the one with Burns pop up.

So... when Burns asked for the second opinion, the nearest rover was a ref from the R&A. Now, the R&A are notoriously hard asses on playing the ball as it lies (much more so than the USGA. They make the USGA look liberal, in fact. But, alas, they are the USGA's equal partner in writing and interpreting the Rules of Golf, Am Status...). Much to Burn's dismay, it wasn't a regular PGA tour official, but an R&A ref that gave the second opinion and denied the relief. I believe if it would have been one of the regular PGA tour officials it would have been granted. On the flip side, the PGA tour officials work for the players and are notoriously liberal in granting relief.

Really, really unfortunate.

 

[Blakejc]

I understand how strokes gained work. Putting has always been the ultimate equalizer and the one thing you have to do the most of. Saying that it was a putting contest just because you couldn’t watch everyone slap driver as much as you wanted is dumb. Bomb and gouge is alive because no place grows up their rough. Oakmont had everyone that’s chasing ball speed watch on the weekend. It’s the US Open and every year it’s like this. It’s designed to identify the best golfer on the hardest test. If you don’t like that just watch a replay of the PGA championships.

Last year the US Open had zero rough and I think we were all happy with the test of golf, no?

 

[Southendzonehusker]

Last year the US Open had zero rough and I think we were all happy with the test of golf, no?

Yeah instead of rough it had sand washouts that might be just as bad with equally as terrifying greens and more run off areas.

 

[Blakejc]

Yeah instead of rough it had sand washouts that might be just as bad with equally as terrifying greens and more run off areas.

Except missing the fairway didn’t always mean you were screwed. Some places required a punch out, but not all places. Players were given a chance to attempt a recovery shot. Some got even more screwed for trying it, but some pulled it off. That’s a great test of golf and fun to watch. That wasn’t the case at Oakmont and that’s the entire point. You didn’t get to see anyone separate themselves with their recovery skill. So you didn’t test every facet of the game.

 

[Blakejc]

Little inside baseball on the Burns ruling...

Keeping names out of it, the referee assigned to the hole was a long-time experienced USGA committee member from Denver. They made the initial ruling and denied relief. Burns asked for a second opinion, which is given by a rover. The USGA uses rovers from the PGA tour, DP World Tour, and the R&A's top referees for things like pace of play, final decisions on relief, Temporary-Immoveable Obstructions (TIOs), etc. The tour players voiced that they wanted to see familiar faces, not USGA referees, when these types of situations, like the one with Burns pop up.

So... when Burns asked for the second opinion, the nearest rover was a ref from the R&A. Now, the R&A are notoriously hard asses on playing the ball as it lies (much more so than the USGA. They make the USGA look liberal, in fact. But, alas, they are the USGA's equal partner in writing and interpreting the Rules of Golf, Am Status...). Much to Burn's dismay, it wasn't a regular PGA tour official, but an R&A ref that gave the second opinion and denied the relief. I believe if it would have been one of the regular PGA tour officials it would have been granted. On the flip side, the PGA tour officials work for the players and are notoriously liberal in granting relief.

Really, really unfortunate.

The only reason there was standing water was because he was in a divot, right? I assume the divot is why relief wasn’t granted?

 

[redzoner]

According to the handicap and slope the USGA posted for Oakmont for this weekend my target score would be a 90. No way in hell could I shoot that in those conditions.

https://www.usga.org/handicapping/cchc/usopen-handicap-course-calculator.html

 

[lee_carvallo_12]

Interesting stats from Oakmont - https://www.usopen.com/2025/player-stats.html?tab=strokesGained

Top 3 finishers category ranks across all 4 rounds -

JJ - Driving distance: T28, FWYs hit: T19, Greens in Reg: T9, Putting: T9
MacIntyre - DD: 63, FWYs: T5, Greens: T21, Putting: T26
Viktor - DD: 11, FWYs: T37, Greens: T2, Putting: 12

 

[lee_carvallo_12]

The only reason there was standing water was because he was in a divot, right? I assume the divot is why relief wasn’t granted?

I tried to find a good pic of it, but can't seem to on a quick search. I don't know that his ball finished in a divot, but it looks like there was one near it. Could be wrong.

I'm guessing (I wasn't there) relief wasn't granted because in the referees opinions there wasn't visible water where Sam was standing.

Here's the definition out of the book, fwiw. The key is "without pressing down excessively with their feet." You can't force your weight into the ground to make water come up, which every player who has ever been in that situation naturally does.

Temporary Water​

Any temporary accumulation of water on the surface of the ground (such as puddles from rain or irrigation or an overflow from a body of water) that:

• Is not in a penalty area, and
• Can be seen before or after the player takes a stance (without pressing down excessively with their feet).

It is not enough for the ground to be merely wet, muddy or soft or for the water to be momentarily visible as the player steps on the ground; an accumulation of water must remain present either before or after the stance is taken.

 

[lee_carvallo_12]

Except missing the fairway didn’t always mean you were screwed. Some places required a punch out, but not all places. Players were given a chance to attempt a recovery shot. Some got even more screwed for trying it, but some pulled it off. That’s a great test of golf and fun to watch. That wasn’t the case at Oakmont and that’s the entire point. You didn’t get to see anyone separate themselves with their recovery skill. So you didn’t test every facet of the game.

The recovery shot at Oakmont was what Burns did over and over in round 3. When he missed a fairway, he would get it back in play to the fairway and then get it up and down from 60-80 yards for par with a great pitch and/or great putt. Not necessarily muscling it all the way to the green and then two-putting for par.

I realize that's not everyone's cup of tea. I really liked it. Reminds me of the gritty US Opens I watched as a kid in the early 90's - 1991 Scott Simpson and Payne Stewart at Hazeltine, Hale Irwin 1990 at Medinah, Curtis Strange 88 Brookline, 89 Oak Hill.

 

[Southendzonehusker]

The recovery shot at Oakmont was what Burns did over and over in round 3. When he missed a fairway, he would get it back in play to the fairway and then get it up and down from 60-80 yards for par with a great pitch and/or great putt. Not necessarily muscling it all the way to the green and then two-putting for par.

This. Just because a shot isn’t punched thru trees at a green doesn’t mean it is a recovery shot. Oakmont rough was meant to punish people and it did.

 

[Pipehog69]

I was there yesterday, left during the rain delay because I was with some older folks and they weren’t to keen on standing out in the rain and getting home wet and muddy at 10pm. Wish I stayed though. What a finish.

Say what you will about the rough or the course or whatever. This was the ultimate test of the mental game in golf. So many examples of this. Lowry couldn’t keep his emotions in check and posted a terrible score. Rory was visibly frustrated the first three days and never in contention, but we followed him early Sunday and he was noticeably more collected and played a really nice round. Hatton and Burns lost their cool late on Sunday and blew their chance. And the one guy who was as steady as anyone all four days, even when the luck didn’t go his way, walked away with the trophy.

 

[HuskerGarrett]

I am an idiot and somehow lost my SW the other day and apparently someone decided to keep it. I should probably get a new one because I’m golfing with @lee_carvallo_12 tomorrow and am already terrible when I have my full set.

Should I just get the same one again (AI Smoke HL) or try a different one?

 

[Blakejc]

This. Just because a shot isn’t punched thru trees at a green doesn’t mean it is a recovery shot. Oakmont rough was meant to punish people and it did.

there’s no skill in the punch out. That’s penal architecture. I don’t disagree that it’s one way to challenge players, but it’s not the best way. You can create the same kind of challenge with more strategic or even heroic architecture.