Did A Shortened Saucon Valley Pay Off?
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 9:53 AM EDT
Email
PrintMike Davis and the USGA reduced the yardage of Saucon Valley's Old Course for each day of the 64th US Women's Open. Never playing its full scorecard distance of 6740, the Sunday final round featured a course that played almost 6300 yards. Almost every hole saw dramatic differences in where the teeing ground was. In particular, holes 10 and 15 had their tees moved up to entice longer players to take a crack at driving the par 4 greens.
The commentary from NBC Sports' crew was hilarious on the subject. Johnny Miller could not get over how easy he thought the course was with the reduced distance. The three shot improvement in scoring average between the first three days and Sunday may well have proven his theory - but that was the idea.
Dottie Pepper said she was really suprirsed to see so many tees having been moved up on Sunday. Pepper could have known this was coming had she bothered to look at the US Women's Open fact sheet, which has several holes' yardages on the official scorecard followed by secondary tee yardages in parentheses. Mike Davis telegraphed his Sunday moves yet Pepper - and some players - were still surprised. It's like they hadn't watched what Davis tried to do at Torrey Pines or Bethpage in the last two US Opens.
The end result was, yes, a shorter course. Still, the scoring in the final round on the shortened holes did not necessarily get radically better. The driveable par 4s only saw a 0.2 shot/hole improvement between Sunday and the entire week's average. The shortened 17th did prove meaningful as it saw a 0.3 shot difference.
Davis was careful to counterbalance the shorter holes with tight pin placements. The best players managed to find ways to these hole cuts that were difficult to access. Many were cut just a few paces away from the front of the green - leveraging Saucon Valley's fast, downward sloping greens to provide defense. The combination left a lot of uncomfortable putts for the leaders as they came home.
Overall, it seemed like the shortened course provided some additional excitement. Davis got the players to drop their guard off of the tee, only to challenge them even more around the green. He was willing to sacrifice the traditional USGA length to test the mental meddle of these players.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And this is a surprise to who ? The only thing that surprises me about this is that the actual yardage was announced publicly. Usually, in women’s tournaments, yardages are very closely guarded. (tucked pins ? come on)
You won’t see Mike Davis setting up a course to potentially play longer than the field can actually handle – even with so many greens with run up areas.
I think he, and the USGA, did a tremendous job setting up the course. It was tough and fair. I don’t think we will see such severe shortening of the course for four days the way we saw at Saucon Valley.
Oh – this is also the reasont having back to back Opens at Pinehurst is a really bad idea. 800 yards difference between the men’s and women’s setups is going to be more than slightly noticable.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
What would intrigue me about Pinehurst is if Davis intends to use some tees that are the same for men and women in back to back weeks.
Email me any comments or questions at ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
not a chance – unless he makes a long par 4 for the men and a short par 5 for the women.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I think he could go that route, or with one of the par 3s or a drivable par 4.
Email me any comments or questions at ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
hmm – a par 5 out of a par 3 ? that’s probably going too far. :-D
tough to turn a par 3 into a drivable par 4. there isn’t that much room behind the par 3 tees, and those greens don’t lend themselves to driveable par 4’s.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Oh no, I mean he could do it with a par three OR a drivable par 4.
Email me any comments or questions at ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
probably not a par 3 – the tee boxes get really beat up. You don’t want all the scarred up ground on TV for the women to hit drivers and fairway woods.
what are you thinking with the driveable par 4 ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Maybe having like a 264 yard hole like Davis had at Torrey Pines. That’s drivable for both men and some women.
Email me any comments or questions at ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
the men have played par 3’s almost that long – but not on greens like Pinehurst #2. WAY too short for a men’s drivable par 4 – and too long for most of the women to be drivable. You have to go at least 290 for the men and I have never seen one under 300. The women would have to be in the 240-260 range for anybody to take a shot at it.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Totally disagree. A 260-ish yard par 4 for men and women would be very intriguing on Pinehurst #2.
Email me any comments or questions at ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com.
by Ryan Ballengee on Jul 13, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
the guys can hit an iron or a hybrid or 5-wood that far. the greens are not flat – they are shaped like bowls with bunkers around. it would be a silly hole for the men.
the women wouldn’t go for it because they don’t want to be in a bunker around those greens. they would lay up around or hit a 7 or 8 iron off the tee and a wedge.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
