Thx! Looking forward to it!
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
2017 USDGC
- Thread starter tom12003
- Start date
Thx! Looking forward to it!
Beren
Newbie
Because I am not MJ. Dude, I'm rooting for ya. :clap:
When I played the USDGC in 2012, I was only rated 893 and I scored 87,93,85, 85. I can only throw 275-300 max. Winthrop isn't about distance, it is about placement, course management and making the putts.
Key to Winthrop Gold: You don't have to get birdies, but you must avoid getting bogeys.
ScottyLove
Double Eagle Member
Anyone know by what criteria Pete May qualifies for the 2017 USDGC? I'm struggling to find that he meets any of the qualificaions listed here: Qualifying Information
That said, anyone can sign up... so perhaps he did just that and won't be allowed to play.
That said, anyone can sign up... so perhaps he did just that and won't be allowed to play.
You could probably PM Pete and ask him personally and privately.
It states clearly on the Eligible Competitors page that it is a Sponsor Exemption:
http://usdgc.com/?page_id=655
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,840
[ALEX TREBEK VOICE]Correct. We would also have accepted: "Because he's Pete May, duh!"[/ALEX TREBEK VOICE]
swedishplastic
Newbie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2016
- Messages
- 17
First time spectating USDGC 2017 - advice?
I'm coming down to spectate on Wednesday and Thursday this year. Never been before. Any advice on spectating? Is it standard to stick with one card for an entire round, or is it easy to skip around from card to card without being intrusive?
Any other tips, including breweries, local courses, etc. would be appreciated!
Psyched!
I'm coming down to spectate on Wednesday and Thursday this year. Never been before. Any advice on spectating? Is it standard to stick with one card for an entire round, or is it easy to skip around from card to card without being intrusive?
Any other tips, including breweries, local courses, etc. would be appreciated!
Psyched!
From Facebook, hole 2:
Directional hazards. I think I like it. Land on the right and you have an obstructed putt. Land on the left and you have an open putt, but you risk going OB.
On some threads floating around on this board, Chuck has throw around the idea of asymmetric baskets that are harder to putt on from one direction than another. I don't think I like the idea on a basket, but I like using the landscape or obstacles to achieve the same thing. We do it all the time with a basket on the edge of a dropoff or the edge of an OB area (next to a lake or river). Land on the good side and you're IB with an unobstructed putt, but it's a death putt. Land on the bad side and you're either at the bottom of a hill with a difficult putt or you're OB.
Same thought process, different execution. Harold likes using USDGC to test new design elements against the best players in the world, and here's another interesting design.
Directional hazards. I think I like it. Land on the right and you have an obstructed putt. Land on the left and you have an open putt, but you risk going OB.
On some threads floating around on this board, Chuck has throw around the idea of asymmetric baskets that are harder to putt on from one direction than another. I don't think I like the idea on a basket, but I like using the landscape or obstacles to achieve the same thing. We do it all the time with a basket on the edge of a dropoff or the edge of an OB area (next to a lake or river). Land on the good side and you're IB with an unobstructed putt, but it's a death putt. Land on the bad side and you're either at the bottom of a hill with a difficult putt or you're OB.
Same thought process, different execution. Harold likes using USDGC to test new design elements against the best players in the world, and here's another interesting design.
bmcgov1209
Bogey Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2015
- Messages
- 75
From Facebook, hole 2:
Directional hazards. I think I like it. Land on the right and you have an obstructed putt. Land on the left and you have an open putt, but you risk going OB.
On some threads floating around on this board, Chuck has throw around the idea of asymmetric baskets that are harder to putt on from one direction than another. I don't think I like the idea on a basket, but I like using the landscape or obstacles to achieve the same thing. We do it all the time with a basket on the edge of a dropoff or the edge of an OB area (next to a lake or river). Land on the good side and you're IB with an unobstructed putt, but it's a death putt. Land on the bad side and you're either at the bottom of a hill with a difficult putt or you're OB.
Same thought process, different execution. Harold likes using USDGC to test new design elements against the best players in the world, and here's another interesting design.
I like the idea, but I think it would be better executed with some bushes or small trees. Just putting some posts in the ground like that looks cobbled together. Maybe the posts are just temporary and they plan to have foliage in their place once there's some feedback on the hole though.
From Facebook, hole 2:
Directional hazards. I think I like it. Land on the right and you have an obstructed putt. Land on the left and you have an open putt, but you risk going OB.
On some threads floating around on this board, Chuck has throw around the idea of asymmetric baskets that are harder to putt on from one direction than another. I don't think I like the idea on a basket, but I like using the landscape or obstacles to achieve the same thing. We do it all the time with a basket on the edge of a dropoff or the edge of an OB area (next to a lake or river). Land on the good side and you're IB with an unobstructed putt, but it's a death putt. Land on the bad side and you're either at the bottom of a hill with a difficult putt or you're OB.
Same thought process, different execution. Harold likes using USDGC to test new design elements against the best players in the world, and here's another interesting design.
I love it. It's likely going to get **** on by some folks as being "unnatural" since it is obviously man-made (cue the "windmill" jokes), but how is this any different than placing a basket near a tree or two that obstruct the putt in a similar fashion? Off the top of my head, I can think of at least one hole at Fountain Hills where the basket is set between a couple of really close trees...same effect.
Anything that makes putting within the circle less than a sure thing depending on where you land is great design, IMO.
I see what you're saying, but the posts like that are arguably more "fair" than it being bushes or trees. Bushes and trees have branches and limbs that can obscure shots that might otherwise be clean. At least with these posts, a clean putt between them is just that. There's no chance of an otherwise good shot clipping a tiny branch or leaf that might effectively be invisible from the player's view.
Also, planting trees that close together, and presumably tall/mature enough to have no limbs for the first 5-6 feet (to create the same effect as the posts), will end up stifling their growth. One or two will eventually crowd out the others and lessen the desired effect.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
These posts are a good idea but not a particularly special type of hazard for those who have played to many pin placements in the woods. This just makes that hole near the pin a bit more woodsy and the approach more biased toward a RH forehand route. You might even see a post kick an approach or putt into the basket.
BionicRib
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2011
- Messages
- 2,617
From Facebook, hole 2:
.
I like it, but (and correct me if I'm wrong) why is this being "tested" during arguably the most premier event and not before?
Well stated. Even dense foliage is still random - some shots get stopped and drop straight down, some shots just an inch or two away fly clean through and come out the other side, some shots just another inch or two away get kicked 20' off into the woods. Using perfectly straight, symmetrical objects removes unfairness/randomness while providing a new challenge to all the players. A safe approach leaves a tough putt. A risky approach leaves an easy putt.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I actually really like this. As we expect from USDGC, they are testing a concept. With the DGWT metrix we should get to directly see the impact. Those numbers will allow the sport to analyze the benefit and other developers can take more natural approaches if the tactic warrants it. Too cool IMO.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Harold, did you guys consider making the guarding posts impenetrable? That is, so landing on the back side man's a lay up around?
Well, lots of things are tested at USDGC. They were one of the first tournaments to use buncr rules, hazard rules, and stroke and distance penalties. They experiment with island greens and artificial OB lines. It's actually been a hallmark of USDGC (though a controversial one) to try new rules on the best players in the world in a prestigious setting. Testing manmade hazards like this at my local C-tier with a bunch of MA2 players isn't going to tell me much of anything.
_MTL_
Flippy Flopper
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,514
Why is the US Championship and a major the place where rules are tested and innovations tested? There's a reason pro sports do that in the minor leagues and pre-season. I wish Innova and the USDGC would test the concepts in C tier events. To my knowledge, this doesn't happen.
However, I understand the idea of the design. The idea is that everyone bails out right and get's a putt and never had to challenge the OB. Now a player who does that is forfeiting birdie. From a design standpoint, I like that.
But the execution is horrendous. Let's say that wall is from 10 feet long to 10 feet for a total of 20 feet. It's now better to miss 30 feet short right or 30 feet long right. A player that does that still has a chance, where a player who is 10 feet short and right has nothing.
To magnify it more, it's better to miss 11 feet short than 10 feet short.
The margin of error of 1 foot from 300 feet plus is so small, it's silly.
There's a reason hole 7 is a great design. It punishes ALL shots that don't hit the gap between the man made obstacle. This only challenges a small portion of those and worst off, the ones closest to the target.
However, I understand the idea of the design. The idea is that everyone bails out right and get's a putt and never had to challenge the OB. Now a player who does that is forfeiting birdie. From a design standpoint, I like that.
But the execution is horrendous. Let's say that wall is from 10 feet long to 10 feet for a total of 20 feet. It's now better to miss 30 feet short right or 30 feet long right. A player that does that still has a chance, where a player who is 10 feet short and right has nothing.
To magnify it more, it's better to miss 11 feet short than 10 feet short.
The margin of error of 1 foot from 300 feet plus is so small, it's silly.
There's a reason hole 7 is a great design. It punishes ALL shots that don't hit the gap between the man made obstacle. This only challenges a small portion of those and worst off, the ones closest to the target.
Similar threads
