2020 US Open

[Stray]

Winged Foot is hosting this year. From everything I've heard and read the winning score is expected to be well over par. Could get ugly out there.

[Boston Red]

I like to watch the pros scuffle around and shoot 78. Makes me feel a touch better about shooting a gentlemen's 98 (on a course those guys would shoot 62 on from the back tees).

[Reds Fanatic]

Winged Foot is hosting this year. From everything I've heard and read the winning score is expected to be well over par. Could get ugly out there.

Yes narrow fairways, really long rough and they have had very little rain recently so the greens are almost impossibly firm. My guess is no one under par and +5 or more probably wins it

[Redhook]

Winged Foot is brutal. It’s easily the most difficult course I’ve ever played. I was fortunate to play there 20+ years ago. Of note, I played with Rory Sabbatini, Bryce Molder and Hank Kuehne that day. That was a cool day!

[Boston Red]

I have no idea who Davis Thompson is, but he's making for a really nice first morning story for now. No matter what happens for the rest of his golf career, he'll always be able to say he was leading the U.S. Open!

[texasdave]

Tiger Woods is making the bookies a ton of money. I don't care what the odds are, betting on Tiger is throwing money down the drain.

https://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/29899088/bettors-place-more-money-tiger-woods-win-us-open-40-1-odds

[bucksfan2]

Winged Foot is brutal. It’s easily the most difficult course I’ve ever played. I was fortunate to play there 20+ years ago. Of note, I played with Rory Sabbatini, Bryce Molder and Hank Kuehne that day. That was a cool day!

How does it compare to some of the newer courses that were built with long hitters in mind? A few years ago I played Pete Dye French Lick and that course was as hard as anything I have ever played. We played the second from the back tees and it beat me up. Courses like that, Black Wolf Run, Whistling, etc. are just brutal because they can play 8000+ yards and were built with 350 yard drives in mind.

I love watching the US Open to see the players struggle and complain about it. Its like an annual right of passage!

[Boston Red]

No matter what happens for the rest of his golf career, he'll always be able to say he was leading the U.S. Open!

By two strokes

[texasdave]

Tiger is on a rollercoaster ride today with 5 birdies and 6 bogeys. +1 through 17.

[Boston Red]

Tiger is on a rollercoaster ride today with 5 birdies and 6 bogeys. +1 through 17.

After he bombed in a 40 footer at #16 (the hardest hole on the course) for birdie to get to even par, he basically gave the Costanza "I'm out!".

[texasdave]

After he bombed in a 40 footer at #16 (the hardest hole on the course) for birdie to get to even par, he basically gave the Costanza "I'm out!".

Yep. He double-bogeyed 18 to finish at +3 on the round, 8 strokes behind the leader.

[Redhook]

How does it compare to some of the newer courses that were built with long hitters in mind? A few years ago I played Pete Dye French Lick and that course was as hard as anything I have ever played. We played the second from the back tees and it beat me up. Courses like that, Black Wolf Run, Whistling, etc. are just brutal because they can play 8000+ yards and were built with 350 yard drives in mind.

I love watching the US Open to see the players struggle and complain about it. Its like an annual right of passage!

Ditto on the last line. As far as the extreme difficulty goes, it’s all due to the greens. A.W. Tillinghast, a genius, created the nastiest greens ever. They’re insane. No modern architect comes close to matching them. Not only are they raised up making green side shots more challenging, they’re extremely slopey. The greens penalize bad tee shots rather than length being the only issue. If you’re in the wrong position, you have almost zero chance of getting it down in 2. Modern courses, in general, aren’t that tough around the greens. By the way, 8,000 yard golf courses are stupid. A great architect doesn’t need to make them that long to be challenging.

[Boston Red]

Phil Mickelson may want to consider moving to the Champions Tour full time.

[Kingspoint]

Phil Mickelson may want to consider moving to the Champions Tour full time.

He'll make six times more money, and he knows that.

[Boston Red]

Phil didn't come particularly close, and now Tiger is only 15% to make the cut according to the US Open website.

I suspect DeChambeau's -3 will hold up as the lead going into the weekend.

[Boston Red]

Jason Kokrak right there. -1 through 2 rounds and 2 shots off the lead for now.

[Boston Red]

I suspect Wolff might blow up a bit tomorrow, making this a pretty wide open tournament.

[ScotlandRed]

I suspect Wolff might blow up a bit tomorrow, making this a pretty wide open tournament.

Hoping so. Got some money riding on Xander and just made a brilliant birdie on 18 to get a shot closer. Need Wolff to come back to the field tho because I’d be staggered if anyone else gets to -5.

[Stray]

I didn't expect Wolff and DeChambeau to be at the top heading into Sunday. Feels like the narrow fairways have neutralized the accurate hitters. Since everyone is playing from the rough a lot, the ones closer have the advantage.

That said, there's huge numbers on this course if you're even a little off. And we saw with Wolff today what a good round can be. Gonna be a fun Sunday for sure.

[Redhook]

The pin locations were very easy yesterday for US Open/Winged Foot standards. I’m guessing the USGA isn’t happy with -5 leading. I’m perfectly fine with it as the course has been difficult, but very fair. And, it’s been fun to watch. I just hope the USGA isn’t the storyline today by tricking up the greens/pin locations.

I’m going to go with even par winning. The course should play much tougher today compared to yesterday. Wolff is missing too many fairways to continue what he’s doing. Missing fairways finally caught up to Reed yesterday and it will probably catch up to Wolff as well. Plus, sleeping on the lead is incredibly difficult. I hope Xander wins as I have a bet on him as well.

[Stray]

Dominant win for DeChambeau. That was super impressive.

[paintmered]

Have to think the game just changed permanently. Guys are going to be bulking up and trying to keep up with the brutes.

One guy finished in the red, which is probably to the USGA's liking. But the rough - US Open rough (!) - simply wasn't a deterrent to DeChambeau. I appreciate that he identified a way to gain advantage, but I'm not sure what the course design antidote looks like to his strength and approach.

[Stray]

Koepka
Johnson
Woodland
Bryson

Those are the winners of the last 5 US Opens. At least for this major, it's pretty clear what it takes to win.

[Redhook]

Have to think the game just changed permanently. Guys are going to be bulking up and trying to keep up with the brutes.

One guy finished in the red, which is probably to the USGA's liking. But the rough - US Open rough (!) - simply wasn't a deterrent to DeChambeau. I appreciate that he identified a way to gain advantage, but I'm not sure what the course design antidote looks like to his strength and approach.

Incredible performance by Bryson. I didn’t see that one coming.

The bombers have a huge advantage. The ability to hit it 40+ yards past your opponents is incredibly valuable. Scott Fawcett of Decade Golf does a bunch of studies on this. Hitting a wedge from the rough is similar to a 7 iron from the fairway in regards to proximity to the hole. Then, if the bomber happens to hit the fairway or the average pro misses the fairway, the discrepancy goes up a ton. Scott Fawcett, who coached Bryson to his US Amateur and NCAA wins, said before the week started that hitting driver as far as possible was the way to play most holes.

I’m a bit torn on this. For this tournament, only one guy was under par. And, he played phenomenal. His entire game was solid and the course was fair. Yes, he was in the rough a lot, but it was still penal. It did allow players to advance it to and around the greens. If they made it deeper and everyone had to pitch out, the event would be boring and skill is taken away from the players. Hitting quality shots from the rough isn’t easy.

In my opinion, the problem isn’t the athletes/golfers getting stronger and longer, it’s the golf ball. It’s goes way too far. I remember in college testing the Titleist balata vs. the Titleist Professional. I played an entire round hitting 2 shots off each tee. It was March in Ohio and a hit and plug day. On a average, I hit the Professional ball 19 yards farther. My coach was reluctant to buy the new balls for us, but I easily convinced him after that round. Then, the ProV1 came out shortly thereafter and the ball has been going farther ever since. I bet I’d hit a ProV1 at least 30 yards farther than a balata ball. So, therein lies the problem. We’ll see if the USGA and the R&A has the “balls to change the ball”.

[bucksfan2]

Incredible performance by Bryson. I didn’t see that one coming.

The bombers have a huge advantage. The ability to hit it 40+ yards past your opponents is incredibly valuable. Scott Fawcett of Decade Golf does a bunch of studies on this. Hitting a wedge from the rough is similar to a 7 iron from the fairway in regards to proximity to the hole. Then, if the bomber happens to hit the fairway or the average pro misses the fairway, the discrepancy goes up a ton. Scott Fawcett, who coached Bryson to his US Amateur and NCAA wins, said before the week started that hitting driver as far as possible was the way to play most holes.

I’m a bit torn on this. For this tournament, only one guy was under par. And, he played phenomenal. His entire game was solid and the course was fair. Yes, he was in the rough a lot, but it was still penal. It did allow players to advance it to and around the greens. If they made it deeper and everyone had to pitch out, the event would be boring and skill is taken away from the players. Hitting quality shots from the rough isn’t easy.

In my opinion, the problem isn’t the athletes/golfers getting stronger and longer, it’s the golf ball. It’s goes way too far. I remember in college testing the Titleist balata vs. the Titleist Professional. I played an entire round hitting 2 shots off each tee. It was March in Ohio and a hit and plug day. On a average, I hit the Professional ball 19 yards farther. My coach was reluctant to buy the new balls for us, but I easily convinced him after that round. Then, the ProV1 came out shortly thereafter and the ball has been going farther ever since. I bet I’d hit a ProV1 at least 30 yards farther than a balata ball. So, therein lies the problem. We’ll see if the USGA and the R&A has the “balls to change the ball”.

What about the clubs? I am an amaeture golfer who tens to buy a one year old used Titleist driver very 5 to 6 years. Each "new" driver I buy I get additional yardage off the driver. Also consider I buy whatever I think is a good deal, I don't fit the shaft to my swing, its whatever comes with the club. My 3-wood, which I tend to hit far more than diver, goes farther than my driver did a few years ago.

I agree about the balls, you used to be able to play a balata for maybe one round (unless you bellied a wedge) now you can play a ProV for multiple rounds without losing much.

I think we see an overreaction like this from time to time. Bryson shout -5, but where was Dustin? Where were the other bombers? I remember courses of a decade ago needed to be Tiger-proofed.

What I would love to see is the tour quit raking the bunkers. Rake them in the morning and that is it. Make the bunker a hazard instead of a prefered location for a missed shot.

[MWM]

If you really want to reward accuracy and precision, you have to have a course that penalizes missing the fairway not by being in the rough, but by not have a clear line to the green. It wasn't just Bryson. Wolff shot 65 hitting 2 fairways because pretty much every time he missed, he still had a clear line to the green. A lot of the bombers miss badly when they miss. If they were in the woods instead of just being in the rough, it would be a different equation at that point. Rough isn't the answer anymore.

I came across the link below not too long where someone took a few years of data and built a regression model using all the stats available on PGA TOUR players and how it correlated to their finishing position in the FedExCup. Not surprisingly, the thing that was most important driving distance. Tee shot accuracy didn't even make the list. It's a different game now.

https://public.tableau.com/profile/ed.orlando#!/vizhome/PGATourAnalytics/PGATourAnalytics

[Hoosier Red]

If you really want to reward accuracy and precision, you have to have a course that penalizes missing the fairway not by being in the rough, but by not have a clear line to the green. It wasn't just Bryson. Wolff shot 65 hitting 2 fairways because pretty much every time he missed, he still had a clear line to the green. A lot of the bombers miss badly when they miss. If they were in the woods instead of just being in the rough, it would be a different equation at that point. Rough isn't the answer anymore.

I came across the link below not too long where someone took a few years of data and built a regression model using all the stats available on PGA TOUR players and how it correlated to their finishing position in the FedExCup. Not surprisingly, the thing that was most important driving distance. Tee shot accuracy didn't even make the list. It's a different game now.

https://public.tableau.com/profile/ed.orlando#!/vizhome/PGATourAnalytics/PGATourAnalytics

I agree with this. There was a lot of talk about "Tiger-proofing" golf courses when Woods became the sensation he was, but the answers they had were to make them longer which only emphasized his strengths. If a golf course wants to counter the bombers, and I don't see any evidence that they do, then the smarter thing to do is to shorten the course. The RBC Heritage course in Hilton Head is a good example as I recall. It's not incredibly long, but requires precision and accuracy on drives in order to play from correct side of fairway toward the hole.

The other thing I was thinking about is that the deep rough ends up slowing the ball down before it can get too far off track. I wonder if shorter rough would actually be harder for these bombers to deal with?

[Hillsdale87]

The thing that people don't talk about a lot with Bryson is his putting. He's obviously incredible with his driver, but last year he finished 10th in strokes gained putting. That's a pretty lethal combination.

It's really pretty incredible what he's managed to do in the last year. He's added a good amount of muscle and revamped his swing and still managed to win a major. The strength gain messed with his touch on his short irons, which have been inconsistent, but he had those pretty dialed in this past week. I assume that he'll get there, because he's maniacal with his training and has historically been pretty good with his irons (in 2018 he was 12th in strokes gained on approach versus 119th this year). If he calibrates those, he's going to be pretty unstoppable.

He reminds me a lot of Trevor Bauer. Unconventional, very cerebral, turns a lot of people off, but he believes in his methods and has been vindicated. Bauer seems to care less about what people think about him, while Bryson has more of a desire to be liked.

[bucksfan2]

The thing that people don't talk about a lot with Bryson is his putting. He's obviously incredible with his driver, but last year he finished 10th in strokes gained putting. That's a pretty lethal combination.

It's really pretty incredible what he's managed to do in the last year. He's added a good amount of muscle and revamped his swing and still managed to win a major. The strength gain messed with his touch on his short irons, which have been inconsistent, but he had those pretty dialed in this past week. I assume that he'll get there, because he's maniacal with his training and has historically been pretty good with his irons (in 2018 he was 12th in strokes gained on approach versus 119th this year). If he calibrates those, he's going to be pretty unstoppable.

He reminds me a lot of Trevor Bauer. Unconventional, very cerebral, turns a lot of people off, but he believes in his methods and has been vindicated. Bauer seems to care less about what people think about him, while Bryson has more of a desire to be liked.

How many guys in today's game are long hitters? I think Bryson will go on to have a pretty successful career, but is he really all that different from DJ? or Justin Thomas? or Wolfe? or Rahm? or Finau?

I don't think his distance really separates him from the pack of golfers today. When Tiger came around in the early 2000's he redefined the game. No one had ever seen that power incorporated into an all around game.

A concern I have with Bryson is health, will his body be able to handle that swing? His size/swing doesn't look natural like DJ or Thomas. I wonder if his body can handle that kind of torque.

[Hillsdale87]

How many guys in today's game are long hitters? I think Bryson will go on to have a pretty successful career, but is he really all that different from DJ? or Justin Thomas? or Wolfe? or Rahm? or Finau?

I don't think his distance really separates him from the pack of golfers today. When Tiger came around in the early 2000's he redefined the game. No one had ever seen that power incorporated into an all around game.

A concern I have with Bryson is health, will his body be able to handle that swing? His size/swing doesn't look natural like DJ or Thomas. I wonder if his body can handle that kind of torque.

He was #1 on tour in strokes gained off the tee last year, and his transformation really started in June, so I'd expect that to potentially widen next year. There are a few other guys close to him off the tee, but it's a huge advantage over most of the field. The other thing with him is that really trusts his process. Yes, he's weighing a million different factors on each shot, but his overall strategy is fairly simple - bomb drives and go from there. Other guys may have different strategies for playing certain holes, look to strategically attack the golf course, but he really only has to focus on one thing. There are going to be tournaments where the driver is not working, and he may blow up, but overall it's likely going to be very effective.

Bringing up Tiger is interesting. I'm not saying that Bryson is the next Tiger after 1 major, but there are similarities, at least physically. Before his scandal, Tiger had a single minded focus on golf and, while blessed with unbelievable talent, also outworked everybody. Bryson is the same way. He's probably not as naturally talented, but there can't be another person on tour that works as hard. Tiger didn't really have any holes in his game, and I'm not sure Bryson will soon. He's elite off the tee and putting. It will take some time to regain his touch with his irons as he's added so much distance, but it's something that he's shown in the past, and I expect it to come back. But even if he matches Tiger from a skill standpoint, Tiger's mental toughness was so unique that I don't think anybody can come close.

The health part is going to be very interesting. He definitely thinks that he's trained his body to deal with the torque, but we will find out over time.

[Kingspoint]

Koepka
Johnson
Woodland
Bryson

Those are the winners of the last 5 US Opens. At least for this major, it's pretty clear what it takes to win.

Talent and the ability to thrive under pressure. This will never change for a U.S. Open.

[paintmered]

One interesting suggestion I came across was to have progressive rough lengths that get more punitive as the distance off the tee increases. For the U.S. Open, the deep rough could be something like 4" out to 275 yards, 6" out to 300 yards and something that's really punitive beyond 300 yards, for instance.