Another 59

soundsham

Appleby shoots 59 to win

....... What kind of courses are the PGA using and setting up

Or are the guys getting better..... Me thinks crappy courses but I didn't watch any of it

I just checked the result

butter13222

it aint over yet overton has 2 to play 1 shot back

Aidric

De Jonge seems to be hovering over the top of the leaderboard for the last few months. A maiden victory can't be too far off.

BiffoGooner

Weak course setups.Bit of a disaster, two now in a few weeks.Cheapening the achievement of a 59 if you ask me.

butter13222

Aidric wrote: »

De Jonge seems to be hovering over the top of the leaderboard for the last few months. A maiden victory can't be too far off.

ya he has always been there or there abouts lately

Aidric

Good man Appleby, first win on the PGA Tour since 06.
Shooting a 59 to win a tournament must feel pretty sweet.

The_Architect

soundsham wrote: »

Appleby shoots 59 to win

....... What kind of courses are the PGA using and setting up

Or are the guys getting better..... Me thinks crappy courses but I didn't watch any of it

I just checked the result

Just because someone shoots low doesn't make a course crappy.

That is just encouraging our courses to get more and more difficult and is part of the reason all our classics are getting mutilated. Luckily the PGA don't play on any classics (apart from a couple including this one) so I care less.

Guys and equipment are getting better, the latter being the real problem.

thelongfellow

BiffoGooner wrote: »

Weak course setups.Bit of a disaster, two now in a few weeks.Cheapening the achievement of a 59 if you ask me.

Haha those 59's are not what worth they were eh! Course must have been in top class condition to shoot that score esp the greens. Really cheap yeah...

JerryHandbag

Watching it now repeated on Sky...already a 60 & a 61 on same day.
Only 2 par 5s on course so obviously all the par 4s must be piss easy. Hell, I might even shoot 89 myself :pac:

Anyone see Jeff Overtons practise swing, he takes exact same swing as his real one, I actually thought he missed the ball off the tee there a min ago

heavyballs

The_Architect wrote: »

Just because someone shoots low doesn't make a course crappy.

That is just encouraging our courses to get more and more difficult and is part of the reason all our classics are getting mutilated. Luckily the PGA don't play on any classics (apart from a couple including this one) so I care less.

Guys and equipment are getting better, the latter being the real problem.

yes equipment is getting better but it's been getting better gradually for years so why this sudden 59/60 fest,it's obviously(comparatively) piss easy courses,also the groove change has helped the players a lot on receptive greens

soundsham

The_Architect wrote: »

Just because someone shoots low doesn't make a course crappy.

That is just encouraging our courses to get more and more difficult and is part of the reason all our classics are getting mutilated. Luckily the PGA don't play on any classics (apart from a couple including this one) so I care less.

Guys and equipment are getting better, the latter being the real problem.

Well if there was 60 & 61 shot also it couldn't have been next or near the average type of course played or set up on the PGA .....crappy course and easy set up if more than one guy shot the lights out

BiffoGooner

You'd wonder if the courses are being intentionally set up a bit easier due to recent circumstances.Tiger's troubles and the economic situation have done no favours for golf in general.Wasn't there a record low number of viewers for the Open this year?Sponsors pulling out left right and centre, no one watching.Nothing like a few 59's and numerous 60's and 61's in the space of a few weeks to get people interested again.To go from 3 59's in the space of 22 years to 2 more within a month of each other is a bit strange.

JerryHandbag

BiffoGooner wrote: »

You'd wonder if the courses are being intentionally set up a bit easier due to recent circumstances.Tiger's troubles and the economic situation have done no favours for golf in general.Wasn't there a record low number of viewers for the Open this year?Sponsors pulling out left right and centre, no one watching.Nothing like a few 59's and numerous 60's and 61's in the space of a few weeks to get people interested again.To go from 3 59's in the space of 22 years to 2 more within a month of each other is a bit strange.

Its a bit fishy alright..the scores at the Greenbriar were ridiculously low...276(-4) finished 2nd last! I'd actually give much more kudos to Ross Fishers 61 on a course where nobody else did better than 64 all 4 days. Fair play to Appelby though, he's the first non-American to do it.

The_Architect

soundsham wrote: »

Well if there was 60 & 61 shot also it couldn't have been next or near the average type of course played or set up on the PGA .....crappy course and easy set up if more than one guy shot the lights out

My point being why does low scoring = crappy course?

the Old White at Greenbriar is one of the only really good courses that the PGA Tour use. I'd actually be happy if they moved the competition away from there back to another PGA identikit course. It might avert the temptation to further bastardise and pro-proof it.

The sooner the pros play on custom made courses set up specifically for them and no one else the better. We can then leave the great courses alone...

blackwaterfish

balls were plugging on the greens and then making one tiny bounce forward... hence the 59 - end of story.

it was like hybrid between golf and darts! shame really becuase the greens looked extremely undulating.

kudos to appleby for that final putt tho... the man makes clint eastwood look an emo.

and that dude overton... christ he had issues!... his swing was bipolar. his contact lenses clearly didnt want to be there. and his lack of emotional control was pure soap opera.

great tv on a sunday night!

The_Architect

blackwaterfish wrote: »

balls were plugging on the greens and then making one tiny bounce forward... hence the 59 - end of story.

And there you have it. Play the course firm and fast and it would be a different story.

As if by magic, I've just seen that the "people in the know" have already been out on the course to see where they can add length and make it more penal.

Professional golf really has got a lot to answer for.

blackwaterfish

The_Architect wrote: »

And there you have it. Play the course firm and fast and it would be a different story.

As if by magic, I've just seen that the "people in the know" have already been out on the course to see where they can add length and make it more penal.

Professional golf really has got a lot to answer for.

The greens were soft due to the rain, hence the 59.

if the event was played after a dry week preceeding it then the stimpmeter would have read 10 or 11. this was compounded by a rough that wasnt exactly the most penal on tour. but the course was setup such that hard fast undulating greens were its defence - whish this didnt happen, which was pretty dumb of them.

as tom watson would say “The Old Lady was there for the taking, she didn't have her clothes on today"

but hardly a need to call in mulder & scully over some corporate manipulation of the masses!

The_Architect

blackwaterfish wrote: »

The greens were soft due to the rain, hence the 59.

if the event was played after a dry week preceeding it then the stimpmeter would have read 10 or 11. this was compounded by a rough that wasnt exactly the most penal on tour. but the course was setup such that hard fast undulating greens were its defence - whish this didnt happen, which was pretty dumb of them.

as tom watson would say “The Old Lady was there for the taking, she didn't have her clothes on today"

but hardly a need to call in mulder & scully over some corporate manipulation of the masses!

I'm not disagreeing with you. They set their courses up soft where they should be firm. That's not all down to rain.

Firmness and green speed are not the same thing though. I think they should be firming up greens but not necessarily speeding them up - fast greens mean flatter greens and more expensive greens.

heavyballs

The_Architect wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with you. They set their courses up soft where they should be firm. That's not all down to rain.

Firmness and green speed are not the same thing though. I think they should be firming up greens but not necessarily speeding them up - fast greens mean flatter greens and more expensive greens.

i'm trying to figure out what you're saying but i can't
any firm green i've played has been fast
they don't set these courses up soft,these pro's can stop a ball without making a proper plug mark fgs
the only way you could have firm slow greens is if you let a an inch of grass grow over,that would slow the greens down:rolleyes:

The_Architect

heavyballs wrote: »

i'm trying to figure out what you're saying but i can't
any firm green i've played has been fast
they don't set these courses up soft,these pro's can stop a ball without making a proper plug mark fgs
the only way you could have firm slow greens is if you let a an inch of grass grow over,that would slow the greens down:rolleyes:

That's right - You slow down the greens by not cutting the grass as low, regardless of firmness. By having higher grass heights, you can have greens with more undulation and they are less expensive to maintain because the grass is healthier.

The PGA absolutely do set up the courses soft. The Old White at Greenbriars could play really firm but they over water and then they get rain and bingo!

They even played on the safe side with watering at St Andrews a couple of weeks back. Hence we saw the pros stopping the balls there as well...

heavyballs

The_Architect wrote: »

They even played on the safe side with watering at St Andrews a couple of weeks back. Hence we saw the pros stopping the balls there as well...

no ...they had to water because on certain holes when the wind blows it becomes unplayable...the green speed has to be uniform...if you think the R&A watered to keep the pro's happy maybe you should stick to architecture.....no offence

The_Architect

heavyballs wrote: »

no ...they had to water because on certain holes when the wind blows it becomes unplayable...the green speed has to be uniform...if you think the R&A watered to keep the pro's happy maybe you should stick to architecture.....no offence

Well it's not unrelated but there is a difference between firmness and speed. Watering greens is done to keep the grass healthy. By softening the greens, it does also aid in keeping the ball on the green in high winds. However, a better way to do that is to slow down the greens (by lengthening the grass). They can then have them playing firm which make them more difficult to hold an approach shot and therefore more testing for the pros.

Uniformity has nothing to do with why greens are unplayable in high winds. Greens are unplayable because of a mix of contour and green speed.

And you don't think the R&A pander to the pro's?....

heavyballs

The_Architect wrote: »

Well it's not unrelated but there is a difference between firmness and speed. Watering greens is done to keep the grass healthy. By softening the greens, it does also aid in keeping the ball on the green in high winds. However, a better way to do that is to slow down the greens (by lengthening the grass). They can then have them playing firm which make them more difficult to hold an approach shot and therefore more testing for the pros.

Uniformity has nothing to do with why greens are unplayable in high winds. Greens are unplayable because of a mix of contour and green speed.

And you don't think the R&A pander to the pro's?....

no they don't
you're theory on letting the grass grow doesn't make sense,hairy greens for a major would be a no no and they would have to be hairy,a mm wouldn't make a jot of a difference in that wind hence the need for watering
if you take yout theory lets forget about watering in the likes of Oz etc where there's not much rain and just let the greens grow to whatever level necessary

The_Architect

heavyballs wrote: »

no they don't
you're theory on letting the grass grow doesn't make sense,hairy greens for a major would be a no no and they would have to be hairy,a mm wouldn't make a jot of a difference in that wind hence the need for watering
if you take yout theory lets forget about watering in the likes of Oz etc where there's not much rain and just let the greens grow to whatever level necessary

I'm not talking about not watering - you have to water for a healthy golf course (but you need less if the greens aren't cut so low).

All I'm saying is you need the right green speed for the undulation of the greens. And instead of watering heavily (and therefore softening) to ensure playability, slowing the greens and leaving them firm would test the pros more whilst meaning undulating greens (as at St Andrews) are playable in windy conditions.

I'm interested why you are so sure in your assumption that the R&A don't listen to what the pros want in their tournament setups.

(P.s. hairy greens are only a no-no because we've got so used to shaved ones in our obsession with the stimpmeter)

downthemiddle

I don't know what the fuss is about. The great Sam Snead shot a 59 at the Greenbrier in 1959. At the time it was a pro am rather than a pga tour event. He certainly didn't have the benefit of modern technology.

soundsham

no fuss my point is that courses i.e. length of holes,pin positions,height of rough & speed of greens must have been favourable to shoot the score.......or maybe its a wide open field where you can bomb away off the tee

I didn't watch any of it so I don't know......I was wondering why 59's are becoming more common

I think the most valid points made were conditions suited it,especially if greens were being watered but also pins must have been easy on a very crappy easy course seeing as there were many in the low 60's
the point about trying to attract veiwers is also interesting...who knows could be a factor

as for the PGA not listening to pro's,
I would have to say I think they do it would seem stupid not to take their point of veiw on board when setting up a course,

heavyballs

soundsham wrote: »

as for the PGA not listening to pro's,
I would have to say I think they do it would seem stupid not to take their point of veiw on board when setting up a course,

i said R&A not pga,big difference,

The_Architect

Soundsham,

Thanks for changing crappy to easy - I can sleep easier now.

Here's my overriding problem - We concentrate far too much on the pros. Our classic golf courses are being lengthened, tightened, toughened and reduced of strategy all for that one time in 8 years that the pros roll up for 4 days. This forgets about 99.99% of the rounds of golf played on these courses by members, guests and visitors.

I don't like to see redesigns based on toughening up courses for pros.

I do like to see different, temporary ways of making the setup tough for those 4 days so that pros won't shoot 59's and immediately have everyone talking about redesigning the course.

Guess that's my bottom line on this subject.

soundsham

The_Architect wrote: »

Soundsham,

Thanks for changing crappy to easy - I can sleep easier now.

Here's my overriding problem - We concentrate far too much on the pros. Our classic golf courses are being lengthened, tightened, toughened and reduced of strategy all for that one time in 8 years that the pros roll up for 4 days. This forgets about 99.99% of the rounds of golf played on these courses by members, guests and visitors.

I don't like to see redesigns based on toughening up courses for pros.

I do like to see different, temporary ways of making the setup tough for those 4 days so that pros won't shoot 59's and immediately have everyone talking about redesigning the course.

Guess that's my bottom line on this subject.

played killarney a few weeks ago it wasn't toughened up at all.......they could have fertilized the rough watered it more and let it go mad if they liked,built a few new tee's they didn't......it was grand to play in june same as last weekend

not to worried if you sleep really,glad to hear its your bottom line though

anyway my question was related to course set up and difficulty and most people said it was set up easy, I didn't watch it myself............gladly

watching pro's batter the pins is the most boring golf on t.v.

Jimmy Iovine

Just like a 9-darter or a 147 break I've never seen a live competitive 59. Would love to have seen Appleby's the other day. The only one I've kinda seen was Mickelson's in 2004. Just ripped the greens apart and if I remember correctly he had an eagle putt on the last for a 58.

If you think the 59 was good an 18 year old from Alabama just shot a 57 in the Junior State Championship (http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/article/0,28136,2007234,00.html). One to look out for in the future maybe cause that's just incredible golf. 12 birdies and an eagle.

My personal best was a 54 on the Tiger Woods game in St Andrews. Too easy