BBC Home

Explore the BBC

New visitors: Create your membership
Returning members: Sign in
Browse: Golf

17 comments

user rating: 3 star

US Open Review

comment on the article

Par means next to nothing when it comes to the US Open. The big-wigs of the USGA like their courses to be par 70 for their national championship so that’s what they make it, regardless of the difficulty of the course.

Despite what it said on the scorecard, Oakmont was not a par 70 layout. Johnny Miller said as much at the start of the week. When you factor in 300-yard par threes and 500-yard par fours and the severity of the set-up it was at least a par 71 if not a 72.

Of the 437 rounds played in the championship, only eight were sub-par. Therefore 70 was not par for the course, especially if you consider that there was no seriously difficult weather involved.

According to the USGA Angel Cabrera’s winning score was five over par, but the more enlightening statistic is to say that he won with a four-round total of 285.

That was the same winning score as Geoff Ogilvy posted to triumph at Winged Foot last year and it marks an upward trend in the scoring at the second major of the year.

The winning tally in the 13 US Opens prior to Winged Foot was 280 strokes or fewer.

So we can conclude that the test is becoming more severe and the golf is becoming more of a grind of attrition.

This is the unique selling point of the US Open and it’s not universally popular. Jim Furyk has now been runner-up in the last two events and was asked whether Winged Foot had been a kinder course than Oakmont.

“I don’t know,” he replied. “They both stink.”

It was said half in jest, but judging by many of your comments on this site throughout the week it is evident there is a strong feeling that fools are being made of the players with such severe course set-ups.

The counter argument is that in recent years US Opens have provided some of the most dramatic and exciting finishes to any of the major championships.

Retief Goosen outlasting Phil Mickelson at Shinnecock Hills in 2004 was stunning sporting drama, the way Michael Campbell held off Tiger Woods at Pinehurst and the Mickelson/Monty collapses at Winged Foot also fall into that category.

Cabrera’s victory is also in keeping. He played the best golf at the right times, posted a target and watched as two of the world’s top three strained every sinew to match it before falling a single stroke shy.

Woods commented: “Angel played a beautiful round of golf. I saw the highlights and the shots he spun out of the first cut; holding the ball on 15, that’s not an easy shot but he did it. He had some great golf shots and that’s what you need to do.”

Every aspect of a player’s game was tested to the full over the last four days on probably the most difficult golf course in the United States.

The right man won, because he passed the test better than anyone else. That is surely what the game is all about.

No we don’t want to see this kind of golf every week; it would be an absolute turn-off. But once a year is fine – you just have to largely ignore this notional concept of par.

comment on this article | send to a friend

Latest 10 comments

view all 17 comments

Read members' comments or add your own
comment by MichaelJP59 (U5524910)

posted Jun 18, 2007

I still cannot understand why the players and commentators cannot adjust their attitude to US open courses, which are a true test of golf, far more compelling than the boredom of weekly target golf. It does not matter if it is a 500 yard par 4, if the average score is 5, then getting a 4 should be cheered like a birdie! Instead we just see stoic expressions and exhalations of breath.. Cabrera the refreshing exception.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by jrparky (U4334643)

posted Jun 19, 2007

You have a review of the tournament and the picture with it is of Woods, not the winner.

Get over the your own media bias towards this undoubtedly talented indivdual and celebrate the deserving winner, please!

Also you say "No we don’t want to see this kind of golf every week; it would be an absolute turn-off. But once a year is fine – you just have to largely ignore this notional concept of par."

Actually watching this kind of tournament will provide more help to the average golfer, in confirming that accuracy off the tee is way way way more important than distance alone.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Seanmx (U7034218)

posted Jun 19, 2007

This whole par debate is very much smoke and mirrors. If the USGA decided "par" was 72 then Angel's score of 285 whould be -3 yet he had to hit the same number of golf shots to achieve +5 when the card has the number 70 printed on it.

It's the same golf course for everyone, the holes are the same and the lowest number of strokes for 72 holes wins regardless of what par the USGA decide to assign to each hole.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Golfbug (U1702519)

posted Jun 19, 2007

I agree with Seanmx.

Some of the players were quoted as saying 'forget what the Par is, just go out and see who shoots the lowest score'.

Where does it say that it must be a (-) Score that wins a golf tournament.

I would be more worried if 'The Little Green Man' no longer meant it was safe to cross the road in this Country.



add comment | complain about this comment

comment by dixonix9 (U8723158)

posted Jun 19, 2007

Crakin' win by Angel - especially so as I backed him a week ago at 125/1.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by EdiSaint (U8132789)

posted Jun 20, 2007

US Opens are always set up tough - and the players expect it to be that way. Cabrera deserves his victory as he had 2 of the 8 rounds under par - and shot the 2nd lowest score of the final round.
He's also one of the nicest guys on tour - some of his earnings go back to a village school in Cordoba - which I believe feeds over 300 children every day. A top bloke. My congratulations to him. This will be huge in Argentina and give the sport a big boost in a football-mad country.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by MontyMiller (U8635455)

posted Jun 20, 2007

Oakmont provided a fantastic four days of golf-and a worthy winner in Cabrera. I'm all for courses being toughened up for the best players in the world, if you go in the rough or a fairway bunker ( Mr. Ogilvy ) you should be penalised not be given a chance to hit it stiff.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by BonzaLOG (U8756488)

posted Jun 21, 2007

Chuffed for cabrera, great player. Anyone who can hit the ball 397 yds on a key hole (and get it in play) in a US Open is someone I take my hat off to. However, even more chuffed for me, I also backed him at 125/1 and has paid off eventually after backing him for a few tournaments now.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by laertes (U2755025)

posted Jun 21, 2007

I enjoyed watching Oakmont more than Hoylake last year for the Open, where, with no wind, Woods was not tested off the tee, and won by a mile because he is smarter than his competitors and only used a 2 iron of the tee.

The course was bone hard and ugly to look at, and Woods won at -18 without ever being challenged.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by 3putter (U8913930)

posted Jul 6, 2007

Bunkum. Pinseeker shots to pudding greens. US target golf is dull. This years US Open and the Master were a joy. Nothing could be taken for granted. Par - what does it matter Standard Scratch is how the ameteurs are measued so forget par. Do something helpful and calculate a competition standard scratch.

add comment | complain about this comment

view all 17 comments | back to the top

Comment on this article


Sign in if you want to comment

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 33.33%
    4 votes
  • 4 8.33%
    1 votes
  • 3 33.33%
    4 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 25.00%
    3 votes

average rating:
3.25 from 12 votes

Sign in if you want to vote