We've launched the new forums! Read more here

2014 US Open Contest & Thread - Awesome Prizes

JB said:
Let me know when that happens. Despite the savings, it is not going to be anytime soon, guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Bulle Rock in MD dropped from $145 to $130. I played there a couple weeks ago and while I'm sure there were many factors that went into it, staff told me their maintenance costs have definitely dropped.
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
Bulle Rock in MD dropped from $145 to $130. I played there a couple weeks ago and while I'm sure there were many factors that went into it, staff told me their maintenance costs have definitely dropped.
Click to expand...

Interesting, because when we called there recently, I was told that prices dropped because of maintenance "issues" and would be heading back up before season's end. No idea which is correct, but there are quite a few courses that have made the switch to less water and chemicals and their prices have not dropped at all.
 
JB said:
Interesting, because when we called there recently, I was told that prices dropped because of maintenance "issues" and would be heading back up before season's end. No idea which is correct, but there are quite a few courses that have made the switch to less water and chemicals and their prices have not dropped at all.
Click to expand...

Oh no doubt, I don't expect many to drop; business is business and if courses can cut maintenance costs and still keep the same or more people coming in the door, they have a realized profit and no reason to reduce.

As for BR, the course was in great condition and didn't see any noticeable problems. With that said and unrelated to this, I will probably not be playing there again due to some very severe service issues.
 
JB said:
Let me know when that happens. Despite the savings, it is not going to be anytime soon, guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Well...I did say "hope" :alien:
 
Philly Golf Guy said:
So showing courses week in and week out with Augusta like conditions on tv get the golfer into the game, then they go to their muni and get a great big wake up call?

And I would be happy explaining to anyone that the way something looks and the way it plays are two completely different things. i.e. the Old Course, for starters.
Click to expand...



This is a really good point as well.

I rarely (if ever) see complaints about course conditions during The Open Championship, even though the courses over there look a lot closer to Pinehurst than ANGC. Especially The Old Course, which now (apart from the road hole) resembles a pitch and putt.


Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and people seem to enjoy complaining. I thought Pinehurst looked interesting, although I would have liked the "natural areas" to be a little more overgrown. They didn't seem to be very penal.
 
I don't think you will see marquee courses drop their prices, but I do think nice courses could be operated with a lower budget and hence lower green fee.
 
JB said:
Let me know when that happens. Despite the savings, it is not going to be anytime soon, guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts as I heard Mike Davis continue to say how much it would save in water and maintenance.

That the look, feel and conditions may have a 1940 appearance but hrs greens fees sure want.
 
Looking around for pictures of the course as most of us would probably see it if we choose to play it in the near future, and seeing this hole by hole layout in the link below, it looks like a course i would love to play.

Conditions are not necessarily all on Pinehurst it's self or the redesign, as we all know the USGA has always pushed courses to the brink, and sometimes too far.

We all have opinions about certain ways we want a golf course to look, and those opinions will always vary greatly.

If all the stats are true about the water conservation, well that is pretty impressive and could go a long way in making things just a little better in the grande scheme of things. When i say things i mean new course design, and expenses that those courses will operate on.

http://www.pinehurst.com/golf/courses/no-2/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viHq8IICNwU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A53pjkt8GMo
 
Canadan said:
I'm kind of curious how it could be defined as not looking bad. It's not a reference to playing conditions, but visual appearance... that course was splotchy with varying shades of green and brown with what appeared to be weeds lining the fairways.

I'll give it credit as being a great test, but I wouldn't frame a photo of one of those holes for my office.
Click to expand...
I think it's the brown and the perceived weeds that make it look quite unappealing, maybe not to a golfer specifically, but people compare that to their yards and may think, "Gosh, my yard looks better than that golf course!"
 
CAA_Beat said:
Hunter's Green?
Click to expand...


Lol, that place went from a swamp to a weed forest when I used to play there lol.


JB said:
Let me know when that happens. Despite the savings, it is not going to be anytime soon, guaranteed.
Click to expand...

I don't ever see a course dropping prices when maximizing profits lol, lowering costs and increasing profit is the things dreams are made of for those guys, heck any business
 
Just another classic US Open for me. Boring golf (don't read this as bad golf. Kaymer was unreal), terrible layout and lack of excitement in any way, shape or form.

I've come to expect it though from the USGA. They have no clue how to run anything. The good old boys need to be sent packing.
 
I really liked how Pinehurts looked. If Kaymer hadn't been playing at an entirely different level of golf than everyone else, it would have been very exciting. There were great storylines in the 2-10 positions. But, with Kaymer running away with it, those storylines weren't as amplified as they could have been.

3 Hearts Compton, Fowler's highest major finish. Jason Day with another top 5 major finish. Bradley and DJ with top 5's. Stenson, Scott and 3x winner Jimmy Walker up there, as well. GREAT Top 10 list that didn't get the drama. Ratings are probably going to be absolutely horrible.

I'm glad Kaymer's back. I was disappointed to hear, in his post round interview, that he mentioned still needing to work on some things for Augusta. That, IMO, is why he fell in to a 3 year funk in the first place.
 
ohio_striker said:
i agree when i think of courses i want to play or that look appealing to me. i dont think of brown, sandy , weedy, patchy course.
Click to expand...

Because you're accustomed to playing manicured golf courses, not historical courses, links courses. Recommend you don't play some of the worlds most historical courses in the U.K.
 
mikeg_74 said:
While I'm in the minority of having a "blah" reaction to the course aesthetics, it's not because I don't like/appreciate natural or links style courses. My thoughts come from the notion that in my mind when I think US Open I think carefully manicured courses with green fairways, deep rough & fast greens that are receptive. This year even offline shots were not penal and more often than not players still recovered even if a tee shot or approach shot landed in the natural area.

I get the need to minimize water use and being environmentally conscious, but at what cost? Did this weekend do more to help or hurt golf? Only time will tell, but I think that golf suffering from lack of players is still an economic issue versus a course set up, pace of play or cost to play issue.
Click to expand...

So THAT's why there were only 3 sub par scores for the tournament? It was too easy to play?
The fact of the matter is that more and more golf courses will need to go to this mentality. Golf courses are not sustainable for the long haul due to maintenance costs otherwise. This is fairly well documented and discussed. There will be courses that are the exception because of the revenue that they generate. There are other threads that talk about golf losing players on an annual basis. The courses can respond by continuing to require high maintenance and raising costs to play there to offset maintenance costs, which will, in turn mean more golfers quit playing due to cost or go to other courses, which is a downward spiral. Or they can take the responsible course of action and go to a more natural golf course, which does not have the environmental or maintenance costs. The best answer probably lies somewhere in the middle as is usually the case.
 
I think the only logical way to settle the debate as to wether or not this course is playable or worthy or whatever, is for it to host a THP event!
 
ATLGolfer said:
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and people seem to enjoy complaining. I thought Pinehurst looked interesting, although I would have liked the "natural areas" to be a little more overgrown. They didn't seem to be very penal.
Click to expand...

Evidently due to lack of rain in the region over the last two months, the "natural areas" became sparse - those areas were really plush with vegetation. It all depends on mother nature in those areas, from my understanding (per interview w/ top greens superintendent).
 
gr8dryv said:
I think the only logical way to settle the debate as to wether or not this course is playable or worthy or whatever, is for it to host a THP event!
Click to expand...

Well if three other THP members want to do a round or a stay and play I will gladly join to make a foursome and then we can all report back if is playable or not ;)

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
Texasbrons said:
So THAT's why there were only 3 sub par scores for the tournament? It was too easy to play?
The fact of the matter is that more and more golf courses will need to go to this mentality. Golf courses are not sustainable for the long haul due to maintenance costs otherwise. This is fairly well documented and discussed. There will be courses that are the exception because of the revenue that they generate. There are other threads that talk about golf losing players on an annual basis. The courses can respond by continuing to require high maintenance and raising costs to play there to offset maintenance costs, which will, in turn mean more golfers quit playing due to cost or go to other courses, which is a downward spiral. Or they can take the responsible course of action and go to a more natural golf course, which does not have the environmental or maintenance costs. The best answer probably lies somewhere in the middle as is usually the case.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was an easy course. I referenced that this year versus years past being offline from the tee wasn't penalized.

As far as losing golfers and how that's fixed, I'm still a believer that until our economy rebounds and discretionary income increases, golf will not see a noticeable rebound no matter how much courses are "naturally" maintained.
 
mikeg_74 said:
I didn't say it was an easy course. I referenced that this year versus years past being offline from the tee wasn't penalized.

As far as losing golfers and how that's fixed, I'm still a believer that until our economy rebounds and discretionary income increases, golf will not see a noticeable rebound no matter how much courses are "naturally" maintained.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. Actually I'm not sure how one could argue that. Think about how many times you say someone hit in to the scruff and pitch out vs hitting a shot up at the green. Now think about how that would have worked out in traditional US Open rough.
 
lightningbolt44 said:
Well if three other THP members want to do a round or a stay and play I will gladly join to make a foursome and then we can all report back if is playable or not ;)

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I would be all for a Pinehurst get together, but for me i would rather play another course and then walk #2 just from a money stand point if it really is 350+ plus and give our opinion .
 
I have to admit there is a level of irony in talking about a Pinehurst get together when an opportunity of a lifetime just opened up in the Carolinas, and so many in this thread, not only qualify, but have not even clicked on it.
 
golfdawg said:
I would be all for a Pinehurst get together, but for me i would rather play another course and then walk #2 just from a money stand point if it really is 350+ plus and give our opinion .
Click to expand...

I looked at it. You can get 1 round on #2, 1 round on another course, lodging and I think breakfast for two days for around $4,000. Don't know how much is for 1 round.
 
JB said:
I have to admit there is a level of irony in talking about a Pinehurst get together when an opportunity of a lifetime just opened up in the Carolinas, and so many in this thread, not only qualify, but have not even clicked on it.
Click to expand...

not to mention at a course that will have some similar characteristics to Pinehurst #2
 
JB said:
I have to admit there is a level of irony in talking about a Pinehurst get together when an opportunity of a lifetime just opened up in the Carolinas, and so many in this thread, not only qualify, but have not even clicked on it.
Click to expand...

I did look at it...but sadly my 22.4 oob does not qualify. And yes I know...I still getting funds for the club. I promise. Wife got layed off again, so every dollar counts. Which is why $500 for a full bag and rounds would be awesome (at least that would be my argument) :act-up:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top