I don’t believe they run subair during the rounds.
I guess that makes sense from a noise and level-playing field perspective. Thanks for the clarification.
Re: Burns 36 hole Leads
Converting 1/7 with 6 top 10s (including a solo 2 and solo 3) is very impressive. Win probability of 28% initially sounds very high, but seems he has a good chance to be in the conversation Sunday afternoon.
Re: OB on 1
OB is 30 yards from the right edge of the fairway (less when you consider the ball moving right on the ground). Optimal target given a 60 yard dispersion at 300 yards is pretty much center left fairway. Prevailing wind and sub-optimal target selection (skewing too far left) is probably the reason for so few balls OB.
Re: JJ’s Big Events
Almost half of the sample (7/15) is from Sawgrass. He’s mentioned mindset issues in the past and how he has newfound belief in his game. I think he will break the pattern this week and we will see him around come Sunday afternoon.
Can we get a Drunk-O-Meter rating for the crowds? Seems pretty tame for a weekend afternoon at a US Open.
Re: Adam Scott
Have heard a few tour coaches say Adam is the only guy who hits a straight ball on tour. I might add Richard Bland to that list.
Re: Victor
Great stuff on the Golf Channel about his work with Grant Waite, absolute legend to us swing nerds.
Thus far about 40% of the field has finished the first 3 holes and they are playing a shot over par. Closer to Thurs/Friday than yesterday when you account for the fact that it’s a stronger field on the weekend.
I’m undecided on how much I’ve enjoyed Oakmont, but one think I really like is how little it’s been a putting contest. The live insight shows this and the SG putting leaders are jj spaun, Fitzpatrick who is +9, and a bunch of guys who missed the cut. Jon Rahm should approve. Monday Finish: Rahm's outburst, tweaks at Augusta, celebrity beatdowns
This graphic that folks post on twitter from time to time…where is it from?
https://x.com/NoLayingUp/status/1934317902213349512
Interested to see what you guys do with the bombometer. As long as people know what it’s actually measuring, it shouldn’t be that misleading. But I understand the logic for changing the labels.
I assume the course fit plot turned out to be pretty accurate?
One theory i’m developing is you can have a tournament that does 2 of these 3 but not all 3: 1) favors accuracy, 2) protects par* or 3) consistently identifies the most skilled players in the world.
*par is just made up and you could just make it a par 60 I suppose.
We know the best way to help accurate players is just make the course shorter. That hurts par. So grow up the rough. That makes the tournament more random. It has been a very wet summer in the US and I’m open to the idea that firm and fast could change this somewhat.
There are very few tournaments that have a track record of doing all three. Memorial comes closest I think.
2 Likes
PGA Tour Media portal. We should have access… never tried to use it though. Should look into that.