Official U.S.Open prediction thread

[GoHogs1091]

Some people feel Ridgepointe in Jonesboro has the best routing, see how easy that is?

www.ricepigisaguru.com.

Merion (East Course)  =   Hosted several U.S. Opens     A worldwide relevant golf course.

Ridgepointe  =   An only relevant in the tri-county area of Northeast Arkansas golf course.

[ricepig]

Merion (East Course)  =   Hosted several U.S. Opens     A worldwide relevant golf course.

Ridgepointe  =   An only relevant in the tri-county area of Northeast Arkansas golf course.

We've hosted several ASGA's, lol!

[Iwastherein1969]

Anyone else think DJ melts down today?  I'm saying he shoots 4 over today.

you nailed the hell out of that one...great call...DJ showed guts for over half of his round after being told by the USGA pin-heads that he "may or may not receive a penalty shot after the round is over"....play one of the 5 toughest golf courses in the world, leading the U.S. Open on championship day, and all the while have the rules committee sending an emissary to plant a bug in your ear of a possible penalty at the end of your round...why I'd say that was the gutsiest back nine of any U.S. Open this guy has ever seen....I hope breaking through the way he did will only bolster Justin's confidence. It should. And I promise you, the last thing the top 3 players in the world want to see is a fully confident, locked and loaded Dustin Johnson to contend with.

[Jackrabbit Hog]

And I promise you, the last thing the top 3 players in the world want to see is a fully confident, locked and loaded Dustin Johnson to contend with.

Better hide the wives and girlfriends.


And maybe the coke too.

[PonderinHog]

Better hide the wives and girlfriends.


And maybe the coke too.

Dustin Johnson is the real thing

[majestic]

you nailed the hell out of that one...great call...DJ showed guts for over half of his round after being told by the USGA pin-heads that he "may or may not receive a penalty shot after the round is over"....play one of the 5 toughest golf courses in the world, leading the U.S. Open on championship day, and all the while have the rules committee sending an emissary to plant a bug in your ear of a possible penalty at the end of your round...why I'd say that was the gutsiest back nine of any U.S. Open this guy has ever seen....I hope breaking through the way he did will only bolster Justin's confidence. It should. And I promise you, the last thing the top 3 players in the world want to see is a fully confident, locked and loaded Dustin Johnson to contend with.

Well, I was talking about the third round, where he did shoot 1 over.  Not quite the meltdown I predicted. The USGA penalty mess was ridiculous.

[Iwastherein1969]

Dustin Johnson is the real thing

well, okay, I can deal with that...how about this one for the son-in-law of Wayne Gretzky....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2KECJv9XrQ

[Jackrabbit Hog]

well, okay, I can deal with that...how about this one for the son-in-law of Wayne Gretzky....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2KECJv9XrQ

Compliments of Don Draper..

[GoHogs1091]

He couldn't see the flag from the original lie. They moved over to where he could see the flag and dropped, again, all within the rules, so suck it that he won and over powered this Mickey Mouse course.

There are still some questions regarding Johnson's drop on Hole 10.

The Rule says to find the nearest point-of-relief, and then it is one club length from that nearest point-of-relief.  Johnson went to the left of where his tee ball originally layed for the point-of-relief, but the nearest point-of-relief (for the line-of-sight relief from the TIO) was actually to the right of where his tee ball originally layed.  Of course, Johnson wanted to go to the left for a drop spot because it would mean he could get on short grass for his next shot after the drop occurred.  The fact that he was still in the line of the TIO when he went left for the drop means the drop should have occurred to the right, which would have meant he wouldn't have had to hit it directly over the tower (which he did after he dropped to the left).

Secondly, a Poster in the thread over on Golfwrx.com posted that Johnson took 2 club lengths from the nearest point-of-relief (which the nearest point-of-relief Johnson used to begin with was incorrect). The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief.

Here are the 3 main remaining problematic aspects involving the drop.

1.  Should he have been granted line-of-sight relief to begin with because with the tower (TIO) around 100 yards away, and with him probably only being able to advance the ball from the rough at most around 50-75 yards, he wouldn't have made it to the tower (TIO) from the rough, so Exemption #3 of the Rule should have been in effect.

2.  Incorrect determination of the nearest point-of-relief.  Should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, and therefore he would have actually had line-of-sight relief, and he would have not needed to hit it directly over the tower, which he ultimately did after he went left of where his tee ball layed for the drop location.  The fact that he ultimately hit it directly over the tower shows that he did not get true line-of-sight relief by going left for the drop (he did get a better lie by going left for the drop, which a better lie for his next shot is what he was truly wanting/seeking).  He would have had true line-of-sight relief if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (which was to the right, not to the left).

3.  According to a Poster over on Golfwrx.com Johnson took 2 club lengths from the what he chose for a supposed nearest point-of-relief (which was an incorrect nearest point-of-relief location), and then he did the drop after taking 2 club lengths.  The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief, and to drop 1 club length from the point-of-relief spot.

[GolfNut57]

There are still some questions regarding Johnson's drop on Hole 10.

The Rule says to find the nearest point-of-relief, and then it is one club length from that nearest point-of-relief.  Johnson went to the left of where his tee ball originally layed for the point-of-relief, but the nearest point-of-relief (for the line-of-sight relief from the TIO) was actually to the right of where his tee ball originally layed.  Of course, Johnson wanted to go to the left for a drop spot because it would mean he could get on short grass for his next shot after the drop occurred.  The fact that he was still in the line of the TIO when he went left for the drop means the drop should have occurred to the right, which would have meant he wouldn't have had to hit it directly over the tower (which he did after he dropped to the left).

Secondly, a Poster in the thread over on Golfwrx.com posted that Johnson took 2 club lengths from the nearest point-of-relief (which the nearest point-of-relief Johnson used to begin with was incorrect). The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief.

Here are the 3 main remaining problematic aspects involving the drop.

1.  Should he have been granted line-of-sight relief to begin with because with the tower (TIO) around 100 yards away, and with him probably only being able to advance the ball from the rough at most around 50-75 yards, he wouldn't have made it to the tower (TIO) from the rough, so Exemption #3 of the Rule should have been in effect.

2.  Incorrect determination of the nearest point-of-relief.  Should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, and therefore he would have actually had line-of-sight relief, and he would have not needed to hit it directly over the tower, which he ultimately did after he went left of where his tee ball layed for the drop location.  The fact that he ultimately hit it directly over the tower shows that he did not get true line-of-sight relief by going left for the drop (he did get a better lie by going left for the drop, which a better lie for his next shot is what he was truly wanting/seeking).  He would have had true line-of-sight relief if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (which was to the right, not to the left).

3.  According to a Poster over on Golfwrx.com Johnson took 2 club lengths from the what he chose for a supposed nearest point-of-relief (which was an incorrect nearest point-of-relief location), and then he did the drop after taking 2 club lengths.  The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief, and to drop 1 club length from the point-of-relief spot.

Why are you still kicking that dead horse with a post that is almost the very same as you posted last week verbatim? JHC let it go you pompous long winded JA!

[ricepig]

There are still some questions regarding Johnson's drop on Hole 10.

The Rule says to find the nearest point-of-relief, and then it is one club length from that nearest point-of-relief.  Johnson went to the left of where his tee ball originally layed for the point-of-relief, but the nearest point-of-relief (for the line-of-sight relief from the TIO) was actually to the right of where his tee ball originally layed.  Of course, Johnson wanted to go to the left for a drop spot because it would mean he could get on short grass for his next shot after the drop occurred.  The fact that he was still in the line of the TIO when he went left for the drop means the drop should have occurred to the right, which would have meant he wouldn't have had to hit it directly over the tower (which he did after he dropped to the left).

Secondly, a Poster in the thread over on Golfwrx.com posted that Johnson took 2 club lengths from the nearest point-of-relief (which the nearest point-of-relief Johnson used to begin with was incorrect). The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief.

Here are the 3 main remaining problematic aspects involving the drop.

1.  Should he have been granted line-of-sight relief to begin with because with the tower (TIO) around 100 yards away, and with him probably only being able to advance the ball from the rough at most around 50-75 yards, he wouldn't have made it to the tower (TIO) from the rough, so Exemption #3 of the Rule should have been in effect.

2.  Incorrect determination of the nearest point-of-relief.  Should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, and therefore he would have actually had line-of-sight relief, and he would have not needed to hit it directly over the tower, which he ultimately did after he went left of where his tee ball layed for the drop location.  The fact that he ultimately hit it directly over the tower shows that he did not get true line-of-sight relief by going left for the drop (he did get a better lie by going left for the drop, which a better lie for his next shot is what he was truly wanting/seeking).  He would have had true line-of-sight relief if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (which was to the right, not to the left).

3.  According to a Poster over on Golfwrx.com Johnson took 2 club lengths from the what he chose for a supposed nearest point-of-relief (which was an incorrect nearest point-of-relief location), and then he did the drop after taking 2 club lengths.  The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief, and to drop 1 club length from the point-of-relief spot.

He took one club length and dropped inside the second, which was correct. He did all of this with a rules official there, he was within his rights. Again, no one knows how far he could advance the ball, just because some announcer suggested it, doesn't make it true.

[Pulled(PP)pork]

There are still some questions regarding Johnson's drop on Hole 10.

The Rule says to find the nearest point-of-relief, and then it is one club length from that nearest point-of-relief.  Johnson went to the left of where his tee ball originally layed for the point-of-relief, but the nearest point-of-relief (for the line-of-sight relief from the TIO) was actually to the right of where his tee ball originally layed.  Of course, Johnson wanted to go to the left for a drop spot because it would mean he could get on short grass for his next shot after the drop occurred.  The fact that he was still in the line of the TIO when he went left for the drop means the drop should have occurred to the right, which would have meant he wouldn't have had to hit it directly over the tower (which he did after he dropped to the left).

Secondly, a Poster in the thread over on Golfwrx.com posted that Johnson took 2 club lengths from the nearest point-of-relief (which the nearest point-of-relief Johnson used to begin with was incorrect). The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief.

Here are the 3 main remaining problematic aspects involving the drop.

1.  Should he have been granted line-of-sight relief to begin with because with the tower (TIO) around 100 yards away, and with him probably only being able to advance the ball from the rough at most around 50-75 yards, he wouldn't have made it to the tower (TIO) from the rough, so Exemption #3 of the Rule should have been in effect.

2.  Incorrect determination of the nearest point-of-relief.  Should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, and therefore he would have actually had line-of-sight relief, and he would have not needed to hit it directly over the tower, which he ultimately did after he went left of where his tee ball layed for the drop location.  The fact that he ultimately hit it directly over the tower shows that he did not get true line-of-sight relief by going left for the drop (he did get a better lie by going left for the drop, which a better lie for his next shot is what he was truly wanting/seeking).  He would have had true line-of-sight relief if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (which was to the right, not to the left).

3.  According to a Poster over on Golfwrx.com Johnson took 2 club lengths from the what he chose for a supposed nearest point-of-relief (which was an incorrect nearest point-of-relief location), and then he did the drop after taking 2 club lengths.  The Rule says to take 1 club length from the nearest point-of-relief, and to drop 1 club length from the point-of-relief spot.

some questions by whom?  Your internet golfing forum buddies?  No one gives a rats ass anymore, but you and your Tiger Woods '99 Sega playing friends


PP

[GoHogs1091]

He took one club length and dropped inside the second, which was correct. He did all of this with a rules official there, he was within his rights. Again, no one knows how far he could advance the ball, just because some announcer suggested it, doesn't make it true.

Why did he drop inside a 2nd club length?  That was outside a 1 club length spot.  Since he incorrectly dropped inside a 2nd club length, then he did not drop at 1 club length, and the Rule says you are entitled to 1 club length (drop should occur at the 1 club length spot).

Here is what someone posted in the 8 page thread about the drop over on Golfwrx.com.

Yes,
Dustin Johnson did cheat and in my view it was a serious breach of the rules and he should be disqualified and kicked off the tour. Yes he is allowed line of site to the flag which he marked and then one club length. He put down two tees marking the one club length and started to put a third tee for a second club length and was told no by the official. The official looks the other way and he acts like he is measuring again, does not put a tee down and drops to the left of the left outward tee. The official gets confused and thinks he is inside the tees and lets him drop again because the ball went closer to the hole. He does it a second time and gets ball in hand. After he places the ball he only picks up the one tee as if this was the tee to the right of the drop area he marked with the tees.There is no left tee to pick up.He never dropped between two tees which is not a penalty but he is clearly outside one club length. He did this because he knew at the point where the ball would bounce forward and give him ball in hand to place it.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1351024-on-the-10th-hole-yesterday-did-dj-cheat/page__st__210#entry13826050

[Pulled(PP)pork]

Why did he drop inside a 2nd club length?  That was outside a 1 club length spot.  Since he incorrectly dropped inside a 2nd club length, then he did not drop at 1 club length, and the Rule says you are entitled to 1 club length (drop should occur at the 1 club length spot).

Here is what someone posted in the 8 page thread about the drop over on Golfwrx.com.

Yes,
Dustin Johnson did cheat and in my view it was a serious breach of the rules and he should be disqualified and kicked off the tour. Yes he is allowed line of site to the flag which he marked and then one club length. He put down two tees marking the one club length and started to put a third tee for a second club length and was told no by the official. The official looks the other way and he acts like he is measuring again, does not put a tee down and drops to the left of the left outward tee. The official gets confused and thinks he is inside the tees and lets him drop again because the ball went closer to the hole. He does it a second time and gets ball in hand. After he places the ball he only picks up the one tee as if this was the tee to the right of the drop area he marked with the tees.There is no left tee to pick up.He never dropped between two tees which is not a penalty but he is clearly outside one club length. He did this because he knew at the point where the ball would bounce forward and give him ball in hand to place it.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1351024-on-the-10th-hole-yesterday-did-dj-cheat/page__st__210#entry13826050

well there ya go!  Some fruitcake on golfwrx said it and it's so.

GoHogs, you're u are an even nuttier fruitcake


PP

[GoHogs1091]

well there ya go!  Some fruitcake on golfwrx said it and it's so.

GoHogs, you're u are an even nuttier fruitcake


PP

My biggest issue with the whole situation is that the incorrect nearest point-of-relief was utilized.  The nearest point-of-relief should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, not to the left of where his tee ball layed.  Yes, he would have still been in the rough if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (he was just looking for a way to get to short grass for his next shot), but he invoked the Line-of-Sight Rule for a TIO to get relief, and he didn't even get true line-of-sight relief by going left of where his tee ball layed (the TIO was still in his line-of-sight; him hitting directly over it on his next shot proves that the TIO was still in his line-of-sight). 

It just so happens that the incorrect going to the left of where his tee ball layed was his avenue to get on short grass for his next shot.  With the TIO still being in his line-of-sight for his next shot after he made the drop, if he had truly been concerned about the line-of-sight aspect then he would have brought it to the attention of the Rules Official, but Johnson was happy because he was now out of the rough and on the short grass.

The aspect of him incorrectly dropping outside of 1 club length, while problematic, is not my biggest issue with the whole situation.  The above incorrect nearest point-of-relief utilization is terrible for the integrity of the game of golf.

[ricepig]

My biggest issue with the whole situation is that the incorrect nearest point-of-relief was utilized.  The nearest point-of-relief should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, not to the left of where his tee ball layed.  Yes, he would have still been in the rough if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (he was just looking for a way to get to short grass for his next shot), but he invoked the Line-of-Sight Rule for a TIO to get relief, and he didn't even get true line-of-sight relief by going left of where his tee ball layed (the TIO was still in his line-of-sight; him hitting directly over it on his next shot proves that the TIO was still in his line-of-sight). 

It just so happens that the incorrect going to the left of where his tee ball layed was his avenue to get on short grass for his next shot.  With the TIO still being in his line-of-sight for his next shot after he made the drop, if he had truly been concerned about the line-of-sight aspect then he would have brought it to the attention of the Rules Official, but Johnson was happy because he was now out of the rough and on the short grass.

The aspect of him incorrectly dropping outside of 1 club length, while problematic, is not my biggest issue with the whole situation.  The above incorrect nearest point-of-relief utilization is terrible for the integrity of the game of golf.

Sounds like the USGA official screwed up, seems to be a common occurrence amongst them. He asked for, and got relief, move on if that's entirely possible in your genetic make-up. If not, hold your breath and see what happens.

[GoHogs1091]

Sounds like the USGA official screwed up, seems to be a common occurrence amongst them. He asked for, and got relief, move on if that's entirely possible in your genetic make-up. If not, hold your breath and see what happens.

Some of the blame goes onto the Rules Official, but most of the blame goes onto Dustin Johnson.

I don't have anything against Johnson.  I feel he got somewhat of a raw deal in 2010 at Whistling Straits due to a goofy Local Rule in effect that week for the 2010 PGA Championship, but Johnson didn't help himself (didn't do himself any favors) by not reading the Rules Sheet that was provided to the Players that week right before the start of the PGA Championship in 2010.

[Pulled(PP)pork]

My biggest issue with the whole situation is that the incorrect nearest point-of-relief was utilized.  The nearest point-of-relief should have been to the right of where his tee ball layed, not to the left of where his tee ball layed.  Yes, he would have still been in the rough if the correct nearest point-of-relief had been utilized (he was just looking for a way to get to short grass for his next shot), but he invoked the Line-of-Sight Rule for a TIO to get relief, and he didn't even get true line-of-sight relief by going left of where his tee ball layed (the TIO was still in his line-of-sight; him hitting directly over it on his next shot proves that the TIO was still in his line-of-sight). 

It just so happens that the incorrect going to the left of where his tee ball layed was his avenue to get on short grass for his next shot.  With the TIO still being in his line-of-sight for his next shot after he made the drop, if he had truly been concerned about the line-of-sight aspect then he would have brought it to the attention of the Rules Official, but Johnson was happy because he was now out of the rough and on the short grass.

The aspect of him incorrectly dropping outside of 1 club length, while problematic, is not my biggest issue with the whole situation.  The above incorrect nearest point-of-relief utilization is terrible for the integrity of the game of golf.

according to joe the plumber on golfwrx......effin really?


PP

[Pulled(PP)pork]

Some of the blame goes onto the Rules Official, but most of the blame goes onto Dustin Johnson.

I don't have anything against Johnson.  I feel he got somewhat of a raw deal in 2010 at Whistling Straits due to a goofy Local Rule in effect that week for the 2010 PGA Championship, but Johnson didn't help himself (didn't do himself any favors) by not reading the Rules Sheet that was provided to the Players that week right before the start of the PGA Championship in 2010.

oh, you have a problem with that?  Every one of those participants were given an explanation of what constituted a bunker


PP