CanadianGolfer.com

Is St. George's Too Easy?

 

Noting that Carl Pettersson shot 10-under par 60 today, and that both the course and Canadian Open tournament scoring records have now fallen, has St. George’s proven to be a push over? There was plenty of talk that single digits might win this tournament, but now it appears something around -20 will win. How did everyone get it so wrong? And has the course proven to be too easy to host the event again?

Note that in 1960, Art Wall’s 19-under winning score led to the changes to toughen St. George’s for the 1968 Canadian Open. I’d hate to see changes made to the course just to host the event again.

Thoughts?

Related Articles

About author View all posts Author website

Jeff Lancaster

Jeff Lancaster is the Publisher of CanadianGolfer.com.

8 CommentsLeave a comment

  • At the start of the week nobody projected playing “lift-clean & place” and the course playing so “soft”.
    Deep rough is not a problem for players who drive it well… when a course plays soft like St. Georges is and Pro’s are allowed to put their hands on the ball in the fairway, this is the net result. It’s like play darts or shooting fish in a barrel for those on their game.
    It would be a different story altogether if the Pro’s couldn’t touch the ball…

  • I bet Mike Weir doesn’t think the course is too easy. You raise an interesting question though. I think I remember Weir saying he thought nine under would win the tourney.

  • If there is some rain next Friday night can I play lift, clean, and cheat too? Will I be allowed to post my score for handicapping purposes? It is ridiculous that they are playing lift, clean, and cheat at our national open and the tour should cut back on this.

  • I am not sure what people expect, the only thing that can slow these guys down
    are really fast greens and thick rough and that is not what the tour wants.
    Lets not forget the winning score of some really good tournaments

    Players – Tim Clark -16
    Pebble Beach – Dustin Johnston -18
    Masters – Phil Michelson – 16
    Memorial – Justin Rose – 18
    John Deere – Steve Stricker – 26

    These guys are good, soft greens and a moderate set up equals lots of birdies.
    Even par rarely makes the cut on the tour.

  • The 62 was prior to lift, clean, and place. And 18 under was the number at the apparently ‘woeful’ Glen Abbey in 2009. Funny, how all of the media hype was around these diabolical greens and super thick rough – that was even cut to work ‘against’ the players. Simply put, even all tricked up, St George’s is by all accounts (and flawed ratings) a wonderful old course that best be enjoyed by wonderful old members.

  • Wonder what the scores would be if they got back to “hard and fast” rather than soft, thick and mushy? And yes, these guys are that good!

    One tour caddy told me today that when he first looked at the course on Tuesday, he thought the cut line would be +2 and the winning score would be -12. This from a guy who sees 25 course setups a year.

    When these players drive the ball 320 yds off the tee on a 470 yd par 4, that leaves a smooth 150 yd 8 or 9 iron into a receptive green. A resulting 10-20 ft putt means a lot of red numbers.

    To say that St. George’s is too easy is assinine. The story isn’t about the golf course; essentially, it’s about the equipment and the ball. One day, the governing bodies of golf will make some decisions to stop the madness! Let’s hope so that we don’t write headlines like this one and people come to their senses.

  • I am not sure why the media is so fixated on the scores and whether the course was “too easy” for the pros. I was at the 2007 U.S. open at Oakmont with a winning score of +5. I think I personally witnessed 5 birdies all week. While I had a good time, seeing the pros struggle to make pars is boring!! Isn’t this about entertaining the fans? I loved what I saw at St.Georges – great shots and birdies!! You can leave the U.S. open setup south of the border – I’ll take what we had here anytime!

Leave a Reply

/* ]]> */