Anyone else not excited by the Open this week ?

First topic message reminder :

This isnt helped for me by the fact that the viewing will probably all be bleak, grey, wet and miserable and links golf in those conditions is not very easy on the eye. But the main reason is to be honest the majors just seem like any other event now because the winners are pretty much all just good, regular tour golfers. The old Nicklaus quote that Harringon has just said, about majors being easier to win because 90% of the field dont think they can win one...well im sorry but I dont think its true anymore. I reckon nearly everyone...bar the English players...who tees up this week will fancy their chances, I mean why wouldnt they. Any player can look at his peers whio have won majors recently and think well if he can win one then so can I.
I know some people might think this is a good thing, but for me it takes away the kudos and mystique surrounding the majors.

Ill be watching but Lytham is a bit diificult to follow.Only thing I can remember is the first is a par 3 next to the railway.Other courses are much more familiar because we get to see them every year.
Lytham suits re parking and accomodation as well as being a decent course.
Barry Lane teeing off at 6.19 ? he'll probably go straight from his previous evenings entertainment.One thing I hope is that weather changes do not have too much effect like TOC last time

Diggers wrote:Navy for me if I dont care who is playing then the game is very dull. Any game, not just golf. I need to invest emotionally a little bit in the outcome which usually means having a favourite.

Well, I'd be lying if I said I didn't have favourites but I'm not sure I buy into this idea that if some superstar doesn't win every time it must a poor event.

Not every time ... just enough to make it so the game has some superstars. I don't here anyone saying they wish Nicklaus had only won a few majors or that Watsons Open reign was tedious.

Having a favourite doesn't mean they have to be a superstar though. One of my long term 'favourites' is Soren Kjeldsen who of late has been seeing a welcome return to form. I like seeing someone who is enjoying themselves when playing well rather than watch a peevish old grump shoot 66 and be tripping over his bottom lip.

An interesting read ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sports/golf/home-soil-is-no-advantage-for-english-golfers-at-open.html?ref=golf

Either I've got extra super eyesight or else some of you should pay a trip to an opticians. I hardly miss a shot of The Open every year and I have never had any more difficulty following the ball than at any other normal golf event.

yeah looking forward to the cricket diggs- just praying on the weather really. At least there can play golf in the rain(well some of the time)

super_realist wrote:

Lairdy wrote:

super_realist wrote:Sergio and Rose are drawn to play with Charisma Bypass

Good because I'll get to see a lot of Sergio. Bad because I dont think he'll take to playing with Woodsy (he likes nicknames and I think this one would help his image).

What makes you think that Lairdy? Sergio could have a hole in one on a par 5 but all you'll see will be slow mo clips of Woods scratching his backside. I'm hoping he misses the cut again.

i wish the beeb and others would stop the overuse of the slo-mo. Wimbledon was littered with shots of the expressions if players and family members in slow. Unbelievably unimaginative and done to death .
I like seeing the shots showing the technique of the player - and the same goes for the golf, but leave out the bum scratching and slo-mo smiles and grimaces please - its a novelty which was naff from the start

ban_bam wrote:
i wish the beeb and others would stop the overuse of the slo-mo. Wimbledon was littered with shots of the expressions if players and family members in slow. Unbelievably unimaginative and done to death .
I like seeing the shots showing the technique of the player - and the same goes for the golf, but leave out the bum scratching and slo-mo smiles and grimaces please - its a novelty which was naff from the start

My sentiments exactly!

Of course I'm excited...Jeezo why would any serious golfer not be. This is the pinnacle of the season for me. I do love the Masters and also the U.S. Open but this is where it's at for me, except when it's held on TOC (I mean when was the last time they had an exciting one there - and bear in mind TOC gets twice as many chances as anywhere else)

Turnberry and Carnoustie seem to produce the most dramatic ones but the other courses do still dish up their share...It's been a while but Seve's wins at Lytham were a fantastic drama. I'd like to see the big guns contending down the stretch on Sunday, here's hoping!!

Enough debate on whether it should move...NO, links is the very essence of the game and it defines the Open. Moving away from Links to me would devalue it...By all means elevate a British Masters or PGA and rotate it around the best inland courses but don't EVER take THEE Open away from true links, it's what makes it unique and to me it MUST stay that way. The Pro's play parkland dross most of the year it's only right they get a proper test that tests them in a unique way...That is what The Open is all about and if I was a Pro I'd always value the claret jug against ANY other golfing prize including the green jacket.

At least the old course gets high quailty winners.. Not many other courses on the rota get them- well actually royal lytham has done as well!

JAS. +1

mystiroakey wrote:At least the old course gets high quailty winners.. Not many other courses on the rota get them- well actually royal lytham has done as well!

What about Els, or Norman they never won at TOC their both high quality, isn't TOC twice as likely to get a so called higher quality winner based on the fact that its held there twice as often, kind of law of averages!

Maybe I need play more links golf but I'm not excited about this at all especially with the current weather can see it just being a case of who plays the safest golf and no necessarily the best golf winning this. I'm hoping franny molinari or Rose come away as winners, hope Westwood gets nowhere near contending its getting boring now hearing how he "deserves" it or is "best" player without one etc. If neither of those I'll settle for Donald or Fowler.

just look at the winners at the old course..

everyone is high quality- its not really about the ones that havent but the ones that have(louis may have been considered only ok i suppose- but i would put him way above many other recent open winners and i think he will have a chance to add in the future as he proved his worth in this years masters).

The fact that its on the rota twice as many times as any others helps its cause, because it allways seems to produce the best-

woods won it both times els was about- faldo and seve won it when norman was about

louis
woods
woods
daly
faldo
seve
nicklaus
nicklaus

by the way lets not even completely write off Els this time either!!

he is in with a shout..

edit: if it was at the old course!!!


but anyway - looking at the list of royal lytham winners its looking pretty good for the top boys as well..

I know its sad but i do like a proper champion winning majors

mystiroakey wrote:louis
woods
woods
daly
faldo
seve
nicklaus
nicklaus

I cant really argue the point you making there with Woods & Nicklaus twice and Faldo and Seve thrown in for good measure...fair point. What has always perplexed me though is that the finest LINKS player in my lifetime... Watson, won the Jug on 5 different courses but NOT on TOC, despite several attempts.

JAS wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:louis
woods
woods
daly
faldo
seve
nicklaus
nicklaus

I cant really argue the point you making there with Woods & Nicklaus twice and Faldo and Seve thrown in for good measure...fair point. What has always perplexed me though is that the finest LINKS player in my lifetime... Watson, won the Jug on 5 different courses but NOT on TOC, despite several attempts.

Actually no... I take that back...Watson will always be fondly remembered as a links genius but...even though he "only" won 3 and 2 of them at St Andrews, between '63 & '82, Nicklaus only finished outside the top 10 twice in the Open in that period. During the whole decade of the 70's his WORST finish was tied 5th.

Well we just need to look at the winners at that time and it answers the question.

BUT- As we all know golf isnt really about links these days- so in a way we could say that st andrews is perhaps the least linksy and more about the complete golfer.

Watson is offcourse an open and links legend, maybe we could call him a specialist- the closest we have to him from the states is possibly fowler!!

But the more linksy a course is the more chance we have of a random winner and that is the biggest problem i feel with the open. It can be to much of a grind. Unless we play more links or less linksy courses for the open we are gonna keep gifting majors(i know that sounds harsh but i think its faor).

Btw id rather we just play more links golf.. Pleased to see the scottish open on a links. I think it would be great to get an english and irish open on links as well that can attract big players. What about a WGC on a links an all!!

Wasn't the Irish on a links course this year!

yeah it allways is but no one plays in it

Don't disagree with that at all Mysti, much as I dislike TOC as an Open spectacle it does seem to throw the cream to the top.

The hardest prize shouldn't be easy to win though, it should demand the best examination of the game, mentally as well as physically. I don't think we do get random winners (Hamilton possibly an exception), I think we DO get the best guy on top of his game that week

Schedule wise I'd like to see the Irish and the French Opens switch dates and if we could have the introduction of an English Open on Links then yeah, move the French back again.

Let July be the month when the Pro's play links (just like June in Tennis when they play grass...leading up to the unique grass-court major)

I always think for me part of the build up to a major would be believing that this one would be the time that Monty eventually won one and now he's about to slip out the Top 500 and hasn't actually made one for 2 years now, it doesn't look likely.

Whilst I still watch, I've become more neutral and so lost some spice.

JAS wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:louis
woods
woods
daly
faldo
seve
nicklaus
nicklaus

I cant really argue the point you making there with Woods & Nicklaus twice and Faldo and Seve thrown in for good measure...fair point. What has always perplexed me though is that the finest LINKS player in my lifetime... Watson, won the Jug on 5 different courses but NOT on TOC, despite several attempts.

Tom Watson came pretty close to winning at St Andrews, but he didn't quite manage it. His five wins came at five different courses - but he didn't win at Lytham, Hoylake (although I'm not sure he played in an Open there), or Sandwich either. Peter Thomson also won five Opens, on four different courses. Anyone who wins more than one Open is clearly a fantastic player, and given that most players only have a ten or twelve year period in their career in which they are a realistic contender, then it's pretty rare to see a player winning more than once on the same course.

TOC is links, but it isn't very linksy if you know what I mean. As such it doesn't reward a top links player like Watson.

Tend to agree, it doesn't seem quite as special anymore. I think it must be because there are just so many big tournaments week after week, the majors are starting to become just another tournament.

This years Open was a bit of an anti climax too.