IN MY OPINION: GEOFF OGILVY

Watching the final nine holes of the US Open at Torrey Pines, I must admit to a slight feeling of deja vu. Amidst much carnage over the closing holes, Jon Rahm ended up being the ‘last man standing’

– if that is not too unfair to Louis Oosthuizen – much as I was when I won the same event at Winged Foot in 2006.

This year’s US Open was a great tournament, despite the low expectations many seemed to have going in. It was the same in 2008, of course. When I arrived for the last US Open at Torrey, I had high expectations for an unenjoyable week. Not because US Opens are routinely scary. But because Torrey is different from an Oakmont or a Pinehurst in that the PGA Tour visits every year. Most guys in the field had played the course a lot. No one was learning it fresh, and we already knew it was hard.

Still, there are differences between February and June. In February, San Diego can be cold and wet. So, the rough is usually brutal, which makes the course a bit of a slog. Yes, it’s sunny. But it’s also cold. The ball goes short. If you’re not hitting the ball long and straight, Torrey can be incredibly frustrating, which is why I never really had a great time at the tournament.

So, I arrived there in June thinking I’d be faced with an even harder version of February. Which it was, but in a nice way. A firm Torrey when the ball is rolling and bouncing – and the kikuyu rough gives you a variety of lies from good to fair to awful – the course is actually less relentless. If you do miss the fairway it isn’t always a wedge back into play and try to make par. As we saw this year, opportunities to hit more enterprising and exciting shots were sometimes available. Which is more fun and interesting of course.

All of which does nothing to disguise the fact that hardly anyone loves Torrey

Pines. It disappoints, I think, because it is such an amazing piece of land. In the big scheme of things though that is a harsh assessment.

Of the public courses where you can call up and book a tee time, Torrey is right up there. It’s a great place to play and an incredible facility. The views are beautiful. The only downside is that many of the holes really are a bit blah. It’s still a nice course, but it could have been Pebble Beach. Better even.

Torrey is difficult just to be difficult. And yes, it is difficult in a pretty boring way. It’s long with bunkers typically on either side of fairways bordered by rough on both sides. The architect didn’t really use the Pacific Ocean or the canyons enough. So, there is often a feeling of “haven’t we already played this hole?” about the place. And it can often be hard to recall every hole at the end of a round.

Having said all that, when the course is set-up as it was the US Open, Torrey Pines is my second-favourite venue for America’s national championship. And watching this time I remembered why that is. I didn’t hear many complaints from any of the players either, which is hardly the norm at a US Open. The USGA got things right this year. The greens were fast but not too fast. And the rough wasn’t so thick that risky recovery shots were always out of the question.

Here’s the big thing though. The really good players do well at Torrey. Tiger won there in 2008. And Rahm won this year against an unbelievable leaderboard on the last day, en route to regaining the No.1 spot in the world ranking. With nine-holes to play, we had Rahm, Brooks Koepka, Rory McIlroy, Louis Oosthuizen, Xander Schauffele and Bryson DeChambeau all up there. Justin Thomas and Dustin Johnson were hanging around. Paul Casey too. Not many names were missing. So, Torrey need apologise to no one when it comes to proving itself a great championship venue. It clearly allows the best to show they are the best.

Why is that? Because you have to be brave to do well at Torrey. You have to hit brave shots that involve large amounts of risk. The short 3rd hole down the hill is a perfect example. Go long there and you are looking at disaster. There, and on other holes like the 17th, you are asked to hit a shot you don’t really want to hit. Even more so now that the trees on the left have been removed and the canyon comes more into play – as DeChambeau and Oosthuizen found out on the last day.

Asking for bravery is what tough tests do. The Masters is great in that respect. So is the Old Course at St. Andrews. If you want to do well on those courses, you need courage to hit close to the trouble and set up the next shot. Especially under pressure. And that’s why Torrey has produced two great championships and two great winners – it asks players to be brave in their shot selection and execution. It makes players nervous and makes them make decisions they don’t really want to make. So, you end up hitting a shot you don’t really want to hit.

Within that, it is the really long shots and the really short shots that sort out winners and losers. Torrey asked for long, straight drives and great long-irons to par-3s where, if you missed the green, more often than not you made at least bogey. Those are classic US Open questions. So, while the course might never make it into the top-ten in ‘Course Architecture Monthly,’ it asks championship questions. Especially when the USGA set it up as they did.

Golf course architecture critics – of which I am one – are like wine critics. We pontificate about all sorts of esoteric things in an effort to sound clever and erudite. But if people like a course they just do.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, which is not to say I would go play Torrey Pines for fun. I would go to Cypress Point, or Swinley Forest, or the Old Course, or Royal Melbourne for a casual game with friends. But to find the best player, you need to go to a place like Torrey. Torrey is the perfect template for how the USGA sees championship golf. It asks all the questions they want to ask.

Look again at what happened over the last nine-holes in the final round of the US Open. Every player who wasn’t quite on top of his game was found out multiple times. Again, that is classic US Open. When it comes to the real crunch, the course and the set-up identifies the player who is most comfortable with his game at that point in time. And Torrey has done that twice now. Clearly, it asks relevant questions in professional golf tournaments.

At its most basic level, of course, the US Open is golf’s ultimate test of execution. It’s not like it takes years of learning like the Masters or an Open Championship at St. Andrews; it’s obvious what you have to do. Yes, architecture snobs will argue that there is a lack of nuance or variety. But that’s not what the US Open is about. It’s not about the ability to hit a lot of different shots. No. It’s about hitting the same shot time after time after time. And Torrey ticks every single box the USGA wants to tick.

In that sense, Torrey is how the US Open should be – an execution contest. And not easy shots. It’s about hitting really hard shots on almost every hole, shots only the true elite can actually hit. That relentlessness is what wore out almost everyone this year. A few coped for 63-holes. But only one – maybe two – hung in there for 72.

If you think about it too, six-under par is just about the ideal winning score amidst the above scenario. It was clearly easy to shoot 80 if you were off your game. But three or four under par was on too, if you were able to hit the shots and handle the moment. Jon Rahm did that better than anyone else. He made birdie on the last two holes, shot 67 in the final round and answered correctly all the tough questions put by the USGA. He had the most moxie at the end. This was a great US Open.