Thoughts on the RBC Canadian Open … and more

Pictured above: TPC Toronto clubhouse with 18th on the North course

Each week, we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.

This week the RBC Canadian Open kicks off on the North Course at TPC Toronto at Osprey Valley. It’s the first time for the course in Caledon but Golf Canada has already announced it’s going back there again in 2026 and moving forward, TPC Toronto will become the semi-permanent home of the RBC Canadian Open, much like Glen Abbey was for over 40 years. Do you like the idea of a semi-permanent site?

Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): Yes.  A permanent or semi-permanent site makes much more sense for event organization, and ultimately spectator experience.  I hope the Open goes really well this week and proves that TPC Toronto is indeed a worthy and convenient venue.

Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): I really like the idea of our National Open moving around the country on a rotation played on our iconic courses. But the reality is, that is not economically feasible or desirable by all parties involved. TPC Toronto at Osprey Valley will be a fantastic host this year and long-term, I wouldn’t doubt that. And in time it will become one of Canada’s most iconic golf facilities too.

Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: If it were to go to TPC half the time, I would like it. I recognize the cost of infrastructure, but several cities in Canada have hosted some quality Opens. Aligning with TPC eliminates the possibility of any other site in the GTA. However, if that included Glen Abbey, I’d be happy.

TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): I do like the idea of a semi permanent site.  The tournament set up gets refined, it becomes a great fan experience, and you get to know the course you’re watching, which is nice.  I still like it being moved around every second year or so, to more traditional sites like Hamilton, St George’s and Shaughnessy. But having a home is not such a bad thing, and I’m looking forward to watching them play TPC this week.

Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: Haven’t had the pleasure, but from what I’ve heard the Osprey Valley course is better than Glen Abbey — not a tough assignment. Terrific that Jack’s first and worst — though there are many challengers — no longer the Open’s home. Given the challenges of parking for TV trucks and ‘patrons’ and hotels and ground and air access that goes into a Tour event, there are few choices in Canada. The Air Canada (Vancouver Open) had to be so far outside Vancouver that some players helicoptered. The attempt at venerable almost-downtown Shaughnessy was a traffic nightmare. Semi-permanent is probably the only way to go for what used to be — arrgh, back in the days of yore when the CLDN was popularly considered the 5th Major. That was so long ago that the sponsor didn’t get pre-name exposure — unlike The Open Championship or the US Open. Sad.

Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine: TPC is a magnificent facility with three terrific courses and plenty of room to do everything necessary to host the national championship. It will only get better with time as they work through any issues a new host facility will face. With Golf Canada’s headquarters there along with the Canadian Golf Hall of Fame and Museum, TPC will become the home of Canadian golf. There are plenty of great courses in the country but few with the proper infrastructure to host a PGA Tour event. Taking the RBCCO elsewhere will be a tough sell.

At the Memorial during the third round, leader Ben Griffin pulled his drive into the rough on the 17th. On his way to the ball, he did a “walk and talk” interview with Rex Hoggard of Golf Channel. Tournament host Jack Nicklaus happened to be in the booth at the time and weighed in with the following comment, “I can’t stand that — the interview on the golf course,” Nicklaus said. “I mean, seriously, here’s a guy who’s leading the golf tournament, he’s just hit the edge of the rough, he’s got a very difficult shot on a very difficult hole, and you’re talking to him about stuff that totally takes his mind off of what he was doing. How do you think [Ben] Hogan would respond to that question? You would not have any teeth left if you did. He’d hit you right in the face with it.” Do you agree with Jack’s comments?

Deeks: I kind of agree with Jack.  I don’t find these walk-n-talk conversations especially valuable or insightful, but they’re a nice break from endless announcer analysis.  To rebut Jack’s point, though, the players can surely decline the request to be interviewed if they wish to.  (Which I’m sure Hogan would’ve done every time!)

Loughry: I don’t like in-play interviews. There is certainly time between shots to conduct them, but it doesn’t mean you should. I know they’re trying to bring fans into the game and learn the mindset of the athlete and all but in my opinion, it cheapens the event and those athletes (for agreeing to do them). Pre- and post-round interviews are just as valuable.

Schurman: I am a fan of the ‘on-course interviews’. However, Jack is correct about the wrong situation. The last round and play-offs should be excluded, and the player should have agreed to the on-course interview before teeing off on #1 with the right to refuse at any time. Where’s Stevie Williams when you need him?

Rule: I don’t mind the walk and talks, but there is a time and place for them, and that wasn’t it.  Read the room!  So, I agree with Jack in this instance, but generally I don’t mind hearing what players have to say during a round, as long as the questions are interesting enough and they pick players with a bit of personality, which isn’t always easy.

Quinn: Haven’t agreed or sympathized with anything Jack has said since meeting him for breakfast, but on this one will make a singular exception. The Walk and Talk is a desperate attempt to engage viewers not fast-forwarding or not even tuning in. No player in contention should be distracted, so who then? Guys not in the mix. What’s the point? Smiley (real name?) and Bones (can’t be real name) give the few who are still watching with the sound up enough insight. Leave the players alone. Good call, Jack.

Mumford: The walk-and-talk is a marginal step up from the hallway-outside-the-dressing-room-interviews we see on NHL broadcasts. Slightly better than, “Yup, we came to play, we’re giving it 110% and hope we can get the W” but not nearly insightful enough to waste the player’s time or insult the viewers. Maybe it’s the interviewer’s fault but I’m with Jack on this one. Leave the interviews for before and after the round.

Last week the PGA Tour announced yet another change to the format for the Tour Championship. Starting strokes are gone and all 30 players will start the final event even and have an equal chance to win the trophy and a big payout from the $100 million prize fund. What are your thoughts on the latest format?

Deeks: I think a level playing field is infinitely fairer than a tilted one.  I find $100million prize money grotesquely obscene, however.  But it’s consistent with the current culture in America: make the rich richer.

Loughry: I don’t know, but moving everyone back to a standard starting point certainly reduces the importance/interest of the year-long and playoff Fed-Ex Cup points race, doesn’t it? I know the Tour fights with winning the Fed-Ex Cup vs recognizing the TOUR Championship Champion. The optics of starting at -10 seemed strange, but it did make sense in some ways, especially for recognizing all year long excellence of the leader(s). I’m willing to see how this works out. You’ll crown a good Champion, if you’re in the top 30, you’re certainly a world-class player.

Schurman: I’ve held that position for years. A play-off is a play-off. Why give Usain Bolt a 2-yard advantage?

Rule: I’ve said it before, there is no perfect solution.  I do think the points leader deserves some sort of an advantage, like the top ranked teams in other sports get home field/course/ice advantage in the playoffs.  It’s not a huge advantage, but it’s something.  Maybe they should get the ability to choose who they play with and pick their tee times the day before based on the weather forecast!  OK, maybe not, but it doesn’t seem fair they don’t get some sort of advantage that they’ve earned through the previous 8-10 months.

Quinn: It’s all been so contrived since day one, that another tweak isn’t even newsworthy. Bulletin— now 30 millionaires evenly playing for more millions! Ya, that’ll move the needle. With the Tour stumbling over the past two years, then regaining balance, one of the unintended consequences has been the loss of the fan base. This ‘change’ isn’t going to change anything.

Mumford: I think they should dole out 75% of the prize pool to the FedEx points leaders after the second last event of the year. Then give out the rest for the final in whatever format makes sense – match play or stroke play. It’s a huge payday. However, the winner of that event is only the winner of that event. The points leader is recognized as having the best season. And winners of the four majors are ultimately recognized for the achievement that matters most.

Who’s your pick to win the RBC Canadian Open?

Deeks: I’m so tired of seeing Tommy Fleetwood’s name on top 10s, but never number one.  So, I would’ve picked him as a Mercy Pick.  However, to my chagrin, I see he’s not playing this week.  Nor is Mr. Chill, Tyrell Hatton.  So, I’m gonna go with Mackenzie Hughes in a flagrant display of proud nationalism.

Loughry: It’s an easy pick: Rory. Hitting driver exceptionally will serve him well at this year’s RBC.

Schurman: What an opportunity for a Canadian! A hometown feel, crowd support, and no passport required. I guess the Millcroft Inn, which is very close by, and the Cedar Springs Motel @ $84.00 are sold out. Any Canadian.

Rule: Hard not to choose Rory, especially since the course will be playing long given the forecast, and it doesn’t look like there will be much wind.  Rory should tear the place apart.  But I’m going to say that Ludvig Aberg will win the tournament where he made his pro debut two years ago.  It could also well be Corey Conners, as the seal has been removed from a Canadian win, so maybe Canadians will start to dominate their home Open.

Quinn: Given the current atmosphere, have to say anyone but an American. Don’t want to hear boos at the trophy ceremony. As for picks, Nick Taylor has been playing really well lately and — didn’t remember until this week that he’s the only player to win the Canadian Junior, Canadian Amateur and Canadian Open — he hits it long. He finds fairways, he could do it again. Pick two: Shane Lowry. He’s been playing really well lately, just a couple of bad swings away. Elbows up! Go Canada!

Mumford: Nick Taylor to win, McIlroy to place and Lowry to show. The track could be slow due to wet weather on Wednesday and Thursday but all three are mudders and can go pin hunting on the soft greens. McIlroy is a good frontrunner, but I like Taylor’s ability on long putts to allow him to make a charge on the final turn and nip Rory at the wire.