Franklin Regional grad Palmer Jackson’s run at U.S. Amateur ends | TribLIVE.com
Other Local

Franklin Regional grad Palmer Jackson’s run at U.S. Amateur ends

Paul Schofield
1549504_web1_ptr-GolfSTOCK

Palmer Jackson’s run at the U.S. Amateur ended Friday.

The Murrysville native and Notre Dame commit fell to Vanderbilt junior John Augenstein 3-and-2 in the quarterfinals at Pinehurst No. 2 at Pinehurst Resort and Country Club at the Village of Pinehurst, N.C.

Jackson struggled with his driver throughout the match, and Augenstein took advantage. Jackson called Pinehurst No. 2 the hardest course he ever has played.

Augenstein went 3-up after five holes before heavy rains delayed the match for more than an hour. Augenstein won Nos. 3 and 4 with pars, and then he sank a 20-foot for eagle on No. 5.

“I got off to a real good start,” Augenstein said. “I let him get back in the match, which was unacceptable. My shot on No. 12 got me going again.”

Jackson missed an opportunity to win a hole after the delay on No. 7 but won No. 8 and No. 9 with pars.

Augenstein, the highest-ranked player left in the championship, got a par save on No. 12 to stay 1-up and then won No. 15 with a par and No. 16 with a par after Jackson’s par putt lipped out.

Jackson reached the final eight by defeating two college seniors — Auburn’s Jacob Solomon and Stanford’s Isaiah Salinda — 2-up.

Paul Schofield is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.