Designing--and playing--the three shot hole

[Ben Sims]

I am sitting here watching the great big cat of golf play the 13th at Warwick Hills.  I can't help but notice how he is playing the hole and how that interacts with it's design.  Tiger puts the ball in the fairway, and--not so shockingly--plays for the green in two.  Water ball.  Plays his 59 yard pitch--now his 4th shot--to 2 feet for par.  I can't help but wonder two things.

1) If his short game is--as he describes it--at a whole new level since pre-injury days, then why is he in the lead, whacking fairway woods into greens instead of laying up and using the same swing that put his 4th shot at 2 feet?

2) The bigger question I see is this.  If putting water near a well bunkered green isn't keeping the leader on Sunday from going in two, then what are you architects are there going to turn to in the future to protect your three shot holes?

Now I understand that we are talking about Tiger here.  Not one of us hackers.  But the question remains.  What are we seeing as the evolution of the long holes when more and more people are trying--succeeding or not--to get home in two? Are the designers putting more emphasis on length, or hazards?  Are we getting to a place in golf where the par 5 is automatically a par 4.5 and every par 4 is a 4.5, just to even it all out? 

[Tim Gavrich]

I'm not sure about your second wonder, but as to the first...

I guess for Tiger (and any player, really) it's totally a mater of pleying one's own percentages.  If Tiger has, say, 265 yards into the hole and he decides to go for it, it must be because Tiger determines simply that he is more likely to get it in the hole in three from 265 by hitting a fairway wood than to get it up and down from 60, 80, 100 yards; whatever his layup yardage would be.  Yes he's got a great short game, but he's good enough to have some kind of expectation to put it in easy up-and-down range, even with the pond by the green.

[Wade Whitehead]

I noticed the same shot and realized Tiger was playing like he needed to make up shots - not like he was in the lead.

At one time, players played differently, depending on their standing.  That's changed as much as anything.

WW

[John Moore II]

I think length has to factor into is all. If you make a hole in the range of 550 yards, then just about everyone at the level is going to go for the green in two shots barring something really odd. The hole has to have some very strategic design, mounds in the fairway, pinched in landing area, or something, to prevent people from totally ripping a driver off the tee. South Mountain in Utah is a pretty good look at a way to design in such a way. The fairways in the landing areas for longer hitters are very hilly/moundy and might make the player hit a shorter club off the tee.

But without making the holes 650 yards or so, theres not much of a way to prevent the elite players from having a go at the green in two.

[Scott Warren]

Sounds great to me that Tiger was tempted to go at it in two, rinsed his ball, and made a par where if he had laid up he might very well have made birdie.

What's not to love about the fact a golfer was tempted, got bitten, then had to scramble his arse off to make par? I'm getting turgid just thinking about it.

[Wyatt Halliday]

What are we seeing as the evolution of the long holes when more and more people are trying--succeeding or not--to get home in two?

In reference to the reachable par five for the touring pro, how about building more greens that slope away from the player? Would this provide the desired effect?

[John Moore II]

Sounds great to me that Tiger was tempted to go at it in two, rinsed his ball, and made a par where if he had laid up he might very well have made birdie.

What's not to love about the fact a golfer was tempted, got bitten, then had to scramble his arse off to make par? I'm getting turgid just thinking about it.

Thats another good way to look at the risk/reward nature of the hole. He took the risk, got no reward but no penalty either. Seems to be fair enough to me. I'm not getting turgid though, far from it.

[JESII]

Wyatt,

I think it depends what is over the green.


As for the shot, I doubt Tiger thought he could over cut it with the wind off the right and the tree forcing him to aim 40 or 50 yards left...anything but an over cut and he's getting it up and down as often as with a 70 yard wedge.

[Wyatt Halliday]

Jim,

I think you just accurately described why he went for the green. With that club in his hand and a clean downhill lie promoting the two stage flight, there was an 75% success rate for the miss (three places: short left, long left, & green). He slipped it just a bit and found the fourth option...water.

Give me the same set of circumstances and I'll go for it also. I'm of course referring to the odds, not the shot he had.

Wyatt

[John Moore II]

Wyatt-I think it depends on what your miss is. My miss is to the right, so given those odds and that shot, I would likely have laid up to a place somewhat close to the green or aimed it for the left bunker, but most likely I would have laid it up. But given Tiger's skills, it was probably the better precentage play for him to take the shot.

[JESII]

Wyatt,

Agreed...my first sentence was in response to your question about building more greens that slope away.

We agree on Tiger's decision.


JKM,

It is noteworthy that Tiger had to hit a huge cut just to get it to the green. Even with a standard miss being to the right, as you say yours is, it would be hard work to get the ball into that pond.

[John Moore II]

Jim-Yeah, I understand the way the miss goes, but that being said, most of us who hit the ball right, like I think Tiger does naturally, tend to be able to hit huge fades on command. I likely would have tried to lay something up, but I'm not quite as good as Tiger.

[Chris DeNigris]

Tiger had a 3 shot lead at the Buick Open...he was just challenging himself. Out of 10 swings he only puts that one in the water, maybe a 2nd. 3 times he has an eagle putt and 5 other times he's got almost a certain birdie. His version of playing to the crowd. Even or only a one stroke lead and he probably would have layed up from there, given how the tree had to affect his shot. And he's not likely to try it in a more important tournament either.

God forbid too many courses are designed for Tour pros (or their caliber) except as an afterthought (special tees). Even if I crunch a drive (280) I've still got 230-260 to go on most shorter to medium length 5s. And the accuracy from that distance for most players is marginal. So outside of 2% of the golfing universe, the 1 putt eagle or 2 putt birdie is still cause for great celebration!