[Greg Tallman]

For the record, I do not think it is a horrible hole.

But you would never, never, ever get away with building a hole like that today.
[/quote

Never underestimate the power of marketing.

You could bill it as the greatest short par 4 in the world and it would be a hit.

[John Moore II]

In all reality, I don't think its that bad. None of the players hit what I would consider to be the preferred shot into the hole. Actually neither shot that I would prefer. None of the players that I say tried to hit a big, super high fade into the pin and land it on the green; not a hard shot with a hybrid, moderately difficult with a long iron. And they didn't try to hit a low draw, land it either on the ridge or on the front and run it back to the back part of the green. Everyone that I saw tried to bounce the ball into/through the rough short of the green and let it bounce where ever it might go. No one really really tried anything different.

And lets not forget, this is the United States Open and these are the best players in the world, stupidly talented. There is no such thing as too hard when it comes to these guys.

John,
These guys played practice rounds, they play the course regularly on the PGA tour, and as you say they're the best players in the world.
But you from your couch know a better way to play the hole?
Could it be that because NONE(by your count) tried your approach, that your approach is not the right one?

Actually it was noted later that at least two people had tried to roll the ball up with a hook. I know how I would have played the hole and how I would have coached someone of that talent to play the hole given calm conditions. Thats all I can say. Anyone with the talent to hit a big, towering fade or a sweeping low hook on command, I would tell them to try to hit one of those shots in there. That would most likely have a greater chance of success than some of the hit and hope shots we saw yesterday bouncing all through the fringe and such.

[Jay Flemma]

Ran, do you think it dawns on a single player to play short right from the tee, leaving a simple pitch and putt to secure par?

I disagree. It is one of my favorite holes in golf and I'd give it a 9.

Mike

Mike you read my mind...Billy Casper-style is the way to go.  play short and two putt up the apron.

122 is silly too...try to stop a long iron with V-grooves on a downslope.

[Bill_McBride]

..
As a bogey golfer I would liekely play the white tees (6100 yards) at Pebble. The distance for #17 from the whites is 163. Realistically, I could hit that left side of the green 5% of the time, and some of those would inevitably be semi-lucky bounces from the rough.
...

My understanding is that the greens designer called the left part the pro's green and the right part the amateur's green. We'll put you down as an amateur.

Who was the "greens designer?"

[mike_beene]

horrible hole.Skill is not rewarded.Just a hole across a field with the sun usually in your eyes.The best results were the lucky bounces.

[Garland Bayley]

..
As a bogey golfer I would liekely play the white tees (6100 yards) at Pebble. The distance for #17 from the whites is 163. Realistically, I could hit that left side of the green 5% of the time, and some of those would inevitably be semi-lucky bounces from the rough.
...

My understanding is that the greens designer called the left part the pro's green and the right part the amateur's green. We'll put you down as an amateur.

Who was the "greens designer?"

The green's designer would be H. Chandler Egan

[Matthew Rose]

I think it would be absolutely fine if the green was just a smidgeon larger. As it is now, it is probably a little bit too small for a shot of that length.... I suspect that is just normal shrinkage from gradually encroaching mowing patterns.

Perhaps if it had slightly more of a redan-ish quality to it, everyone would love it?

[Jim Nugent]

Interesting stat:  average score after two rounds at 17 is 3.516.  Average score at #6 is 4.6891.  Slightly over a stroke separates these two holes, though one is a par 3 and the other a par 5. 

Like Greg Tallman says, why does a half par have to mean birdie?  Pebble so far has 3 to 4 half-par bogeys: 2, 9, 14 and 17. 

[Kevin Pallier]

I think it's a poor hole. The neck currently is way too narrow for mine. A very overrated hole IMO and there are much better long P3's going around.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

There should be more holes like this.

Isn’t this just a case of a Risk/Reward hole. Something one seldom sees on a Par 3 nowadays. How about Risk by going for the pin by way of a lucky bounce or Reward for placing the ball off the green and playing a canny chip and run.

It would be really cool if the green had a strong spine or gully where the green connects the “forward” and “rear” part of the green - thus the second shot as a running chip could be slung into a chosen pin position tucked against the front fringe of the “rear green” - if you see what I mean.

[brad_miller]

It is difficult so it must be good. 

[Chris Buie]

I clearly remember hearing as a kid that Billy Casper intentionally laid up on a par-3 at Winged Foot - and parred it every day to win the US Open. 
I don't really see too much area to work with like that on the 17th.  Still, I think going for the front edge of the angled hour-glass and then taking your chances with a chip (from that green) may be the higher percentage strategy.  Chopping around in all that cabbage surrounding the back part...a player could get seriously messed up with that and lose the tournament.  I think I'd only try to zip a long iron to the back if I was down by one on the 71st hole.
I'll tell you what bothers me about the 17th - that service road right off the tee!  This hole should be some sort of mystic golf experience at the edge of the continent.  Seeing a service road while you are looking out at that hole and Pacific beyond - that dials down the magic for me. 

[Gary Slatter]

Glad so many people also think it's great test -  the score is the thing!  it gets inside a players pants!
 
I prefer it to the island green at TPC because you probably won't lose a ball at PB.  I would prefer it without the silly frilly bunkers.

so what about the 16th at CP ?   

[Mike Cirba]

Not sure if this has been covered and sorry if it's redundant, but how far was it in 1972 from the tee Nicklaus hit his vaunted 1-iron to inches of the hole?

[Adam Clayman]

Mike, I believe it was of similar length.

The low profile nature of the green complex, while viewing it from the teeing ground, use to be something Ran would've appreciated. If Pete Dye had made the hole, I'm sure it would be considered genius.

One cannot see the left side parameters of the green. According to some, that's not good architecture. But, I can think of plenty of great holes where seeing the size of the target green is not a deterrent to their greatness. Why so on this hole?

Is it the East Coast Bias shining through?

[John Moore II]

Mike, I believe it was of similar length.

The low profile nature of the green complex, while viewing it from the teeing ground, use to be something Ran would've appreciated. If Pete Dye had made the hole, I'm sure it would be considered genius.

One cannot see the left side parameters of the green. According to some, that's not good architecture. But, I can think of plenty of great holes where seeing the size of the target green is not a deterrent to their greatness. Why so on this hole?

Is it the East Coast Bias shining through?

I am not sure if it is East Coast bias, or just that the hole is very hard. I will give you that the target on that left side is very small given the shot needed to be played. Although, I think they could probably just water it down, make it slightly softer (yeah, I know, not ideal) and better able to hold longer shots and it would be fine. Now, not spongy soft, but moderately soft, just enough to make it so that it can hold those shots. Then it would not be an issue because those high 3 irons and hybrids would hold, at least a little bit.

[Mike Cirba]

Adam,

I would agree....in fact, the more I'm seeing it, the more I'm thinking it's great.

It begs the question...is there anything wrong with architecture where only the very best of the very best golfers can hit the shot that's required?

Think Niicklaus in 72...how many other players in the field could have hit that shot?   Very few.

And isn't that what the US Open is supposed to do?   Separate the very best from the very best golfers?

[Jim Nugent]

Think Niicklaus in 72...how many other players in the field could have hit that shot?   Very few.

And isn't that what the US Open is supposed to do?   Separate the very best from the very best golfers?

Mike, I'm pretty sure we covered this before, but I'm also 99% sure Nicklaus said after that Open that he hit that shot poorly, and got the great result out of luck. 

[Matt_Ward]

When you have a par-3 that's #1 in scoring demands and averages +3.5 in stroke average something is amiss. I too want what Mike C has advocated but the situation with #17 is simply a poke and hope situation. The Nicklaus situation from '72 is touched upon over and over again -- but Jack's shot benefited from hitting the stick.

[John Moore II]

When you have a par-3 that's #1 in scoring demands and averages +3.5 in stroke average something is amiss. I too want what Mike C has advocated but the situation with #17 is simply a poke and hope situation. The Nicklaus situation from '72 is touched upon over and over again -- but Jack's shot benefited from hitting the stick.

I don't think anything is amiss. Let it be more than a half stroke over par. Whatever. Though I would like to see much of the rough around the green shaved down. Now that would make it interesting.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

When skills are not the central force but randomness and sheer luck -- then the meaning of ANY golf shot is rendered to a level of nondistinction.

People want to see pros suffer at least once a year so if something is created -- a certain hole or shot that's borderline you get the calls from certain people that they should "suck it up." OK -- nothing wrong with that but provide a means for the well-played shot to be rewarded -- if it's all pure chance then I can get head to the Jersey Shore and play skee ball and take my chances there.

[John Moore II]

John:

When skills are not the central force but randomness and sheer luck -- then the meaning of ANY golf shot is rendered to a level of nondistinction.

People want to see pros suffer at least once a year so if something is created -- a certain hole or shot that's borderline you get the calls from certain people that they should "suck it up." OK -- nothing wrong with that but provide a means for the well-played shot to be rewarded -- if it's all pure chance then I can get head to the Jersey Shore and play skee ball and take my chances there.

Could probably go to the Jersey Shore and take your chances with Snooki too, but whatever. 

The randomness is part of why I said they should trim the rough down. That would make it an easier play. Either that, or play it 225 to the front right part of the green (yeah, the tees, whatever, play the 17th from the edge of the 4th tee) and then 165ish to the back left part of the green.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

How bout the idea -- silly on my part -- that the hole should not be played at the length for that type of shot.

ANGC's 7th is another good example where extensions to tees don't make sense when greens are left in the same shape / configuration they were originally created for.

[John Moore II]

John:

How bout the idea -- silly on my part -- that the hole should not be played at the length for that type of shot.

Isn't that what I said in my post? Play it as long length to a front right pin and have the ability to run it on the green? How much clearer do I need to be? I just don't understand

ANGC's 7th is another good example where extensions to tees don't make sense when greens are left in the same shape / configuration they were originally created for.

[Mike Hendren]

But you would never, never, ever get away with building a hole like that today.

I'm surprised by this comment.  Why not?

Would you say the same of RTJ's 4th at Spyglass?

Mike

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()