[Steve_Lovett]

There have been a lot of comments about the 17th at TPC Sawgrass over the years. It's received criticism as being one-dimensional, gimmicky, or whatever....

If you had cart blanche to redesign the hole - with virtually no constraint in budget or the freedom to manipulate the land other than it having to connect the existing 16th green to 18th tee - what might it look like?

Could be an interesting hypothetical/fictional design competition.....................
 

[Jason Thurman]

Exactly like it looks now. It's one of the great par 3s in golf, as shown by the fact that it's been so talked about here.

The problem with 17 at Sawgrass isn't 17 at Sawgrass. It's every shoddy copy hole that's been thrown together over the last twenty years.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Possibly the greatest par 3 in golf if you took the masses vote.

[Matthew Essig]

I have always wondered why Pete never changed the look of the hole when he dug the giant hole for sand, causing the giant water hazard right where the 17th green is. For example, turning the green 90 degrees counterclockwise and placing it along the edge of the hazard. Although I love the hole as it is now.

[Tim Gavrich]

I'd make it a club shorter.  That's it.

[Michael George]

I am not a fan of the hole.

I would move green to the back and left along the grass area where some spectators sit now.  It would still have water in front and on the right.  However, short left would be open as a running fairway to the green (with tees that went up along the left side for every player) - providing a bail out similar to #16 at Cypress Point.  I would keep the back of the green as a hill with no bunkers, making the recovery shot very difficult and opening up the water short of the hole if you get too aggressive on your chip.  I would put one deep pot bunker to the left of the green.  It should be small but deep and would be used to mess with the player's mind when teeing off (similar effect to Strath bunker on Eden hole).  The green should be fairly flat running left to right toward the water.  In sum, the player would be primarily concerned with carrying the water, but would face really difficult shots if he is too aggressive or pulls it left.  Plus, a player could bail out short left and take his 4 so it would not be as horribly penal as the current hole.

[Steve_Lovett]

I'd make it a club shorter.  That's it.

Why, out of curiosity? Do you sense the hole would play differently, or better? BTW - from the back tees the card says 137.

[Matt_Cohn]

I am not a fan of the hole.

I would move green to the back and left along the grass area where some spectators sit now.  It would still have water in front and on the right.  However, short left would be open as a running fairway to the green (with tees that went up along the left side for every player) - providing a bail out similar to #16 at Cypress Point.  I would keep the back of the green as a hill with no bunkers, making the recovery shot very difficult and opening up the water short of the hole if you get too aggressive on your chip.  I would put one deep pot bunker to the left of the green.  It should be small but deep and would be used to mess with the player's mind when teeing off (similar effect to Strath bunker on Eden hole).  The green should be fairly flat running left to right toward the water.  In sum, the player would be primarily concerned with carrying the water, but would face really difficult shots if he is too aggressive or pulls it left.  Plus, a player could bail out short left and take his 4 so it would not be as horribly penal as the current hole.

14 at Harbour Town but shorter?

[Mark Pritchett]

Needs a hairy bunker! 

[Matthew Rose]

I'd get rid of the railroad ties and replace it with a gentle bank all the way around. In fact, I'd get rid of all the railroad ties on the golf course, because I think they are ugly. But then it wouldn't be a Dye course.

Other than that, I don't think I'd do anything. It's a perfectly built hole for its intended purpose.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Floating bunkers that could be, at times, moored on the periphery of putting green.  

[Steve_Lovett]

The problem with 17 at Sawgrass isn't 17 at Sawgrass. It's every shoddy copy hole that's been thrown together over the last twenty years.

I think this is probably right. I haven't seen it in the flesh but think it looks like a fantastic hole from the TV. It is severe but it's not a long hole - it demands that you execute but also the green is really interesting and can play so differently depending on the wind. Tiger in his press conference yesterday recalled hitting a punch 5 iron when it was really cold in the amateur one year. He said he was extremely nervous standing over that shot but luckily pulled it off. He really lit up talking about that shot. I think the notion of "giving options"  and "bail outs"on a hole of this length is GCA groupthink. Sorry Michael!

I attend the tournament pretty much every year and will be there tomorrow.

From a spectator viewpoint the fact that it's a short hole is really beneficial - you can easily see the ball leave the tee and follow its flight. This would be much harder to do on a long par 3. The scale is really impressive, especially when the bank on the left of the hole is full of people and the hospitality chalet's at the tops of the ridge are in full activity. For stadium golf, it is impressive theater.

The view of the action on 17 from the 16th is also impressive and creates anticipation, and I'm sure the walk to the 17th tee is long enough to have put doubt in the heads of many players.

[Matthew Petersen]

I have always wondered why Pete never changed the look of the hole when he dug the giant hole for sand, causing the giant water hazard right where the 17th green was. For example, turning the green 90 degrees counterclockwise and placing it along the edge of the hazard. Although I love the hole as it is now.

In "Bury Me In a Pot Bunker" he says that the original plan was for a fairly normal par 3 with water in front and to the right, but as they kept excavating sand from the area the hole/would-be lake just got bigger and bigger and one day the island green idea popped in his head (he mentions some older course in the area that he may have seen that inspired him but I can't recall it now). He took the idea to Alice and to Deane Beaman and they both loved it.

[Ronald Montesano]

Essig, what do you mean "was"? That's how the hole always was. Dye thought about leaving it sandy, but I don't believe it ever played that way.

If we take the jaws that Muirhead had at Stone Harbor in Jersey and put them around the green, it would look like Pac-Man eating a green monster from space.

Other than that, leave it alone. It's great. You only need one island green, just like you only need one green with a bunker in the middle, etc.

[Matthew Petersen]

The problem with 17 at Sawgrass isn't 17 at Sawgrass. It's every shoddy copy hole that's been thrown together over the last twenty years.

I think this is probably right. I haven't seen it in the flesh but think it looks like a fantastic hole from the TV. It is severe but it's not a long hole - it demands that you execute but also the green is really interesting and can play so differently depending on the wind. Tiger in his press conference yesterday recalled hitting a punch 5 iron when it was really cold in the amateur one year. He said he was extremely nervous standing over that shot but luckily pulled it off. He really lit up talking about that shot. I think the notion of "giving options"  and "bail outs"on a hole of this length is GCA groupthink. Sorry Michael!

I attend the tournament pretty much every year and will be there tomorrow.

From a spectator viewpoint the fact that it's a short hole is really beneficial - you can easily see the ball leave the tee and follow its flight. This would be much harder to do on a long par 3. The scale is really impressive, especially when the bank on the left of the hole is full of people and the hospitality chalet's at the tops of the ridge are in full activity. For stadium golf, it is impressive theater.

The view of the action on 17 from the 16th is also impressive and creates anticipation, and I'm sure the walk to the 17th tee is long enough to have put doubt in the heads of many players.

Really a great and underrated feature of the hole. I have played a few island greens (including PGA West) that you just sort of come upon all on their own. But not only do you know 17 at Sawgrass is coming but you see it while you play the 16th and then have that walk all around the edge of the lake ...

[noonan]

The only flaw is the bunker - it is too small - otherwise it is perfect

[Matthew Petersen]

The only flaw is the bunker - it is too small - otherwise it is perfect

That might be the change I'd make, too, but I think I would be more interested in eliminating the bunker altogether.

[Wade Whitehead]

I might expand the teeing ground so it wraps around the hazard.  While the yardage wouldn't change much, you could present different angles to the green.  The bunker might become more important as a result.

Think #6 at Tobacco Road.

WW

[Ronald Montesano]

It's no surprise that Strantz worked with Dye...He did a lot of cauldron holes, not just at Toe Road.

[Steve_Lovett]

I might expand the teeing ground so it wraps around the hazard.  While the yardage wouldn't change much, you could present different angles to the green.  The bunker might become more important as a result.

Think #6 at Tobacco Road.

WW

I made an ace at #6 at Tobacco Road in December '09 so it has a bit of a special spot in my heart. I like that hole and the options that the various teeing areas and width of the green present.

Notwithstanding the tree on the island in the lake it would be an interesting angle from nearer the 16th green - and the backdrop of mounds/people would be much different than the stand of trees behind the current line of play.

[Jason Thurman]

The problem with 17 at Sawgrass isn't 17 at Sawgrass. It's every shoddy copy hole that's been thrown together over the last twenty years.

I think this is probably right. I haven't seen it in the flesh but think it looks like a fantastic hole from the TV. It is severe but it's not a long hole - it demands that you execute but also the green is really interesting and can play so differently depending on the wind. Tiger in his press conference yesterday recalled hitting a punch 5 iron when it was really cold in the amateur one year. He said he was extremely nervous standing over that shot but luckily pulled it off. He really lit up talking about that shot. I think the notion of "giving options"  and "bail outs"on a hole of this length is GCA groupthink. Sorry Michael!

I actually think the hole presents as many options as any par 3. Lost in all the water is a relatively large green with pretty significant undulation. Most players could probably play for the middle of the green quite safely, but the temptation of getting closer to the flag brings disaster into play. I think 40 feet in any direction is a pretty adequate margin of error for a 135 yard shot, but too many players get a little too aggressive and then miss by 20 into the water.

[noonan]

The only flaw is the bunker - it is too small - otherwise it is perfect

That might be the change I'd make, too, but I think I would be more interested in eliminating the bunker altogether.

Removing the bunker would be better than the one there....hard to get a good stance in there

[Matthew Essig]

Essig, what do you mean "was"? That's how the hole always was. Dye thought about leaving it sandy, but I don't believe it ever played that way.

You are right. I fixed my mistake.

[Mike Hendren]

The only flaw is the bunker - it is too small - otherwise it is perfect

That might be the change I'd make, too, but I think I would be more interested in eliminating the bunker altogether.

+1 since the bunker serves as an aiming point for the better player.  Play at or right of it and you need an extra half-club.   That's only if forced to make a change - I like it as is.

How about no bunker and a Raynoresque thumbprint, perhaps smaller than usual to feed holes in one?  If not small, the higher "toilet-set" would simply be too brutal to access.  



Bogey

[Carl Rogers]

Technical question:
How much does the level of the lake rise and fall?  I assume that it rises and falls according to rainfall drainage.  Does the lake itself drain to other lakes?

This question has a lot to do with a potential "remodeling".

I am very much of two minds about the hole ...
1. As a gauntlet-stage set for the top golfers in the world, it is magnificent!
2. For everyone else .... it is a way to lose balls and keep the golf ball industry thriving.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()