[Patrick_Mucci]

It would be good to hear the opinions of some people who have played the hole. 

So are those who haven't played a particular hole not entitled to an opinion? 
It may not be as informed of an opinion as those who have played it, but it's still an opinion.

Yes, but, is it a credible opinion ?

[Jim Nugent]

It would be good to hear the opinions of some people who have played the hole. 

So are those who haven't played a particular hole not entitled to an opinion? 

Didn't say that, and didn't mean to imply it.  Of course you are entitled to an opinion, and GCA.com is the place to express it. 

I said it would be good to hear what those who have played the hole think about it.  I do believe as a group they can give better input on how a hole plays than people who haven't played it. 

[BHoover]

It would be good to hear the opinions of some people who have played the hole. 

So are those who haven't played a particular hole not entitled to an opinion? 
It may not be as informed of an opinion as those who have played it, but it's still an opinion.

Yes, but, is it a credible opinion ?

Perhaps not. I'm willing to concede that. Look, a previous thread asked for well-regarded holes that one secretly thinks is not so great. To me, the 12th at ANGC, if you separate it from the Masters (something not easily done, which I acknowledge) does not seem all that interesting. No, I've not played it, and realistically I probably never will, but judging from what I've seen on TV of the hole itself it just doesn't strike me as being worthy of its status as one of the great par 3s in golf. I could be totally off my rocker here, but that's just how I feel.

[Greg Taylor]

Take away the fact that it's between two bona fide great holes... the 11th and 13th (obviously) and sheer beauty of the back drop I'd still say it's a stout par 3...

Not long in length, but the angled green and water/bunker configuration means there's plenty to consider, even if par 3's are pretty much point and shoot golf holes.

I'd say very good hole out of context, add in where it is and the looks and it's an all world par 3.

It trumps the 7th at Pebble in my world, for what it's worth.

[Bryan Drennon]

I've probably played the hole more than most here so I'll give it a go. There's 2 distinct holes, one with wind and one without. With no wind, it's an easy hole with a middle or left pin and a fairly easy par if you play the right pin conservatively. I aim it over the middle of the front bunker and draw it to the left side. It gives you a good birdie putt to all pins except the far right and that is a fairly straightforward 2 putt. If I were playing in the Masters I might play the hole that way all 4 days. I wouldn't personally ever play a cut into that green because if you come off it at all it's in the water. The problems start when the wind is blowing. It's amazing how many times the wind can change while you're standing on the tee. Now you're one unlucky gust of wind from a double bogie or worse. Any aggressive shot brings the water into play. Here's the problem with any kind of bailout. The back bunkers are very difficult to a right pin. If you get a bad lie you're probably aiming at the front bunker just to stay out of the water. Long left to a right pin is a difficult chip. It's one you can't land on the green in the air so you're guessing at the bounce. A long left miss can also put you up in the bushes or ivy and that's a quick double. If you're lucky enough to end up in the front bunker it's still fairly difficult. What most people don't realize is how deep that bunker is. You can't get any height on a bunker shot and have to barely clear the lip to get the shot close. It's still the easiest up and down from off the green. If they took that bunker out, I think the hole would be twice as difficult. All of this on a hole the pros hit between wedge and an eight iron.

You're question was is it an interesting hole. I would say without a doubt yes. To me it gives you what every course architect strives for in a design. Birdie is possible for all handicaps, it's a very challenging shot for all handicaps, it provides plenty of drama for a regular foursome or a Masters Sunday and it's one of the most beautiful and memorable golf holes in the world.

[BHoover]

I've probably played the hole more than most here so I'll give it a go. There's 2 distinct holes, one with wind and one without. With no wind, it's an easy hole with a middle or left pin and a fairly easy par if you play the right pin conservatively. I aim it over the middle of the front bunker and draw it to the left side. It gives you a good birdie putt to all pins except the far right and that is a fairly straightforward 2 putt. If I were playing in the Masters I might play the hole that way all 4 days. I wouldn't personally ever play a cut into that green because if you come off it at all it's in the water. The problems start when the wind is blowing. It's amazing how many times the wind can change while you're standing on the tee. Now you're one unlucky gust of wind from a double bogie or worse. Any aggressive shot brings the water into play. Here's the problem with any kind of bailout. The back bunkers are very difficult to a right pin. If you get a bad lie you're probably aiming at the front bunker just to stay out of the water. Long left to a right pin is a difficult chip. It's one you can't land on the green in the air so you're guessing at the bounce. A long left miss can also put you up in the bushes or ivy and that's a quick double. If you're lucky enough to end up in the front bunker it's still fairly difficult. What most people don't realize is how deep that bunker is. You can't get any height on a bunker shot and have to barely clear the lip to get the shot close. It's still the easiest up and down from off the green. If they took that bunker out, I think the hole would be twice as difficult. All of this on a hole the pros hit between wedge and an eight iron.

You're question was is it an interesting hole. I would say without a doubt yes. To me it gives you what every course architect strives for in a design. Birdie is possible for all handicaps, it's a very challenging shot for all handicaps, it provides plenty of drama for a regular foursome or a Masters Sunday and it's one of the most beautiful and memorable golf holes in the world.

Hard to argue with your comments. Thanks.

[jeffwarne]

I've probably played the hole more than most here so I'll give it a go. There's 2 distinct holes, one with wind and one without. With no wind, it's an easy hole with a middle or left pin and a fairly easy par if you play the right pin conservatively. I aim it over the middle of the front bunker and draw it to the left side. It gives you a good birdie putt to all pins except the far right and that is a fairly straightforward 2 putt. If I were playing in the Masters I might play the hole that way all 4 days. I wouldn't personally ever play a cut into that green because if you come off it at all it's in the water. The problems start when the wind is blowing. It's amazing how many times the wind can change while you're standing on the tee. Now you're one unlucky gust of wind from a double bogie or worse. Any aggressive shot brings the water into play. Here's the problem with any kind of bailout. The back bunkers are very difficult to a right pin. If you get a bad lie you're probably aiming at the front bunker just to stay out of the water. Long left to a right pin is a difficult chip. It's one you can't land on the green in the air so you're guessing at the bounce. A long left miss can also put you up in the bushes or ivy and that's a quick double. If you're lucky enough to end up in the front bunker it's still fairly difficult. What most people don't realize is how deep that bunker is. You can't get any height on a bunker shot and have to barely clear the lip to get the shot close. It's still the easiest up and down from off the green. If they took that bunker out, I think the hole would be twice as difficult. All of this on a hole the pros hit between wedge and an eight iron.

You're question was is it an interesting hole. I would say without a doubt yes. To me it gives you what every course architect strives for in a design. Birdie is possible for all handicaps, it's a very challenging shot for all handicaps, it provides plenty of drama for a regular foursome or a Masters Sunday and it's one of the most beautiful and memorable golf holes in the world.

Hard to argue with your comments. Thanks.

Those 10000 people gathered around the tee in the bleachers seem interested to me
Fascinating hole as it requires judgement, skill, and discipline, yet offers a chance for recovery.

Not sure how many more times Bryan has played it than me, but I guarantee you he's played it with a hole cut in the green more times than me

[Greg Taylor]

I found much the same regarding the wind when I play it. On EA Sports.

 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Those 10000 people gathered around the tee in the bleachers seem interested to me

This is to my point. The hole is infinitely interesting -- and apparently difficult -- on the Masters course, certainly on the Sunday Masters course. Final-round 12 tee is perhaps the only spot in tournament golf where watching the pros go through their typical fidgeting, fretting, calculating, stalling pre-shot (pre pre-shot?) behaviors produces delicious suspense (as opposed to "hit the @$$&ing ball already" viewer infuriation).

Which pro said it's not a hard hole, not hard at all...until Sunday at the Masters?

A reminder that as Charles Price wrote, there is golf and there is tournament golf and then -- and few seem to note this particular distinction -- and then there is major championship golf. Given not only this week's course but this week's course conditions, it's a point worth remembering.

[Tim_Weiman]

Brian,

Feels like the case for the hole being "interesting" is fairly well laid out.

Not sure the con case has, but that doesn't mean there isn't such a case.

I struggle with Pat Mucci's point about many notable Par 3 holes being one dimensional and penal. Does that mean we can't argue target golf is not interesting?

[Patrick_Mucci]

It would be good to hear the opinions of some people who have played the hole. 

So are those who haven't played a particular hole not entitled to an opinion? 
It may not be as informed of an opinion as those who have played it, but it's still an opinion.

Yes, but, is it a credible opinion ?

Perhaps not. I'm willing to concede that. Look, a previous thread asked for well-regarded holes that one secretly thinks is not so great.


Brian,

Yes, that's correct, but I believe, inherent in the question was the understanding that the responder had played the hole.

What's interesting about golf, golf course architecture and opinions is that many to most times, opinions tend to be restricted.
Restricted in the sense that they tend to be limited to how the golfer fared on the hole.
Restricted in that the opinion tends to be based upon the "game" of the respondent.

Rarely does a 1 handicap view a hole in the context of the game of an 8, 14, 20, 26 and 32 handicapper.
And, rarely does an 8, 14, 20, 26 and 32 handicapper view a hole in the context of a 1 handicapper.

Vision and perspective tend to be myopic.

Your opinion is removed even further in that you have no playing experience on the hole.
Nothing in the way of interaction with the features of the hole.
Your opinion is based solely on what you've seen on TV.

You've never felt the wind in your face as you're deciding to choose your club.
You've never felt the wind shift after you've decided which club to hit.
So that uncertainty has never entered your mind.
You've never stepped onto the tee, looked at the hole and flag and had to decide how to hit the shot.
You've never had to contemplate margins of error.
You've never had to evaluate your contemplated shot, based upon your play of the prior 11 holes.

So, in a sense, you're a bit like the three blind men examining the elephant.

And, your perspective is mostly that dictated to you by the height of the TV tower, and not from the golfer's eyes.

Hence, your credibility not only comes into question, but, has to be deeply discounted, if not dismissed.

To me, the 12th at ANGC, if you separate it from the Masters (something not easily done, which I acknowledge) does not seem all that interesting.
Then you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
And, from a golfer's perspective, any hole with water adjacent to a green has to gain a player's interest.

Check out the 13th at Pine Tree on Google Earth and tell us if you find that hole uninteresting as well.

No, I've not played it, and realistically I probably never will,

Then you don't know what it's like to step up onto that tee and evaluate that which sits before you.

but judging from what I've seen on TV of the hole itself

What you've seen on TV is from a limited perspective, from a TV tower, not from the golfer's eyes.
And, you've never felt the impact of the wind as you stand on that tee trying to determine what shot and club you intend to hit.

it just doesn't strike me as being worthy of its status as one of the great par 3s in golf.

It's a great hole.
And, let's not forget who designed it.

I could be totally off my rocker here, but that's just how I feel.

Well you are totally off your rocker.
And you have to feel that way because you couldn't defend your position if you didn't feel that way.
But, it's an untenable position and you'd know that if you had played it.

Could you answer my question regarding the 7th at Pebble Beach.
Surely, you've seen it on TV as well.

[BHoover]

I refuse to read Mucci's rainbow comments. His use of colors gives me a headache. I have played the hole on Xbox and it just didn't seem to be too interesting.

Pat, I'm being sarcastic. What I find insulting is that, despite my attempt to be reasonable and concede that I am willing to discount my opinion because I haven't actually played the hole, you still have to insult my intelligence. But I shouldn't be surprised. I deeply discount your opinion as well.

Tim, I give up. I'm obviously wrong about 12at ANGC. I just don't have the time, energy or inclination to continue to argue in favor of my opinion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I refuse to read Mucci's rainbow comments. His use of colors gives me a headache.

You were the one who brought about your headache by offering your critical analysis of the hole without ever having actually seen it.

I have played the hole on Xbox and it just didn't seem to be too interesting.

Pat, I'm being sarcastic.

What I find insulting is that, despite my attempt to be reasonable and concede that I am willing to discount my opinion because I haven't actually played the hole, you still have to insult my intelligence.

But, you haven't attempted to be reasonable.
You presented an unequivocal analysis absent any personal experience

I didn't insult your intelligence, you're the one who did a great job of that by rendering an opinion absent any personal experience.
If you had played the hole and offered your opinion, it would carry far more weight.

Why don't you tell us what sex is like with Kate Upton

But I shouldn't be surprised. I deeply discount your opinion as well.

More reason to question your intelligence.

When you put forth an opinion, not based in fact, but, based upon your limited views as dictated by the producers of the telecast, you expose yourself to critical comments

Tim, I give up. I'm obviously wrong about 12at ANGC. I just don't have the time, energy or inclination to continue to argue in favor of my opinion.
Nonsense, it's not fatique, it's a flawed and failed position that's caused you to send up the white flag, one absent any basis in personal first hand experience.

Before you go making definitive, critical comments on golf holes, don't you think you should play or walk them to gain some sense of the hole.

Do you judge a meal by how it photographs or by how it tastes ?

[BHoover]

Whatever you say, Pat.  I can't read your pastel writing.  Seriously, trying to read that gives me a headache.

[Keith Grande]

How are we defining interesting?  

Not dull?

Holds you attention?

Requires or stimulates thought in approach and practice?

Well, certainly #12 is not dull, it holds your attention, as there is peril throguhout the hole.  Don't go short , or long off the tee, or disaster can strke.  

However, does it require advanced thought as to how to play the hole?  Are there real options to consider other than middle of the green? Do other approaches or insights reveal itself after many plays?  Does the wind change strategy, or is it always use the club which will get you to middle of the green?

[MClutterbuck]

I think that it's tough to separate the hole from the Masters, where it's obviously played a crucial role in deciding the tournament (see 1992 and Fred Couples). But if you ignore the pressure of the Masters, the hole seems rather bland to me. It's a green without much movement (from what I can tell) and it's either hit the green or you have little chance as you're in the creek, the bunker or the woods. Not much chance for a chip or shot from off the green. It just doesn't do much for me. I may be crazy but it's just not my favorite well-respected hole.

Chris made a good point earlier about the angle of the green, but it's not apparent from tv so I missed that.

The only reason to differentiate the 12th on Masters or regular weeks is the speed of the greens. The tee shot is probably the only case where you are playing pretty much from where the pros play if not the same spot on some days.

The green is actually fast, and does have counter. It is not an easy put, if you are left with a center or right flag, nor the other way around. There is nothing bland about the green or the hole. I think it is one of the highlights of the round.

With respect to the front bunker, if that was taken away, I think the hole would be much tougher and unfair. The front bunker allows the 10-15 handicapper a safer shot.

[Tim_Weiman]

I refuse to read Mucci's rainbow comments. His use of colors gives me a headache. I have played the hole on Xbox and it just didn't seem to be too interesting.

Pat, I'm being sarcastic. What I find insulting is that, despite my attempt to be reasonable and concede that I am willing to discount my opinion because I haven't actually played the hole, you still have to insult my intelligence. But I shouldn't be surprised. I deeply discount your opinion as well.

Tim, I give up. I'm obviously wrong about 12at ANGC. I just don't have the time, energy or inclination to continue to argue in favor of my opinion.

Brian,

One way to go with the discussion is to compare and contrast the 12th with another Par 3 you feel better meets your definition of interesting.

Pat mentioned the 7th at Pebble Beach, a hole that shares some characteristics with Augusta #12, specifically the changing wind conditions and club selection challenges.

Personally, I never really considered the 7th interesting. Fun and challenging, but not interesting because unlike the proceeding 6th hole and the following 8th hole, I always played #7 exactly the same way. I just aimed for the middle of the green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim,

The first reason that # 12 is interesting as a golf hole is that you've seen the best golfers in the world play it a thousand times, and now you get a chance to "compete" with them on an almost equal footing.

When you make birdie or par, you think back and ask yourself, how much would _____ pay to have my birdie/par in the 19__ or 20__ Masters.

Or, "I played this hole as good or better than ____"

There's an exhilaration associated with standing on that tee, and it's for a variety of reasons with different golfers.

And, there's an exhilaration associated with having played the hole in par or better, making the walk to the 13th tee all that more enjoyable.

Now back to other reasons

Par 3's are typically one dimensional.

Perhaps that's the attraction of the Biarritz and Redan, they offer playing options.

There's little in the way of playing options at # 7 at PBGC.
Yes, you can punch a lower iron or hit your normal shot depending upon conditions/wind, but, it's strictly target golf with dire consequences for errant shots.

Let's not forget that modern I&B has removed the ability to flight the ball, significantly.
In the 60's, 70's and 80's, many to most good golfers worked the ball depending upon hole location and conditions.
Today, that's not as pronounced.

One of the neat things about # 12 is how it comes on your radar screen as you're playing # 11.
It gets your attention as you observe the entirety of the hole as you walk down the 11th fairway.
Then, after holing out on # 11, you turn your back on it while walking to the 12th tee.

Once on the tee, you turn, see the entire hole before you and now have to decide on a few things.
As was mentioned previously, at 145-155 you're about as close to playing what the competitors play in the Masters.
So, distance calibration and club selection come first.
Then, hole location and flighting the ball, given your, and your caddy's understanding of the influence of the wind, come next.

The water and bunkers loom large in your view because there's not much in "profile" presented by the putting surface.

Distance control is king.

Depending upon your ability, hole location becomes your focus in determining direction and ball flight.
Better players will seek the pin, others will take a more comfortable route.

If the "hitter knows" at contact I think most golfers are instantly informed of their fate, but, distance control and the wind can keep one in doubt until the ball lands.

# 12 is a neat hole, one that holds your interest when you first see it from the 11th fairway until you walk off the green to the 13th tee.

But, what do I know, I never played it on XBox. 

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

You raised the critical issue of distance control. I can still remember Bob Lewis standing in the middle of #16 at Pine Valley preparing to play the shot that closed out his Walker Cup match in 1985.

The caddy had given him 185 as his yardage, but Bob asked "is it 185 or is it 185 1/2?". Absolutely true story.

Anyway, what level of handicap has the distance control to do anything but aim for middle of green on Augusta #12?

P.S. I wish the "Good Doctor" himself could weigh in!

[archie_struthers]

 

When a tour pro can make 6 and a "hack" lol cam male 2 it's certainly interesting !

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()