[Jeff_Lewis]

Point:  The worst hole on the course.   The beginning of the many RTJ changes that make the course less legitimately  Golden Age and more Dark Age.   Its really not an interesting hole at all.   Hitting it in the water is just awful because generally players don't need to risk the water (because of the severity of the green's slope)  in order to get it close to left pins. And basically going for right pins is just stupid because the bunker is so penal.   So you have no strategy.   Tremendous randomness of result attached to incredibly similar shots.  No risk/reward.

Counterpoint:  One of the most dramatic holes on the course.  The Sunday pin is birdie-able at a time where you want somebody charging to at least have an opportunity. 6 of the last 12 winners birdied it. How can you criticize a theater that is so beautiful.  Where so much history has taken place.  Where TIger Woods' chip-in is as amazing a shot as we have ever seen at a critical point in a major.  The bunker is such a type 1 error that players should be punished for going at right pins. 

[Mark Bourgeois]

It's a rinky-dink goofy golf type hole for the reasons you mention. It derives its legitimacy merely from its position in the round and from the Masters.

[Terry Lavin]

Looks like it belongs on an Art Hills Florida resort course.

[Kalen Braley]

Counter to the point:

#7 is worse...and 3 reasons why

Tight hit and hope fairway
Tight hit and hope fairway
Tight hit and hope fairway

[Matthew Rose]

Is the left bunker between the lake and the green really necessary? As long as that is there, it takes a pretty lousy shot to find the water.

[Jeff_Lewis]

Judge Lavin, I cannot disagree. 

[Matt_Cohn]

I can't understand someone saying the hole lacks interest or strategy. I also love, love holes that play so differently depending on the hole location, and 16 is that to the greatest extent.

[Marc Haring]

The problem is even though it maybe lacks strategic merit, it's ANGC and has seen some massive drama over the years so it is difficult to criticise. 

[Steve Lapper]

I think Art Hills MIGHT be able to do better

[Terry Lavin]

Like most hereabouts, I will nonetheless watch this compromised classic all weekend, knowing that it could make or break the toonamint. Just ask Greg.

[BCrosby]

There are few par 3's where such small differences in shot placement make such profound differences in outcomes. I really like the hole. It is greens within greens. I wish RTJ had done more like it. Alas, he didn't.


Standing on the tee, it is hard to overstate how scary the left side pin looks. On Sundays at the Masters it must be terrifying. 



Bob



 

[Peter Pallotta]

There is little strategy, that's correct. What there is instead is the need to hit a terrific golf shot worthy of a true champion on the most public and pressure packed stage in all of professional golf ("Be right" said Jackie; "It is" said Jack). Or, if you don't hit that kind of tee shot, you're called instead to make an all-world putt when you need it the very most, with a major championship and a storied green jacket and a life-long exemption to Augusta National  on the line. ("Ah, that's one of the greatest putts I've ever seen in my life", said Henry Longhurst. "And back on the tee, young Mr. Weiskopf will now have to take it, having dished it out the hole before").  In short - I think all this architecture psycho-babble we spout around here has gone to our heads. We seem to have forgotten that the only reason a golf course or "golf course architecture" has any meaning or value whatsoever is that it serves as a field of competitive play, and the 16th hole has served as the very ideal of such a field of play for decades.
Thanks very much, good night....   

Peter
Edit: also what Bob says.   

[Joe Hancock]

There is little strategy, that's correct. What there is instead is the need to hit a terrific golf shot worthy of a true champion on the most public and pressure packed stage in all of professional golf ("Be right" said Jackie; "It is" said Jack). Or, if you don't hit that kind of tee shot, you're called instead to make an all-world putt when you need it the most. ("Ah, that's one of the greatest putts I've ever seen in my life", said Henry Longhurst. "And back on the tee, young Mr. Weiskopf will now have to take it, having dished it out the hole before").  In short - I think all this architecture psycho-babble we spout around here has gone to our heads. We seem to have forgotten that the only reason a golf course has any meaning or value is that it serves as a field of competitive play -- and 16 has served as the very ideal of such a field of play for decades.
Thanks very much, good night....   

People, the applause sign is on.....

[Alex Miller]

There is little strategy, that's correct. What there is instead is the need to hit a terrific golf shot worthy of a true champion on the most public and pressure packed stage in all of professional golf ("Be right" said Jackie; "It is" said Jack). Or, if you don't hit that kind of tee shot, you're called instead to make an all-world putt when you need it the very most, with a major championship and a storied green jacket and a life-long exemption to Augusta National  on the line. ("Ah, that's one of the greatest putts I've ever seen in my life", said Henry Longhurst. "And back on the tee, young Mr. Weiskopf will now have to take it, having dished it out the hole before").  In short - I think all this architecture psycho-babble we spout around here has gone to our heads. We seem to have forgotten that the only reason a golf course or "golf course architecture" has any meaning or value whatsoever is that it serves as a field of competitive play, and the 16th hole has served as the very ideal of such a field of play for decades.
Thanks very much, good night....   

Peter
Edit: also what Bob says.

[Peter Pallotta]

 

Thanks for the laugh, Alex - that was a sublimely excellent choice of "applause". The bug-eyed ferocity of Kane's determined clapping has always stayed with me...

Peter

[BCrosby]

I hadn't seen that in years. Citizen Kane was a cold, cold man. Haunting.

[Tommy Williamsen]

It's a rinky-dink goofy golf type hole for the reasons you mention. It derives its legitimacy merely from its position in the round and from the Masters.

Not sure how anyone can write both those sentences. It is a demanding a par three that requires precision and nerve. It has been the site of some of the most dramatic moments in the tournament. Seventeen is less interesting. twelve though sixteen might just be one of the most exciting stretches in championship golf.

[Josh Tarble]

For tournament play, I think 16 might be the most interesting of the par 3s at Augusta.  Clearly not as good as 12 - not trying to argue that.

But in the tournament, especially on Sunday, 16 seems like the par 3 most likely to produce the widest variety of scores.  With the standard Sunday pin, it seems just as easy to make a 2 as it is a 5 and 1 isn't totally out of play. 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Tommy,

As Josh well makes my point, what if we just dropped a random number generator in there? Yeah, I know: we wouldn't get the visuals!

[Kalen Braley]

It's a rinky-dink goofy golf type hole for the reasons you mention. It derives its legitimacy merely from its position in the round and from the Masters.

Not sure how anyone can write both those sentences. It is a demanding a par three that requires precision and nerve. It has been the site of some of the most dramatic moments in the tournament. Seventeen is less interesting. twelve though sixteen might just be one of the most exciting stretches in championship golf.

I agree with Tommy on this one, but I would extend it back to #10..

10 thru 16 on Sunday afternoon is totally must see TV and then 17 and 18 seem so anti-climatic where players are just trying to hold on....

[John_Cullum]

Back in the 80's it seemed like more often than not, the winner birdied 17. While it does not appear dramatic or requiring much strategy, it was a very pivotal hole back then. And it was not totally bereft of strategy. Left side of the fairway was better to a Sunday flag.

[V. Kmetz]

Has anybody who thinks poorly of the hole seen it in person?


I agree with BCrosby's remarks that the Sunday pin can strike the competitor in the thick of it, as terrifying.


It's really closer to "Four greens within a green"

[Mark Bourgeois]

I've seen it. We are talking past each other. I think it's a poor hole architecturally but then I don't see a golf course on Thurs-Sun. I see a TV studio. The hole is deus ex machina, a random score generator: its role being to generate drama. Many nevertheless are confused by randomness.

[V. Kmetz]

MB,

What is an example of a good one-shot hole, architecturally speaking?


cheers
vk

[Peter Pallotta]

I've seen it. We are talking past each other. I think it's a poor hole architecturally but then I don't see a golf course on Thurs-Sun. I see a TV studio. The hole is deus ex machina, a random score generator: its role being to generate drama. Many nevertheless are confused by randomness.

We're not talking past eachother Mark. I like the point you make. My point is that ANY and ALL Par 3 holes are nothing more than random score generators. Indeed, if any architect knew what we was doing when he designed it, that is what the hole was INTENDED to be. The "score generator" and the "design/architecture" distinction is, IMO, a false dichotomy. You have come far, but not far enough, along the road to a unified theory where all is One...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()