TPC Scottsdale #17

[John Kavanaugh]

The entertainment value of watching Spieth’s ball roll and roll thinking that it just has to stop was high. I love watching a ball walk the plank.

[jeffwarne]

Spieth hit a great drive when he needed it on 17

It wasn't a great drive. He said afterward he toed it, too.

Yeah, it sucked. The hole is listed at 333. The ball landed just short of the middle of the green. It was terrible. What was I thinking. Maybe you should work with him. You could be the answer.

Not to nitpick, but Jordan knew it was in trouble when it left the club.(Not many including Jordan react that way after a "great" shot)
Where it landed is not that relevant when it's curving left on a firmish course-especially when Jordan knows the course and conditions well enough to know it was borderline.
The hole is 330,Jordan AVERAGED 317 for the week, so certainly well within his range on a firmish course.


So bringing it back to the thread topic, if a toed, "average length"(for him that week)hooking drive is good enough to leave an eagle putt,without undue risk, I'd say it's not a great hole, but since the shot wasn't good enough(and certainly not "great"), I'd say the jury on the hole is still out.

[Jim Sherma]

Great for what? As far as entertainment goes it's obviously a great stage for the pros. Otherwise we would not be talking about it after the fact.


Architecturally, it produces a wide spread of scores across the field which speaks highly of the hole. While it is interesting how no one ever seems to lay up, that is likely a response to the Pelz/Broadie ideal of a lower expected score the closer you're to the hole. At that point of the round/tournament there is also a likelihood of an asymmetric loss function where a 2 or three is viewed much more valuable than a 5 is deemed costly.


For a wholly manufactured hole on flat ground that was designed with the writ of hosting a pro tournament... I'd say it fulfills the definition of great architecture. Is it great architecture if the writ was a muni or a club course? Of that I'm less sure.

[Jeff Ober]

Spieth hit a great drive when he needed it on 17

It wasn't a great drive. He said afterward he toed it, too.

Yeah, it sucked. The hole is listed at 333. The ball landed just short of the middle of the green. It was terrible. What was I thinking. Maybe you should work with him. You could be the answer.

Not to nitpick, but Jordan knew it was in trouble when it left the club.(Not many including Jordan react that way after a "great" shot)
Where it landed is not that relevant when it's curving left on a firmish course-especially when Jordan knows the course and conditions well enough to know it was borderline.
The hole is 330,Jordan AVERAGED 317 for the week, so certainly well within his range on a firmish course.


So bringing it back to the thread topic, if a toed, "average length"(for him that week)hooking drive is good enough to leave an eagle putt,without undue risk, I'd say it's not a great hole, but since the shot wasn't good enough(and certainly not "great"), I'd say the jury on the hole is still out.

This is exactly right.  The entire point of the hole is that a hook is a bad play, and Jordan hit a hook.  Got to be able to play the straight ball or even slight fade under pressure.  Or lay up.  Didn't Finau layup a couple years ago in contention?  NLU guys were roasting him on the pod since he laid up straight into the center-line bunker.

[JESII]

I enjoy watching the TV guys play it...and especially enjoy watching them play that back left pin when it's really firm. I am not sure I would enjoy playing that pin but the rest of the hole looks good to me. If you cannot reach the green, is there a viable option in the 85 - 100 yard area?  The green actually does look like it has some interesting slope...but I haven't actually been there.

[Tom_Doak]

Great for what? As far as entertainment goes it's obviously a great stage for the pros. Otherwise we would not be talking about it after the fact.


Architecturally, it produces a wide spread of scores across the field which speaks highly of the hole. While it is interesting how no one ever seems to lay up, that is likely a response to the Pelz/Broadie ideal of a lower expected score the closer you're to the hole. At that point of the round/tournament there is also a likelihood of an asymmetric loss function where a 2 or three is viewed much more valuable than a 5 is deemed costly.


For a wholly manufactured hole on flat ground that was designed with the writ of hosting a pro tournament... I'd say it fulfills the definition of great architecture. Is it great architecture if the writ was a muni or a club course? Of that I'm less sure.

This is probably the response closest to my own feelings.


I would disagree that nobody lays up.  Koepka laid up [for him] -- I didn't see what club he hit off the tee but he definitely played short of the water.  I'd guess he hit it a bit further right than he wanted, but obviously not too far right to have a shot at the flag.  I was not watching except for Sunday, but I assume that earlier in the week, more players take a more conservative approach than when they are two behind with two to play?


The one thing I dislike about the hole is how contrived the green feels.  I guess that's inevitable on a course in the desert where you have to have big greens because they do a lot of rounds, but the various strategies are both well thought out and a bit too obvious; and yet, guys still make a train wreck of it.


I was looking at the back center bunker and thought to myself that Tom Weiskopf probably intended that as a decent miss for the Sunday hole location, but I didn't see anyone go in it . . . they are all aiming further away from the water left than they did in TW's day.

[Forrest Richardson]

There is no way I can hide on this thread as the next issue of Golf Journal will feature TPC's No. 17 with my commentary. The USGA asked me to select a hole I admire, and I proposed the Morrish/Weiskopf short par-4 here in my backyard. As Tom D points out — it is contrived, but I don't think anyone ever said otherwise. For a manufactured hole, to me it strikes a good chord.

Without giving away the whole commentary, the hole works and is highly entertaining because of the tremendous angles created when you begin drawing lines from the ball's position after the drive to the hole location on the large green. Those two factors — especially the hole location — conjure up a nearly endless variety that can change dramatically on where the cup gets set.

There was a comment above about not being able to reach the water for "mortal" players, yet this is fully untrue. That becomes a matter of where you tee off from, and that personal choice is often "bad" by the regular player. The tees allow play down to just 205 yards to the green's center — so if you are playing the "right" tees, everyone can have nearly the the same tee ball experience as the big boys of the PGA.

[Jason Thurman]

I don't think I'd ever watched much of the Phoenix Open before. I remember the course pretty well from epic Tiger Woods 2004 matches in college, but hadn't really watched it in tournament play.


I thought the whole back 9, while a little "common" aesthetically, made for a really fun rollercoaster ride home. 17 proved the key swing hole of course.


I found it interesting that the guy who clearly played safe off the tee ended up also being the one who cashed an eagle for the win. I saw a really wide variety of second shots on the hole, and the math never seemed immediately clear when it came to which positions made for easier second shots.


I get contrived. The whole course seems pretty contrived. But yeah, this hole works for me as the star of a pretty damned good back nine across the board, at least for a TV viewer.

[JESII]

Comments about Koepka laying up highlight the other thing that helps the hole in my opinion...it's between clubs for these guys.

[Jim Hoak]

As I tried to say when I bungled the subject by trying to bring up an old thread--I think it is a very good hole for the Phoenix Open.  Terrific risk-reward hole at a very opportune time in the round.  It introduces an element of luck--but professional golf probably needs more of that .  It creates excitement and anticipation.  As Feherty said, strange things always happen there--as they did with Koepka.
As a hole for the rest of us mortals, my opinion might be more restrained.  It probably does slow down play.  It seems a bit gimmicky.  It is less "fair" than many of us might desire. 
But, in conclusion, it serves a great role in that tournament!

[Matt Kardash]

The hole does what it was intended to do for this pro tournament. I think increased driving distance has almost taken the lay-up out of the equation. I would bet less than 10% of pro golfer's lay-up. I remember watching 20 years ago and it was probably closer to 50%.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I agree with Forrest Richardson. It's a " highly entertaining" hole  made for the pros on television AND the the recreational golfers. TPC Scottsdale opened in 1987 replacing the traditional parkland courses of Phoenix CC and Arizona CC. Every year, 16& !7 generate discussion and that's a good thing. I hope to return as  a spectator next year.

[JMEvensky]

Comments about Koepka laying up highlight the other thing that helps the hole in my opinion...it's between clubs for these guys.

Would Koepka laying up Sunday be similar to Billy Casper laying up on 3(?) at WF? Each hole a par 3.5 just that today it has to be over 100 yards longer?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Yeah, it sucked. The hole is listed at 333. The ball landed just short of the middle of the green. It was terrible. What was I thinking. Maybe you should work with him. You could be the answer.

So much for ignoring me.

Again, Jordan said in the post-round interview that he toed it, and he was (IMO) clearly worried about it from the start. He started yelling "sit" really early. He mis-hit it and knew it was headed left side, and particularly after the kick in the fairway knew it might be wet.

Not to nitpick, but Jordan knew it was in trouble when it left the club.(Not many including Jordan react that way after a "great" shot)Where it landed is not that relevant when it's curving left on a firmish course-especially when Jordan knows the course and conditions well enough to know it was borderline.The hole is 330,Jordan AVERAGED 317 for the week, so certainly well within his range on a firmish course.

Yep.

As for the hole, and the topic, I think it's "great" for that event and great for that course. I'm not a big fan of the course in general, and when I played there, it was 45° and the wind was blowing into us on 15 through 17, so we were concerned about the center bunker well short of the green more than anything.

Pros know it's a par 3.5 at most, effectively, so they have to go for it, but with the fairway contours AND the green contours, it makes shot placement very particular. You can lay up just short of the green, but even if you're off your angle there, it leaves a tricky pitch or chip. The green and hole locations open up a bit from the left, but pros are very water-averse (as they should be).

Not a hole I'd want to see on every course, but a good hole for that event and that course, and for the pros.

How does it play for amateurs? That little near-center bunker is a bit of PITA.

[Amol Yajnik]

I was looking at the back center bunker and thought to myself that Tom Weiskopf probably intended that as a decent miss for the Sunday hole location, but I didn't see anyone go in it . . . they are all aiming further away from the water left than they did in TW's day.

Part of that reason is that more Tour players every year are playing the hole with the same strategy off of the tee regardless of where the pin is located.  Scott Fawcett (creator of the Decade system) put up a graphic on his Twitter feed last week showing that players should center their shot pattern directly over the centerline fairway bunker, which is well to the right of the center of the green.  It's formulaic, but that's the way the game is going, playing it by that formula.

[JESII]

The hole is usually in the back left peninsula once per tournament...I didn't see it this year. Any ideas what the tee club selection dispersion is that day?




Amol, agreed. Is it worth architect and set up guys thinking about how to counter that approach?

[Kalen Braley]

One of the primary measures this group has used to define great short par 4s is the variety of scores it produces.

17 is certainly no exception even if its not the prettiest looking hole like a CPC 9.

P.S.  I too enjoy watching balls that "walk the plank" as Barney coined the term.  Nothing like a ball that rolls forever and either fails (spieth on this hole), or succeeds, (Tiger with his famous better than most TPC Sawgrass putt)

[Rob Marshall]

Spieth hit a great drive when he needed it on 17

It wasn't a great drive. He said afterward he toed it, too.

Yeah, it sucked. The hole is listed at 333. The ball landed just short of the middle of the green. It was terrible. What was I thinking. Maybe you should work with him. You could be the answer.

Not to nitpick, but Jordan knew it was in trouble when it left the club.(Not many including Jordan react that way after a "great" shot)
Where it landed is not that relevant when it's curving left on a firmish course-especially when Jordan knows the course and conditions well enough to know it was borderline.
The hole is 330,Jordan AVERAGED 317 for the week, so certainly well within his range on a firmish course.


So bringing it back to the thread topic, if a toed, "average length"(for him that week)hooking drive is good enough to leave an eagle putt,without undue risk, I'd say it's not a great hole, but since the shot wasn't good enough(and certainly not "great"), I'd say the jury on the hole is still out.

Jeff, You think it was a bad drive? Jordan says something to the effect that if it hit a few years shorter it would have turned out pretty well. Under the conditions, hitting 300 yard tee shot? It's not like he sniped it like Xander.

[William_G]

Give it up Rob, it was not the proper shot, geez

[Rob Marshall]

Yeah, it sucked. The hole is listed at 333. The ball landed just short of the middle of the green. It was terrible. What was I thinking. Maybe you should work with him. You could be the answer.

So much for ignoring me.

Again, Jordan said in the post-round interview that he toed it, and he was (IMO) clearly worried about it from the start. He started yelling "sit" really early. He mis-hit it and knew it was headed left side, and particularly after the kick in the fairway knew it might be wet.

Not to nitpick, but Jordan knew it was in trouble when it left the club.(Not many including Jordan react that way after a "great" shot)Where it landed is not that relevant when it's curving left on a firmish course-especially when Jordan knows the course and conditions well enough to know it was borderline.The hole is 330,Jordan AVERAGED 317 for the week, so certainly well within his range on a firmish course.

Yep.

As for the hole, and the topic, I think it's "great" for that event and great for that course. I'm not a big fan of the course in general, and when I played there, it was 45° and the wind was blowing into us on 15 through 17, so we were concerned about the center bunker well short of the green more than anything.

Pros know it's a par 3.5 at most, effectively, so they have to go for it, but with the fairway contours AND the green contours, it makes shot placement very particular. You can lay up just short of the green, but even if you're off your angle there, it leaves a tricky pitch or chip. The green and hole locations open up a bit from the left, but pros are very water-averse (as they should be).

Not a hole I'd want to see on every course, but a good hole for that event and that course, and for the pros.

How does it play for amateurs? That little near-center bunker is a bit of PITA.

Erik,
If you are going to respond to my post there is a chance I'm going to respond to yours. There is a simple solution.

[Mark_Fine]

I think the 17th hole is the best on the golf course.  It can be played by anyone (even with only a putter) so Mackenzie would also love it.  It can lead to an eagle two (someone once even made a one) and win you a golf tournament (or maybe just $10 from your buddies) or a bogie and second place.  It is only 330 or so yards from the tips and has all kinds of interesting options/ways you can play it.  Hole location can mean every thing making it play differently every day.  It may be manufactured but it is as good as short par fours get. 

[Matt_Cohn]

There are two holes on the back nine (12 and 17) where a mis-hit can finish short of the greenside water. That always seemed weird to me.


The fact that nobody lays up has to be a strike against the hole, right?


I agree with those who say the hole has a contrived feel.


And no, Jordan did not hit a good shot. He nearly got away with it, but he didn't.

[Mark_Fine]

Matt,
Not everyone goes for the green.  Many just lay up in different places than you or I might, e.g. they sometimes carry the bunker knowing they still might not get to the green which is still a layup.  The centerline bunker is a 275 yard carry. The water is 295 from the back tee.  As I said earlier, hole location dramatically impacts how most play the hole and where they intend to hit their tee shot.  I stand by my comment it is the best (most interesting and exciting) hole on the course playable by EVERYBODY! 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Erik,
If you are going to respond to my post there is a chance I'm going to respond to yours. There is a simple solution.

I'm not the one who said he was going to ignore my posts. You did, and yet you couldn't even ignore the post after you proclaimed you'd be ignoring my posts. I'm just waiting for you to follow through.

It wasn't a "great" tee shot regardless of how many times you say it. Jordan toed it. Says as much. I linked to the post-round interview, and you don't go at that hole with a draw. The ball is going to roll, and it's heading left.

[Rob Marshall]

Erik,
If you are going to respond to my post there is a chance I'm going to respond to yours. There is a simple solution.

I'm not the one who said he was going to ignore my posts. You did, and yet you couldn't even ignore the post after you proclaimed you'd be ignoring my posts. I'm just waiting for you to follow through.

It wasn't a "great" tee shot regardless of how many times you say it. Jordan toed it. Says as much. I linked to the post-round interview, and you don't go at that hole with a draw. The ball is going to roll, and it's heading left.

I said it was a "great" drive once.