[Thomas Dai]

I watched a wee snippet of film the other day that showed a well known and successful Aussie pro from the 90’s/00’s era playing a very famous par-5 in the Open, an Open he came within a couple of shots of winning.
The weather was traditional at The Open but not in any way extreme yet his club choices in playing the hole in question were a 1-iron from the tee into the fairway, a 7-iron second shot to avoid awkwardness further up the narrowing fairway followed by another 1-iron to the green and then two putts.
Course management and the use of the 5.5 inches between the years is imo a very important and enjoyable aspect of the game yet it’s an aspect that doesn’t seem so important these days although maybe it still does exist at lessor and shorter hitting levels of the game. Rather sad.
Atb

[Rob Marshall]

Tiger won a British Open hitting driver one or two times if I remember correctly.

[Thomas Dai]

Tiger won a British Open hitting driver one or two times if I remember correctly.

A good point and he certainly did, 15 yrs ago. Not sure he used a 1-iron for his 3rd shot on a par-5 though, nor for his 2nd either and Nicklaus did something similar at HCEG/Muirfield in 1966 while Peter Thomson was famous for using 2-woods and 3-woods from the tee during his various Open victories.
Of course it’s not just super elite players that require consideration. Far from it. It’s all players.
Tactical play, use of angles, the desire/need to keep the ball away from awkward spots once seemed more prevalent within the game at all levels and players played accordingly. Nowadays …..
Atb

[John Kavanaugh]

I play with younger higher handicaps than myself. The other day one of them told me that I don't hit the ball all that much better, I just know all the tricks. The ball doesn't move and we have wonderful modern clubs. It only makes sense that the crafty golfer wins.


I thought the same thing about the old men I grew up competing against. I called them crusty while today I call myself crafty.

[Jason Thurman]

I'm not sure that playing to set up an approach with a 1-iron is quite as great an example of course management as you seem to think it is. Barring really wonky conditions or really funky design...


It's hard to look at all the data that informs player decisions these days and not acknowledge that there's a very heavy emphasis on course management.

[Kalen Braley]

I find there is quite a bit of difference when it comes to exploring and understanding options...and being willing to do it.

I suggested playing 3 7 irons and a wedge on a difficult and tight par 5 on a different thread, and it was like I was asking for their first born.  Most either just can't resist or ego gets in the way of playing difficult holes very conservative to take big numbers out of play.

[Mike Worth]

I find there is quite a bit of difference when it comes to exploring and understanding options...and being willing to do it.

I suggested playing 3 7 irons and a wedge on a difficult and tight par 5 on a different thread, and it was like I was asking for their first born.  Most either just can't resist or ego gets in the way of playing difficult holes very conservative to take big numbers out of play.

You might have felt disagreement because golfers expect to have a chance of hitting a green in regulation — assuming the shots are well struck.


Playing three 7 irons and a wedge on any hole is really saying it’s a par 6

[Jeff_Brauer]

One of my great golf experiences was playing Turnberry with Pete Dye.  He told me, "You look like you're shooting 70, but you are shooting 90.  I look like I'm shooting 90, but I am shooting 70."  That was just one example of an older golfer and better thinker than me pointing out that there are many ways to score on a golf course.


Another similar comment made once was that there is a difference between being someone who plays golf and a "golfer."  He was clearly implying I was the former and lesser category.

[Mike Hendren]

Here's one for you.  The 4th at my course is a lengthy par 5 with a creek crossing about 300 yards from the tee.  I'm struggling getting my fairway metals off the ground and have dumped my second into the creek more than once.  That leaves a double or worse. 


What if I  hit a mid-iron for my second and hope I catch the fairway metal on my third.  Worse case is a bogey.


Forget all the "you need to practice" pot shots and just answer this question:   Isn't that good course management for someone trying to break 90?


Bogey

[Ken Moum]

I find there is quite a bit of difference when it comes to exploring and understanding options...and being willing to do it.

I suggested playing 3 7 irons and a wedge on a difficult and tight par 5 on a different thread, and it was like I was asking for their first born.  Most either just can't resist or ego gets in the way of playing difficult holes very conservative to take big numbers out of play.

It's not that simple, unfortunately.  Even if a player does try the "very conservative" approach,  there's no guarantee it will work.


Your example on the hole we were talking about would require three good seven irons...not a certainty for any of the guys I play with.


That fairway was 23 yards wide, for Pete's sake.

[Jeff Schley]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week. Of course he knows he has a great wedge game and back then he was one of the best on tour.
The opposite is John Van de Velde on 18 OMG, I almost get sick for him. Paul Lawrie should put Van de Velde's kids in his will for that was a gift for whoever ended up winning after his collapse.

[Ken Moum]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week. Of course he knows he has a great wedge game and back then he was one of the best on tour.

Like I said, using a strategy like that requires more skill than people some times realize.

The opposite is John Van de Velde on 18 OMG, I almost get sick for him. Paul Lawrie should put Van de Velde's kids in his will for that was a gift for whoever ended up winning after his collapse.

There's another great misconception. VdV made an error off the tee, but his next shot got the single worst break in the history of Championship golf.  He did the smart thing and hit a shot that would get him near the green without taking a risk of ending up in the knee-high grass short of the burn. He hit it toward the grandstand.


But it hit a ROUND railing on the grandstand and bounced all the way back to the other side of the burn in that tall grass. From there, nothing he did was going be a good idea.

[Jeff Schley]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week. Of course he knows he has a great wedge game and back then he was one of the best on tour.

Like I said, using a strategy like that requires more skill than people some times realize.

The opposite is John Van de Velde on 18 OMG, I almost get sick for him. Paul Lawrie should put Van de Velde's kids in his will for that was a gift for whoever ended up winning after his collapse.

There's another great misconception. VdV made an error off the tee, but his next shot got the single worst break in the history of Championship golf.  He did the smart thing and hit a shot that would get him near the green without taking a risk of ending up in the knee-high grass short of the burn. He hit it toward the grandstand.


But it hit a ROUND railing on the grandstand and bounced all the way back to the other side of the burn in that tall grass. From there, nothing he did was going be a good idea.

Ken for point 1, they are professionals so they already are ahead of most of us significantly. Johnson ahead of almost all pros at the time as well. So he knew his strengths.

For the JVDV collapse, I think he made 2 straight poor decisions. First I 100% agree, driver was the absolute wrong play. You have OB left and water right, so why hit driver?  I'm still wondering with a 3 shot lead. He narrowly avoided water right. Mistake with the club selection.
His decision to take 2 iron I don't agree with at all. He had 5 shots from that spot to get down and win. I would have recommended laying up left back into the fairway. Yes his 2 iron shot hit a grandstand, but don't you invite bad bounces hitting grandstands? Mistake IMO for even hitting 2 iron.
We are talking the final hole of the Open Championship up 3 shots on one of the toughest par 4's in the world. He has hit driver and 2 iron! I just rewatched it and I could hear the pain in Peter Allis's voice commentating.
From there it was just tough shots out of very thick waist high fescue, it wasn't the wrong decision as you have to carry water somehow, just a balls hard shot.
Sorry again to JVDV as he played so brilliantly other than that.

[Phil Burr]

I personally agree with Ken re JdV and his second shot on #18 at Carnoustie.  The fairways were so narrow that even hitting the fairway with a 50-yard pitch was no lock.  If he tried and missed he could be 200+ and still having to pitch sideways with his third shot.  I’m not sure there’s a clear cut right or wrong decision.  All I know is I’d need to change my shorts if I reached that hole with less than 5 shots in hand in ANY event, let alone an Open.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week. Of course he knows he has a great wedge game and back then he was one of the best on tour.
The opposite is John Van de Velde on 18 OMG, I almost get sick for him. Paul Lawrie should put Van de Velde's kids in his will for that was a gift for whoever ended up winning after his collapse.

I disagree with almost all of that.

Zach was lucky to have performed that well that week. Jean was unlucky to have gotten that bounce off the railing. Zach may have shot a lower score had he been a bit more aggressive, or maybe it was a once-every-15-years type of wedge/putting performance for him that week. He out-performed even his own wedge game that week.

I don't even think Jean made an error off the tee. Even if he hits it in the burn, he drops in two, lays up in three, pitches on in four, and two-putts to win.

[Rob Marshall]

I wonder if Zach Johnson thinks he won two majors on luck or thinks he worked his ass off on his game and played to his strengths and shied away from his weaknesses? What did Hogan say, the harder I practice the luckier I get?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I wonder if Zach Johnson thinks he won two majors on luck or thinks he worked his ass off on his game and played to his strengths and shied away from his weaknesses? What did Hogan say, the harder I practice the luckier I get?

That's not what I said, Rob, but troll on.

[Jeff Schley]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week. Of course he knows he has a great wedge game and back then he was one of the best on tour.
The opposite is John Van de Velde on 18 OMG, I almost get sick for him. Paul Lawrie should put Van de Velde's kids in his will for that was a gift for whoever ended up winning after his collapse.

I disagree with almost all of that.

Zach was lucky to have performed that well that week. Jean was unlucky to have gotten that bounce off the railing. Zach may have shot a lower score had he been a bit more aggressive, or maybe it was a once-every-15-years type of wedge/putting performance for him that week. He out-performed even his own wedge game that week.

I don't even think Jean made an error off the tee. Even if he hits it in the burn, he drops in two, lays up in three, pitches on in four, and two-putts to win.

Erik,


We can disagree.


Although why is Zach lucky to win by relying on his wedge/putting game that week, but Tiger not considered lucky to have performed at the Open in 06 at Royal Liverpool not using driver but once? Both did something the rest of the field didn't and won a major.

[Rob Marshall]

I wonder if Zach Johnson thinks he won two majors on luck or thinks he worked his ass off on his game and played to his strengths and shied away from his weaknesses? What did Hogan say, the harder I practice the luckier I get?

That's not what I said, Rob, but troll on.

You said Zach was “lucky to have performed well that week”. You can take all your stats and statistics but a top player has to play to his strengths and what HE thinks gives him the best chance to make birdie. Zach did that and won tournament. There is no trolling. I disagree that he got lucky. He performed well that week because we works hard on his game and he played HIS game.

[Kalen Braley]

Players on Tour regularly say you need a few lucky bounces or good breaks to go your way to win in any given week.  I suspect you can find at least one or two categories for the winner each week where they did "better than normal".

P.S. Patrick Cantlay putted out of his mind in that epic playoff against BDC a couple months ago, and even then had to go like 6 extra holes to finally win...

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Although why is Zach lucky to win by relying on his wedge/putting game that week, but Tiger not considered lucky to have performed at the Open in 06 at Royal Liverpool not using driver but once? Both did something the rest of the field didn't and won a major.

Zach out-performed his typical performance that week by a good margin (and the weather, etc. depressed the performance of many others). Tiger was an other-worldly iron player, likely the best ever, so his performance was not nearly as far an outlier. And the ball still went 270+ off the tee with irons.

That's all.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Great illustration of course management was Zach Johnson at the Masters in 07, where he laid up on all the par 5's. I think he had only around 210-220 on hole 13, but still stuck to his game plan.  Played them brilliantly with probably -10 or so for the week.

I find there is quite a bit of difference when it comes to exploring and understanding options...and being willing to do it.

Zach was -11 on the par 5's that week. Over the last 26 masters (1996-2021) the winners average on the par 5's has been -8.6. Only 6 times has a winner scored better on the par 5's for the week than Zach did.

• 1996, Faldo, -12]
• 1997, Tiger, -13
• 2006, Phil, -13
• 2010, Phil. -12
• 2015, Spieth, -12
• 2018, Reed, -13

It was a brilliantly executed strategy, but was it a brilliant strategy on its own?

Modern stat analysis would suggest that going for as many par 5 in two as possible is the ideal strategy. It maximizes scoring potential to a greater degree than it takes on excessive scrambling risk. As Kalen pointed out, the ability for one to execute the ideal strategy relies on that players willingness, or how comfortable and confident they are with the strategy. The ideal strategy executed poorly will not maximize scoring potential.

The best strategy for Zach may not have been the ideal strategy. While his strategy may not have maximized overall scoring potential, he  minimize blowup holes and used every inch of the scoring potential afforded to him.

Would Zach have scored better if he went for the par 5 in two? Only Zach could say for sure, but most likely not.

[Jeff Schley]

Although why is Zach lucky to win by relying on his wedge/putting game that week, but Tiger not considered lucky to have performed at the Open in 06 at Royal Liverpool not using driver but once? Both did something the rest of the field didn't and won a major.

Zach out-performed his typical performance that week by a good margin (and the weather, etc. depressed the performance of many others). Tiger was an other-worldly iron player, likely the best ever, so his performance was not nearly as far an outlier. And the ball still went 270+ off the tee with irons.

That's all.

Not an outlier?  Hmmm, so while we are giving our own assertions and opinions, perhaps Tiger's own coach can weigh in on how Tiger played that week. Spoiler: The best anyone ever has! Quote in Tiger Sunday red.
Haney, who coached Woods during six of his victories in majors, concurs. In an interview last week, the renowned swing coach told John Huggan of The Scotsman newspaper that Tiger was at an absolute peak at the 2006 Brit.
“That week was far and away the best ball-striking tournament he ever had,” Haney said. “Considering the length of the approach shots he was hitting on most holes, I’m not sure anyone has ever played better than Tiger did at Hoylake.”


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2125887-then-and-now-tiger-woods-back-at-royal-liverpool-after-emotional-2006-title

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Not an outlier?  Hmmm, so while we are giving our own assertions and opinions

Not opinion. Fact. They didn't keep ShotLink stats at the time in the British Open, but his performance wasn't significantly better than his average performance.

He was nearly a full shot clear of second with 2.072 strokes gained approach in 2006. Morikawa in 2021 was 1.170, and in 2020 was .884 to Justin Thomas's .997.

Zach's performance was a much greater outlier than Tiger's. Tiger has (almost) always been a phenemanl irons/approach shot player. And again, he was hitting his irons off the tee quite far, as the ball rolled out quite a bit. It's not like he chipping out 210-yard tee shots that week.

[Michael Felton]

Not an outlier?  Hmmm, so while we are giving our own assertions and opinions

Not opinion. Fact. They didn't keep ShotLink stats at the time in the British Open, but his performance wasn't significantly better than his average performance.

He was nearly a full shot clear of second with 2.072 strokes gained approach in 2006. Morikawa in 2021 was 1.170, and in 2020 was .884 to Justin Thomas's .997.

Zach's performance was a much greater outlier than Tiger's. Tiger has (almost) always been a phenemanl irons/approach shot player. And again, he was hitting his irons off the tee quite far, as the ball rolled out quite a bit. It's not like he chipping out 210-yard tee shots that week.

I am curious what the average number of drivers hit that year was. I was at Hoylake for that event and the ground was so fast running. 12 and 14 I think it was it was virtually impossible not to run through the fairway. There must have been a lot of irons hit off tees by a lot of players. And Tiger's 2 iron was way out there a lot of the time.


That said I feel like the comparison between Tiger and Zach for how big of an outlier each is is a bit like the hole in one vs birdies on all four par threes. Most people would cite the hole in one as a bigger outlier I suspect given it's so much rarer than making a few birdies, but I think four 2s is less common than a 1. Similarly Tiger's hitting one driver all week feels like such an outlier vs Zach getting up and down 12 out of 16 times. But I bet it isn't.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()