"Jake Knapp’s watery demise reminded us why this event is great"

[Tommy Williamsen]

These words were in my inbox from GOLF. It might be the dumbest golf headline I've ever seen. I hate the course. A plethora of water is boring. Who would want that course as their home course? Marquis de Sade?

[Andrew Harvie]

The golf course is utterly abysmal but there's a big difference between a great golf course and a great tournament venue. At least in my recollection, prior to the whole "signature event" thing, PGA National did produce an exciting finish, and that's not because it's this architectural marvel or anything. When it was windy and firm, the par 3's down the stretch were so exciting to watch players on, and the 18th's gamble has its fair share of iconic moments (Rory's 5 wood into 18 way back in 2012 or whatever, as an example). I'm with you though, I wouldn't want it as my home course. I've played it once, that was enough for me, but I usually tune in weekend afternoons to see what's happening!


GOLF and other organizations do not prioritize architecture because the TOUR brings in more eyes (I think Fried Egg's recent push to cover the TOUR show this in real time), so I'm not sure if I disagree with their headline because they aren't looking at in the same light anyone on this discussion group is.

[Michael Moore]

anyone on this discussion group

Come on man, there's two feet of snow on the ground. I don't want to see someone gain .05 strokes on the correct side of the fairway. I want to see someone hit it into the water then compound his error.

[Andrew Harvie]

anyone on this discussion group

Come on man, there's two feet of snow on the ground. I don't want to see someone gain .05 strokes on the correct side of the fairway. I want to see someone hit it into the water then compound his error.

You're right, sharp generalization!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Is it more exciting to watch someone hit the ball in the water and then hit from the drop zone or execute a great up and down?

[Andrew Harvie]

Is it more exciting to watch someone hit the ball in the water and then hit from the drop zone or execute a great up and down?

Both! I don't want every venue to be PGA National, of course (especially because I genuinely do not like the golf course at all), but it provides a different challenge than TPC Scottsdale, or Pebble Beach, or Harbour Town, etc, and I don't see that as a bad thing.

[Bruce Katona]

I saw the replay just a it ago.


Jake came close to pulling off a great save; which would have made great TV (IMHO) or he needed more mud to fly up and on him - that would have been a great visual.




PS: The snow just melted here over the warmer weekend but you can still ice fish on the ponds; watching warm weather golf is a really nice thing about now.

[Craig Sweet]

Ugh!  "The Bear Trap" is like something cooked up for TGL....gimmicky make believe.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Is it more exciting to watch someone hit the ball in the water and then hit from the drop zone or execute a great up and down?

Both! I don't want every venue to be PGA National, of course (especially because I genuinely do not like the golf course at all), but it provides a different challenge than TPC Scottsdale, or Pebble Beach, or Harbour Town, etc, and I don't see that as a bad thing.

But Andrew, do you want water on every hole? It is lazy architecture and hole after hole boring to watch unless you like train wrecks.

[Andrew Harvie]

Is it more exciting to watch someone hit the ball in the water and then hit from the drop zone or execute a great up and down?

Both! I don't want every venue to be PGA National, of course (especially because I genuinely do not like the golf course at all), but it provides a different challenge than TPC Scottsdale, or Pebble Beach, or Harbour Town, etc, and I don't see that as a bad thing.

But Andrew, do you want water on every hole? It is lazy architecture and hole after hole boring to watch unless you like train wrecks.

I'm not sure you're getting what I'm saying here. Yes, it's lazy architecture and yes, it's boring to play and sometimes watch... until it's the weekend, and things start to matter and then usually, as this headline suggests, there's a fair bit of drama or interest down the stretch as the tournament comes to a close.


This isn't a personal opinion thing—I obviously don't want water on every hole and I don't like PGA National as a golf course, as I've said in this thread already—but as a tournament venue, it's proven to be a suitable place for the TOUR to produce a compelling product. You posed a question on "who would want this to be your home course?" and the answer is, very few... if any, but there are different genres of golf courses and it's not trying to be a home course. PGA National is not one for the everyday player and really only fulfils its purpose once a year. For what it's worth, you would have to be pretty wayward to hit it into the water on 1, 2, there's no water on 4, 7, no water on 10. I don't want to keep defending PGA National because it's lucky if it's a Doak 3; it's more commentary on how far detached the professional game is from the rest of golf because the antithesis of what the everyday player would want to play is perfectly suited for the pro game.

[Kalen Braley]

As another data point..

TPC Sawgrass has water on every hole too, and I find neither the drama nor architecture to be lacking....

[Tommy Williamsen]

As another data point..

TPC Sawgrass has water on every hole, too, and I find neither the drama nor architecture to be lacking....

I have played both courses, PGA National once and Sawgrass three or four times. I thought about Sawgrass as well, but it is a bit different. While there is water water everywhere, it isn't nearly as terrifying. Indeed, except for a few holes, it is placed more strategically.

[Tags:]

Tags: