Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Jfaspen on February 05, 2007, 10:25:02 PM
-
I fell into a conversation with some people at work about golf courses today and ANGC came up..
Thinking through the course, the changes it has gone through recently, the way the changes have impacted the Masters, although the front 9 may now be more mundane, I think the back 9 still has plenty of character.
10-Demanding tee shot, bonus for working the ball the correct way off of the tee. Difficult area around the green.
11-Hampered by the new trees, but still a thrilling approach shot
10 and 11 provide a worthy start where the leader hopes to make 2 pars and get to the conquerable part of the course.
12-Perhaps the most precise tee shot in golf. Arguably more so than the 17th at TPC Sawgrass. Difficult to guage the wind, small landing area, pivotable point in the round.
13-The big reason why I feel the back 9 is superior is are the par 5's and the way they appear to play. Although unlikely, almost anyone contending for the lead on sunday could make 2 eagles on the back 9. We all remember Phil and Ernie trading eagles on the back 9 a few years ago. Yet this hole provides penalties if you miss the fairway and a green challenging enough that the world #1 putted off of it.
14- No bunkers. A birdie hole sandwiched inbetween 2 par 5's.
15-Another reachable par 5. Again, a treacherous approach shot, the ultimate in risk/reward.
16-I love this par 3 because I think the water comes into play, but the great shots on this hole are the players hitting it into that one spot in the green which then feeds the balls towards the flags. I loved seeing 2 aces in a row a few years back.. I also love that a long shot (like tigers 2 years ago) should mean death, but recovery is possible.
17-18 Worthy finishers for a championship. Demanding par 4's which don't take birdie out of play, but also only reward a player who can keep his wits.
I know, I know.. I've just taken perhaps the most celebrated 9 holes in golf and said they're still great.. Perhaps I just wanted to type out the reasons why I find them still great.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
jeff
-
Jeffrey:
No argument with your comments about the back 9, but what do you think about the front 9 is mundane?
The back 9 has all the azaleas and provides some great TV drama, but the front 9 has some of the most demanding and interesting holes on the course.
Andy
-
Jeff,
The back nine remains an exciting test.
Alot depends on the weather.
There's been a trend toward fast & firm, which makes the course play difficult around the greens, and, makes it more difficult to keep the ball in the fairway.
I'm not so sure that # 14 is a birdie hole.
When you add # 9 to the mix, that's a pretty good 10 hole finish.
Hopefully, Mother Nature will co-operate and we'll have another great tournament.
-
When you add # 9 to the mix, that's a pretty good 10 hole finish.
Why stop at #9 when #8 is a great par five with excitement built right in it.
-
The Sunday pin placements make all the difference. For a couple of years the committee placed them in very difficult locations, then they went back to the old Sunday pins for the past couple of years and the back nine has once again been a thrill ride with lots of birdies, eagles and the occasional bogey or double.
Remember the year Vijay won? That was probably the most boring Masters ever, the committee was "protecting par." ::)
-
Let's look at the front 9:
1 - a LONG uphill par 4 with trouble left.
2 - a wonderfully shaped green that dares the player to go for it in two. Doom awaits those that try and fail.
3 - a fantastic short par 4 with an extremely difficult green
4 - I still don't know how the competitors can get the ball to the upper right with that bunker staring them down. (The only hole with a palm tree at AGNC, by the way)
5 - Danger left. Danger right. Get a par and run
6 - My favorite par 3. Too much spin and you're off the green.
7 - Narrow and a green surrounded by bunkers. To a handicap golfer, this hole would be extremely difficult
8 - Wow - you have no idea how much uphill this hole is. And what a green.
9 - Back to the clubhouse - to me, perhaps the weakest hole architecturally on the front 9.
Yep - the front 9 is damn good too...
-
When you add # 9 to the mix, that's a pretty good 10 hole finish.
Dan,
I don't see # 9 as a weak hole, "architecturally"
The topography is great and the green and surrounds terrific.
Why stop at #9 when #8 is a great par five with excitement built right in it.
I wouldn't agree with that assessment.
I don't think # 8 is a "great" par 5.
-
From the seat I have every year it seems like a pretty awesome 18 hole finish...
-
This is a minor point but in one thread Tom Doak said he wasn't fond of the 18th but he never elaborated on his reasons for disliking the hole. Seems like a long uphill slog but that's not really surprising given the terrain and the fact that the clubhouse is on high ground. Club selection for the big hitters just amazes me for an uphill 465 yard hole. Tiger in '05 - 3-wood/8 iron; Lefty in '04 3-wood/6-iron. Does it really play as long as the card?
-
This is a little off topic, but interesting, I think. A couple days ago, I watched a reply of the 2001 Masters. It was a tournament with Tiger, Duval, Mickelson and a couple other big names in contention. I was shocked at the way that all these players were overpowering the golf course. Tiger hit 8 irons into 11, 13 and 15 (and I don't think he hit drivers off the tees either). Duval had 101 yards into the 18th green. All three of them were hitting very short irons into the greens on the back nine. The tournament was very much a putting contest, with Duval missing several makeable putts on the way in to let Tiger off the hook.
In retrospect, I think I like the way AN plays today. I think the changes to the course (especially the back 9) have raised the importance of strategy and shotmaking, and reduced the emphasis on putting (well at least as much as you can at AN). IMO, the Masters does a pretty good job of identifying the player with the best skills.
-
This is a minor point but in one thread Tom Doak said he wasn't fond of the 18th but he never elaborated on his reasons for disliking the hole.
Seems like a long uphill slog but that's not really surprising given the terrain and the fact that the clubhouse is on high ground.
Does it really play as long as the card ?
YES
But, weather and ground conditions play a substantive factor.[/color]
-
Patrick,
My comments on 8 and 9 come from walking the course twice. Obviously, that's not enough to really know what's happening out there ;)
Thanks for the corrections
-
15-Another reachable par 5. Again, a treacherous approach shot, the ultimate in risk/reward.
Jeff,
When I played this hole a couple of years ago and saw how wonderful and inviting that second shot is down the hill, my mind wandered back to 1986. Seve was right there with Jack and he went for this green in two. No big deal. But the situation and the look must have gotten him pretty darn good, as he hit that pathetic iron shot into the left side of the pond. The cheeers went up and it was the unraveling of Seve. This is just one of many memories we have of this great risk/reward hole.
Thanks for this thread
Guy
-
#14 a Birdie hole ??? Why, because it doesn't have any bunkers?
I can tell you, I've been to AN 9 times and what you have at #14 is a triple tiered green that has been described as trying to stop a golf ball going down mable steps. As you know, it's a 2nd shot course, and position on the green is vital, none more so than #14. Par is a good score.
-
It's great alright. The only back nine I can think of that's greater is Fernandina Beach Municipal G.C.
-
As for the Front 9....
Let's look at the front 9:
1 - It has been lengthened to the point of almost being in front of Eisenhower's cabin.
2 - Even with the added length, the pro's mostly own this hole, unless your name is David Duval.
3 - To my thinking, arguably the most difficult green on the course. It's small, irregualar shaped, with a plateau to boot.
4 - I have photos of that Palm Tree! A horizontal green, a tee box that has been significantly moved back, but the bunker really doesn't come into play. These guys are good.
5 - A raised nose in the fore of the green makes it appear an elephant is buried there. But if Nicklaus can eagle it twice in one tournament, it's doable.
6 - Solid hole, no doubt about it. Watching the shots soar across the azaleas into a backdrop of white flowering dogwoods to the green below, is pure beauty to the eye. BTW, All the par 3's are strong.
7 - They've added length at the tee, and provided the green with a 4th pin placement.
8 - Play the slope to the left of the green, and watch it filter to the hole. Save Greg Norman, this is a birdie hole.
9 - Architecturally,this is a weak hole. With only the slope and speed of the green as it's saving grace, I've never much cared for it. If it wasn't for the grandeur of the course, the style would be a hole you'd find on many a public muni that is short on space.
BTW, by moving the 11th to left and adding trees and mounding, they've taken #11 away from the spectator's view until the 2nd shot. And, I've been railing about the grandstands to the right of the 15th green that block out the beauty of the 16th's hillside and green. While they are accomdating greater crowds, it's a blight on the property. For one, people sit there for only a short period of time because the afternoon sun bakes directly on them. And two, nothing on the course is more fun than sitting behind the right-side "bail out" bunker at the 15th and yelling... INCOMING!
-
As for the 18th being long and uphill, it is, but like walking down the adjacent 10th, it's a graduated climb, not a rope climbing adventure as you might think.
The old 18th, was a wonderful finishing hole, until Tiger et al began hitting wedges into it. The added length is nothing more than a funny car track set behind the 17th. All that's needed are flashing red, yellow and green lights to signify that it's okay to swing. There are towers and camera placement behind and to the side of this chute that lend to it's ugly appearance.
But, since we live a world of technological advances, and given the convergence of three holes and sloped terrain in that area of the course, not much else they could do.
-
Tom Zemi,
The bottom line is that it's a great golf course.
Any tee shot on # 9 that doesn't make it to the bottom of the hill is left with an awkward lie to a difficult green.
I don't view the hole as weak.
I don't think the golf course has a weak hole, some are just easier than othes.
-
#9 to my mind is a very strong hole. The approach to a treacherous green (ask Greg Norman) may come from any and all sorts of lies. The Euros, for their shotmaking abilities, seem to perform well on this hole.
I might be able to argue that #18 is the weakest hole on the course. Just don't ask me to.
-
I might be able to argue that #18 is the weakest hole on the course. Just don't ask me to.
Why do you think 18 is weak? It's so famous and I only know it from tv. I know you don't want to answer this question, but dare to be great!
-
18 is weak?
I'll bet most amateurs wouldn't even get close to hitting their tee shot even 3/4 of the way up that hill. Plus, those greenside bunkers are a lot more menacing looking in person than on TV.
When I watched the practice rounds in '05, Tiger spent about 20 minutes on and around 18 green. Lots of subtle features there.
-
Gary,
Did you mean weak as in easy or weak as in not a great hole architecturally?
As far as difficulty goes, it's a bear now. Pre 1967(?) when the fairway bunker(s) were not there and there were very few trees up the left side and almost none where the bunkers are now, it was far easier. At 405 yards you could bomb it left well away from the woods on the right and still have a clear shot from the old driving range!
Today at 465 and with the bunkers added as well as a lot more trees, it's a very hard and scary tee shot.
-
I must say since they added length to #18 that left side fairway bunker does seem to be remarkably well positioned.
-
I must say since they added length to #18 that left side fairway bunker does seem to be remarkably well positioned.
Tiger, at least, takes 3-wood to lay up short of the bunker nowadays, whereas he tended to hit driver before they added the length. Remember the bomb he hit in the last round the year he completed the Tiger Slam? Inside of a 100 yards as I recall. So the length has caused him to change tactics. Even laying up short of the bunkers leaves him with 6 to 8-iron approach, which is better than a lob wedge I guess.
-
12-Perhaps the most precise tee shot in golf. Arguably more so than the 17th at TPC Sawgrass. Difficult to guage the wind, small landing area, pivotable point in the round.
In my opinion the biggest difference between the twelfth at Augusta and the seventeenth at Sawgrass is indeed its pivotal point in the round. A tee shot in the water (or lost ball over the green, god forbid) does not effectively end ones contention in The Masters, as it tends to at The Players. Rather, it ratchets up the need for heroics on 13, 15 and 16.
There also appear to be a wider range of "safety" options at the former, or maybe that's just from the point of view of a spectator rather than a player. Finally, it seems to me that a perfectly executed shot at the flag on Sunday leaves an easier birdie putt at Augusta's twelfth that at the seventeenth at Sawgrass.
Here's a question for those who have actually visited both courses. If you move up to the drop area after a ball in the water, which hole presents the easier spot to get up and down for bogey?
-
Tom Zeni,
I don't view the hole as weak.
I don't think the golf course has a weak hole, some are just easier than othes.
You're playing a semantics game. It's a weak hole. It's only saving grace is the serverly sloped green. You can't back #9 tee box any further or you'll run into the downhill #2. As such, the way the course runs, everyone can reach the bottom of the hill. A player only has "no shot" when they try to cut the corner and fail to do so.
-
I wish they wouldn't have added trees, especially on 11, 15, and 18. (The trees in play on 18: don't remember if they actually added trees on 18 or if it was the change in location of the tee, but one of those things definitely brought the trees in play.) It seems like it's encouraged more conservative play. 18 looks like an evergreen chute with a big sand pile at the end.
These are just impressions, don't have any stats, but it seems like there's a lot more laying up on 15, and 18 feels more like a "hang-on," play-it-conservative hole, whereas before even when golfers were in the wrong place they might still make the wrong decision and go for it.
Does the back second nine demand fewer difficult decisions today? Have the changes taken some of the mental ciphering out of the equation? Would Tom Weiskopf today have occasion to say, "If I knew the way he [Nicklaus] thought..."
For all the changes, the second nine still tends to produce the most-compelling spectating in golf, but I would say not as much as it used to.
-
Tiger, at least, takes 3-wood to lay up short of the bunker nowadays, whereas he tended to hit driver before they added the length. Remember the bomb he hit in the last round the year he completed the Tiger Slam? Inside of a 100 yards as I recall. So the length has caused him to change tactics. Even laying up short of the bunkers leaves him with 6 to 8-iron approach, which is better than a lob wedge I guess.
In 1961 Arnie hammered his drive and was left with a 6-iron, as I recall. The hole played 405 then? And Tiger can hit 3-wood, 8-iron with the hole at 465?
Shows how even with the added length, even with the extra bunkers and rough, ANGC plays nothing like it did several decades ago.
-
The 9th is a very interesting hole. It's a counter-intuitive hole in some respects. Because of the slope and angle of the green, hitting it to the right side of the fw to open up the green may be the wrong play. Your approach is more likely to suck off the green on that angle. Approaching the green from the wrong (left) side reduces that risk somewhat.
Tom Zeni - I attend the Masters pretty regularly. Everyone does not hit to the bottom of the 9th.
Bob
-
Tom Zemi,
# 9 is far from being a weak hole.
It's not just the slope of the green that presents a dileman, it's the angle and the fronting bunker.
Drives that aren't perfect have a downhill/sidehill or uphill/sidehill lie.
Having watch Vijah and others leave drives out to the right over the last week, I can assure you that a drive hit right will find trouble.
The tee has been brought back further and the hole may play beyond the 460 on the card.
Mark,
I don't recall any trees being added at # 18.
At 460 uphill, I don't know that I'd label the prefered play of that hole as conservative. It's a challenging finishing hole.
Jim Nugent,
Don't forget that Greg Norman hit a 4-iron into that green not that long ago, took a bogie and lost the tournament on the final day.
And, it's not just that these guys were hitting 8-irons or wedges, it's that they were hitting them from uphill lies to a highly elevated green.
-
Patrick,
Your reference to Norman was 1986. I think he hit 3-wood off the tee to take the bunkers out of play, and was criticized for leaving himself so far back on his second shot. It was a conservative tactic for such a great driver of the ball.
-
Patrick,
By conservative I meant the repositioning of the tees seems to have led golfers to change strategy and not challenge the left-hand bunkers. It seems like the new strategy is just hit a 3-wood down the chute for position and a mid / short iron in, as Phil Benedict mentioned with Tiger.
Mickelson, too. From 2004 press conference:
Q. Did you play 18 exactly the same way today as you had the first three days in terms of club selection?
PHIL MICKELSON: For the most part, yes. I hit 3-wood Thursday, Friday and Sunday. Yesterday I hit driver because there was a bit of breeze in. But it's just a good 3-wood. I think it's 310 to the bunker, and I can't hit that up the hill past 300.
The hole did need to be lengthened -- no more sand wedges -- but what would you think if they pruned back the left-hand tree line? Would more golfers hit driver and / or try to hit a big fade over / around those bunkers? (I think it's the first fade they have to hit since something like the fifth hole, a huge challenge under pressure.) Maybe in addition move those bunkers a little closer to the tee, to entice golfers to take the chance.
Mark
-
Does the tee shot on 11 call for a fade with the new trees?
-
No. The new trees make it so tight that working the ball either way doesn't make much sense and from the new back tees they can't drive past the trees.
Bob
-
They also moved the tee over to the right, yes?
Bob, with the tees and trees, would you say players are going for some kind of left-to-right action, however much they can get?
I would say in answer to Phil that it does favor a fade now, albeit a baby one, whereas before it was a hook.
The spectating on 11 is not as good as it used to be, is it Bob? Watching a lot of balls from "nowhere" flying out the trees and over that hill...
-
So the optimal shaping off the tee shots on the back 9 for a right hand player is:
10- Sweeping draw
11- Neutral to soft cut
13- Sweeping draw
14- Draw
15- Draw with the tee moved to the left
17- Neutral
18- Fade
It's always been known as a hookers' course. On the front 2 and 9 favor a draw but I'm not sure about the other holes. 3 and 7 are pretty straightaway.
-
Phil,
Sure about 15?
Mark
-
They also moved the tee over to the right, yes?
The spectating on 11 is not as good as it used to be, is it Bob? Watching a lot of balls from "nowhere" flying out the trees and over that hill...
The new tee is so far behind the old tee that it's hard to see it from the old tee. ;) If they moved it to the right, it's so slight that it's hard to tell.
For the Masters they rope off the fairway behind the trees so spectating is difficult. The best spot for viewing the 11th is probably to set up shop behind the 12th tee.
-
Bob,
That's what I meant -- it's hard to see as much of the play on 11 from the grandstands, even if you're sitting on the left.
Mark
-
Phil, my memory is that Norman hit an iron off the last tee. It wasn't 1986, though. Happened later. Was an overcast day, and the course may have been wet. I remember almost screaming out loud when I saw him pull the iron out of the bag. He blew so many tournaments with poor mental decisions.
-
Phil, my memory is that Norman hit an iron off the last tee. It wasn't 1986, though. Happened later. Was an overcast day, and the course may have been wet. I remember almost screaming out loud when I saw him pull the iron out of the bag. He blew so many tournaments with poor mental decisions.
I think you are right about hitting an iron. Not sure it was '86.
The interesting thing is that in this case the notionally conservative play - choosing the shorter club off the tee - was the wrong one. Tiger does this a lot (ie lay back, not make the wrong choice) but his iron play from 175-200 yards is phenomenally good, whereas his driving accuracy is a relative weakness. Norman's strength was driving the ball so there is no excuse for leaving the driver in the bag under those circumstances.
-
It's always been known as a hookers' course.
Interesting that Nicklaus generally faded the ball. Did he change his strategy at the Masters?
-
Phil, Dan and Chris,
Definitely not "weak" in terms of easy. But the lengthening of the hole, while it took the sand wedge out of Tiger's hands, also removed club selection as an issue on the tee. Who can forget Tom Lehman's regrettable 1-iron?
OK, the drive through the chute (in particular) and the Olympus-like climb to the green are great theatre, especially on TV.
And please note that I said weakest on that given course.. being #18 at ANGC is much to live up to.
But since you guys asked and at the expense of sounding petty, the narrowness of the landing area contrasts, and I would say negatively so, with much of the rest of the course. The approach, longer now for sure, doesn't jump out and challenge a skill set in the way some others at ANGC do. The green isn't as special as those at #1, #2, #3, #4, #5..., and the areas around it don't seem to get a tremendous amount of action or produce that much drama.
On drama, what memorable Masters moments have occurred at #18? Not Tiger winning his first major or Mickelson doing same... those don't count. But what on the order of (from my own memory and history).. Crenshaw's putt at 10.. Mize's chip at 11.. Weiskopf's meltdown at 12 .. Billy Joe Patton at 13.. Sarazan at 15 .. Nicklaus :D, Tiger :o, Norman :-[ at 16.. Nicklaus's '86 putt at 17 (and what the heck, "body bags")?
As for 18, I just don't feel the love.
So gimme a cigarette.. let the execution begin.
-
... wish they wouldn't have added trees, especially on 11, 15, and 18.
11 was such an elegant hole before those trees. One of my favorite memories from my one and only Masters visit was sitting on the hill between 11 and 12 and taking in the panoramic view of the guys hitting their second shots from the top of the hill down to that dangerous green. With the trees, I suspect that majestic view doesn't even exist anymore.
-
Jim Nugent,
In the 60's there was an article in Sports Illustrated about how Jack had messed up his game by developing a hook for Augusta. Obviously he figured out a way to do this without contaminating his game for the other 51 weeks of the year. So yes - Jack played a hook where needed at Augusta. I wonder if the same was true of Hogan?
The interesting thing about Augusta - as least as it appears to me on TV - is that some of those tee shots (10, 13) require a pretty sharp right-to-left curve, not just a soft draw.
Gary Daughters,
Thank you for the architectural critique of the 18th. Many threads ago Tom Doak said he didn't like the hole and I have always wondered why, given its notoriety. The fairway bunkers took the width out of the hole. The left used to be very safe but not the best angle.
-
Jeff,
Re 11 it's not so much the trees, although they're an issue, as the length. The players are hitting second shots from back up the hill. It's hard to take in the sweep of the hole.
Although I did see all of KJ Choi's eagle on 11, from something like 220 (5-iron), back in 2004...
Mark
-
Jeff,
Re 11 it's not so much the trees, although they're an issue, as the length. The players are hitting second shots from back up the hill. It's hard to take in the sweep of the hole.
Although I did see all of KJ Choi's eagle on 11, from something like 220 (5-iron), back in 2004...
Mark
Last year, as in 2005, they were unable to finish the third round on Saturday. Tiger comes out on Sunday and promptly birdies 10. The Tiger suck ups at CBS go into full flight, with Nance leading the charge. Then Tiger dumps his second into the pond on 11 from a fair bit back up the hill, which definitely stalled his momentum. That is one tough hole now - hard drive and hard second shot.
-
That hole is bailout after bailout. The stroke average runs something like 4.4...guess they succeeded in adding another gambling par 5 to the back!
-
Mark,
# 18 has been lengthened since 2004.
It's now 460+, up hill and the shoot is effectively narrower as you go further back.
Phil,
In 1986 # 18 was considerably shorter than it's present length.
Norman, recalling the 18th hole indicated that he tried to hit a 3/4 4 iron instead of a full 5-iron, and that's what caused him to leak the approach to the right.
-
Leak to the right is being a bit kind.
As memory serves it was about 50 yards right. And I thought it was a 6 iron he hit on that shot?
-
Leak to the right is being a bit kind.
As memory serves it was about 50 yards right. And I thought it was a 6 iron he hit on that shot?
By the time we get through with thread it'll be a 9-iron! Actually, I think you may be referring to the 6-iron he fanned on the 72-nd hole in the 1984 US Open at Winged Foot.
Patrick,
Having played the course, how sharp are those doglegs on 10, 13 and 14? My impression is they reward a pretty hard right to left turn. I once read an article by some first time Masters participant who was paired with Nicklaus in a practice round. The article was in the form of a diary as I recall. He described Jack's drive on 10 as a snap-hook that was perfect for the shot.
-
It was definitely Augusta I'm thinking of, just was unclear on the iron...but not a biggie. :)
-
.. I once read an article by some first time Masters participant who was paired with Nicklaus in a practice round. The article was in the form of a diary as I recall. He described Jack's drive on 10 as a snap-hook that was perfect for the shot.
might have been David Ogrin
-
I think it was David Ogrin who, oddly enough for a Tour player, has a personality.
-
Phil, my memory is that Norman hit an iron off the last tee. It wasn't 1986, though. Happened later. Was an overcast day, and the course may have been wet. I remember almost screaming out loud when I saw him pull the iron out of the bag. He blew so many tournaments with poor mental decisions.
In 1986 Norman hit a 3-wood off the tee, not an iron.
-
Leak to the right is being a bit kind.
As memory serves it was about 50 yards right. And I thought it was a 6 iron he hit on that shot?
No,
It was a 4-iron.
-
Leak to the right is being a bit kind.
As memory serves it was about 50 yards right. And I thought it was a 6 iron he hit on that shot?
No,
It was a 4-iron.
Indeed you are right, I should have never questioned that fact. ;D
-
Patrick,
Having played the course, how sharp are those doglegs on 10, 13 and 14?
# 10 isn't so much of a dogleg as it is a crescent shaped hole with topography that lends itself to a draw.
# 13 is a sharp dogleg.
Tee shots hit straight will end up in the pine trees/straw.
# 14 turns slightly from right to left.
I wouldn't classify it as a dogleg.
# 5 also favors a draw.
For me, the drives on # 11 and # 18 are very uncomfortable on the set up. # 11 is blind and you get an awkward feeling on the tee because the DZ is not defined.
On # 18 you can't draw or fade the ball too much or you'll be in trouble and unable to see or reach the green with your approach.
My impression is they reward a pretty hard right to left turn.
# 10 and # 13 do, but, not so much for # 14.
A soft draw would probably be the prefered shot.
Remember, these guys hit the ball pretty high and there's not as much movement in their shots when compared to decades and decades ago.
I once read an article by some first time Masters participant who was paired with Nicklaus in a practice round. The article was in the form of a diary as I recall. He described Jack's drive on 10 as a snap-hook that was perfect for the shot.
Nicklaus had high trajectory on almost every shot, so, that seems like a bit of embellishment, and, golfers don't want to overcook their teeshot on # 10 as it can find the woods left.
But, a low draw/hook hit to the right of center usually ends up in good shape.
-
interesting that Jack, at age 46, hit 3wood/5iron on 18..which means he was hitting it about the length as the much younger Norman
-
interesting that Jack, at age 46, hit 3wood/5iron on 18..which means he was hitting it about the length as the much younger Norman
Paul,
1986 was pre-metal woods and PV1's.
Persimmon clubs combined with those balls could produce inaccurate shots easily.
And, if you're hitting a 3-wood on # 18, you're not looking for distance, it's secondary to finding the prefered DZ in the fairway, short or just right of the bunker.
Nicklaus and Norman's distance with the 3-wood is immaterial because you don't know if either one of them choked up or hit an off-speed shot in order to end up in the DZ they were seeking.
In addition, the hole was so much shorter than it is today at approximately 405.
On that tee, from that distance, one has to factor in the bunker, the elbow in the dogleg, the slope of the DZ, etc., etc.. Position would be paramount, not distance with a 3-wood.
-
Leak to the right is being a bit kind.
As memory serves it was about 50 yards right. And I thought it was a 6 iron he hit on that shot?
No,
It was a 4-iron.
Correct Patrick. The Video backs you up. Norman fanned on a 4 iron.
-
In 1986 Norman hit a 3-wood off the tee, not an iron.
Yes, the year he hit iron was later. Maybe around 1989? Jack was in the announcers booth.
Just read some interesting things about the 1986 Masters, from the April 2006 GD...
Jack about his 2nd shot and the resulting putt at the 72nd hole: "On 18 I just wanted the ball in the fairway. A 3-wood left me with a straightforward shot. I still remember the yardage: 175 to the hole. It was a 5-iron, and I needed to get all of it to get the ball on the top level. I hit the ball really well, but just as it left the clubface I felt a little breeze in my face. The hole was all the way in the back of the green, and when the ball stopped on the lower tier I thought, Great, now I've got this darned putt.
It was a good 40 feet, but fortunately I knew what the putt did because our company had rebuilt that green, and I'd practiced that approach putt earlier in the week. Some of the greens had become too severe, and the back part of 18 was contoured too steeply from back to front. We'd leveled it out, and I knew that after the ball climbed the tier it would coast."
That part about his company rebuilding the green is really interesting. Did that give him some key local knowledge few others had?
Seve about his 4-iron into the water at 15: "The problem was not pressure. The problem was that I had to wait for Watson and Nakajima to putt out. While I was there, Nicklaus holed a birdie on the 16th. I had to wait a number of minutes. I was talking to my brother and decided to hit a 5-iron. Then I changed to a 4-iron. It was better to be long than short. All I had to do was put the ball out of the water, and the tournament was mine. Maybe overconfidence was the problem."
Tom Kite: "Seve's shot was not as easy as it looked. His ball was slightly on the downslope of one of those mounds in the fairway."
Seve: "I tried to hit a soft 4-iron. I hit a little behind the ball and, you know, I hit it in the water. Then everything went wrong for me."
Seve, looking back 20 years, on how HE might have won 6 Masters: "No question, that Masters really hurt my confidence a lot. If I had won there, instead of Nicklaus holding the record of six green jackets, it probably would have been Seve Ballesteros who would have had six."
-
Jim Nugent,
Seve's take is interesting.
I don't recall the shot being that difficult in terms of the lie and position, but, I do recall that it was an awful shot, not even marginal.
I can understand the wait unsettling him, but, those guys were used to waiting at almost every tournament.
Under pressure, it appears that these golfers would have been better off taking less club and trying to hit it hard, rather than finessing a lesser club.
-
On drama, what memorable Masters moments have occurred at #18? Not Tiger winning his first major or Mickelson doing same... those don't count. But what on the order of (from my own memory and history).. Crenshaw's putt at 10.. Mize's chip at 11.. Weiskopf's meltdown at 12 .. Billy Joe Patton at 13.. Sarazan at 15 .. Nicklaus :D, Tiger :o, Norman :-[ at 16.. Nicklaus's '86 putt at 17 (and what the heck, "body bags")?
Here are a few that come to mind...
* Mark O'Meara sinking a 20 foot putt in 1998 for birdie and the win.
* Sandy Lyle nailing his 7 iron out of the fairway bunker, watching it land on the ridge, then crawl back to ten feet. He holed the birdie putt and won by a stroke.
* Mike Weir sinking a 7-foot putt to tie Len Mattiace, and go on to win the playoff.
* TW hitting a perfect 3 wood, then perfect 8 iron, then sinking a 15 foot putt to win the playoff with DiMarco in 2005.
* Doug Ford holing his greenside bunker shot for birdie, to win back in 1957.
* Nicklaus two-putting from 40 feet and the lower tier in 1986, nearly holing out for birdie, preserving his lead.
* Bob Goalby hitting into the trees, then slicing a long iron (or was it wood) onto the green, and two-putting from around 50 feet to (apparently) maintain his tie with DeVicenzo.
* Arnie sinking a six foot putt for birdie in 1960 to win by a stroke over Ken Venturi.
And some memorable misses:
* Arnie doubling in 1961 by picking his sand shot clean, after his drive split the fairway and he only needed par to win, bogey to tie.
* Jack hitting the 2nd-best pressure putt I ever saw that did NOT go in, back around 1966. He was on the upper tier, the pin in its lower-tier Sunday position. Looked like it was heading in for the win, but veered left in the last foot or so. He went on to win the playoff the next day anyway.
* Watson starting the 72nd in 1991 tied for the lead, but doubling 18 to lose by two. Olazabal also was tied, but bogeyed 18, and Woosnam won.
* Norman half-shanking his approach from the middle of the fairway in 1986, taking bogey and losing to JN by a stroke.
-
It's always been known as a hookers' course.
Interesting that Nicklaus generally faded the ball. Did he change his strategy at the Masters?
Jim Nugent (and Phil Benedict, and Sports Illustrated)
from Golf My Way, IIRC, Jack had an attack of bursitis in his hip in about 1967 (I'm guessing/recalling here - was this 1967? did he win in 1967?) which meant he couldn't swing like he normally did. He said that he had to play a draw because of this physical predicament, and resulted in better opportunities on ?2, obvioulsly 10 and also 13.
According to his book in that year, he didn't amend his swing for the Masters, it was the only way he could swing.
James B
-
James, JN did not win in 1967. He won 1963, 65 and 66. Next victory didn't come till 1972.
-
Jim
then it was either 1965 or 1966 when he had hip bursitis. Sorry, but it is well over 30 years since I read his book. And it was a library copy.
James B