Some of the old hands at GCA may recall a thing called a TEP Value - the mathematical correlative of the now incredibly famous TEP Conjecture. It is basically a measurement of the spread of scores on a hole.
The reason that scoring spreads are worth looking at is based on the theory that great strategic holes offer choices. Golfers take on risks voluntarily if there is a potential of lower scores. The heart of the theory is TEP's insight that the more effective the temptations offered by the hole, the better it is strategically. Attractive risks, risks that actually tempt golfers, are preferrable to risks you merely avoid or ignore. (Trying to be as pretentious as possible, we have called that the TEP Conjecture.
)
It follows from the TEP Conjecture that great strategic holes ought to have wide scoring spreads. The more widely AND evenly the spread of scoring, the more strategic the hole is. You want to see roughly similar numbers of under, even and over par scores. Such scoring implies (i) lots of golfers were tempted to take risks and (ii) some succeeded and some failed.
Looking briefly at the TEP Values at the Open, what jumps off the page is the scoring spreads on the 12th.
I had always thought it was a wonderful little par 4. But now, with everyone hitting it so far, it may be an even more strategic than it was previously. More people appear to be tempted to drive the green. The consequence is that more people are getting in big trouble off the tee, while others are left with easy chips or two putt birdies. The 12th caused some to fail ignominiously and some to succeed gloriously. Can't ask architecture to get any better than that.
The 12th at TOC ought to be seen as a much better hole than it usually is. If TEP Values are any guide, it played as one of the most interesting holes at the Open last week.
Bob