[Tommy Williamsen]

A couple buddies of mine attended the Golf Digest min-summit in Chicago this weekend.  Ron Whitten spoke about shot values and that he wants panelists to rate shot values hole by hole.  He demonstrated it by giving shot values for Augusta National.  The average score for the course was 6.7.  The average panelist's score was 8.7.  Oh, number 13 was 9.5 and he called it the best hole in the country.
It is at least interesting.

[Tom_Doak]

Tommy:

I sat through the same lecture at the summit in Las Vegas in December.

I don't think two people in the room really agreed on the shot values of each hole.  Whitten and I disagreed significantly on several holes.  I did agree with him on #13 -- except, if the best hole in America is only a 9.5, they are setting the bar pretty high!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy,

In what context would each panelist evaluate the shot values for each hole ?

In the context of their own game ?
In the context of the scratch handicap player ?
In the context of the PGA Tour Pro ?

And, from what tees, what DZ and what AZ ?

The subjectivity of the exercise probably explains why noone could agree on the values.

Most courses that host Majors don't permit routine play from the extreme back tees, so why should a golf course be evaluated from tees primarily used by PGA Tour Pros ?

[Tommy Williamsen]

Pat, I attend a mini-summit in two weeks.  I will try to answer it when I return.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy,

I'd appreciate it if you could ask the questions I posed.

I'd also ask, what the perceived goal of this exercise is.

Thanks

[cary lichtenstein]

They must be rating #13 from either the pro tees, or a scratch player.

For me, it's just another par 5, driver, layup and wedge.

Now the best shot value hole is #16 at Cypress Pt.

[Andy Troeger]

Tommy,

In what context would each panelist evaluate the shot values for each hole ?

In the context of their own game ?
In the context of the scratch handicap player ?
In the context of the PGA Tour Pro ?

And, from what tees, what DZ and what AZ ?

The subjectivity of the exercise probably explains why noone could agree on the values.

Most courses that host Majors don't permit routine play from the extreme back tees, so why should a golf course be evaluated from tees primarily used by PGA Tour Pros ?

Pat,
My understanding of this is that the hole should be evaluated as best as possible from all sets of tees for as wide of a variety of players as possible. It most certainly is NOT just that of the PGA pro from the back tees.  I would guess that in reality the focus is more going to be on a single-digit handicap seeing as that's the demographic of the panel.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tommy,

I'd appreciate it if you could ask the questions I posed.

I'd also ask, what the perceived goal of this exercise is.

Thanks

Will do.  They are good questions.

[Jim Nugent]

Can anyone explain the scale?  I assume 10 is the highest score a hole can get, and 0 the lowest.  But how exactly are you supposed to assign a number for shot values?  

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jim, here is what Golf Digest gives us.  It is no secret because they have published it in the magazine.

Shot Values

How well do the holes present a variety of risks and rewards, and test accuracy, length and finesse without overemphasizing any one skill over the other two?

[cary lichtenstein]

Jim, here is what Golf Digest gives us.  It is no secret because they have published it in the magazine.

Shot Values

How well do the holes present a variety of risks and rewards, and test accuracy, length and finesse without overemphasizing any one skill over the other two?

Well, if "without overemphasizing anyone skill over the other 2," where do Oakmont and Augusta stand respectively?

[Garland Bayley]

Cary,

Which of those three are you suggesting are overemphasized at Oakmont and Augusta?
Enquiring minds want to know.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jim, here is what Golf Digest gives us.  It is no secret because they have published it in the magazine.

Shot Values

How well do the holes present a variety of risks and rewards, and test accuracy, length and finesse without overemphasizing any one skill over the other two?

Well, if "without overemphasizing anyone skill over the other 2," where do Oakmont and Augusta stand respectively?

Cary, I have not played Augusta but I have played Oakmont.  Obviously strength and length are important.  So are accuracy, finess, and imaginantion.  The Second shot at two doesn't need strength but it certainly needs finess and touch.  Same is true for #4,5 and 9. Pretty much every hole has some risk and reward to it.  How much do you want to challenge this fairway bunker or hit it close to that pin, go for the green on 17 etc. I think Oakmont could be the poster child for shot values.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()