[Tommy Williamsen]

I have played Sawgrass a few times. It is one tough bugger. I simply cannot understand how these guys can score like they do. They really are good.

[Wade Whitehead]

Tommy:

Webb Simpson's missed seven-footer on 15 (I think) today was his first missed putt inside ten feet all week.

WW

[Tommy Williamsen]

I made a ten footer last week. I was thrilled.

[Peter Flory]

It is incredible.  I watched Tiger absolutely smooth that 9 iron on 18 from 192 yards. 


I  think it is a combination of the course playing short (high temps, fast and firm conditions, and only moderate length), the greens being perfect, and one guy playing out of his mind.  It's one of those courses where it is easy if you're on and really penalizing if you are off.  So, you get Phil shooting a 79 while others flirt with 59. 


I can't remember which player said it, but the comment was that it was the best conditioning that he has ever seen for any golf course. 

[Matthew Essig]

The lowest ever score to par was Greg Norman's -24; however, the lowest score since the move to May was Tim Clark's -16.

My takeaway is that the course has lost some of its bite, though the wind hasn't been as big of a factor as it normally is.

[Joe Zucker]

I actually don't think Sawgrass is that tough of a course for a tour event.  There is way more room to avoid the hazards than I originally thought, it's pretty short for tour players, and the wind is usually a big factor in Florida (as Matthew noted).  Whoever wins a tour event always putts well, but it seems like Webb is especially good this week.  He could be playing just as well with a a couple more putts missing and be at -14 and it would be a fairly normal week. 


The course should probably be a par 70 and this would not be abnormally low scoring with the new 12th hole the players are hitting irons into and the usual reachable par 5s.

[Jon Wiggett]

One guy is playing outstanding golf over three rounds to be at -19 but look at the rest of the field too as second and third place still playing great golf is -12 & -10 respectively. If Simpson shoots -24 he equals the best ever shot there which has stood for a quarter centaury. If he shoots 75 he ends up on a very respectable -16 but will anyone remember what he shot in 5 years time?


Time to shorten the ball.

[Jeff Schley]

Of Friday, Dustin Johnson played the par 5, 532 yard 2nd hole with 3 wood 334 yards (not really down wind either) then 8 iron from 198.  Amazing.

[Matt Kardash]

Let's be honest, this course has lost a lot of bite in the past 35 years.
It was 7000 yards in 1980, and is maybe 7200 yards today.
7000 yards in 1980 is probably the equivalent to 8000+ yards today.
I can't think of a single par 4 that can't be hit with more anything more than a 7 or 8 iron.
Two of the par 5's can be hit with mid irons. One can be hit with a short iron. The other one used to be unreachable, now it can be reached with a long iron.
On top of all that the new 12th is easier than the old 12th, as it is now essentially a long par 3.
Last but not least, the most recent renovation flattened the greens a little more.
Put it all together and the course is certainly not the scary monster it once was.

[Joe Hancock]

After reading the commentary here, I’m wondering how strong the corrolation is between the near- perfect maintenance and the low scores, especially as it pertains to the ability of the pros to have almost absolute predictability of how the greens respond to recovery shots and putting. Putting in particular seems to be such an easy exercise compared to what it was 20 years ago. Once the pros dial in their mechanics, it seems to me that it becomes nearly machine-like in the execution.


As an aside, the TV commentators keep trying to tell us how beguiling this course is, but it looks pretty straightforward they way these pros manage themselves and information through their caddies nowadays.

[Peter Pallotta]

As per Joe's point, it's instructive to 'watch' the tournament on the pgatour.com 'shot tracker'. The overhead view shows all the angled fairways and visual clutter that the course/PB is famous for, but also shows how every player (who is playing well) consistently ignores all of that and picks the right line for their individual games/skill sets. And those lines are almost always dead straight, whether for shorter hitting Simpson or bomber Johnson. In other words, as has been noted, there is more room out there than it seems, and a lot less imagination is required to play it than it first appears. Since golfers as different as Davis Love and Fred Funk have won there, I suppose you could say that it's a 'fun' golf course instead of a hard one, and playable for all...

[Thomas Dai]

It’s a par 68 these days.
Atb

[Tommy Williamsen]

Evidently Webb has a game plan he has stuck to. His shots into the greens average less than eight feet from the others.

[Jeff Schley]

Simpson is putting exceptionally well this week, I think he has made more putts in terms of total distance through the first 2 rounds than any other golfer but 1 in the last 5 years.  You guys remember this stat shown yesterday?

The next closest even now midway through the final round -12, which isn't epic. So take out Simpson and it is somewhat normal.

[Mike Bodo]

After reading the commentary here, I’m wondering how strong the corrolation is between the near- perfect maintenance and the low scores, especially as it pertains to the ability of the pros to have almost absolute predictability of how the greens respond to recovery shots and putting. Putting in particular seems to be such an easy exercise compared to what it was 20 years ago. Once the pros dial in their mechanics, it seems to me that it becomes nearly machine-like in the execution.


As an aside, the TV commentators keep trying to tell us how beguiling this course is, but it looks pretty straightforward they way these pros manage themselves and information through their caddies nowadays.

I think putting has become easier because of the greens books the caddies now carry around with them detailing each minute break on a putting surface. I think these should be outlawed, as players and caddies should go back to reading greens with their eyes and do their own research and homework of the putting surfaces during practice and tournament rounds. These greens books are like having a cheat-sheet on the course.

[jeffwarne]

Tommy:

Webb Simpson's missed seven-footer on 15 (I think) today was his first missed putt inside ten feet all week.

WW

and ironically, the competitive golf world in general responds to this with ever increasing green speeds due to turf research, agronomy, skill and ever increasing superintendant experience---
then after they've pushed the turf to an ever faster , truer roll...
they respond by further flattening the surfaces to accomodate the speed.


and...these guys are good


Nice to see Simpson overcome the stupid anchoring rule, which unlike other equipment gains -never caused a modification to any golf classic course

[JESII]

To Joe Hancock's point...and if we stretch it, to Jeff Warne's as well...


If a 6 to 8 foot putt is really easy to make, how much easier does that make chipping the ball? If chipping the ball is really easy, how much more relaxed and aggressive could you be on the approach? If approach shots are easy and relaxing, why not blast away from the tee? Afterall, even if you miss the drive, just get it up around the green and you can chip it close and make the putt.


This is a very real cycle at the Tour level...to think they're going to try to turn it around is foolish though...BECAUSE IT'S TELEVISION!


At the local level, the job is ours to defend the best, most interesting and rewarding parts of the game...not to blame our struggles on the guys selling golf balls and ad space...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()