So far a bit differently than some predicted.  Here are stats for the holes they changed.  The 2006 column shows the difficulty rank to par this year.  The all-time column shows where the hole ranks in all Masters.   This obviously suffers from sample size -- Sunday night should reveal a lot more, weather permitting -- but begins to show what is going on.

I put the average scores in parentheses.  They don't seem as significant to me: they depend so much on conditions.  Also, this year only has one decimal place.  

Hole      2006 rank   All-time rank
1             5  (4.3)            7  (4.23)

4             8  (3.2)            3  (3.29)

7             6  (4.3)           13  (4.14)

11           1  (4.5)            4  (4.28)

14         10 (4.2)             8  (4.19)
   
17           4  (4.3)           10  (4.16)

Four of the holes got harder, relative to the rest of the course.  Two got easier, including number 4.  Surprises me.  Did they use a way upfront tee on that hole?  That would bias the scores and ranking downward.  

As many expected, 7 made the biggest move so far.  Followed by number 17.   Number 11 has made the biggest move stroke-wise, while also becoming the toughest hole on the course so far this year.  

Also so far this year the changes have not handed the tournament only to long hitters.  The first three places are held by short to medium length hitters.  Over half the top 22 are short hitters.

The par 5's are playing easiest this year to par.  Same as in the all-time stats.  Each one is averaging under par.  The only holes on the course that is true of.  

12, historically the 2nd hardest hole, has gotten bumped back to 7th place this year.  

Exciting to see how things play out on Sunday.

    

Jim, Great work. Do you compile those stats yourself?

While reading your post I couldn't help but sense that these stats have little to do with the enjoyment of golf, and focus primarily on difficulty. Yet, another duece was made on 11.

I suppose that is the biggest difference between the tournament or yesteryear and today. It wasn't ALL about how difficult. It was about how difficult it was from certain angles and areas versus others. Now it's been dictated to mostly from all one area, one angle.

Adam, yes I compiled them.  

Garland, good idea, but these are the only numbers I found.  Plus I don't want to take the time to do this for ten years, even if I did have the raw data.  

When the tournament is over, I'll give the updated version.  

Jim Nugent,

I think the problem in the statistical presetation is that it assumes that the holes played to their longest yardages this year.

What surprised me is where # 17 stood on the all time list.
Perhaps part of its ranking stemed from the pressure on golfers on the last two holes.

But, I was really shocked by # 4's all time position.

This afternoon should be interesting.

With the tournament over, here are the updated stats.  I did some quick calculations of my own to round off the 2006 average strokes to two decimal places…

Hole      2006 rank   All-time rank
1            4  (4.25)         7  (4.23)

4            7  (3.21)         3  (3.29)

7            6  (4.22)        13  (4.14)

11          1  (4.49)         4  (4.28)

14         10 (4.18)           8  (4.19)
   
17          2  (4.28)        10  (4.16)

The big surprise to me is that 17 was the 2nd hardest hole in the tournament.  Still it was 0.2 of a stroke easier than number 11.    

The two most interesting holes in terms of angle of play and strategy are the ones they've never tinkered with badly, the 3rd and 12th.

By the way, how good was Tim Clark's bunker shot at the 18th hole? It was worth exactly $366,916.67.

Tim Clark's bunker shot hole out on #18 sure was significant, and Tim Clark sure is an interesting spunky little tour pro---all 5'7" and 145lbs of him. I don't know that I'd say his bunker shot on #18 was all that good, though, other than the fact it went into the hole. I noticed a commentator or two wondered about it as soon as he hit it. It looked like he hit it so heavy it just kept rolling and rolling and eventually the hole got in the way. If he actually planned it like that---let's just say I sure am impressed. But it looked like "just one of those things".