News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Best Short Par Fours
« on: June 14, 2005, 06:29:21 PM »
What are the nominees for best short par four played by the Tour?

I'll go first with thoghts on three.

The fourteenth at Muirfield Village is one of my favorites.  It requires two well-played shots for a chance at birdie, with water lurking on both shots.

The only drawback some might see (I personally do not) is that there is no utility in attempting to drive the green, making the hole a true par four.  Perhaps not a lot of choices, but two well-executed shots are required.

Contrast this with the 10th at Riviera, which in my view is a straight bomb-it hole.  Worst case, the bomber has a pitch shot out of high rough for a second shot, or better yet a bunker shot.  Even if the player gets unlucky left and is behind a tree, he can pitch back to the fairway for the same shot as if he had laid up.  Very little thought required it seems, and not a great short par four to me.

A third would be the sixth at Winged Foot, where up until last winter there were a small stand of evergreens to the left of the green.  I saw Trip Kuene hook a driver into the evergreens and actually concede a hole in the US Amateur, while Luke List had hit an iron to 100 yards in the fairway.

This stand of trees was gone, however, when I played there this spring.  Now it seems there is nothing to make a lay up something the player should even consider.  Little real choice, and little penalty for a less than stellar attempt to drive the green.  I view the sixth, while a fun match play hole, as a weakness in WF's layout.

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2005, 06:42:06 PM »
Scott,

Welcome to the board.  Your first post should elicit some response.  Many here believe #10 at Riviera to be one of the finest short 4s in the country, Tour or not.  It would certainly be the top choice here for best short 4 on Tour.

I also played #6 at Winged Foot - West this year.  Sort of a nothing hole, straight and flat through a wide corridor to a medium severe target.  In a recent SI round table discussion posted here, David Fay mentioned he'd like to see this hole sport 8" rough to defend par.  Not my favorite way to provide interest.  I made bogey by pulling a 4-iron into the rough.  Not really a tour hole.

The first short 4 on Tour that comes to mind for me is #17 at the Phoenix Open, about 340, driveable with severe consequences if you miss left or right.  I like that one.

Yannick Pilon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2005, 07:42:27 PM »
Wow!

To say that the 10th at Riviera is not a great short par 4 sounds like heresy to me!  I would take an 18-hole course filled with holes like this one over any 7,200 yards course any day!

Recently, someone made a great post complete with pictures to explain all the subtleties and choices presented by this hole.... You should try to find it.  You would probably change your mind.
www.yannickpilongolf.com - Golf Course Architecture, Quebec, Canada

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2005, 08:57:26 AM »
Took a look at the thread on Riviera's 10th

While i agree that the hole is a great short par four for you and I, if the thread remains correct, technology has passed it by for a tour pro.

The hole is listed at 315 yards.  Assuming the green is 30-40 yards deep that makes the front edge approximately 300 yards from the back cut of the toonamint tee.

PGA Tour.com lists 189 players in its driving distance statistics.  The median driving length (94th place on the list) is 286 yards, and there are those who believe that for many reasons (holes chosen for measurement, player club selection,wind, etc.) these statistics tend to understate a tour player's length.

My point is this--if a player can hit it 290-300 yards, he is either putting or chipping for eagle.  If he mishits it, what is the reasonable worst case outcome?  Looks to me like there are three:

1.-short of the right front bunker

2.-in either left or right bunker

3. in trees/bushes left.

of these, the logical recoveries are:

1-from the right rough, the player has a tough pitch to a green running away.  however the worst case outcome of this shot is over the green, from which the player has an uphill chip to get up and down for par.  

2-right front bunker-player is 50/50 he gets up and down and makes birdie, worst case he chips back and makes par.  worst-worst case he makes 5.

left bunker is tougher, but 6 is still out of play for anybody with a Tim Finchem commemorative money clip.

3--only worry in the trees is an unplayable.  short of that, the player can chip out short o' the putting surface and make 4, and may do better.

The avg. player may see a lot of options from the tee, but a tour player who can get there really has little downside to bombing it, unless the rough is 8" thick, to paraphrase David Fay.

Contrast these outcomes with 14 at Muirfield Village, not because its better but because i led off with it.  Here a player see all kinds of numbers.  From the tee, the player does have an iron but a pull goes into the creek and a push gets behind a tree.  From the landing area, a push is in the creek, a pull is in the bunker leaving a downhill bunker shot to a green running away into a creek.  4 is a possibility, right next to 7.

I think the "choices" at Riviera 10 are not really choices at all for a tour player, but for you and me.

Muirfield does not offer choices either, it just escalates the penalty for mis-hit shots.

Was hoping to find example of short 4's that really do offer risk/reward opportunities not for us but for for tour players.



Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2005, 02:26:47 PM »
17 at TPC Scottsdale, particularly with the back hole location.....

Ari Techner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2005, 05:44:44 PM »
Id nominate the 13th hole at Franklin Hills CC in MI.  295 from the tips yet most are very happy walking off with a 4.  One of the smallest greens anywhere and imo one of the finest examples of a short Ross par 4.  

Id also nominate #6 at Pacific Dunes, one of my favorite holes anywhere.  
« Last Edit: June 15, 2005, 05:45:54 PM by Ari Techner »

THuckaby2

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2005, 05:50:16 PM »
Id also nominate #6 at Pacific Dunes, one of my favorite holes anywhere.  

Ari - if we open this up to all golf holes, hell yes that belongs - it's one of my favorite holes anywhere also.  The funny thing is though that it has a new cousin in #14 at Bandon Trails, one that just might be a better golf hole.

Just do understand the post here seems to be about holes played on the PGA Tour.  Oh well....


Gerry B

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2005, 08:41:23 PM »
 my quick list of tour holes or holes that have hosted majors or other events on the reg tour /  senior tour / ryder cup:

#10 at riviera - one of the great strategic holes of all time
#7 at olympic
#10 at the belfry - sat on the bank behind the green at the 89 and 93 ryder cups - great risk reward match play hole
#6 at ridgewood - called the 5 and dime - they played a senior major there a few years ago
#13 at Salem - played the us senior open there a few years ago - a beauty
18 at olympic before they flattened the green
#2 at spyglass
#4 at the country club - great match play hole - plays as a different hole when the course is not in composite mode
#10 at Merion - again risk reward comes into play

Don_Mahaffey

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2005, 09:01:32 PM »
"Assuming the green is 30-40 yards deep"

Huh? Have you ever even seen the hole?

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2005, 09:36:47 PM »
I think what Don is trying to say here is #10 Riviera has a really small green.  I believe the back right portion is only 7-8 paces deep.

Ian Andrew

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2005, 10:15:29 PM »
Scott,

The green is 8 paces and falls away from play. You need to be as left as you can make yourself for the approach, but the bunkering makes you hit far too far right. You can knoock it on or hit it right of the green and make a potential double real quick.

It's the best short four I know.

Best I have seen that I can think of:

Riviera #10
Merion #10
French Creek #15
Philadelphia Country Club #1
Pebble Beach #4
Cypress Point #9
National Golf Links #2
Pinehurst (no. 2) #3
Old Course #12
Friars Head #5
Sunningdale (old) #3
Prestwick (old) #17
Highland Golf Links #4

Kyle Harris

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2005, 11:45:39 PM »
After finally playing it today, the "Reef" Hole at Bethpage (Yellow #12) is quite devilish and imminently enjoyable.

DMoriarty

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2005, 04:21:33 AM »
Scott,

Welcome to the website.  You will likely be very popular here among those who constantly argue that one must really get to know a hole before forming much of an opinion about it.  You are making their case for them!

As Don points out the Riviera 10 green is tiny.  Must be less than ten yards deep on the right side.  In addition, it is not contoured to be receptive to an approach from the right from any distance.  

As for technology passing it by for the top players, I am not sure they would agree.  If I recall correctly, in the 2004 LA open somewhere around 2 out of 3 pros chose to layup left rather than risk the easy drive at the green you describe.

Why?  Because none of the misses you describe provide an easy recovery.  Also, because players who bring bogey into play risk losing two on the field.  

Quote
Was hoping to find example of short 4's that really do offer risk/reward opportunities not for us but for for tour players.

You found one.  You just dont realize it yet.  


Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2005, 11:11:03 AM »
Gentlemen:

I joined the board to try to further the debate, so i'll push forward---

In referring to the depth of the green, i was attempting to illustrate the distance from the tee to the front edge, and was referring to the total depth of the green, not the depth of the right side, to which i think a few of you refer.

I've spent a decent amount of time at Riviera and thought i knew the hole pretty well, but to be certain I consulted a yardage book from the L.A. (still can't say Nissan) Open.  The front edge of the 10th at Riviera is indeed approx. 289 yards from the Toonamint tee.

the distance from the front edge (left) to the back edge (right) is 33 yards.  The distance bet the forward (right) edge of the green to the back right edge of the green, which indeed would be abt 8-10 yards.  I will further stipulate that the tour will put the hole 3 paces from the front edge, leaving 5-7 paces to the back edge past the right hole location.

Still don't understand why our card-carrying friends would do anything but grip it and rip it, unless he is (unusally) great with a wedge, its cold, or the wind is into the player.

The left bunker is out of play for most players.  The carry yardage is abt 270 yards, which happens to be the avg. driving distance of the 180th player on the current PGA Tour list, Brad Faxon.  Why not hit it over the right edge of that bunker?  

None of the "leaves" i describe offer the up and down opportunities of a typical par four, but my point is that the likely MISS from these places does offer a good up and down.  Imagine a tour player in the right front bunker who knocks it over the green past a left pin.  The players' third is uphill from the chipping area, making par a pretty likely outcome.  Why wouldn't a tour player fire driver at the hole and take the chance?

I'll try to dig up some hole by hole stats and see whether they add anything to this debate.

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2005, 11:17:19 AM »
Scott - I'm in favor of pushing forward the debate.  Its great to prod at assumptions on this site (although I agree with the general view on this hole)

2005 150 out of 286 went for the green.  11 of 150 hit it.  (wet conditions -2 rounds)

2004 139 of 442 went for the green.  6 of 139 hit it.

The overall stroke average in 2005 was about 3.75.  I did not check 2004.

To me, these stats demonstrate a great hole that can be reached but a player feels like he must make 3.  It would be interesting to compare the stroke average of those going for the green vs. those laying up.

DMoriarty

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2005, 11:33:29 AM »
Scott,

I dont have a yardage book in front of me so you you'll have to help me out.  When you give the 33 yrd number, that isnt really green depth, is it?  Green depth fron the angle one would have to take when trying to drive the green?  

Quote
Still don't understand why our card-carrying friends would do anything but grip it and rip it, unless he is (unusally) great with a wedge, its cold, or the wind is into the player.

Yet somewhere around two-thirds of them do not grip it and rip it.  In your mind, are these pros just simple making a bad play?  Or is it possible that you misunderstand the ease of just flailing away with driver, even for pros who are all capable of hitting it far enough?

Quote
Dutch pink and Italian blue
she is waiting there for you
my will has disappeared
now my confusion's oh so clear
temptation, temptation, temptation
whoa, whoa, temptation, temptation
 -- Tom Waits
« Last Edit: June 16, 2005, 11:37:43 AM by DMoriarty »

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2005, 12:52:12 PM »
Jason's info is really interesting.

2005-52% of the field goes for it, despite weather

2004-31% goes for it in better conditions

thats really counterintuitive to me, unless one believes, as I do, that players are gradually coming around to the Dave Pelz-like theory that its better to be as close to the green as possible, even if that means the rough/bunker.

Jason, do you know where #10 ranked in difficulty relative to the other holes?

I wasn't really trying to make any point on green depth, and I don't think its relavent at all to the decision to go for the green.

The point I'm trying to make is that, in our age of amped-up balls and drivers, the tour player views hitting the green as a bonus, and the decision abt whether to use the driver is about what happens if he MISSES the green.  I think, when looked at from this perspective, there is little downside to a 300 yard + hitter to wailing away and no benefit to "positioning" unless the guy has a David Toms-like approach to scoring.  Two years are not really a trend, but comparing the two stats seems to support this view.

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2005, 12:59:24 PM »
sorry, to be responsive, the 33-yard number simply reflects the way the USGA/PGA Tour would prepare a hole placement chart--doesn't reflect at all the way the hole plays, just helps you figure out how far to the front edge from the tee.

I dont think the fact that the effective target area is 8-9 yards in diameter is as relevant as the liklihood of getting into that area with a recovery shot, or using two shots to get within 4 feet of the hole.

Will be curious to see how Pinehurst #3 shakes out this week.

DMoriarty

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2005, 01:34:38 PM »
I dont think the fact that the effective target area is 8-9 yards in diameter is as relevant as the liklihood of getting into that area with a recovery shot, or using two shots to get within 4 feet of the hole.

Wow.  These guys are good, but are they really that good?

Quote
2005-52% of the field goes for it, despite weather

2004-31% goes for it in better conditions

thats really counterintuitive to me, unless one believes, as I do, that players are gradually coming around to the Dave Pelz-like theory that its better to be as close to the green as possible, even if that means the rough/bunker.

This is your support for your premise?  Two rounds in a non-tournament where barely 1/2 the field saw it as you do?  Hmmm . . . Sorry but I am not so easily convinced.

Did you watch the year Weir won?  If I recall correctly there was a playoff which ended on No. 10,  Howell went for the green, missed right.  Hit an absolutely brilliant second, two putted for par and lost to Weir, who had played safe and left and then knocked a wedge stiff from a perfect angle.  


. . . now my confusion is oh so clear . . . teeeemptation . . . ohh temptaaaaaation . . .  
« Last Edit: June 16, 2005, 01:36:40 PM by DMoriarty »

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2005, 02:23:46 PM »
Thinking abt it, the right way to decide if this is really a good risk reward hole is to evaluate the dispersion of outcomes among those who attempt the shot, rather than looking at who goes for it and who does not.  The fact that the percentage of players going for it improved so dramatically from one year to the next, despite advrese conditions, tells me that players are changing their views on just how much "risk" is really involved.  I f i can find the stats i'l try to post something over the weekend

I do believe, however, that citing the outcome of one two player sample in order to refute conclusions drawn from two samples totalling over 700 players is less than convincing.

Don_Mahaffey

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #20 on: June 16, 2005, 03:46:21 PM »
Scott,
"sorry, to be responsive, the 33-yard number simply reflects the way the USGA/PGA Tour would prepare a hole placement chart"

I don't think that the PGA tour would prepare the hole location sheet like that at all. For instance, in AZ I had a green that was 18 yards deep, but 30+ yards wide. And even though it was slighlty tilted away from the tee, the 18 yard number was used by the tour, not the width of the green. I'd bet a bundle that the pin sheets given to players does not list the depth of the green at #10 as 33 yards.

"effective target area is 8-9 yards in diameter"
Now, I may be misunderstanding you here, but how can the effective target area be 8-9 yards when the green is only 8-9 yards deep and falls away?

I also think the hole plays easier in soft conditions and that may be the reason a higher % went for the green in '05.

I like the 14th at Muirfield Village, but I believe truly great short par 4s do give the player the go for it option. I've never seen Muirfield but it seems to me that the design forces a certain play if one wants a good chance at birdie. The 10th at Riviera gives options that can reward or punish. And, it's not that easy of a par, especially if played in the summer when the turf has a little bounce.  

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #21 on: June 16, 2005, 05:03:53 PM »
The more I think about it, i'm beginning to think that a great short 4 produces a wide variey of outcomes based on both the choices avail to the player as well as the skill of execution.  

I'm not sure, in my own mind, that a hole offering just two options--either gun it at the hole or lay up for a pitch--and producing scores of 3, 4 or 5, is as good a hole that offers one option but coughs up anywhere from a 3 to a 7 depending on the skill of a players execution.  


As an aside, if you follow the guideline published by the USGA for preparing hole placement charts, 33 yards is (close to) accurate.  If a square were drawn around the green with the edges touching the edges of the green, the distance from the edge of the green closest to the tee to the axis on the opposite side of the square will be 30+ feet.

The guideline is in a pamphlet on competitions prepared last year.  


DMoriarty

Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #22 on: June 16, 2005, 05:33:45 PM »
Thinking abt it, the right way to decide if this is really a good risk reward hole is to evaluate the dispersion of outcomes among those who attempt the shot, rather than looking at who goes for it and who does not.  

What do you expect that the dispersion is going to tell you and what difference does that make anyway?   Contrary to popular belief a good strategic hole does not necessarily have a large dispersion of outcomes.  Penal holes have large dispersions of outcomes, but noone is saying that Riv. 10 is a penal hole.  

A while back I started a thread on exactly this issue, using the relatively narrow dispersion of scores at Riviera 10 as my example.   It should be somewhere around here if you are interested.  

Quote
The fact that the percentage of players going for it improved so dramatically from one year to the next, despite advrese conditions, tells me that players are changing their views on just how much "risk" is really involved.  If i can find the stats i'l try to post something over the weekend

Scott, the 2005 stats are all but worthless.  First, there was no official tournament, not unless two rounds counts as a tournament.  Second, while you try to paint the 2005 results as being "despite the weather, " Don points out it is much more likely that more players went for it because of the weather.  The ball generally has to bounce or run to get to any of the really nasty spots on the hole (particularly long left.)  Big bad dangerous bounces are taken out of play in soggy conditions.   Also, it was pretty clear that this was not going to be an official event, and the golfers may have played accordingly.


But let's give the 2005 stats the great weight you want to . . .  

Just over 50% went for it in 2005.  That means that just under 50% laid up.   When around half a PGA field decides to lay up, I'd hardly call this support for your position.   When half the golfers go one way, and the other half go the other, I'd say that is a pretty good indication that there was actually a legitimate strategic choice.  

I am baffled as to how you can interpret these stats otherwise.  

Quote
I do believe, however, that citing the outcome of one two player sample in order to refute conclusions drawn from two samples totalling over 700 players is less than convincing.

Well, if all I cited were the outcome then you might have a point.   But that isnt all I cited.  I cited the stats for the last Official PGA tournament at Riviera.  Someone else added the specific numbers and the stats for the first two rounds in 2005.  All those numbers show that a significant percentage of tour players lay up on a hole you describe as a no-brainer-go-for-it hole.   Every stat I have seen undercuts your position.

Of course the recent dramatic finish is anecdotal.  But it just happens to be a pretty powerful anecdote.  The two players most on their game that particular week took two entirely different routes to the hole (every time, I think.)  Given this and the stats above, how on earth can you argue that there is no real choice?

By the way, I wasnt citing the "result," but rather that the two leaders took two different approaches.  Weir's winning didn't invalidate Howell's decision no more than Howell's winning would have invalidated Weir's decision.   What is important is that each had a decision to make with two distinct but viable options.  

Scott Stearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #23 on: June 16, 2005, 06:46:04 PM »
i think the number that SHOULD be going for that green should be 80%, the other 20% being guys that can't there.  That the pct that are going for it has jumped dramatically supports my view.  

I would expect the dispersion of success figures to tell me whether more players should be bombing it.  If the reward for laying up is a 3, 4 or 5, while the risk of going for it is 2, 3, 4 or 5, then why am i laying up?  I think the three is no more probable one way vs. the other, and the 5 is not a materially bigger risk.  The numbers would tell us.

If guys are bombing it and making 3s AND 6s in material numbers, that tells me there is a real choice offered here.  If these guys are making the same scores, or better, than those who lay up, then is there really a strategic choice offered, or are people following the mowing pattern?  Conversely, if guys consistently do worse by going for it, has the hole simply suckered the players?

Look at the number of players who actually stuck it on the green off the tee.  In each year the number was less than one percent.  this has to indicate that the players definiton of "success" has more to do with getting close to the hole, whatever the lie, than it does with actually putting the ball on the green.  Otherwise, why would so many players tolerate so low a success ratio.


I disagree that soft conditions promote going for the green in this case.  What is there to bounce into, except the trees WAY left, and its tough to do that as the ball should hang up in the rough behind the bunker, not kick into the trees.  
A kick into either the right bunker or right rough is a tough leave, but playable as described before, and a kick long left (not so far left as the trees) leaves an uphill shot to the green--i like that leave best of all.

I REALLY disagree that the "non tournament" aspect of 2005 matters at all.  the prize money spent the same way, and players had no idea that the tournament would be unofficial as this had never happened before, at least not in their lifetimes.  I'd bet that 1/3 of the field had no idea what would happen to the results, whether the tournament would be cancelled, whether the $$$ would count for the money list, etc. even AFTER thay had finished play of the second round.  The news media sure didn't understand.

More data would be welcome.

For you and I the hole offers choices, for Jack Nicklaus with a persimmon driver the hole offered choices, but for the tour player today the right choice is to bomb it if you can get there.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Best Short Par Fours
« Reply #24 on: June 16, 2005, 06:49:28 PM »
Almost didn't look in because I figured what else can compare to Riv #10....

Just out of curiosity, can anyone provide the various stats for Muirfield Village #14? Go/no go, scoring average, etc.? I don't recall anyone going for it, at least no one in contention, in recent memory.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back