Is the 12th at Augusta over-rated, or just mis-understood?

[Phil McDade]

Another Masters, another year in which the famed par 3 12th hole played as the easiest of Augusta National's par 3s.

Statistics from this year's tournament:

-- The 12th played to an average of 3.0605, easier than the other three (#4 -- 3.2190; #6 -- 3.1746; #16 -- 3.1115).
-- The 12th played as the 13th most difficult hole during the Masters this year. In other words, if you divide up Augusta National's holes equally into three types -- hardest, medium, and easiest -- the 12th was among the easiest subset of holes this year.
-- On the final day, when the 12th pin was at its traditional (and allegedly fearsome) Sunday hole position, the hole played to an average of 2.9677 -- the only par 3 to play under par on Sunday, and one of seven holes to play under pay yesterday.
-- Of the par 3s that averaged under par for a given day's play (the 16th averaged under par on Friday, and the 6th and 12th averaged under par on Saturday, as well as the 12th on Sunday), the 12th hole was the only one to do so twice during the four days of play.
(Note: this is at least the 3rd year I know of in which the 12th has played as the Masters' easiest par 3. I began closely looking at Masters course statistics several years ago, and noted it played as the easiest par 3 in 2008, as well as last year. Course stats here:
http://www.masters.com/en_US/scores/stats/cstats.html

A few more statistics from this year's tournament:

-- The 12th yielded 59 birdies during the tournament, compared to 49 bogies, 13 double bogeys, and 1 other. Compare that to the 4th (22 birdies, 80 bogeys, and 5 doubles/others); the 6th (38 birdies, 83 bogeys, 5 doubles); and the 16th (41 birdies, 55 bogeys, 12 doubles/others).

To me, the 12th's ratio of birdies to bogeys/others -- 59 birdies to 63 bogeys/others -- and its higher yield of birdies than the other par 3s strikes me as a terrific example of very good risk/reward hole. To me, a solid risk/reward hole ought to carry relatively equal amounts of each -- solid, well-executed play should be rewarded with a good score, but poorly executed/thought-out play should be punished with a bad score.
 
Yet the 12th has traditionally been described as Augusta's most fearsome par 3, and one of the -- if not the most -- challenging tee shots on the course. Nicklaus always called the 12th tee shot the one he feared the most at Augusta, and note Tom Doak's remarks about the 12th in this thread about Augusta's routing and "pacing:" http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,47931.0.html

Should we re-categorize the 12th?

[Sean Leary]

seemed like swirling wind was less of an issue this year than normal.

[Steve Salmen]

I have no idea Phil.  Be careful.  It has been conveyed to me that since I haven't played the hole, I'm not qualified to talk about it.

[Jim Nugent]

Historically #12 has played as the hardest par 3 at ANGC.  Here are the cumulative stats from the Masters website for all years (I believe including this year):

#4.....3.29

#6.....3.14

#12....3.30

#16....3.16

12 isn't just the hardest par3.  It ranks as the 2nd hardest hole on the course against par, after #10.  Interesting, though, if it's played easier several years now.  Any ideas on what has changed? 

[Terry Lavin]

Its a short hole which is a mental setup For a birdie.  Then,  there's the combination of visual intimidation (water, shallow green, jail behind) and the unpredictable winds. The end result is conservative play and a lot of pars and not many "others".

[George Pazin]

Should we re-categorize the 12th?

Stats be damned, what other par 3 with water could have accommodated Hanson's tee shot? !!

On a more serious note, 12 needs a good bit of wind to really be scary. There are going to be years when it plays the easiest, who cares?

On a side note, I wonder how much scarier it was with iffy clubs and iffy balls, like it was in the 60s and earlier.

[Howard Riefs]

The only time I thought Peter Hanson had even the slightest chance to win yesterday was after that whiff/shank - because that was rock bottom.  And we all know what usually happens after a player hits rock bottom like that, as long as he get themselves into the right frame of mind.  Some of the best golf I've every played has come after rock bottom moments like that - they're like a giant Etch-a-Sketch for everything that's gone wrong....

That was the perfect time for the ol' caddy pep talk...if I was his caddy, I'd have told him "Dude, fire up!  Don't you see?  That was fate.  God just tapped you, my friend.  If He wanted you to lose, you know damn well that shot would have been wet.  But it's not.  Know why?  Because He wants YOU to win the Masters. So doggone it, flush those first 11 holes out of your mind because that was definitely rock bottom...now you're about to play the best golf of your life...   You do realize you're gonna make a 3 here, don't you?

Get this up and down, and I guarantee you're gonna play about 5 under the rest of the way in...Go get 'em...that was a sign..."

Why weren't you at Ravisloe with us on Saturday?  I could have used this pep talk.

[Jason Topp]

It does seem to me that the difficulty of the hole has changed for tour pros.  It used to be the case that everyone pretty much hit their Sunday tee shot to the center of the green.  In the last 5-6 years, leaders tend to hit it at the pin, erring a bit long. Balls in the water used to be a regular occurence.  Now they seem pretty rare.

I am sure weather plays a rule but I also suspect players are more accurate with irons today than they were 10-15 years ago. 

I would think the original challenge could be maintained by adding some length. I am unsure whether or not such a change would be an improvement.

 

[Michael Tamburrini]

Historically #12 has played as the hardest par 3 at ANGC.  Here are the cumulative stats from the Masters website for all years (I believe including this year):

#4.....3.29

#6.....3.14

#12....3.30

#16....3.16

12 isn't just the hardest par3.  It ranks as the 2nd hardest hole on the course against par, after #10.  Interesting, though, if it's played easier several years now.  Any ideas on what has changed? 

My guess would be that modern equipment has taken some of the fear out of the hole. Even Sundays pin position doesn't require any more than an  8 iron, with many hitting a 9. I doubt Hogan or Nicklaus were using such short irons. When you add the increased forgiveness, it'd take a really poorly struck shot to find the water.

[JESII]

The way current balls perform in any wind (less effect on the ball) is a huge comfort to these guys...BUT...I'll bet this would be among the last holes they would pick to make a par on if given the choice.

[Brent Hutto]

Like everything about ANGC and The Masters, I believe pacing is everything.

If it were the third hole of the round instead of the twelfth it would probably seem less crucial. Nobody would be thinking "gotta make birdie" that early on Sunday and if they made a bogey they'd feel there was plenty of time to make it up.

If it were the seventeenth hole instead of the twelfth (a la TPC Sawgrass and many other courses) a player in the final round would be more certain of what he has to do and where he stands.

But coming immediately before the huge scoring swings possible in the stretch 13-16 that has be about the most uncertain moment of the final round in terms of players in contention knowing where they stand. So they are really, really loath to make a bogey there on Sunday. That's the beauty of it. It's only 150 yards with a nice, clear view of the green down that lovely hill and the hole is in more or less the same place every year. Just not a hole you can dismiss with "four is an OK number". You gotta make a par. And that feeling of "gotta" is what brings five and six into play.

Unless the wind is howling, surely these guys could play for a four and almost assure themselves of avoiding the big number. But you can't play Augusta "avoiding the big number" because there's so many ways for so many guys (typically) to catch and pass you while you're playing it safe. It's that context of "I can't play it safe" that provides the drama, not the hole itself in isolation.

[Phil McDade]

The way current balls perform in any wind (less effect on the ball) is a huge comfort to these guys...BUT...I'll bet this would be among the last holes they would pick to make a par on if given the choice.

By the time players reached the 12th, they had played 11 holes, 8 of which ranked among the top 9 holes at Augusta in terms of difficulty. I'd say the hole came as a relief.

[Jim Nugent]

Brent, how do you play for a four at 12?  Seems like a lot of trouble there everywhere except the green. 

[Tom Yost]

seemed like swirling wind was less of an issue this year than normal.

Seemed to be playing very soft this year as well.

[Phil McDade]

seemed like swirling wind was less of an issue this year than normal.

Seemed to be playing very soft this year as well.

The winning score this year was -10 or 278 -- the highest score (relative to par of 288) in the past four years.

[Brent Hutto]

Isn't long better than short and right better than left? Seems like if you always took the longer of the two clubs they always seem to be "in between" and kept your aiming point over toward the right side of the green you take most of the serious trouble out of play.

[Matthew Rose]

Less wind, softer conditions?

I don't think I saw one player hit it in the creek this year. I'm not sure I've ever seen that happen. I'm sure a few players did, but I didn't see any. And usually on Sunday, at least one player in contention rinses a ball there. Didn't happen this year (I guess you could argue that Hanson should have).

Maybe everyone's figured it out?

[Patrick_Mucci]

The way current balls perform in any wind (less effect on the ball) is a huge comfort to these guys...BUT...I'll bet this would be among the last holes they would pick to make a par on if given the choice.

By the time players reached the 12th, they had played 11 holes, 8 of which ranked among the top 9 holes at Augusta in terms of difficulty. I'd say the hole came as a relief.

Phil,

You're correct, the hole's position after # 9, 10 and 11 make it an "oasis" type of hole, a welcome relief.

As to wind/s, the hole sits at the lowest point in the golf course, in a dead end/cul de sac type of environment, so you can forget the notion of winds sweeping that hole.  What you can get it swirling wind, but, not the type of wind you associate with the 10th and 11th at Pacific Dunes or the 7th at PBGC

What's changed about the hole over the last few decades ?  Very little.
What's changed about the play of the hole over the last few decades ?  Plenty.

If you look at the 1962 and 1972 Masters highlights, you'll see the players hitting 5, 6 and 7 irons.
Now you see them hitting 9 irons and wedges.

As to scoring averages, they're misleading in terms of assessing difficulty.
Included in scoring are penalty shots, not executed shots.

On holes like # 4 and # 6, it's rare to see penalty shots in the scores.

Quite simply, at 145 to 156, # 12 presents a unique challenge, depending upon your objective.

# 4 is a really HARD par 3.

While there are exceptions like the "postage stamp" green at Troon, distance is "a", if not "the' material factor in determining difficulty on par 3's.
When you add in penalty strokes for errant shots when water and/or OB are nearby, it heightens the challenge, mentally or physically.

But, think of how difficult the hole is, compared to the others, in these terms.

If you needed to make a birdie, during every round, which hole would present the easiest opportunity ?

# 4 ?
# 6 ?
# 12 or
# 16 ?

# 12 gets my vote, by FAR..

[Matthew Rose]

So, do you lengthen it? Would that be blasphemous? Is there even room to do so?

I suppose if you made it 175, it might add two clubs.

[Phil McDade]

Matthew:

Well, most everything else out there has been lengthened, so blasphemy only goes so far with the folks at ANGC. I think there is ample room to add length to #12.

But it is, easily, one of the smallest -- if not the smallest -- greens out there. And it's also one of the thinnest, from front to back. I don't think there's any question they could make that hole play harder. Not saying they should, but it appears that they could.

[Patrick_Mucci]

So, do you lengthen it? Would that be blasphemous? Is there even room to do so?

I suppose if you made it 175, it might add two clubs.

Mathew,

It's not that simple.

As you lengthen it, you elevate it, giving the golfer a longer shot but a far better visual.

I'd be surprised if it's not lengthened in the next two years.

[Phil McDade]

Patrick:

I've always wondered that. From the televised views, it looks like the golfer has a clear view of the green, and the troubles he'll encounter with a poor shot. Is that not the case? (You suggested in another thread, in response to Sean Arble, that the approach to #12 was level; I always had the impression it was downhill -- perhaps not the extent of #4 and #6, but enough that it would -- under normal tournament conditions -- result in a club section of perhaps one club less than usual. Is that not the case?)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

I've always wondered that. From the televised views, it looks like the golfer has a clear view of the green, and the troubles he'll encounter with a poor shot. Is that not the case? (You suggested in another thread, in response to Sean Arble, that the approach to #12 was level; I always had the impression it was downhill -- perhaps not the extent of #4 and #6, but enough that it would -- under normal tournament conditions -- result in a club section of perhaps one club less than usual. Is that not the case?)

Phil,

It's not a downhill shot and the putting surface can't be seen in its entirety, that's one of the things that creates uncertainty within the golfer's mind.

# 4 from the back tee is very downhill, not quite like # 6, but certainly pronounced, whereas # 12 and # 16 are pretty much elevation neutral.

[Sam Morrow]

It's over-analyzed.

[Phil McDade]

It's over-analyzed.

It's probably the best-known par 3 in the world.