How does a 15 HCP play the 15th at Augusta?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tim,

What few, if any understand, is that the green really isn't visible from a good number of locations.

You can't see the putting surface.

You know it's there, but, can't see it.

Often, you just see the water and fronting bank and the water on # 16.

That's a difficult visual that will unnerve even the best golfers, let alone a 15 or an 11 Ben 

[Sven Nilsen]

Sentences are independent of one another and there's no mandate that they "work together"[/color]

So good I had to preserve it.  

[Tim_Weiman]

I looked at the hole from a go-jillion angles and two things stood out at me.  

1) By far the best layup IMHO was as far left and far down the fairway you can get. It's the flattest part of the fairway and offers an angle that allows for the most error. It'd be a 40-50yd shot off ground that's not nearly as sloped as dead center fairway 100yds out. I guess that'd be somewhere near the drop circle.

2) I'm an 11, and if I was anywhere in the fairway and not blocked out, I'd go for it every time. If I get over, I'm on the same side as the green and have a chance at birdie and hopefully an easy bogey.  If I don't make it, I get to drop in the fluffy cut next to the water just 30yds from the green. After all, I'm not required to use the drop area am I? Then I'm hitting 4 and with decent play, I can still make a bogey.  

Ben,

I agree. The far left from 40-50 yards is way better than dead center 80-100.

Tim,

Do you still think so with a far left hole location ?

How about a far right hole location ?

Pat,

I haven't looked at it enough. But, I have from the cross walk area for spectators and that is awfully hard.

[Ben Sims]

Pat,

Yes, it's difficult. No where in my post did I ever insinuate that it was a kick-over hole. But I know how I'd play it. And I'd use a putter as much as possible around the green. And yes, I'd hit it as far as a could for my second and if I didn't make it, I'd drop it in the yard or two of fluffy rye just prior to the water. I'd have a 30yd pitch off an elevated lie. Sure I could duff it. But hell, it's better than hitting three from 100yds out and flubbing it and now I'm hitting 5 from the same spot. Low double digit handicaps have learned how to mitigate their shortcomings. I don't think they're quite as incapable as you make out.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat,

Yes, it's difficult. No where in my post did I ever insinuate that it was a kick-over hole. But I know how I'd play it. And I'd use a putter as much as possible around the green. And yes, I'd hit it as far as a could for my second and if I didn't make it, I'd drop it in the yard or two of fluffy rye just prior to the water. I'd have a 30yd pitch off an elevated lie. Sure I could duff it. But he'll, it's better than hitting three from 100yds out and flubbing it and now I'm hitting 5 from the same spot. Low double digit handicaps have learned how to mitigate their shortcomings. I don't think they're quite as incapable as you make out.

Ben,

You make a pretty good case, but it strikes me as a little crazy. Can you think of a comparable situation (leaving Augusta #13 aside which might be a little similar, I think).

[Ben Sims]

Pat,

Yes, it's difficult. No where in my post did I ever insinuate that it was a kick-over hole. But I know how I'd play it. And I'd use a putter as much as possible around the green. And yes, I'd hit it as far as a could for my second and if I didn't make it, I'd drop it in the yard or two of fluffy rye just prior to the water. I'd have a 30yd pitch off an elevated lie. Sure I could duff it. But he'll, it's better than hitting three from 100yds out and flubbing it and now I'm hitting 5 from the same spot. Low double digit handicaps have learned how to mitigate their shortcomings. I don't think they're quite as incapable as you make out.

Ben,

You make a pretty good case, but it strikes me as a little crazy. Can you think of a comparable situation (leaving Augusta #13 aside which might be a little similar, I think).

Tim,

I agree it's not the most straightforward way to play the hole. But there are some unique architecture problems at Augusta that primarily involve slope, target size, and speed. The water is obviously a factor. For the high capper, the goal should always be to get over that water in as few strokes as possible. Due to the chance of having a difficult third, why not try to get over? At worst you'll have a fourth shot from a lie either in the drop area or the fluffy cut fronting the water, at best you're over and trying to carefully plod your way onto the green.

[Tim_Weiman]

Ben,

Again I think you make a case I hadn't really thought about. I'm having trouble thinking of anything similar.

[MClutterbuck]

Pat,

Yes, it's difficult. No where in my post did I ever insinuate that it was a kick-over hole. But I know how I'd play it. And I'd use a putter as much as possible around the green. And yes, I'd hit it as far as a could for my second and if I didn't make it, I'd drop it in the yard or two of fluffy rye just prior to the water. I'd have a 30yd pitch off an elevated lie. Sure I could duff it. But hell, it's better than hitting three from 100yds out and flubbing it and now I'm hitting 5 from the same spot. Low double digit handicaps have learned how to mitigate their shortcomings. I don't think they're quite as incapable as you make out.

I am a 11-12 and was playing really we'll in my 3 rounds there. From 180 out or so, the senior caddies convinced me this is one shot I did not want to try ever. Their take was that it is very tough for us to by precise yardage wise AND hit it really high AND stop the ball on that green. Whilst from 80-100 yards the shot to the right side of the green is not that tough. There is margin of error provided you are not short. If you have a half decent shot, you are not going to miss by 20 yards long. The key is not looking at the flag if it is left. Just aim right and your big problem is going to be 2 putting the green.

[Sean_A]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

+1

IMHO . if there was a "way" for the 15 handicap (whatever that means) to successfully and ideally "play" the hole- that is drive it far enough and straight enough to be clear of the trees right and left to get an angle to hit the supposedly preferred left side 40-50 yards out, and he could execute both shot one and shot two successfully and long enough, wouldn't the law of averages almost automatically dictate that he then chunk it in the water?

Because I'd hate to be giving a shot on EVERY non par three hole to someone who could think that well, and execute three pretty difficult shots in a row.
The hole's the #2 handicap-plenty of people struggle with it.
Not every challenge should able to be overcome by perfectly planned plodding(though it can argued one can play their approach to the right of the green)-sometimes one has to execute.  (the actual water carry is about 30 yards before anyne gets too excited-and your grandmother's 7 wood can hit the wide bank and skip up)
 

[Mark Bourgeois]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

Pennard's 17th and 18th have nonnegotiable forced carries over water? Did not know that.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

You should know by now that many, if not most, if not all golfers have an inflated opinion of their game.

And as such, typically play with themselves when playing a hole in their minds.

In order to get past the left side fairway trees from the Members Tees a golfer would have to hit his drive 320 yards.

How many 15 or 11 handicaps have that shot in their bag ?

The comments on how to play the hole are comical, and, as Mike Tyson says, everyone has a game plan until they get hit.

In reality, # 15 is much harder than the Pros make it look and getting home in two is a figment of the 15/11 handicap's imagination.

[jeffwarne]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

Pennard's 17th and 18th have nonnegotiable forced carries over water? Did not know that.

Actually, many 15's have the perfect ball flight for holding Pennard's 18th fairway .
17-not so much-love that hole-can't play it, but love it and I'd say a 15 has little chance there unless he plays ULTRA conservatively and WELL

[Patrick_Mucci]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue. 

That's because you don't have an accurate understanding of the hole and the play of the hole.
You have no understanding of how small/narrow the target is and how difficult it is to hit that target from a flat lie, let alone a downhill lie

Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys? 

NO, it separates the LOW handicaps from the HIGH handicaps.
It has nothing to do with macho B.S.

Others, and perhaps yourself, appear to posture that your game's are the equivalent of the PGA Tour Pro's games.
The PGA Tour Pros on TV make it look easy, when in reality, it's far from it.


A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt. 

ANGC has an abundant supply

In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year. 

Absolutely NOT

[Mike Schott]

''The original design vision is not the priority''

How has the hole changed since the original design?

I caddied for 10 years in my younger days, and have a bit of experience with the average golfer.  In fact one guy i caddied for who was on a downhill lie 80 yards from the green in an old pal match, asked me what to do.  I told him to put his left shoulder down and go with the shot.  He pulled it off and won the hole and thanked me later.  Should the course have regraded the hill to take the challenge out of the hole?

I would think the average golfer would fair much better from 80 yards on a downhill lie at #15 at Augusta, then they would at #16 at Cypress Point.  Do you know the story about #16 at Cypress? 

I'm that average golfer and without practicing the downhill sloped 80 yard wedge shot, I know I have a better chance of playing out to the bailout area left of the 16 at CPCC. I am pretty confident that I can pull my 3 hybrid and clear the ocean from a flat lie off of a tee. The caveat we don't mention is how nerves come into play.

[jeffwarne]

''The original design vision is not the priority''

How has the hole changed since the original design?

I caddied for 10 years in my younger days, and have a bit of experience with the average golfer.  In fact one guy i caddied for who was on a downhill lie 80 yards from the green in an old pal match, asked me what to do.  I told him to put his left shoulder down and go with the shot.  He pulled it off and won the hole and thanked me later.  Should the course have regraded the hill to take the challenge out of the hole?

I would think the average golfer would fair much better from 80 yards on a downhill lie at #15 at Augusta, then they would at #16 at Cypress Point.  Do you know the story about #16 at Cypress? 

I'm that average golfer and without practicing the downhill sloped 80 yard wedge shot, I know I have a better chance of playing out to the bailout area left of the 16 at CPCC. I am pretty confident that I can pull my 3 hybrid and clear the ocean from a flat lie off of a tee. The caveat we don't mention is how nerves come into play.

OK-let' say this downhill lie shot is so hard a 15 shouldn't attempt it.
So he plays out to the right of the green towards 17 fairway where's there's no water carry-and the chips/pitches/putts on.

How is that any different than 16 at Cypress Point?

[Tim_Weiman]

Jeff:

I think there is a difference. My understanding is that Mackenzie was initially skeptical that a direct shot at #16 was possible for even the best players, but Marion Hollins stepped up and proved it could be done. Put another way, the area to the left was always considered part of the hole, especially when the site was considered for a par 4.

By contrast, to my knowledge Mackenzie and Jones never envisioned anyone playing towards the 17th fairway to safely reach the 15th green.

[Mike Hendren]

It's a valid question, but ANGC is a made-for-the-telly golf course now... It is all about the Masters. Location of members' tees aside I can't see the overlords giving one hoot about the 15 h'cap member and his twice yearly game.

My opinion anyway!

Greg

This comment ignores the make-up of the membership.  I suspect we'd all be astonished at their average age.  A little water on the greens and a slightly higher fairway cut during member play would likely increase the odds of hitting and holding the green, or at least make the pitch-back more feasible.  

Match play solves the ostensible angst as well.

Let me ask this:  Where else in the world of golf course architecture is the golfer asked to solve the equation of this third shot - perhaps repeatedly as Tom Doak experienced?

Bogey

[Sean_A]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

Pennard's 17th and 18th have nonnegotiable forced carries over water? Did not know that.

Maybe worse, non-negotiable must hit the tee shot straight with some curve into the slope or theres a good chance of a lost ball/X on the card.  In any case, the point is valid concerning penal architecture. 

Are folks really advocating no forced carries/bowling alley shots ever?  Geez, I hope not.

Ciao

[BCowan]

''This comment ignores the make-up of the membership.  I suspect we'd all be astonished at their average age.  A little water on the greens and a slightly higher fairway cut during member play would likely increase the odds of hitting and holding the green, or at least make the pitch-back more feasible.''

Bogey,

  I already mentioned this in prior posts as an easy solution.  Thanks for posting common sense solutions...     

[Tim_Weiman]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player? 

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.     

Ciao

Sean,

Your post certainly touches on the heart of this discussion.

First, obviously we have disagreement regarding the difficulty of the third shot for our 15 HCP - the 80-100 downhill wedge shot over water with water behind the green.

No minds have been changed here and probably won't be, but I am clearly in the camp that believes it is much more difficult than some here are willing to concede.

Now, for the sake of good discussion you seem willing to concede the shot is "penal" on a golf course that was intended to be "strategic". That makes sense to me. We don't need to hear good players describe how easy the shot is for them when the whole point is to discuss the perspective of the mid handicapper on a course that was intended to be strategic.

I guess theoretically I might be willing to join you in supporting a few penal holes on an otherwise strategic golf course. But, I am not sure this is ideal.

Let's compare two Mackenzie par 5s, one that has been changed (Augusta #15) with one that has been preserved (#16 Crystal Downs). Both have very wide fairways and our 15 HCP shouldn't have any trouble staying in the fairway. Both also have very difficult third shots, although in the case of Crystal Downs it isn't so obvious for the first time player. Both also present a very difficult challenge for the expert player trying to get a third shot close for a birdie putt.

But, I would argue the Crystal Downs shot is more faithful to the original concept of being tough for the expert player to make birdie, but not so penal that the mid handicap guy can't at least make bogey and have a good shot at par. Also, at Crystal Downs even our 15 HCP isn't going to lose a ball.

Mike Hendren:

I haven't spent enough time at Augusta to know if the fairways are cut significantly different for members play. Maybe Pat Mucci can comment.

[Sean_A]

...but I still think what we have here is a judgement call: does the 15th really provide an option for the mid handicap player?

I guess your question leads to the next question; does every hole have to provide an option for the mid handicap player?  

I can't fathom why hitting over water from a downhill lie is such an issue.  Sure, its penal, but isn't a mix of penal with strategic shots a great way to separate the men from the boys?  A great course (I assume we all agree Augusta is great) should have some shots which puckers the butt.  In any case, there must be tons of 15 cappers who pull this shot off every year.  I realize you want to focus on 15 only, but I don't think thats very helpful if we are trying to decide if a shot requirement is reasonable.  I use the same justification for Pennard's 17 & 18.  Both holes require very specific shots to be successful. While demanding and penal, when compared with the remainder of the drives which are really quite generous, its not too much to ask for a few holes to require more precision.      

Ciao

Sean,

Your post certainly touches on the heart of this discussion.

First, obviously we have disagreement regarding the difficulty of the third shot for our 15 HCP - the 80-100 downhill wedge shot over water with water behind the green.

No minds have been changed here and probably won't be, but I am clearly in the camp that believes it is much more difficult than some here are willing to concede.

Now, for the sake of good discussion you seem willing to concede the shot is "penal" on a golf course that was intended to be "strategic". That makes sense to me. We don't need to hear good players describe how easy the shot is for them when the whole point is to discuss the perspective of the mid handicapper on a course that was intended to be strategic.

I guess theoretically I might be willing to join you in supporting a few penal holes on an otherwise strategic golf course. But, I am not sure this is ideal.

Let's compare two Mackenzie par 5s, one that has been changed (Augusta #15) with one that has been preserved (#16 Crystal Downs). Both have very wide fairways and our 15 HCP shouldn't have any trouble staying in the fairway. Both also have very difficult third shots, although in the case of Crystal Downs it isn't so obvious for the first time player. Both also present a very difficult challenge for the expert player trying to get a third shot close for a birdie putt.

But, I would argue the Crystal Downs shot is more faithful to the original concept of being tough for the expert player to make birdie, but not so penal that the mid handicap guy can't at least make bogey and have a good shot at par. Also, at Crystal Downs even our 15 HCP isn't going to lose a ball.

Mike Hendren:

I haven't spent enough time at Augusta to know if the fairways are cut significantly different for members play. Maybe Pat Mucci can comment.

"Ideal" is a very broad spectrum  

Sure, a carry over water is penal, but I don't think of penal architecture as bad, its just another tool in the box for archies to create interest and variety.  The important thing is balance.  I think its important to cause angst in the golfer once, twice or thrice in a round.  Reasonable folks can disagree if that means 1, 3, 5 or 10 penal shots.  I don't think it is reasonable to say they shouldn't exist at all, especially where natural sand or water exist.  

I am to understand that Crystal Downs has its own issues with very penal rough.  Sometimes, that is worse than water.  

Ciao  

[Tim_Weiman]

Sean,

I thought it was clear that the pond on #15 wasn't natural. It was created as part of a revision to the original hole.

Should a course intended to be "strategic" have a limited number of "penal" shots? I don't know. My preference would be for either type of design to remain faithful to the design intent, but I'll concede even Pine Valley has strategic elements (e.g., #13).

[Brent Hutto]

It is sooooo tempting to put words in Jeff's mouth and muse upon the idea of the pond at ANGC #15 being too penal but the water in play on every other shot at Doral being ideal...

[Sean_A]

Tim

Yes, I realize about #15, but I was thinking there more in general terms.

Have you ever seen a course you could call all strategic or penal?  I don't think either beast exists.  The entire Strategic to Penal continuum is about balance between the two extremes with most courses leaning toward strategic (despite the rhetoric of authors).  I think if we saw a course with 50% penal drives people would generally say that is a penal course.  I think I went through Oakland Hills once and it was about 50% tee shots and we know what sort of rep OH has.  TOC, often held up as one of the most strategic courses on the planet, has some cross hazards and forced carries. 

Ciao