Is the 17th at Augusta National...

[V. Kmetz]

...the plainest, most uninteresting hole on the course?


...perhaps the plainest, most uninteresting 17th hole in major championship rotation/at the top of most lists?


I mean what are the architectural "merits" for the hole; why is it any fun or stimulating in the way noted architecture is often praised?[/size][size=78%]  [/size]


I'm sure I've seen its biography and changes over the years, but forgotten what kind of intents existed in the bones of this particular hole. For Masters competition, it seems like a boring, un-strategic drive, with no advantage for one side of the broad fairway or the other worth risking, or catching a speed slot, or a level approach lie...it's just bash it up over the crest of the hill anywhere between the 60 yard wide goal posts of "managed" pines... and the second shot... on TV, it seems like a stock short iron that only offers bogey for an unforced or sloppy error...


I'm sure all of this is a bit sterner for the everyday player, even playing 60 yards shorter, but isn't this hole a great letdown from the interesting dangers and opportunities that apply to the other 17 holes?


I'm not saying the Eisenhower tree ever was a factor for Masters players, but even then it gave the hole some visual interest and some lore to discuss during the tournament, which is a portion of one's enjoyment of watching competition on TV...and we sort of "know" that the tree (fairly or unfairly...as either a symbol of Roberts' corrupt authority or his acumen) played a role in frustrating the everyday ANGC player, which again at least gave the hole "some" edge/memorability...


Without even the tree now, what is this hole, but the plainest hole at (GCAlly speaking) the worst time?


cheers  vk

[George Pazin]

Wow, I've always thought it's one of the more underrated holes at ANGC, particularly that green complex. For my money, 18 is much more along the lines you describe.

[Matt_Cohn]

It's more like 33 yards wide, for what it's worth. You see plenty of guys in the trees there. The green does look pretty fascinating.

[Paul Jones]

VK,


17th green is fantastic, just that alone makes it a really good hole to me.  There is also a huge elevation change going up the hill.

[James Brown]

That green is sooo interesting.  If the pin is back left and you drive it down the left side of the hole you have no chance to get it anywhere near the hole. 

[V. Kmetz]

I've been there twice and I personally agree (or can find agreement) with the features that have been praised (fascinating green, demanding uphill tee shot), but that still leaves the question that it might be Augusta's plainest, most architecturally uninteresting, most "boring-to-watch" hole... is there one that's moreso? I've never heard volumes of praise for it, in fact it's barely mentioned in any Augusta thread here or coverage elsewhere.


And is/are there noted classic championship/major rota courses that have a 17th as unmemorable as this one? (Apologies to the Golden Bear, Verne Lundquist and the Z-putter)


Also, that front bunker wasn't there originally, was it?


cheers  vk

[Greg Chambers]

18 runs laps around 17 as the most uninteresting hole on the course.  The hazards are out of play, and they’re hitting a nine iron into the most predictable green on the course.  Snooze fest.

[Scott Sander]

*I have not been on the property, so this is not an answer to the original question.  It's just an observation from a distance.

17 is the one hole that teevee has never 'figured out'. 
Every other hole on the back 9 and most on the front have at least one camera position that gives the viewer an immediate and lasting sense of elevation change and strategic challenge.

For 17, tho, we see: the teebox... the landing area from the right side, directly opposite the left trees... and the view above and behind the green.  None (to my eyes) have the kind of depth or detail that give a shorthand visual 'explanation' of the hole.
 
One challenge is the sun: it's always in an awkward spot for cameras on that hole in the late afternoon when we are watching most closely. It forces the cameras to adjust in a way that washes out the contours on the green (to my eyes) - leaving me stunned at the amount of break when I see putts actually roll.

HD spoils me 1-16, and even 18. 
17 reminds me that I'm not actually there.

[V. Kmetz]

18 runs laps around 17 as the most uninteresting hole on the course.  The hazards are out of play, and they’re hitting a nine iron into the most predictable green on the course.  Snooze fest.

I have to counter most of this GC:


1. The physical hazards (the left fairway bunkers) are NOT out of play, they are absolutely in play to the extent that Masters players frequently hit less than driver...and that's a strategic compromise which provokes a tactical choice.  And with the the longer tee, those hazards work in "gate-keeping" concert with the trees/pine straw short right of the inside corner (Cabrera-Country).


2. While I have certainly observed 9-irons played, the post-2002 iterations of the hole, (including the above) have more often caused 8, 7, and 6 irons to be played...and I've never seen 9 irons played to the three "rear" pin locations used, only to the two in the front swale of the green.


3. This green may be predictable to a Masters viewer who watches 80 approaches into there per tournament day, but for the player this is a semi-blind hit and trust, to what is the thinnest green width on the course, and adds the notorious pressure that not achieving the proper tier creates a difficult up and down.  Each of the 5 hole locations regularly seen there (front left, front right, back right, back center, back left center) defy long-putt making.  If there's a germ of truth in your "predictability" critique, it's in the fact that they use those 5 locations so rigidly and the Sunday pin hasn't been elsewhere in decades...also I'd love to see the tournament committee deploy what I think is the most difficult, provocative pin...right in the middle, a few paces onto the back tier.


But even in disagreement, are there other ANGC holes, besides 18, less exciting or interesting than 17? Can anyone even recall a double or triple bogey there, not to  mention a decisive one among contenders...or an amazing shot (besides a putt) that kept somebody alive or won the tournament?  And can you say that about ANY other championship/classic 17th hole? To me, besides Nicklaus' putt, the most interesting thing that's happened on the hole is that deVicenzo's marker put a 4 instead of a 3, 50 years ago.


I agree with SS's take on TV production challenges for the hole, the green is much more wonderful than TV has ever captured it...




cheers  vk

[Tommy Williamsen]

I have not played ANGC but as a tournament watcher 17 can play a pivotal role. In 2017 it was the the 7th most difficult hole with a 4.19 average score. It may not have the architectural merit of the other holes, but for the leader it can be a scary hole. Bogey is pretty easy and birdie difficult. I wouldn't want to have to birdie the hole to catch the leader. Rose doubled it when he was one back and Jack birdied it on the way to his 1986 win.

[V. Kmetz]

I have not played ANGC but as a tournament watcher 17 can play a pivotal role. In 2017 it was the the 7th most difficult hole with a 4.19 average score. It may not have the architectural merit of the other holes, but for the leader it can be a scary hole. Bogey is pretty easy and birdie difficult. I wouldn't want to have to birdie the hole to catch the leader. Rose doubled it when he was one back and Jack birdied it on the way to his 1986 win.

1. With the four par 5s playing the "easiest" (to their par) that means #17 is the the seventh most difficult hole out of what's really 14...or in the dead middle of the pack... and the 8th easiest hole out of that same pack. Combined with the details we've been discussing, it speaks more to relative "mediocrity" of the hole.


2. I can understand not wanting to have to make a birdie on any hole, no less a 17th...but wouldn't you rather this hole for that task as opposed to other holes on the course? and other 17th holes in classic championship view?  I mean #6 doesn't get much ink, but I'd hate to have to birdie it to that back right pin...and not bogey it going for it that pin to still maintain a last chance on an 18th hole...that perhaps the greater question TW...you may not want to have it for a birdie, but isn't there a better chance of keeping at least your par, even going for that birdie there than on the rest of the course?


My overall intent for this stage of the thread is to point out that if 17 is indeed the plainest or dullest hole on the course, a pretty great course this must be...


Though an honestly-held critique of mine remains that it is unfortunate that this plainest of ANGC holes appears at #17...it has registered with me as far more antic-climactic and pressure packed than a 17th hole on THIS course ought to be. The Eisenhower tree, though facile, at least gave it a gimmick, a bit of lore...without it, it seems like a plain design on a course of audacity.

[George Pazin]

[/size]2. While I have certainly observed 9-irons played, the post-2002 iterations of the hole, (including the above) have more often caused 8, 7, and 6 irons to be played...and I've never seen 9 irons played to the three "rear" pin locations used, only to the two in the front swale of the green.

Largely true, since the hole was lengthened a decade or so back. But has anyone else noticed much more often 18 seems to be birdied now, with the added length, versus that simply unbearable time when it was a half wedge approach? That was the rationale for lengthening it, IIRC - "18 wasn't meant to be a 65 yard approach shot!" That's when guys were just bombing it over the bunkers.


Now that it's been lengthened, and perhaps more importantly, the tee shot tightened via the tunnel of trees, it just seems like more guys are birdieing 18. I could be wrong, certainly don't have the stats at hand, but I recall Tiger birdieing 18 to win, Phil, Schwartzel, etc, etc. I also recall the comments made to Freddie when O'Meara buried his longish birdie putt to win in 99: Nobody makes this putt. Maybe nobody makes the putt across (except O'Meara), but everybody seems to birdie the comebacker down the hill.


[/size]

My overall intent for this stage of the thread is to point out that if 17 is indeed the plainest or dullest hole on the course, a pretty great course this must be...

I do like this thought, although I'd argue #7 is the most dull, since it was stretched out. Just doesn't seem to work at all, can't recall a memorable shot there in many years.