[Ben Hollerbach]

Day 1 Stats:
Going For the Green:

• 64% of the field
• Scoring average 4.56

Laying Up:

• 36% of the field
• Scoring average 5.00

• 3 Eagles
• 36 Birdies
• 33 Pars
• 11 Bogeys
• 3 Double Bogey +

Scoring Average: 4.7209
Historical Average: 4.77

[JLahrman]

Day 1 Stats:
Going For the Green:

• 64% of the field
• Scoring average 4.56

Laying Up:

• 36% of the field
• Scoring average 5.00

• 3 Eagles
• 36 Birdies
• 33 Pars
• 11 Bogeys
• 3 Double Bogey +

Scoring Average: 4.7209
Historical Average: 4.77

Ben thanks for pulling this. Will be interesting to see what it looks like after four full days of play. In another thread about the changes I calculated the standard deviation of the scores on #13 to see how much variance there was. Last year, 13 had the highest variance of any hole on the course. I'll plan to do the same thing this year after the tournament finishes.

[Matthew Rose]

Has the creek been enlarged or does it have more water in it?

It looks larger and more threatening than in past years, at least in my head.

[Jason Thurman]

Are we all ready to admit that, for these players with current equipment, the new tee is exactly what this hole needed?

[Matt Kardash]

I think anyone who doesn't admit it is just deluded.Whether it is good for the game is another thing.But there is no doubt that extending the tee back brings back the driver + awkward side-hill lie with a longer club in the hand of the player that makes the second shot more difficult.

[Michael Morandi]

I am not too proud to admit that the early stats seem to demonstrate that lengthening the hole has not detracted from its risk/reward calculus.

[Michael Morandi]

Let’s see what decisions are made in the final round. Hopefully, the green jacket will be in the balance, although it looks like Koepka is in command of his game and the field.

[Jason Topp]

I think we need to give it a few years to see how it plays in a variety of weather conditions.  So far, I think the change has vastly improved the hole.

[Michael Morandi]

Will Augusta recognize that the rain has turned 13 into a boring 3 shot  hole and move the tee up for the final round or has that tee been eliminated?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Will Augusta recognize that the rain has turned 13 into a boring 3 shot  hole and move the tee up for the final round or has that tee been eliminated?

There are two tees at ANGC. Member and Masters tees. That tee box is NLE.

[Michael Morandi]

Well then they should move the tee markers as far forward as possible

[Sven Nilsen]

Sunday at the Masters should always be about eagles, or the chance thereof.

[archie_struthers]

 


Thought it played just perfect. Jordan Spieth , the human highlight film . actually could have gotten close if he didn't miss a couple short putts. Had a shot at a Johnny Miller round today. 


Pretty fun , Rahm is an inexorable force in golf right now. Really has all the shots under the gun.

[JLahrman]

FWIW,

Last year the 13th had the highest standard deviation in scores of any hole. I.E., lots of variation, so relatively speaking plenty of eagles, birdies, bogeys and doubles.

I was interested to see if it would still have the highest standard deviation, or if more players laying up would mean more 4s and 5s, fewer 3s, 6s, and 7s.

Somebody else can maybe look up the go-for-it percentage, but the 13th hole again had the highest standard deviation this year, and it was pretty close to last year (.809 vs .806).

Last year there were 6 eagles, 91 birdies, 139 pars, 37 bogies, and 10 others. Average score: 4.85
This year there were 8 eagles, 108 birdies, 124 pars, 30 bogies, and 9 others. Average score: 4.74

Interesting that even with the added length we had more birdies and eagles this year, and a lower average score. The average score for the rounds was 73.95 last year vs. 72.99 this year, so the whole course played a bit easier which may have something to do with it.

I'm sure we all liked seeing guys hit longer clubs in for their second, but we got about the same scoring results.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Interesting that even with the added length we had more birdies and eagles this year, and a lower average score. The average score for the rounds was 73.95 last year vs. 72.99 this year, so the whole course played a bit easier which may have something to do with it.

The weather was quite a bit different this year than last year, IIRC.

[JLahrman]

Interesting that even with the added length we had more birdies and eagles this year, and a lower average score. The average score for the rounds was 73.95 last year vs. 72.99 this year, so the whole course played a bit easier which may have something to do with it.

The weather was quite a bit different this year than last year, IIRC.

A GD article was mentioning that the hole played easier than last year, but harder than the hole played in other recent years. It does sound like it played tougher in 2022.

[Jeff_Brauer]

If those first round stats held, i.e. 64% of the field going for it in two, I would say the distance is pretty good.  On a go for it par 5, which according to Mac should have featured a "momentous" decision, what length would you suggest, or more appropriately, as a designer or course setup guy, what % of players do you think should go for it in 2?


I would think it should be somewhere between 50%-75% as a target, and that about 2/3 of players actually trying it would be about ideal.  90+% would indicate it is not a momentous decision, but a mundane one.  Especially when many of those approach shots are with short irons.  I mean, there is no thrill in playing or watching what is really a par 4 disguised as a par 5 where everyone can hit it.


Standing there, what struck me is how narrow the LZ from 300-335 is now with the tree plantings on the right growing in by bunches.  From my limited viewing there, it seemed that many who decided not to go for it in 2 really laid up to just a bit over the end of the creek (where it gets piped under the fw)  which might even be under 200 yards off the tee.  A few players appeared to hit it 250-260 and way right to avoid the creek.  Pitching out from trees really isn't a hazard, knowing you are trying to cover the last 325 or so yards in two shots.


I thought it was better (and would be at the new length) if the fw were wider, at least around 300 (it could narrow at 335 as far as I am concerned) so that playing the left side near the creek shortened the shot, and playing safe out to the right merely added some distance on the sharp dogleg.  Again, according to the yardage book, a 300 yard tee shot leaves 196 to the green from the left and 219 from the right edge.  If it was wider, a shot from the old right edge after a 300 yard drive might be as high as 240-45, which could be a tweener, and more exciting than a pitch out.  Yes, the narrow fw is a better test of tee shot accuracy.


As always, just MHO.

[Tom_Doak]

I thought it was better (and would be at the new length) if the fw were wider, at least around 300 (it could narrow at 335 as far as I am concerned) so that playing the left side near the creek shortened the shot, and playing safe out to the right merely added some distance on the sharp dogleg.  Again, according to the yardage book, a 300 yard tee shot leaves 196 to the green from the left and 219 from the right edge.  If it was wider, a shot from the old right edge after a 300 yard drive might be as high as 240-45, which could be a tweener, and more exciting than a pitch out.  Yes, the narrow fw is a better test of tee shot accuracy.

The best thing about that hole is that the second shot from the right is not only longer, but it has to be played off a steeper, sidehill / downhill lie.  The difference in distance alone is rarely enough to convince players to play closer to the creek . . . the distances have to be JUST right for it to matter . . . but having the ball so far above your feet always provides a momentous decision.

[John Bouffard]

As much as I like Spieth, I can’t follow him in real time because he takes too much time evaluating every conceivable aspect of a shot. For a game focused on quickening the pace, Jordan sets a bad example. I just attended a big college tournament where the average round was over 5 hours.

Amen. Move it along. They need some kind of shot clock on the players. These back and forth discussions, with practice swings, wind tests, etc., ALL occurring BEFORE they even begin their shot routine (aim, etc.) are like watching paint dry. I know some people probably like hearing the conversations, but after you've heard a couple, they become pretty stupid IMO. Cantlay was criminally slow yesterday, particularly on the greens.


They should be allowed a little time to think over a shot, but what they do is way beyond reasonable. Baseball is far more enjoyable to watch this year; maybe golf will get the hint.

[Pat Burke]

Given that Augusta does not use the Mark Long yardage books that most are used to relying on so maybe different a bit.


Gathering a yardage and knowing all the Carrie’s, thru lines, etc should take no time.
Ever single thing they need should be there.


Some of the deliberations were obscene

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()