Oostie's Albatross vs. Bubba's Winner - Page 3

The point is he did not hit that shot to "WIN THE MASTERS". He won it because it was a great shot but Oosthuizen bogied the hole. I'm not sure what you are saying in your last sentence but Bubba (and other tour pros) could pull that shot off much of the time.

 

It was 260, and he landed it in the perfect spot. Bubba's shot was 150 and he was just trying to (and did successfully) get it on the green.

 

I've hit a wedge shot like the one Bubba hit - even put it to 15 feet or so (was, like Bubba was likely doing, just trying to hit the green) - I don't recall ever hitting a 260-yard 4-iron and landing it in an area that's about a square yard.

 

I think you'd be surprised at how many PGA Tour players could pull that shot off.

 

Anyway, that's my opinion, and I'm using my playing experience as the foundation for which shot was technically more difficult.

It seems to me that the difference in viewpoints is whether you take Bubba's shot by itself, or in the context of it being "for the win." Obviously, the context makes it more clutch, important, crucial, maybe even memorable. But I still think that, even in the pressure of a Masters playoff, there are dozens of pros who could have hit that shot and had the same outcome, i.e. a good chance at birdie, while only one guy in history has made an albatross at 2.

I think you're making Bubba's shot easier than it was.

 

"Hooked it about 40 yards, hit about 15 feet off the ground until it got under the tree and then started rising," Watson said. "Pretty easy."

I can hit a high draw that flies 240 yards (which is about how far Louis's shot flew) from a perfect fairway lie--any tour pro can.  Obviously it's hard to hit your spot from that distance, but not impossible.  I can't hit a shot 150 yards that flies low for 50 yards, then rises up in the air and hooks 40 yards, then lands with enough spin to stop on that green.  Then add in the pine straw and a Masters playoff.  I think the number of guys who could hit that shot is comparatively very small, Masters playoff or not.

 

If Sergio or Tiger had hit a 40-yard hook from that spot, they would have been sitting on Rory's plaque from 2011.  I don't think you could hit that same shot as a slice.  In order to keep it low, you'd have to hit a lower lofted club, and it wouldn't have enough spin when it hit the green to stay.

 

 

Honestly, I think Kuchar's shot into 15 was just as good as Louis's.  Similar yardage (I think Kuch had 269), hitting a FW wood.  Except where Kuchar landed his shot, the penalty for landing 2 or 3 yards shorter means that it rolls back into Rae's Creek.  And that pin on 15 is not a spot where the ball naturally feeds to, unlike the pin on #2.  And Kuch's shot got him a share of the lead on the home stretch.  The only difference in the result between Louis's albatross and Kuch's approach on 15 was a perfect bounce, which is mostly luck.  All of the other factors made Kuch's shot more difficult and more clutch.
 

 

Not that I see the whole point with comparing, but they are two very different shots. Louis hit the perfect shot into the perfect spot. Technically, his shot was easier, seeing as he had no obstacles in the way. If you get them out there and try to re-hit the shots though, you might never make the shot Louis hit again.

Bubba's shot had of course the added pressure of being in the playoff and pretty much to stay in play. He pulled it off and it turned out to be the winning shot. His shot was more difficult since he had to shape it a lot and the pressure.

So both wins. Louis' was the most unlikely shot, but Bubba's was harder.

The OP wants to know which shot was more impressive.  Definitely Bubba's.

 

Oosthuizen was going for an eagle or birdie, and we can give him that. That it found a way into the hole was sheer luck, much like Larry Mize's shot in 1987. 

 

Bubba pulled off what he intended, and from a difficult spot, and it meant the tournament. 

 

There's the context factor, too. If Oosthuizen hadn't hit his shot all that great, he still would have had a par at worst, early in the round. If Watson had flubbed his, see above.

 

 

 

 

Odd, I looked it up while posting that and the link I found said it was 210 to the front and 235 to the pin. Reports on the distance seem to vary, but 250-260 seems to be more common. Regardless, it's long.

 

I think the truth is that almost any of the top pros could probably pull off either shot. Maybe not that length with a 4 iron, but most of them have something that would get there, and once in a while it drops.

This was covered earlier in this thread but it wasn't sheer luck that Oosthuizen landed the ball from 250 or so yards exactly where he intended.
 

 

I'm pretty sure they said 260 on the CBS broadcast, I remember writing it into the chat. They very well could have been wrong, of course.

Right, but if Oostie's shot had stopped a foot below the hole, instead of going in, would it have been the greatest shot of all time?  Because the difference between the ball going in, or stopping a foot from the hole, was purely luck.  How much spin did the ball still have when it landed (which, BTW, is almost impossible to control when the ball flies 240 yards); how soft/hard was that exact spot on the green where it landed, how deep into the green was the first kick, etc.
 

 

260 to the pin *maybe*, but he only had to carry to the front of the green. And wasn't it downhill? Sure looked like it on TV.

 

And Bubba didn't just hit a wedge to 15 feet.  Having to keep it under the trees for the initial flight and then hooking around them adds some degree of difficulty.

 

I can't hit either shot, but based on the number of times I've seen pros hit an accurate 210-230 iron straight downhill, verses the number of times I've seen them pull off a shot like Bubba's, IMO the latter is more impressive.

 

You are absolutely right about this but the perfect shot he hit gave it a chance to go in the hole. Lets say Louis hit it 10 feet right of where it landed. It would never have had a chance to get to the hole.

Did Louis have one of those Jack 1 iron moments in the fairway, yes. It was a great shot to hit that ball to the exact spot to get it close to the hole. Everything after that was luck to have it go in. But i still think, under the pressure, knowing you just missed an easy putt to win, then you jacked your drive deep into the woods, and your opponent is looking at par, maybe 5. He hooks a ball nearly 40 yards, to hit the green is amazing. I know it was only 150, but still, i think the moment is what made that shot tougher, and more impressive.

And, fair or not, Louis' DE gets devalued because he didn't win. That's just the way it is - nobody remembers great shots by the runner-up.

 

And I'll play it the other way - had Louis made his putt on 10 & the playoff got extended & he went on to win, then Bubba's hook wedge on 10 gets devalued.

You don't have to look too long to find other players hitting the same shot Bubba did. Some from 200+ yards away. It's not that good of a shot. It was a good shot because of the cirumstances. It's still a good shot, without the circumstances, but nothing mind blowing. Nor was Louis' shot. He hit a good iron that turned out to be perfect. Hitting an iron 200+ yards to a green is done regularly at the tour.

 

 

Okay. Thanks for sharing. :-)

 

The ball doesn't suddenly change spin mid-flight. The ball was always rising, and always drawing. His description makes the shot sound more difficult only if you believe he actually hit a ball that started low and straight, then rose suddenly and started hooking.

 

That pretty much says it all. Neither shot was really, truly incredibly spectacular. They just happened to come at The Masters by two guys who tied (or were tied) for first.

 

 

I've seen shot shapes like Bubba's from 200 yards too, but it gets harder to shape a shot the higher lofted the club is, no? I haven't seen shot shapes like Bubba's from 150 with a wedge - not saying it can't be done, just that it seems more difficult than you and others are saying.

 

 

I don't think footage exists of the actual ball flight from impact to landing, so it's hard to say what the ball actually did.

 

And spin certainly does change mid-flight - it decreases the farther you are from impact.  Maybe what you're trying to say is the *trajectory* doesn't change mid-flight, but that's not true either. We all know fades and draws can start straight but then turn as the speed of the ball through the air decreases, resulting in the sidespin then having a greater effect.

I'm very confused.  Who else "hit the same shot Bubba did"?  From 150 yards, 15 feet off of the ground for the first 50 yards to stay under a tree, then climbing in the air, turning right 40 yards, and landing softly on a severely sloping green and stopping 10 feet below the hole.