2016 Masters Toonamint Discussion Thread

[marcharing]

4 hours ago, b101 said:

Quote

He could have had a a sympathetic word for Jordan but those sort of feelings aren't in the Brit culture.

Disagree with this, we're one of the most apologetic cultures out there! I think it was just very awkward and suspect he probably did have a word off camera.

 

Ha Ha...Well maybe not the Brit culture but Yorkshire culture?????? They're not exactly know for their apologetic nature. Witty yes (as exemplified in his brothers tweets) but not apologetic and tactful.

[Braivo]

Good take by Lee Trevino:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole/?cid=twitter-gc-a-trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole-041216

Quote

 

"Let me tell you something," Trevino said, "he went totally blank on the hole, and it's happens. It absolutely happens. And your caddie can go totally blank also under the moment of all that pressure. ...

"But there are two rules on the 12th hole at Augusta. ... One, is you never aim at the flag at Augusta on the 12th hole. You always aim in the middle of the bunker, and try to carry the bunker, and take your 20-footer left or right. ... That's what you do there. Never go at that flag. Okay, that's No. 1.

"No. 2: If you do hit it in the water, you never, ever go down to the creek and drop a ball. You always re-tee it. And the reason for it is because when you go down to drop your ball, you're dropping it in a wet area with a downslope trying to hit the ball up over a creek. 

"Weiskopf hit four in there one year. He hit four! He went down there and dropped exactly where Jordan did and hit four in there."

 

Also, the first comment nails it:

Quote

Remember folks, The best player to ever tee it up on #12, Made a comment in some book I read, That, #12 at Augusta National was the hardest par three in the WORLD......Mr. Jack Nicklaus.....Take all your comments and think about that for a moment!

 

[newtogolf]

7 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Good take by Lee Trevino:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole/?cid=twitter-gc-a-trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole-041216

Also, the first comment nails it:

 

I heard that on PGA TOUR radio and it made so much sense.  The 12th hole is known as a round killer, they needed to have more respect for it and should have known that their chosen drop point was a bad spot.  

I do think if Spieth had a more experienced caddie that he'd have been more focused on how to approach 12 and the caddie would have made him stick with the plan.  I'm in no way blaming Greller but Stevie or Bones would have been more emphatic on what Jordan needed to execute so Jordan didn't go up there with some uncertainty.   A caddie has to protect his golfer from making poor decisions and also has to know how to get the wheels back on the bus quickly.  

[saevel25]

31 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

I do think if Spieth had a more experienced caddie that he'd have been more focused on how to approach 12 and the caddie would have made him stick with the plan. 

He did stick to the plan. He's said he wanted to hit a baby fade in their because it gave him the 150 yardage he wanted. 

He's also said hitting that fade was an issue because of how he has been missing shots right.

33 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

A caddie has to protect his golfer from making poor decisions and also has to know how to get the wheels back on the bus quickly.  

How was he going to stop Spieth from hitting that 9 iron that way? In the end Spieth is going to hit the shot he wants to hit. Even if the caddie tells him to hit the draw, Spieth can still hit the fade. 

I guess unless Greller pulls a Romeo ;)

 

[ppine]

Only one person gets to win a tournament with medal play. That does not mean that everyone else" lost".  Watching the Masters is an empowering experience to me because the best in the world have trouble.  They are human just like the rest of us duffers.

Match play and team match play in some ways are more interesting, because half the contestants get to "win."

Edited April 13, 2016 by ppine

[natureboy]

16 hours ago, skydog said:

I also could have sworn that in the post round interview he said that he and Greller decided on holding a slight draw against the wind into the middle of the green, and that when he got up to the ball he changed his mind and decided on trying to peel a fade towards the pin. I could easily be wrong though.

Not positive that jibes with the convo on the tee? http://www.masters.com/en_US/watch/2016-04-10/q3_nm_orgn_o5c_v3xbgcbstv6a8oy9h.html (at 5:50), but maybe there was some discussion on their way to the tee that we didn't hear.

16 hours ago, Chris E said:

That's what I remember as well. 

See above.

10 hours ago, b101 said:

Don't see why anyone would make this point.

I'm just remembering some of @Nosevi's comments about The Hotchkin and your HCP system. I would say his assertions were largely accurate, but the emphasis had a hint of a theme of 'we have it tougher'. My comment also partly tongue in cheek.

8 hours ago, marcharing said:

He could have had a a sympathetic word for Jordan but those sort of feelings aren't in the Brit culture. 

I think he did say something in an interview after, but you can hardly blame the guy for being ecstatic and in a bit of his own bubble on achieving a career goal.

7 hours ago, b101 said:

Over the week, Danny played far better golf from tee to green; it was just Jordan's incredible scrambling and putting that kept him in it.

I agree. If you follow the Masters tracker feature and run through each of their rounds, Willett's long game did seem more solid/consistent and gave him some good looks at birdie. But he also rarely 3-putted or chipped/pitched and 2-putted so his short game was quite solid too. Possibly putting in the wind on the fast greens was a plus skill many of the British players had in common for the week.

3 hours ago, Braivo said:

I agree. It wasn't the tee shot on 12 that cost him the tournament, it was the next shot. A double bogey instead of a quad gives the whole tournament a different look and puts more pressure on DW the last few holes.

I expect an instinctive urge to get the ball high to stop it may have led to Jordan 'dipping under' slightly with his trail side, reinforcing the common error to hit fat / thin on downhill lies (part of the genius of the hole design).

Quote

That being said, Greller should definitely have slowed things down for Jordan before dropping and hitting that next shot no 12. He will learn to manage Jordan better as time goes on. You can also see why player / caddie relationships that seem perfect on the surface sometimes don't last. 

That probably would have been helpful. Greller is still relatively inexperienced for a caddy to one of the top players. Didn't Tiger start with Fluff? This is part of his seasoning as a professional too. Some to-be-expected growing pains as a team here.

 

Apropos quote for this past weekend:

Quote

Golf is a funny game. It is also a tantalizing, frustrating, fascinating game. Tournament golf can be heroic or tragic, a play of forces in which players and spectators alike may experience drama equal to that on any stage. And in any kind of golf, pathetic and ludicrous situations may succeed one another with kaleidoscopic rapidity.
BOBBY JONES

Edited April 13, 2016 by natureboy

[VOX]

5 hours ago, Braivo said:

Good take by Lee Trevino:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole/?cid=twitter-gc-a-trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole-041216

Also, the first comment nails it:

 

It's interesting that it gives the pros fits but is the easiest hole on the course (other than the par fives) for a mid handicap player like me. I would much rather have a 150 yard shot over water than a 230 yarder. Of course I don't have to worry about spinning a 150 yard shot off the green.

Edited April 13, 2016 by VOX

[natureboy]

1 hour ago, VOX said:

It's interesting that it gives the pros fits but is the easiest hole on the course (other than the par fives) for a mid handicap player like me.

On what are you basing this assertion? They cut the rough and fringe on this hole very differently for The Masters than for regular member play.

Edited April 13, 2016 by natureboy

[pumaAttack]

7 minutes ago, natureboy said:

On what are you basing this assertion? They cut the rough on this hole very differently for The Masters than for regular member play.

Im guessing he just means a par 3 playing at 150 yards.  Rather than all of the various conditions that #12 has to offer.

[natureboy]

44 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Im guessing he just means a par 3 playing at 150 yards.  Rather than all of the various conditions that #12 has to offer.

But the 'various conditions' really make a difference. Plus just on basic architecture, the 4th hole is tough, but less insidious. It has about 10 yards elevation drop from the tee so roughly a club less on carry distance. On Sunday, Willett hit 230 yards to the center of the green e.g..

The surface area for the 4th is very roughly 900 square yards while the 12th is very roughly 375 square yards. That's a 140% increase in the surface area on 4 relative to 12 for a roughly 45% increase in length. Granted you're likely targeting only a portion of the green on 4, but still seems to me a much more inviting shot without even factoring in the hazards and setup.

Edited April 13, 2016 by natureboy

[Gunther]

On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 0:15 PM, natureboy said:

 

All of those factors pale in comparison to the distance for your average amateur.  I'm a decent player but will always choose a 150 yard par 3 over a 230 one, regardless the details, and I think I represent maybe right around 99% of amateurs on this.  I think that was the point of the post you quoted.

[VOX]

16 minutes ago, natureboy said:

But the 'various conditions' really make a difference. Plus just on basic architecture, the 4th hole is tough, but less insidious. It has about 10 yards elevation drop from the tee so roughly a club less on carry distance. On Sunday, Willett hit 230 yards to the center of the green e.g..

The surface area for the 4th is very roughly 900 square yards while the 12th is very roughly 375 square yards. That's a 140% increase in the surface area on 4 relative to 12 for a roughly 45% increase in length. Granted you're likely targeting only a portion of the green on 4, but still seems to me a much more inviting shot without even factoring in the hazards and setup.

Just that I have played it twice and did not find it as intimidating as many other holes. Although there was only a light breeze into me both times. I figured even if I chunked my 6 iron I would be on the front of the green and if I smoked it I would be on the back of the green. I hit it pretty well both times. Birdied it the first time and lipped out for a tap in par the second time. In contrast, I think I got double bogey on 17 both times I played it.

[Vinsk]

10 hours ago, Braivo said:

Good take by Lee Trevino:

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole/?cid=twitter-gc-a-trevino-spieth-went-totally-blank-12th-hole-041216

Also, the first comment nails it:

 

Ok. But I can beat a 7 more often than not.

[natureboy]

8 hours ago, natureboy said:

I'm just remembering some of @Nosevi's comments about The Hotchkin and your HCP system. I would say his assertions were largely accurate, but the emphasis had a hint of a theme of 'we have it tougher'. My comment also partly tongue in cheek.

@Nosevi @b101 I just want to extra clarify that I agree The Hotchkin is a durn tough course and your HCP system with it's step function and onerous tournament requirement is a bit stodgy. I did not however, buy into the 'Brits have it / are tougher' running theme or that you are better golfers just because your HCP system doesn't keep up with recent progress well, just that your yardstick is a bit different...so to speak. Just in case you want to take away the reputation vote you gave me.  

3 hours ago, Gunther said:

All of those factors pale in comparison to the distance for your average amateur.  I'm a decent player but will always choose a 150 yard par 3 over a 230 one, regardless the details, and I think I represent maybe right around 99% of amateurs on this.  I think that was the point of the post you quoted.

I get what you're saying. I figured as an 8 you could put a 5 wood or hybrid up there pretty reliably, but saw on consulting charts that 220-230 is in the average drive / 3 wood range for the typical 8-10 HCP. But the green is ~ 40 yards wide - bigger than many fairways.

3 hours ago, VOX said:

Just that I have played it twice and did not find it as intimidating as many other holes. Although there was only a light breeze into me both times. I figured even if I chunked my 6 iron I would be on the front of the green and if I smoked it I would be on the back of the green. I hit it pretty well both times. Birdied it the first time and lipped out for a tap in par the second time. In contrast, I think I got double bogey on 17 both times I played it.

That's impressive that the difference between a fat shot and smoking it with a 6 iron is only ten yards for you. That's pretty impressive good distance control.

What does 17 have to do with discussing relative difficulty of par 3's or do you just want to talk about your score on different holes at AN?.

[Nosevi]

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

@Nosevi @b101 I just want to extra clarify that I agree The Hotchkin is a durn tough course and your HCP system with it's step function and onerous tournament requirement is a bit stodgy. I did not however, buy into the 'Brits have it / are tougher' running theme or that you are better golfers just because your HCP system doesn't keep up with recent progress well, just that your yardstick is a bit different...so to speak. Just in case you want to take away the reputation vote you gave me.  

I have never thought that we're "better golfers" or that our system in any way 'breeds' a tougher golfer, what a thing to suggest!

........Although of course we had 5 Englishmen in the top 10 at The Masters vs 5 of your guys in about the top 30.......And of course there's the way the leading pair  going into the final round handled the pressure compared to Willett and Westwood....... Then there are all those Ryder Cups to consider....... I don't want to, but in light of statistical evidence I may have to reconsider my position on this topic  

I'm mucking about of course, there are ebbs and flows as far as how 'our' golfers perform.

I hate our handicap system with a passion and wish we'd change to yours or something very similar which actually makes sense. It is a different yardstick - I'm a 5 here as the tournament season just starts up and Game Golf (based on actually comparing my play with others) has me pegged at a 0.4 I think. 

[b101]

1 hour ago, Nosevi said:

I have never thought that we're "better golfers" or that our system in any way 'breeds' a tougher golfer, what a thing to suggest!

........Although of course we had 5 Englishmen in the top 10 at The Masters vs 5 of your guys in about the top 30.......And of course there's the way the leading pair  going into the final round handled the pressure compared to Willett and Westwood....... Then there are all those Ryder Cups to consider....... I don't want to, but in light of statistical evidence I may have to reconsider my position on this topic  

I'm mucking about of course, there are ebbs and flows as far as how 'our' golfers perform.

I hate our handicap system with a passion and wish we'd change to yours or something very similar which actually makes sense. It is a different yardstick - I'm a 5 here as the tournament season just starts up and Game Golf (based on actually comparing my play with others) has me pegged at a 0.4 I think. 

Not for the first time, I'm in total agreement with you about our handicap system (my Game Golf is 7.7, my actual is 11.9...) and it's just a bit archaic. I also don't like the way we get our initial handicaps as, in my opinion, it's too open to abuse (for info, you just hand in three marked cards and they cut down anything over a double to a double. Cards being marked don't even need to be verified at some golf courses, nor do you need to state that you're marking a card before your round). It seriously needs looking at, as I can't really think of one thing our handicap system actually does well...

As for @natureboy, I don't think we disagree at all. The Brits had a good week, but they've had 15 years of nothing at Augusta, including in '07, so it's not like we're stating that we play well every time it's windy or rough conditions. If that were the case, we'd be winning our own Open every year rather than people like *cough*... Ben Curtis...

[natureboy]

9 hours ago, Nosevi said:

I hate our handicap system with a passion and wish we'd change to yours or something very similar which actually makes sense. It is a different yardstick - I'm a 5 here as the tournament season just starts up and Game Golf (based on actually comparing my play with others) has me pegged at a 0.4 I think. 

Congrats on your progress.

Since you have some nice ties to the Woodhall types and are big on maths, I suggest you relate to them that our slope system (while quite good overall) has a slight inaccuracy. When the USGA created the model 'bogey golfer' they looked at a very small sample of golfers - likely top competitors. The accuracy profile they created for 'bogey' skill from this limited sample appears too narrow compared to the 'big data' sample that Mark Broadie collected. Broadie's dispersion values are 20% to 60% larger (bigger inaccuracy for the longer shots), reflecting the fact that the 'typical' higher handicap is both shorter and less accurate than more skilled golfers. 

7 hours ago, b101 said:

It seriously needs looking at, as I can't really think of one thing our handicap system actually does well...

The one thing I like about your system is that your non-tournament rounds may be quicker with lots of picking up in matches. You can pick up in a match here, but if you still have to enter your most likely score you're more likely to figure that on the course while it's fresh in your mind. Probably a marginal difference in time saving, but at least more time for chit-chat and banter with friends on the course when you only have to occasionally post a score.

Edited April 14, 2016 by natureboy

[nevets88]

This piece is a bit of an ad for the analytics company Willett used, and but does have some interesting stat tidbits.

Quote

As Nichols explains, Willett’s victory at the Masters, which was played in 14.6 strokes better than the field, was based on success in two key areas. “It was largely achieved with superior performance on putts (+5.6 strokes gained – 6th best) and approach shots (+4.9 strokes gained – 3rd best),” he says. “However, his performance gained strokes on the field on all types of shots (drives, short game, approach shots, and putts).” Jason Day ranked as the best putter in Augusta (+10.3 strokes gained) but his approach shot play did not measure up well against the field. So much for putts for dough.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/apr/13/danny-willett-golf-analytics-masters-champion-15th-club

The one that got away. What else can you say that hasn't been said before?

http://golfweek.com/2016/04/14/jordan-spieth-pga-tour-players-debate-masters/