It’s like how poker strategy is basically just Game Theory Optimal now.
6 Likes
Eventually all these golfers are going to be human Stockfish.
3 Likes
So many fields have been Moneyballed. Golf is no different.
Is there a short 4 on Tour where there is a lot of variety to the strategy? Seems to me that the line between “the math says send it” and “the math says it’s not worth sending it” is razor thin and it would be hard to design a hole to sit on that line.
2 Likes
You’re not wrong, but it’s more of an indictment of how uninteresting the rest of the course is.
Also, the hole was played 394 times this week. There were 2 eagles (.5%) and 7 doubles + (1.77%)
The variety isn’t as much as you make it out to be
This also doesn’t really tell the full story. Like many have already said, every eagle to double on this hole is basically played the same way and isn’t really that fun to watch
At least 17 at Scottsdale we usually get to see some different strategies based on where the pin is
5 Likes
Seems like most of the short 4s are in full send it mode.
But there’s still some differentiation on how aggressive a line or the shot shape you take off the tee. Like at Scottsdale, you can bail right off the tee and you’re in more trouble on your second shot but guaranteed to stay dry off the tee. I think Travelers (?) is similar with the water left, you can bail a little away from trouble.
Today at 10, Max took a more aggressive line than Keith or Rahm (who hooked his shot) and he was rewarded for it, but a little extra fade and he’s in a bad spot in that front bunker.
Which is why these holes are still fun to have on tour.
2 Likes
Compare it to the rest of the holes on the course. Hell, compare that to any hole on tour. You’re not going to find many that have more variability. You rail against 10 often while propping up TPC Scottsdale as a better strategic par-4 (if you need the receipts I can go back and find them). Yet the data shows it to mete out a more vanilla result than 10 at Riv. Explain how that makes the hole more “interesting” or “strategic”.
1 Like
13 Likes
If all you look at is the numbers, you’re just as bad as the Scott Fawcett’s of the world and part of the problem
1 Like
I still like 10, but the pacing thing is entirely the Tour’s fault and should be rectified. They bus players & caddies between holes at Kapalua to keep up the pace, why not throw them in a cart after the tee shot on 10?
As for the scoring diversity… not a lot of double or triple bogeys on 10 this week. I don’t think there should be a ton of those scores, but I feel like you could reasonably expect to see 3-4 a day. Per the stats @Forty just linked above, there were only 5 doubles and 2 worse scores. On the flip side, only 2 eagles!
Contrast with the 2014-15 season numbers:
I wish I could see where the tee shots landed for all those doubles & triples in 2015, but not sure where to find that data.
My overall impression after watching a lot of the featured hole coverage today is that the pro’s are playing this hole a lot differently than I recall seeing in the past, so I can see why KVV now believes it stinks. I don’t totally agree, but it definitely could be improved.
That outcropping of trees/shrubs/whatever just left of the green where KVV sat is somehow a fairly safe bailout zone for a pro who just wants to make par, and I think it shouldn’t be. Put in a grandstand, or a pond, or make it OB, I don’t know. But something should be done to either 1) make the layup a more attractive option, with players opting to rely on their 50-80 yard pitch shots instead of rolling the dice with those little trees left/behind the green, or 2) bring in the possibility of a complete scorecard massacre for guys who attempt to drive the green so that it’s less tempting. Maybe a mix of both. Perhaps do away with the initial set of fairway bunkers since nobody on tour is ever hitting them anyway.
IMO if “drive the green” looks like “I can have a really good look at eagle if I hit my target, or else I’m locked into double/triple if I miss”, then it’s a real decision on the tee box. Some guys will have to go for it in an attempt to scramble up the leaderboard on Sunday or make a cut on Friday. Others with less at stake would then likely lay up and take their chances at sticking it close from 50-80 yards (or implode if they mess up the layup and somehow find a fairway bunker).
Maybe this is achievable by making the green more receptive but the greenside hazards more deadly. And I do think the front bunker is not deadly enough. I forget who it was, but someone today sent a drive into the rough short and right, and then intentionally pitched their ball into the front bunker because they had more confidence in holding the green from the front bunker shot than they did from a ~40 yard pitch out of the rough. That’s lame as shit. I’m not entirely sure what the solution looks like, and I don’t think the hole completely stinks yet, but I’m sold that some components of this hole could be changed to make sure it doesn’t stink going forward.
3 Likes
Wait, what? You’re just tolling at this point.
So let me get this straight. A great short par-4 is one that players choose a wider variety of shots off the tee regardless of whether they produce bland scoring results?
As I shared and mentioned above, that area used to be a creek bed when it was originally constructed.
1 Like
yeah, idk if a creek would be big enough to deter those shots now though. Plus, free drops are being given out like halloween candy these days by the rules officials 
Yes, I’d rather see a mix of strategies, day to day and player to player) than everyone trying to execute the same shot and then deciding if they got a lucky enough bounce to either try and make a birdie or protect par.
A 300 yard par 4 played by the best players in the world should be playing more under par than 10 does. The fact that is plays remotely close to par means it’s more gimmicky than interesting, imo.
3 Likes
Why are you reducing it to being about numbers? Why should the length of the hole be the determining factor of what scoring average it spits out?
1 Like
This is an incredibly horrible take. Riviera is the best course in the PGA Tour rotation. It’s better than Pebble, which has 6-7 great holes on the ocean and the rest is rather boring and forgettable.
4 Likes
The same pacing thing happens on long, hard par 3s and reachable par 5s. These holes screw up pacing because they generally require a lot more shots on and around the green than the other holes on the course.
1 Like
Then it is absolutely not a decision. I would have my player lay up every single time in those scenarios. Trying to pull off one shot to risk a double/triple every single time I pull it off is not worth it.
The reality is once you understand any sort of system like Decade, options become somewhat meaningless for players that are as good and consistent as PGA Tour pros. Statistically, there is one correct play. That play might be different based on the limitations of the player (Rory versus Brendan Todd).
If you want more people laying up on drivable par 4s, then those drivable par 4s need to be at least 350 and some sort of carry that prevents shorter hitters from going for it. But, right now whenever there is a drivable par 4 basically every one goes for it or doesn’t.
Technically, 4 at Pebble is drivable as it is only 345 from the very back of the tee. But, virtually no one ever tries it because of the narrow run up, the hazard on the right, the difficult up and downs that result due to the tiny green, the landing area being marginally wide enough for a driver, the ease of laying up in the fairway, and the ease of hitting that little wedge shot on the green.
Architects are trying to figure out how to combat the optimal playing strategy systems to create true options, but I don’t think they have yet.
1 Like
And then people would (justifiably) complain that it’s a hole/course designed only for bombers where some players can’t win, blah blah.
Maybe instead of evaluating short 4s with “lay up or go?” as the defining decision, we need to evaluate short 4s with “how aggressive is my line?” as the decision, at least for pros. People like 17 at Phoenix even though everyone goes for it. There is a safe zone to the right that creates a tougher 2nd shot, or you can be aggressive and pay a large price if you miss left, but are rewarded with a much easier 2nd if you’re successful. With Riv, pretty much everyone is trying to execute the exact same shot, there is no aggressiveness decision to make.
3 Likes
Fewer things drive fear into the heart of a pro golfer than having to take a penalty stroke due to a hazard. Water or even just a steep ravine so they cannot play out of it and have to take the drop would make players think twice about taking on that shot. If it’s a penalty stroke vs just some bushes I bet you see more players lay up.
4 Likes