Blood, Sweat, and Tiers
The Tiers
Last week, Pinehurst Resort announced the hiring of acclaimed architect Tom Doak to build the tenth golf course on the property. Andy Johnson hosted Tom on The Fried Egg Golf Podcast to chat about the Pinehurst development and a few other topics.
One of Tom’s comments in the podcast stood out to me. He mentioned that, after visiting Pinehurst No. 2 over a decade ago, the experience was like visiting your uncle with dementia who doesn’t remember who you are. Quite the analogy.
He was suggesting that the golf course had lost some of its essence. Pinehurst No. 2 was still a special place to play a round of golf, but it had lost part of its identity over the years.
Evidently, the criticism resonated with executives at the resort. Shortly after Doak’s visit, Pinehurst commissioned a restoration effort. Architecture firm Coore & Crenshaw led the project, which completed in 2011. Today, Pinehurst No. 2 is a much better golf course than it was 15 years ago. Tom Doak didn’t criticize Pinehurst because he is a hater; he criticized Pinehurst because he knew how much better it could be. Sometimes criticism is an effective step towards progress.
Anyway, last week I created some uproar on Twitter after posting a tiering of (most) courses on the PGA Tour. Two qualifiers before we look at the tiers:
I intended the effort as a categorization exercise based on how courses test professional golfers. It was NOT a strict ranking system.
Ex. I do not think TPC San Antonio is a better golf course than Pebble Beach.
This was not a “Say something crazy to rile people up” exercise. I will never do that. Ever. I stand behind my work.
Ok here are the tiers:
At the time I’m writing this newsletter, the tweet has 250k views and hundreds of comments from golf fans, media, architects, etc. Some are positive. More are negative. It’s a bloody war zone.
Even Justin Thomas halted his day to take a swipe at me:
My perspective on PGA Tour golf courses is the result of watching thousands of hours of PGA Tour golf, being on site at the tournaments, analyzing data in great detail, and talking to players and caddies about the courses.
In my uninformed opinion, the worst kind of golf shot is a shot of little consequence.
There’s a reason golf fans react viscerally to errant shots that get bailed out by relief from grandstands:
The relationship between action and consequence is baked firmly into the fibers of the sport. Accordingly, I look favorably upon golf courses that reward well-struck shots and penalize errant misses. Players should be faced with consequential shots.
I’m not going to go through my rationale for every tiered course, but let’s contextualize some of the tiering.
Augusta National Golf Club, annual site of the Masters, provides ample room off the tee. The corridors are wide, yet the tee shots are demanding. Lined with trees on each side of the fairways, Augusta does not treat wide misses kindly:
From the tee boxes through the greens, shots at Augusta are consequential. Brilliant shots often result in a birdie. Loose swings spiral into bogeys or worse. Opportunities exist, but danger is omnipresent.
I wish I could say the same of Torrey Pines.
Consider the two tee shots below at Torrey. Notice that these tee shots resulted in the same score on the hole:
Despite enormous disparity in the accuracy of each tee shot, each player parred Hole 10 at the 2022 Farmers Insurance Open. Obviously, I cherry-picked this example.
But the data support my position:
Reminder: Strokes Gained refers to how many shots you gain against your competitors in the tournament. Notice how differently TPC San Antonio punishes Really Wide Misses (-0.58 Expected Strokes Gained) versus a Wide Miss (-0.27 Exp. SG). At Torrey Pines, a Really Wide Miss and a Wide Miss are only separated by 0.07 strokes. That’s a small number!
This is part of why Torrey Pines is notoriously highly-correlated with Driving Distance. The fairways are firm and narrow, and on the vast majority of holes, nothing threatens the perimeter of players’ dispersion patterns. Said more simply, it’s hard to hit the fairway, and there is not a steep penalty to missing the fairway super widely, so you might as well hit driver and hit it hard. You do not have to worry about consequences.
It is no coincidence that Bryson DeChambeau, after becoming one of the longest and least accurate drivers in the world in 2020, has had most of his PGA Tour success in my “Just Bunkers, Grass, and Some Trees” tier since his distance gain. That tier is full of bland courses that fail to ask a diverse set of questions off the tee. As long as Bryson remains extremely inaccurate, places like TPC San Antonio will not be kind to him. Nor will Augusta. Nor will Los Angeles Country Club, host of the 2023 U.S. Open.
A few other notes on the tiers:
“Better 50 Years Ago” was not intended as criticism. I admire these courses, but it is abundantly clear that with modern fitness and equipment, the professional game overwhelms these courses compared to how they’d have played half a century ago.
“Yikes” was intended as criticism.
If I were to redo the tiers, I’d strongly consider
elevatingdesignating Riviera as an “Elite Golf Course.” I wouldn’t change anything else.In light of Justin Thomas’ and others’ comments, I will be re-evaluating Innisbrook when the Valspar Championship rolls around. I have an open mind!
The day I posted the tiers was a noisy day. But it was a good kind of noise. It was the sound of opinions being exchanged in the marketplace of ideas. I learned quite a bit: I already loved Riviera, but my appreciation for that course is now heightened. If being called a clown by a hundred strangers is the price of knowledge, it is a small price to pay.
The conversation is ongoing. Some people are creating their own tiers. Some people are realizing that the courses on the PGA Tour could be more compelling. It’s a thoughtful exercise.
Most importantly, these competing thoughts are being exchanged among a group of people who share both an affinity for the sport and a stake in its future.
A sincere thank you to Justin Thomas, truly one of the best players in the world, for his contribution to the conversation. Your perspective and dissent is valued here.
Onward.
NFL Playoffs Overtime Strategy
Last NFL season, the Kansas City Chiefs eliminated the Buffalo Bills from the Playoffs with a 42-36 final score. The game went to overtime, and the Chiefs scored a touchdown on their opening drive to end the Bills’ season. Buffalo never got the chance to touch the ball.
Nearly everyone within the NFL agreed that the overtime rules needed to be changed. Both teams deserve the opportunity to possess the ball. So the NFL revised the rules. Starting in this season’s Playoffs, each team is guaranteed one offensive possession. If the score remains tied after each team’s possession, the next score wins.
Ok, so if you win the coin toss, should you elect to take the ball first or second?
Most NFL teams now have sophisticated models to optimize their decision-making. Yet, coaches make plenty of in-game mistakes. With the NFL Playoffs starting in a week, let’s think through some of the considerations involved in the decision-making process.
The most important consideration is the value of the additional information you have when you possess the ball second. When your opponent plays offense first, you know how many points you must score when it is time for your offense to take the field. If your opponent scored a touchdown, you are never settling for a field goal, even on 4th and 30. Any score less than a touchdown is a loss. The informational edge is why nearly every college football team chooses to take the ball second in college overtime, which has sort of similar rules to the new NFL overtime rules.
Another subtle benefit of taking the ball second is a recurring Finding the Edge principle, optionality. Suppose your opponent has the ball first and scores a touchdown plus they make their extra point. If you score a touchdown, you can elect to go for a two-point conversion to win the game. This is an attractive option, and I expect most teams in this situation to attempt the two-point conversion.
Similarly, if you take the ball second and your opponent makes a field goal on their initial offensive possession, you have some options in situations like 4th and 4 from the opponent’s 35-yard line. You can attempt the long field goal to try and prolong the game, or you can go for it on 4th down to continue the drive. You have options. There’s intrinsic value to optionality.
(Note: Kicking a long field goal when you’re down by three is an unattractive option in this format. Missing the field goal ends the game. And even if you make it, which is no guarantee, your opponent just needs to make a field goal on their next drive to end the game. Distance to the first down is obviously a huge factor, but I expect teams to make the mistake of kicking the field goal too often in this scenario.)
Ok last point: the variables change depending on the characteristics of your team and of your opponent.
If the overtime sequence plays out
Punt → Punt → Next Score Wins
Or
Field goal → Field goal → Next Score Wins
Then starting overtime with the ball would have been an advantage because you’ll have the ball third, which is a “Next Score Wins” situation. In every other sequence, having the ball second provided a distinct advantage. The bulleted scenarios will happen most often when strong defenses and/or poor offenses square off against one another. Therefore, taking the ball first makes sense most often for a team with an incredibly strong defense. Remember, Touchdown → Touchdown is not a scenario where we’re afraid to have the ball second because we’re going to go for the win with a two-point conversion anyway.
(Smaller note: Fatigue will be a storyline in these situations. “Well the defense was just on the field for the end of the fourth quarter, so they’re probably tired and you may want your offense to start with the ball to give them some rest” is a legitimate point. It’s probably not impactful enough to heavily influence the decision, but it’s a consideration.)
Props to the NFL for implementing a cool rule change. I’m looking forward to observing how teams handle these decisions if a game goes to overtime.
Some Food for Thought
Contact/Feedback
Twitter: @JosephLaMagna
Email: Joseph.LaMagnaGolf@gmail.com
Other Recent Content
Click for golf predictions I made on New Years. Hold me accountable in a year:
For the second time in a week, the Denver Nuggets had to fix an uneven rim in the middle of the game. We all handle sheer frustration differently. Coach Mike Malone is the best lol:
President of the UFC Dana White has come under fire for a recent video showing him in a physical altercation with his wife. Words are exchanged, she hits him, he hits her. This also seems relevant. The situation was discussed on ESPN, a rights partner of the UFC. It’s a big story. I found some of the below commentary on ESPN…odd:
Buffalo Bills player Damar Hamlin collapsed on the field a week ago. He suffered cardiac arrest and is progressing. The situation was a frightening reminder of how violent football is. It was also an inspiring display of courage and medical competence:
Between the time Hamlin collapsed and when the NFL eventually cancelled the game, Fox Sports personality Skip Bayless tweeted this:
He got dragged for the tweet and continues to get blasted.
I am not a Skip Bayless fan. At all. But his tweet was not a big deal. At all. We live in an attention economy. Everyone’s brain has become Twitterified.
Damn, a defense of TPC San Antonio and Skip Bayless in the same newsletter. I die on the weirdest hills.