Opinion & Analysis
2017 Masters Odds, Picks and Props Bets

The wait is over. It’s finally arrived. Master’s week has officially begun, and for most golf fans it’s the best week of the year. If your productivity at work doesn’t drop 100 percent on Thursday and Friday, you’re doing something wrong.
The Masters doesn’t need much of an explanation; the history is common knowledge and the course is one of the most famous in the world. However, there are a lot of storylines this year. They will revolve around Jordan Spieth’s return after his devastating quad on No. 12 in the final round, Dustin Johnson’s first major as the No. 1-ranked golfer in the world, and Rory’s attempt at the career grand slam at the ripe old age of 27. While the field is the weakest of the four majors – it’s a much smaller and includes players with lifetime exemptions and special invitees – it’s still loaded. To put it in perspective, defending champ Danny Willett is listed at +12,500.
- Tournament Record: 270 shared by Tiger Woods (1997) and Jordan Spieth (2015)
- Single-Round Record: 63 by Nick Price (1986) and Greg Norman (1996)
The Course
Augusta National needs no introduction. It’s one of the most famous and prestigious courses in the world; right up there with St. Andrews and a few others. The par-72 course measures out at 7,435 yards this year, and with heavy rain expected on Wednesday it will play even longer. Augusta demands excellence from all parts of a player’s games; it will be crucial to be long off the tee to allow for short irons that will stop the ball on Augusta’s firm and fast greens.
The general rule of thumb at Augusta is the better you putt, the better chance you have to win. Obviously making putts is key to scoring, but approach shots will be just as important this week. Getting off to a hot start and firing at pins while the course is still soft on Thursday and Friday could make the difference.
Odds
Favorites:
- Dustin Johnson +600
- Rory McIlroy +750
- Jordan Spieth +800
- Hideki Matsuyama +1,800
- Rickie Fowler +1,800
- Jason Day +2,000
- Jon Rahm +2,200
- Justin Rose +2,500
- Phil Mickelson +2,500
- Henrik Stenson +3,000
Past Champs in the field:
- Bernhard Langer +30,000
- Larry Mize +250,000
- Sandy Lyle +250,000
- Ian Woosnam +100,000
- Fred Couples +25,000
- Jose Maria Olazabal +150,000
- Mark O’Meara +250,000
- Vijay Singh +50,000
- Mike Weir +250,000
- Phil Mickelson +2,500
- Zach Johnson +12,500
- Trevor Immelman +250,000
- Angel Cabrera +20,000
- Charl Schwartzel +8,000
- Bubba Watson +4,500
- Adam Scott +3,500
- Jordan Spieth +700
- Danny Willett +12,500
Amateurs:
- Curtis Luck +50,000
- Scott Gregory +100,000
- Brad Dalke +100,000
- Toto Gana +100,000
- Stewart Hagestad +100,000
Picks
My Pick – I’ve gone back and forth on this for a quite some time. This is my favorite week of the year so naturally I’ve been thinking about it since last April. A lot has changed since then, but until recently I was confident I would go with Jordan Spieth (+800). Dustin Johnson (+600) has definitely made me rethink that. He’s won his last three starts and is beginning to separate himself from the rest of the pack. He’s appeared unbeatable for the last five weeks or so. But with that said, I’m still going with Spieth. For the foreseeable future, I think the path to winning the Masters goes through Spieth. He won’t win them all, but he will certainly be standing in the way. He obviously has a great history at the Masters; in three starts he’s finished T2-1-T2. He didn’t play well last week and missed the cut at the Shell Houston Open, but I think his head was already in Augusta. He ranks 1st in Shots Gained: Approach-the-Green and 5th in Birdie or Better Conversion. And, on top of all of his stats, I think he just wants it more.
Value Pick – I’m going with Justin Thomas at +3,500. It’s rare to see odds like this for a player with three wins before the Masters so it’s worth the risk. I think he’s been devalued because of a few poor starts in recent events. It’s true that he’s not in the same form he was in Hawaii, but if something clicks he has the chance to make a ton of birdies. He ranks 5th in Total Shots Gained and 1st in Birdie Average. If he gets on a roll, he could be tough to beat.
Long Shot – I’m taking a chance on Marc Leishman this week at +5,000. If you’ve read some of my other previews or know me at all, you know I’m a Leishman fan. I think he’s one of the more underrated players on Tour. He’s made the cut at Augusta all four years he’s played, including a T4 in 2013, and he’s been playing great golf this year. He’s had seven top-25s in nine events, and he has a win and a top-10 in his last two. I think he’ll carry that momentum to Augusta and make a run.
Props
Top Amateur – Curtis Luck (-135); I don’t love the odds here, but Luck is in a different league than the rest of the amateurs in the field. He’s the reining U.S Amateur and Asia-Pacific Amateur champion and the No. 1-ranked amateur in the world. What really gives him the edge in my book is the way he handled playing alongside Jordan Spieth in the Australian Open. In the spotlight he played great golf and proved he could handle the big moments.
Top Debutant – Thomas Pieters (+700); The popular pick is Jon Rahm, which I admit is a solid choice, but I’m all in on Pieters. He bombs it off the tee and has the ability to shape the ball however he chooses. That will definitely come in handy on the doglegs and when going after some tucked pins. Also, the way he played in the Ryder Cup makes him a great choice for Top Debutant. I think what kills most first-timers is nerves, but Pieters’ 4-1 record at the Ryder Cup showed that he’ll embrace the jitters and play his best.
Will there be a playoff – Yes (+300) No (-450); I’m going with “No” this week. The average margin of victory is just above two strokes, so I’m going with the trend even though I hate the odds. There have only been 16 playoffs in the 80 times the event has been played and three in the last 11 years.
Related
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.