Augusta PR campaign due to?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Great points Pat.

How many out there think that after the 12th was flooded and the green so fastedely repaired in time for the tournament, think that they got the contours exactly as the original?

[TEPaul]

I read this thread very carefully! Pat Mucci, you have come a long way!!! Most excellent.

[ForkaB]

Patrick

From what I read, the aim of lengthening ANGC is precisely to preserve (or, more properly, re-institute) the shot values envisioned by the original designers (e.g. mid-iron 2nd to the 18th)

N'est-ce pas?

[Tim_Weiman]

Brian B:

It is not clear to me why complaining about changes to Augusta is "getting old".

Augusta, as you point out, is the only club which holds a major championship every year.  Doesn't this mean Augusta SHOULD be the most carefully scrutinized course in the world?

Are we more likely to find a rational solution to the golf technology arms race if people here remain quiet because as a private club Augusta can do whatever it wants?

Do we have to spend more and more money lengthening courses to preserve an element of risk vs reward?

Why not encourage the club to be a little more enlightened?

[Brian B]

Mike C. - your overly sarcastic comments are a little uncalled for. The point I was trying to make is that Augusta National grooms the golf course for The Masters. It is not conditioned for everyday play and players of every caliber. Ask just about any member of Augusta what the number one reason any changes are made and their response will be "We did it for the tournament". Preservation of the original design was long ago thrown out the door. Any club trying to follow in the direction of Augusta is foolish and destined for failure. This does not take rocket science to figure out. Without question to follow in the model of Augusta National would not be proper for any other course but the philosophy of other courses are no where near the same. At least I don't know of any other courses that groom themselves for a major championship every year. Do you?

Tim W. - Hopefully these comments have helped clarify your questions also. Scrutinizing a course for changes is fine and I agree that Augusta will always be a topic, but the circumstances are completely different for any other course and we hear the same thing about Augusta every year. "Oh God, here they go again making changes to the course".  

[Mike_Cirba]

Damn...I love you guys.

I left my last post late in the day wondering if I was simply being my old reactionary self.

After reading your posts, I feel encouraged to know I'm not alone in questioning what's happening...

AC,

Do we have to travel to ANGC to know that narrowed fairways, Bermuda rough, tree plantings, and Mark O'Meara hitting 3-wood into #18 are probably not consistent with the design intent of Mackenzie and Jones?

What else is there to see that we're all missing??

[GrassGuy]

Mr. Cirba:

Maybe it would be a good idea for you and some of the other ANGC "experts" who post here to actually make the trip to Augusta some April. You will discover that there is no bermuda rough at ANGC. In fact, I don't think there is any bermuda anywhere on the course. By the time bermuda will green-up in Augusta (usually in June) the course is closed for the summer. You won't find green bermuda anywhere in Georgia in early April. They barely were able to get the bermuda rough at Pinehurst up to 3 inches in time for the 1999 Open the third week of June.

Also, because the fairways at ANGC play so firm in April, the only players that will be hitting 3-woods into #18 are the old past champions. Players who need 3-wood to reach that green won't even qualify to enter.

Regarding an earlier post by Mr. Naccarato:
I am no pine tree expert, but I think the Eisenhower tree on #17 may be the only loblolly pine on the course.  The others are just run-of-the-mill tall Georgia long leaf pines. The new trees planted in recent years appear to be the same. If some of the trees have died in recent years, I sure have not noticed it, and I am pretty sure that none that effect play have been lost. I am also pretty sure that the rumor that fairways were watered to reduce roll is unfounded. The fairways play firm.

Can anybody name an architect who would turn down an invitation from ANGC to make changes to their course? My guess is that the only architects who have not worked on that course are the ones who have not been asked to.

[TEPaul]

The image ANGC presents to the clubs and courses of America (or the world) every year when we see the Masters may not be the best one for architecture and maintenance practices if those clubs and courses in some way are deluded into thinking they should emulate ANGC.

Are clubs and courses deluded in emulating ANGC in some way? Have they been? Of course, otherwise there never would have been the  term "Augusta Syndrome". Whose responsibility is the "Augusta Syndrome"?

I'm sure you will all answer that your own way. Should golf clubs realize they should not try to do the things that ANGC does? Of course they should. Should ANGC advise (maybe through a statement) other clubs not to emulate them for obvious reasons? Well, that would be nice of them but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Has ANGC made their golf course into something it was not designed to be? Probably has in some respects. Certainly trying to narrow the course either actually with trees and rough or watering it to prevent roll is the wrong thing to do in the context of their design intent.

They certainly have narrowed some of the holes with trees over the years and the recent roughline inclusion was going in the opposite direction from the width oriented design intent of ANGC. I have never seen ANGC water the fairways to such an extent that it prevented roll though. Unless there was a deluge it seems the ball has always rolled well at the Masters.

Is adding tee length a terrible idea? Not to me it isn't, not really, if it's done correctly and preserves some of the basic strategies and maybe even the "shot values" (sorry about that) of ANGC's design intent. It is a far better design alteration than to start redesigning holes "through the green" or on and around the greens! That's simply because it's an addition at one end that can be easily taken away if necessary and you haven't actually changed anything on a hole that you might not be able to reconstruct properly. I also believe that Mark O'Meara will probably not need to hit the 3 wood to #18 next April that he did last October.

What is adding tee length to ANGC really? It's basically utilizing the known architectural design practice (hopefully during original construction) of "elasticity", but in ANGC's case, after the fact, since "elasticity" was apparently not originally designed into ANGC.

Can an architect make architectural errors using "elasticity"? Of Course! He has to be careful not to add so much tee length on a particular hole that he has even today's super long pros approaching greens from places they were never intended to be, even originally. Certainly to a degree the architect has to consider the effects of things like adverse winds. Set-up (tee markers) can compensate for that but sometimes that can get tricky in stroke play. It appears, according to Matt Ward that a mistake may have been made this year on #1 by not considering a hill crest that should be able to be carried or reached. It appears they added too much length to #17 last year forcing pros to hit long irons into a green that really was not designed for long irons. These aren't necessarily errors in the context of whether tee length should be added at all or not, they're errors in where exactly they placed the tee. It seems they might have made design errors on those holes with added tee length. #13 & #15, however, may have their more top half of the bag descision-making strategies returned with added tee length--we'll just have to see if they got those tees right. #18? Well, everybody was screaming when Woods hit a SW last year and that that was not the design intent of the course. He won't be doing that next year.

There are even others who say that ANGC should be doing none of these length oriented things, that they are missing the point and the problem entirely! That the point and the problem is that the golf ball is going too far! Well, last I heard that point and problem was in the realm of the manufacturers and the USGA! In the meantime ANGC will have to deal with the Tour pros and the equipment they bring to town. Let's hope they deal with it right!

[T_MacWood]

The golf course is a shadow if its former self. There has been a general lack of appreciation for the original design, which now seems to be eccelerating. For those who
defend the changes and those who have made the changes---what changes have improved the golf course from a design standpoint?

[Mike_Cirba]

Grassguy,

Perhaps you can enlighten me on what type of grass is grown in the rough that has now been grown at ANGC?  Or enlighten Tommy on what other versions of coniferous trees grace the property than the majestic Loblolly?  

Is the introduction of more of either of these features an improvement to ANGC?

Grassguy, AC, TBJ;

As an aside, it's really much more pleasant to discuss these issues with people who use their name.  We're talking golf architecture here...not state secrets.

Unless you initials are JFK, FDR, or LBJ, it's easy to make statements anonymously.  Healthy debates between friendly people with similar interests and differing opinions are really a GOOD thing for the game.  And even a good thing for ANGC, I believe.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Grassguy,
Your right, I'm not a ANGC expert, nor a pine tree expert either, but the person who I got that information from is and from his experienced dealings with the club informed them why the Loblolly's or tall Georgia Pines (Whatever you want to call them) were dying. I even have a drawing in his own hand depicting what was happening, and will not post it just because people will then know who it is, just from the his style of artwork.

Also, I don't see where I stated that the fairways were overwatered. I stated that the trees themselves were, which is from the information I was given from the gentleman who will go unmentioned.

All of what you are talking about smacks of design by maintenance, which is a horrible burden to place on superintendents already faced with the daily problems of maintaining everything green and keeping green speeds at 11 on the stimp meter at all times.

[GrassGuy]

Mr. Cirba:

Fooled you, didn't I. You see, I really don't know much about grass. I just used the name "GrassGuy" to give the impression that I am an expert on the subject and to provide cover in case I say something rediculous or mis-informed.  You might want to try that idea. You could be "AugustaGuy".

I do know bermuda when I see it, and I know it is still dormant in early April in Georgia. The grass in the rough at ANGC is the same as that on the fairway (some sort of cool weather grass). They just let it grow a little longer. Whatever it is, it is a whole lot easier to play out of than bermuda. I imagine that it has more of a psycololgical than physical impact on the players. They do not use warm weather grasses at ANGC because the course is closed in the summer (or is it the other way around?)

[Mike_Cirba]

Grassguy,

When I say something ridiculous or uninformed, as we all sometimes do, I still prefer to let people know the source.

That way, when I also hopefully say something of value or insight, others will be able to balance my opinions knowing the whole story, warts and all.

Is anyone here familiar with the fairway/rough grass(es) used at ANGC if they aren't Bermuda?

[Tim_Weiman]

Brian B:

I missed your response to my question about whether remaining quiet about changes at Augusta will encourage a rational solution to the golf technology arms race.

Should we remain quiet on this subject?

Should we keep spending more and more money lengthening courses to meet each new technological advance in balls and equipment?

Can the only golf club which holds a major tournament every year not be responsible for the example it sets?

[ForkaB]

Tim

I see no evidence at all to suggest that ANGC does not fully accept responsibility for what it does or does not do to its golf course. It just doesn't really care what you, I, Mike, Tommy, Tom MacW, etc., think, and that is very much their right.

[Mike Hall]

The grasses at ANGC are ryegrasses, probably a blend, from Oregon origins.  Depending upon which seed company it came from, they carry names such as Charger, Bright Star, etc.  In April, it is 100% accurate to say they are playing on a rye fairway and rough surface, with a bermuda base for some cushion, though the golf course looks like hell in the summer as it only has around 80% coverage before it it overseeded again in the fall.  Everyone knows the greens are bent, but prior to that conversion, in April, they were primarily poa annua and rye.

[GarySmith]

As a Southerner who knows a little bit about our native trees, and who has actually been at ANGC a few times, here is my $.02 on the pine tree situation there. I believe it is true that the club is worried about some of the pine trees dying early there. They have had arborists in to study the situation. Most of the pine trees in our region developed and dominate on the well-drained, relatively low fertility, sandy-loam uplands in our region. (hardwoods, such as oaks, tulip poplars, etc, primarily developed in the moister, more fertile, bottom lands) Anyhow, it seems that the pines are getting more moisture and fertility than they require, and have grown faster than normal. This leads to weaker wood, more susceptibility to fungus infections, root diseases, etc.
The club has planted young trees in certain places in anticipation of some of the older trees dying prematurely.

The above may well be an oversimplification. But what the hell, oversimplification sometimes rules here!!

I totally agree that ANGC gets dissed way too much here, and it gets old.

Instead of talking about ANGC, what this forum really, really needs is a long 150+ thread on the bunker situation at Merion.  

[Mike_Cirba]

GarySmith,

Thanks for providing more about the tree situation.

Do you think the changes in recent years make ANGC a better golf course?

Generally, would you rather see historic, classic courses preserved or heavily modified and modernized?

150 posts on a single thread!?  Wow...must have been a topic that generated a lot of passion and interest, I'd think.  

[Brian B]

Tm W. - I think your questions are deviating from the original topic. I believe the subject I was discussing was that we complain about Augusta making changes to the golf course every year and how this effects the integrity of the course. And my point is that Augusta is always going to do what they want and has been for the last 60 plus years. What the general public has to say about their efforts is not going to sway any descisions they make.

Now, to your point that technology is the cause of these changes and Augusta should be responsible for any changes they make because of the example they set. I think you can discuss the issue all you want but Augusta is going to do whatever they feel necessary. Again I'll emphasize that Augusta is like no other club and any club trying to follow their model is destined for failure. Who is Augusta setting an example for? How many clubs work with this type of budget and why?

I agree that technology is an issue and that costs of development and renovation will considerably increase if things continue along the same road, but to blame Augusta for being able to adapt to the situation is somewhat absurd.

[AMacKenzie]

DMoriarity:

You are referring to the essential features of an ideal golf course item number 3, which reads, "There should be little walking between greens and tees, and the course should be arranged so that in the first instance there is always a slight walk forwards from the green to the next tee; then the holes are sufficiently elastic to be lengthened in the future if necessary."  Taken from the tome "Golf Architecture" published in 1920.

Refer to Schackelford's book "The Good Doctor Returns" for more information and opinions on the changes at the Augusta National.

[GarySmith]

Mike Cirba,

Your questions brought out the longest post I've ever produced here or anywhere else, and as I was rereading prior to hitting the submit button, I lost my internet connection. Mr. Paul would have been proud of my post's length.  

Here is the short and sweet answers to your two questions.

In general, the old classics, whether they be golf courses, black and white movies, antique furniture, etc, should be left the hell alone.

Having said that, ANGC has different factors to consider. They have got not just a course to worry about, but the Masters golf tournament as well. The real solution is a tournament ball. (invitational tournament, their party, they make the rules) In lieu of doing that, I think they are justified in the lengthening some holes. Just wait and see, 13 is going to be a VERY interesting hole next year.
I know it already was, but I'm sure its going to be even better.

[TEPaul]

Would you mind telling me who is going to produce a "Master's Tournament golf ball"? This is not exactly the sort of thing they can go down to the local sports store and buy! What would the pros do about their contracts? The Masters might be one helluva invitational but this isn't some local club event, you know! This is a Major!

[TEPaul]

Also, how dumb do you think these lying, cheating, sub-scum, envelope pushing, potentially B&I rules breaking, bottom-line consumed manufacturers are anyway?

Have you ever noticed they rarely if ever make any product distinction between the ball they're trying to sell to you and the one the pros might use?

If they manufactured a "competition ball" they would be making that distinction--HUGE! Do you really think you can sneak this distance control idea around their back like that? It would be nice, but I don't think so! Best policy, rein in the distance any and every golf ball can go--for the everyman and the competitor and Tour Pro too!

[GarySmith]

Yes, I mind telling you.  

[GarySmith]

Seriously, Mr. Paul, I agree that the ball needs to be reined in across the board.

My thoughts about ANGC mandating a tournament ball was for them to play a lead role in getting this sold. They need a front man to help sell this. I noticed Nicklaus recently got in there. Could he be the salesman? He's for it.

Have a good night.