Nicklaus on Fazio's changes at Augusta

[PThomas]

I've got the solution:  John Daly is going to build an 8000 yard course in suburban Chicago...now it might still be just a wee bit nippy that time of year, esp for you Southern folk,  but at that length we don't need all them damn trees...so if someone could just give me Hootie's number I'll give him a call and talk to him about brining the whole show up here!

course those pimento sandwiches and peach cobbler probably won't be in heavy demand......so we'll replace them with a good Chicago hot dog and some Italian ice!!

[Phil Benedict]

Jeff,

I have neither played nor actually seen Augusta other than on TV.  I wonder if all these changes (enlargement of bunkers, addition of trees) affect play from the member tees.  If not, who cares about the set up for the Masters?  

[Robert Thompson]

Jeff,

I have neither played nor actually seen Augusta other than on TV.  I wonder if all these changes (enlargement of bunkers, addition of trees) affect play from the member tees.  If not, who cares about the set up for the Masters?  

Phil: I've only walked it, but the changes are pretty drastic. Were the scores really that low lately that warranted such significant -- and ongoing -- alterations?
I personally think Fazio couldn't care at all about the legacy of Jones and Mackenzie. This is about putting his Fazio brand on Augusta, on top of the stamps of Jones, RTJ, Bob Cupp and the like. Do you think Fazio actually has any input, or does he just nod and agree to everything?

[Phil Benedict]

Robert,

I don't think Fazio could do anything without the whole-hearted support of Hootie and whoever else is influential in the club.  These guys are tremendously strong-willed people who are used to getting their own way.  Fazio is a hired hand who may be responsible for specific changes but the spirit of these changes eminates from Hootie and his cohorts.  They wanted a championship course the pros, particularly Tiger, wouldn't beat the hell out of.  The effect on the members' course and traditional architecture was of secondary concern.

[George Pazin]

These guys are tremendously strong-willed people who are used to getting their own way.

Just the kind of person I'd want running my classic....

It always fascinates me how many people profess to not care about anyone else's opinion, yet every action in their life would seem to indicate otherwise.

[Craig Sweet]

I think its a pity that Hootie and the gang at Augusta have made all these changes over the years. I would have hoped they had some integrity and said no to change. Even if it ment no longer hosting the tournament.

[Jim Nugent]

One the interesting things that Ron Whitten brings up is that Augusta has just two sets of tees - one at 7500 yards for the top 100 players in the world (in Tom Doak's words) and the other at around 6300 yards, which basically works for a membership with an average age of over 70 (at least).  

What happened to the old tees the pro's used to play from, at under 7000 yards?  They let them overgrow?

[Tom_Doak]

Jim:  A few of the old tees are still there, but most of them have disappeared -- partly for aesthetics, partly so no one brings up the idea of going back to those tees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I think people don't know that Augusta has ALWAYS put a premium on accuracy off the tee.  I think it does so in a way that's more subtle than a golf course set up for say, the US Open.  

Perhaps for the average golfer, but not for Pros and especially not for PGA Tour Pros.[/color]

In contrast to a US Open set-up, Augusta says this...

"Look, here's a fairway thats 50+ yards wide...you can hit it anywhere you want...we don't care where, but when you get up to your ball, and realize there's absolutely no way to go for the pin or even put the ball in a spot that gives you an easy up and in, don't complain.  We give you all the options in the world when it comes to playing this hole, but it's up to you to choose the best line and cope with risk/reward trade-offs given your own natural imperfection."  

That's a total myth.

Especially when it comes to exceptional players.

Howitzer like trajectories can get to any pin location.[/color]

Augusta perhaps tests the mind in ways that it spurs on creativity.  That is what is so great.  

Augusta isn't going to test a PGA Tour Pro's mind.
They know where to play and what they have to do, the question is, can they execute as intended.[/color]

An example is on 11.  15 years ago, a great tee shot on 11 was down the right side eliminating the need to go over the lake on your 2nd shot.  What is there now?  Trees.

I'm not so sure that hitting over a pond isn't easier than hitting toward a pond.[/color]

Anyway, last and final point.  All I know is that I love golf that is exciting, but also gruelling, but requiresome of intellect.  Maybe the tournamet committee is on the ball, who knows.  Is it possible that they went overboard like on the narrowness of 7 and the length of 4?  Probably.  

Justin, you're not dealing with second graders, these are the greatest players in the history of the game, The PGA Tour Professional.  

If mindless cretins like TEPaul can break par on the great classic courses I can assure you that the PGA Tour player knows how to play ANGC year in and year out.[/color]

Excluding these holes, what other options do they have?  This is not rhetorical, and this is not in defense of ANGC.  What is the real solver of their problem?  Is it the comp. ball?  How do you allow for deviations with this ball to suit each players individual styles?  Do you think that increasing the fairway width would decrease scores that much?  I personally think not.  

Of course if would, it would let them bomb away even more, without fear of repercussions.

I'm disappointed that ANGC didn't employ horizontal elasticity.
Narrowing the fairways for the tournament, but widening them to their intended boundaries for membership play.

As to length, designers have factored vertical elasticity into their designs for a century.[/color]

I want to hear what this body of knowledge thinks.

See my comments above[/color]

Jim Nugent,

Many of the tees are surf board tees, hence the old tees are playable if the markers are set there.

Other isolated old tees have been removed, but, the course has substantive vertical flexibility, and, the members tees remain for the most part, untouched.

Craig Sweet,

ANGC is "The Masters" and "The Masters" is ANGC.

The two are intricately woven as one.

The Masters has been, and remains a great tournament at a great venue.[/color]

[A_Clay_Man]

I'm disappointed that ANGC didn't employ horizontal elasticity.
Narrowing the fairways for the tournament, but widening them to their intended boundaries for membership play

Pat- This comment is surprising. First, It's my understanding that to do so is near impossible. The grass needs to be trained. It cannot go from short grass to long readily without risking it's health.
And secondly, why not just widen them for everyone? The way it use to be? I'll tell you why. It's plain down home ignorance and a lack of respect for those who had the vision to begin with.

[Phil_the_Author]

Justin,

You asked, "Excluding these holes, what other options do they have?"

They have the option of ignoring the winning score!

How many golfers when asked what was the greatest tournament in golf history will answer with the Masters when Tiger shot about a billion under par?

As much as some will complain about low scores it is just meaningless as a measurement of anything other than someone played great that day or 4.

Me, I prefer to see a winning score of 12 over because I enjoy watching frustration overcome, but that also is just an opinion of what is fun to see. I also like watching two pitchers pitching no-hitters against each other.

Finally, there have been a number of great changes to ANGC over the years. These have been documented many times on here. Those who complain about Hooties changes being against what Jones & Mackenzie wished as the ultimate design challenge need only examine 16 to learn how Wrong they were for that small piece of land.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam,

Transitioning from short grass to long is easy and has NO adverse effect upon the plant.

Transitioning from long to short is the difficult part.

But, since the course closes shortly after the tournament, getting the fairway widths back to normal shouldn't be a problem since the course doesn't reopen until the following October.

ANGC is not going to provide football field width while testing PGA Tour Pros.

The original vision would have been nice if we lived in a static world, but, we don't, and from the inception, the golf course was intricately connected to the tournament.  Henee, it has responded as the game has changed.

I like the concept of horizontal elasticity and believe that more clubs that host tournaments should employ it.

[A_Clay_Man]

Pat, Augusta Nat'l could likely get away with transitioning back to short grass, because of it's break in play. As an aside; I don't know why they'd want to??  Wouldn't the course be much more penal for the members, because the ball would roll-out where trees limbs would now affect the next? Other clubs without that break inplay, likely colud not pull it off. Maybe some of expert turf growers can chime in?

Please do not bother to ask me if i've played there, but I am mystified with your acceptance of altering a key "principle" of the design, while justifying it as an adaptation to the changes in players abilities and their equiptment.

 Does that mean when "whoever" reduces the distance the ball travels, you will be in favor of wider fairway coirridors, for the pros?

[jeffwarne]

I am absolutely amazed at the judgement being handed down about Augusta's recent changes BEFORE they even play the event.
Flogging is deplored on this site, yet when steps are taken to discourage it, they are soundly criticized.
Seve and Crenshaw didn't hit it all over the place to take advantage of better angles.
That said I've always enjoyed the recovery aspect of Augusta.
This "rough" we're talking about is less than an inch and I can't think of any that's in a place where a player hit on on purpose to improve his angle.

I say let's let them play and see what happens.
Augusta is a tournament venue, with an older membership.
7500 yards under firm fast conditions(which can exist there without monsoon rains of the last couple years) is not long,and 6300 is about right for most members.

the fact that it's too difficult for 0-5 handicap club pros and good playing amateur guests who's egos demand they play the back tees is their problem.
And shouldn't the course be too long for 4 and 6 time champions in their mid 60's and mid 70's respectively?
The ball is at least 10% longer,shouldn't the course be?

Augusta's tradition has ALWAYS been one of change and the course you all fell in love with had long ago lost much of the Jones/McKenzie features.
At this time I have no opinion on this years changes,but I thought the most recent changes were OK (OK, I hate the trees right of 11,but only because they look fake and are too close together)

Let's see how they play out and have this discussion on April 10th.
This has always been the best run tournament in the world-

let's give them a little credit.

[Patrick_Mucci]

As an aside; I don't know why they'd want to??  Wouldn't the course be much more penal for the members, because the ball would roll-out where trees limbs would now affect the next?

Adam, I'm afraid that I don't understand what you're trying to say in the above paragraph.


Other clubs without that break inplay, likely colud not pull it off.

Sure they could because most of them don't host tournaments annually like ANGC does.

A host course, in preparation for a US Open or PGA could constrict the fairways and then after the tournament return them to their original widths by the time the next season rolls around or the following year if conditions weren't ideal.

Please do not bother to ask me if i've played there, but I am mystified with your acceptance of altering a key "principle" of the design, while justifying it as an adaptation to the changes in players abilities and their equiptment.

Why are you mystified ?

Today's PGA Tour game is substantively different from that of 1934.

And, if you think about it, if there were prefered DZ's for good to great players, what's wrong with identifying them for one week a year ?

Does that mean when "whoever" reduces the distance the ball travels, you will be in favor of wider fairway coirridors, for the pros?

That would depend upon other flight qualities.
If clubs and equipment produced the dispersed shot patterns of olde, why not ?

[A_Clay_Man]

Adam, I'm afraid that I don't understand what you're trying to say in the above paragraph.

Pat, Isn't it true that the rough at ANGC (even one inch) will impede certain ball's forward progress? This added friction stops balls from being adversely affected by trees on the perimeter?

Pebble Beach returned to their resort fairway widths after the open. So, I wasn't saying it couldn't be done. I was responding to what I inferred from your post that you would like to see other tour venues do the same. That is all.

I was under the impression that world famous authors like Geoff Shacelford believed that the one cut fair green at ANGC, was inherent in the design principles of Mac and Jones. I disagree with you if you are saying that those priinciples have changed since 1934. The need for something else is at the root of this evil. I suspect it has more to do with score, than anything else. And what a pity that is, too.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff W. said:

"Seve and Crenshaw didn't hit it all over the place to take advantage of better angles."

Not on every hole, Jeff.  But Ben did tell me that there are three holes where he used to play to a spot for his approach, that is now in the rough.  And Seve was all over the place:  I can remember twice when he hit it onto the seventh green from 17 tee and took a drop from there!

[jeffwarne]

Tom,
As I typed that I had a feeling somebody might call me on that (I don't remember following Crenshaw that closely until the back nine the years he won )
I can think of a few spots where it's now rough that some players used (and can still use ),but it did create a safety issue on certain holes.

-Did he share with you what three holes they were?
I'd guess-layup on 2 way right:
short left of bunker on 3(not really a safety issue);
right on 11 (definite safety issue) I'm not crazy about that angle as it's scary hitting towards the lake,particularly knowing a short ball can kick hard left off the mounds into the water;
second shot right on 8 (not a safety issue);
layup right on 13 (safety issue)
I did follow Seve quite a bit in his 2 wins.
I remember not having a red 19 to post when I worked the scoreboard because nobody had ever been 19 under.
He nearly hit in 6 fairway off 5 tee and hit the greatest fast rising LONG iron shot from down that hill over the tallest pines I've ever seen-onto the green. Anyone who knows that spot knows how incredible that is.

I have a 1 handicap friend (who's pretty long) who says they ruined #7 (based on him having 5 iron into the hole)
I'll pass judgement after I see them play in April.

Make no mistake,I liked all fairway because it was different and it looked awesome, but I like the super light rough way more than US Open spinach.
My whole point is I'm not passing judgement on the LATEST changes until I see them in action against the tour's best.

[tonyt]

Jeff,

I have neither played nor actually seen Augusta other than on TV.  I wonder if all these changes (enlargement of bunkers, addition of trees) affect play from the member tees.  If not, who cares about the set up for the Masters?  

I do, because it sets the most famous worldwide example for amateur club office bearers to rightly or wrongly aspire to. I live in Australia, and not less than a few thousand clubs here would have discussed or invoked changes based partly on what they see on TV, with Augusta being the most often mentioned example of them all.

Also, just a small comment about the point raised earlier about being right on #11 to not play over the pond. As opposed to perhaps the masses, the pros prefer playing on a line further away from the trouble, and thus they like to carry an object (knowing that a certain minimum distance means there is no water to be encountered), instead of having it wide of their line, meaning a leaked shot can get into trouble.

When I was a tour caddy for a few years, all my players relatively familiar with a course preferred these lines with width forgiveness over lines where trouble would have to be played closer to or towards. They couldn't care less what was on the ground whilst their ball was in the air.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam, I'm afraid that I don't understand what you're trying to say in the above paragraph.

Pat, Isn't it true that the rough at ANGC (even one inch) will impede certain ball's forward progress?

Adam, ANGC wasn't a golf course without rough.
I don't know why so many people labor under this false impression or where this myth started.


This added friction stops balls from being adversely affected by trees on the perimeter?

For years, the trees were pretty sparse and playing from those areas, unless you were unlucky enough to have your swing or stance interfered with, was fairly easy.

In addition, with wide fairways, those areas are pretty well removed from play.

Pebble Beach returned to their resort fairway widths after the open. So, I wasn't saying it couldn't be done. I was responding to what I inferred from your post that you would like to see other tour venues do the same. That is all.

What I was implying was that courses that prep themselves for a tournament could easily return the golf course to its pre-tournament or desired width, vis a vis, horizontal elasticity.

One of my biggest disappointments was Merion's failure to return their fairways to their pre-US Open widths.

For all of those who rave about Merion, you should know that I know of NO OTHER club that has rough as deep and as thick as Merion's, day in and day out, and not just for tournament play.

I was under the impression that world famous authors like Geoff Shacelford believed that the one cut fair green at ANGC, was inherent in the design principles of Mac and Jones.

Where did you get the notion that there was ONE CUT, fairway to green at ANGC ?

Photos as early as 1932 and subsequent show rough throughout the golf course.

I disagree with you if you are saying that those priinciples have changed since 1934.

The rough's been there since 1932.
What are you talking about ?

The need for something else is at the root of this evil. I suspect it has more to do with score, than anything else. And what a pity that is, too.

Defending par has and will continue to be a concern for those who run tournaments.

How would you test the best golfers in the world ?