[TEPaul]

Bobzee:

Back in the old days what was ANGC's "rough" situation? Did they ever really have any "rough" per se or did they just regularly mow down everything on the course that wasn't fairway?

[A_Clay_Man]

One major difference in tourney set-up has been pin placements. In the olden days they appered to be relatively easy on Thursday and Friday. Identifying the hot and the best. Then on the weekend, the pins would be moved to less traditional, less known, more difficult spots. Clearly identifying the best player by weekends end. Now, it's all about the excitement on Sunday. And I will stick to my conviction that if someone makes another ace on 16, Sunday this year, I will never watch again.

[BCrosby]

I don't know when they started growing a "second cut". But until the last couple of years it wasn't much of a factor in shot choices. For example, until recently some longer players aimed for the right side rough on the 15th trying to find a flatter lie. There was no real concern with longer grass affecting spin or ball flight. It wasn't a negative, apparently.

The pivotal moment for ANGC - one that is almost never talked about - is when they first installed irrigation systems in the late 40's. After that the old hard, fast ANGC was no more. A number of competitors commented on it at the time.

With the irrigation, limited play and unlimited capital resources, the temptation to create a lush, verdant course was too strong. And so one bad maintenance decision led inexorably to another and another.

Sometime in the 70's it resulted in the Augusta syndrome. Then you mix in the Pro V1, some titanium, graphite, soporific governing bodies and you get today's hodge-podge of a golf course.

Bob  

[TEPaul]

"With the irrigation, limited play and unlimited capital resources, the temptation to create a lush, verdant course was too strong. And so one bad maintenance decision led inexorably to another and another."

Bob:

ANGC may always look lush and verdant on TV and in person during the Masters but the point is unless the weather just takes them out the golf course can and will play pretty firm and fast and they want it that way. (By pretty F&F in the Masters I'm talking 30-40+ yards of rollout. I know because I've watched them do it).

The real problem with the "Augusta Syndrome" is that people who look at it on TV think they can have firm and fast conditions AND ALSO lush and verdant looking grass like ANGC during the Masters.

Any club can have both but the bad news is they'll probably need to spend about 3+ million per year like ANGC does on their maintenance budget to do both.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

TV filters present colors that may differ from the onsite colors, hence the problem is that viewers aren't seeing the golf course as it is, but as CBS wishes to telecast and present it.

The viewers perception becomes the reality, and that's what's motivating the golfing viewer to pursue the illusion at  his home course.

And when you import that mindset to your home course you're trying to create conditions that don't actually exist.

Now, think of the situation that put's the superintendent in.

But, isn't the media, TV and the Movies all about creating illusions, or can one guy fight 50 men armed with knives, guns and martial art skills and whip them all without breaking a sweat. ?

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

You can talk about perception and illusion all you want but ANGC in the Masters is green. Are you actually trying to tell me the course is browned out in person but green on TV because of CBS color filters?  

Maybe some of those courses during the British Open should borrow some of those CBS color filters when the weather is dry over there.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

It ain't that green.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
It ain't that green."

Patrick:

Maybe you don't realize this but a golf course does not have to be browned out to play really firm and fast. I've seen a number of them that are incredibly firm and fast and just a lighter green and with very little to no browning.

Of course to get a golf course that way consistently takes a lot of man power generally in the syringing department including "Through the green".

ANGC has that kind of man-power and money but very few do.

[Mike_Cirba]

The fairways at ANGC are F&F.

You can hear your footsteps on the fairways.

$omehow, they manage to be green too.  

[TEPaul]

Actually, Patrick, last fall I took the super, asst, GM and a few others from Fox Chapel to see GMGC's super, HVGC's super and Manny's super as well as Merion's Matt Shaeffer.

Matt can be hilarious and he has to be a frustrated teacher because he got on his blackboard to explain how this stuff worked.

Fox Chapel was over here to visit our known firm and fast clubs to see how they do it. The interesting thing about Fox Chapel apparently is the super gave them some real F&F last year and they want much more of it. If he gave them 50 yards of roll they may want 100.  

So they were over here, I guess, to see where the "stress limit" really is with managing some real F&F conditions.

So Matt says to the GM;
"So, boss, do you really want to know how to increase your F&F past what you apparently already have?"

And the GM says to Matt:
"Yes I do."

Matt to the GM:
"Are you absolutely sure you want to know how to do it?"

GM to Matt;
"Yes, of course"

Matt to GM:
"OK boss, the way to do it is to give Dave (FC's super) here, money and lots and lots of it. Give him all the money he wants and asks for. And after that give him some more."

And then Matt hits his blackboard and starts to track the cost to go 50%, then the cost to go 75% and then 90%, and then Matt thinks a minute and says---"but to go that last app 7-10% is going to cost real money, lots and lots of it."

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Where is the money going ?

What's it being spent on ?

It seems contraintuitive that the more you want F&F the more you have to increase your budget, especially when your water costs should be diminishing.

While I can see certain increases in the transitionary period, once F&F conditions are achieved, why would their be an ongoing need for a substantially increased budget ?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,

Where is the money going ?

What's it being spent on ?

It seems contraintuitive that the more you want F&F the more you have to increase your budget, especially when your water costs should be diminishing.

While I can see certain increases in the transitionary period, once F&F conditions are achieved, why would their be an ongoing need for a substantially increased budget?"



Patrick:

How much longer do you really expect me to educate you day after day by answering all these questions of yours, only to have you turn around the next day and act like you knew it already or like your questions were only rhetorical?

I can answer those questions of yours generally or else I can take them and call Matt Shaeffer and ask him to anwer them all in far more specific detail.

The only problem is if I do either the only thing that happens is that you want to argue with either or both of us and what really is the point of that?  

Matt Shaeffer has enough to do at Merion without being an informational nurse-maid to people like you and I have a war to win with my IMM and I don't have the time anymore to waste on the constant "devil's advocate" jabbering of someone like you.  

But, if you are willing to just admit that I am the master and you are my perpetual student, I guess, in that case, I may be able to just suck it up and deal with all these inane questions of yours just a little while longer.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

How much longer do you really expect me to educate you day after day by answering all these questions of yours, only to have you turn around the next day and act like you knew it already or like your questions were only rhetorical?

Is that like Deja Vu all over again ?

I can answer those questions of yours generally or else I can take them and call Matt Shaeffer and ask him to anwer them all in far more specific detail.

Call Matt Shaeffer.
I'll be able to understand his explanation.

The only problem is if I do either the only thing that happens is that you want to argue with either or both of us and what really is the point of that?  

It will either validate or dismiss your theories.

Matt Shaeffer has enough to do at Merion without being an informational nurse-maid to people like you and I have a war to win with my IMM and I don't have the time anymore to waste on the constant "devil's advocate" jabbering of someone like you.  

You're employing the olde "side shuffle" defense, I'll have to counter with another interogatory.

But, if you are willing to just admit that I am the master and you are my perpetual student, I guess, in that case, I may be able to just suck it up and deal with all these inane questions of yours just a little while longer.

I was told, prior to accessing this site, that you were THE master debator, or something that sounded like that, but, I am curious as to how F&F can result in an exponential growth in a green budget beyond the transitional years.

Please enlighten this humble pupil.

(P.S. It's important to make TEPaul think he really knows something )

[TEPaul]

"Please enlighten this humble pupil."

After that, I was willing to....

"(P.S. It's important to make TEPaul think he really knows something)"

But, after that, you just blew it again, as invariably happens. Henceforth, if you really want knowledge and information from me you will have to pay for it like the rest of the smarmy "know-it-alls".    

[Matt_Ward]

Quote from Retief Goosen today ...

"It used to be a fun week. Now it's a grinding week," Goosen said. "The Masters is now like the U.S. Open - even tougher on the mind than the U.S. Open."

[Matt_Ward]

Reported in the Thursday edition of the Newark Star-Ledger:

"You've ruined it, Ken Brown (former European Tour player, now a golf analyst for the BBC) told Fazio (Tom) flailing up rolled up papers for emphasis. "You've ruined the course. You had a Rembrandt, and now it's like you've got Jackson Pollock take his brush and paint around the edges."

Fazio stood silent for most of the rant, then told Brown, "You're entitled to your opinion." And when the Scottish tornado finally spun off in another direction, Fazio turned to the group of sportswriters and asked, "Who was that."

Brown, who won four times on the European Tour and played in five Ryder Cups in the 1970s and 1980s was acting as the unofficial spokesman for most of the players on Hootie Johnson's campus.

[JESII]

So Matt says to the GM;
"So, boss, do you really want to know how to increase your F&F past what you apparently already have?"

And the GM says to Matt:
"Yes I do."

Matt to the GM:
"Are you absolutely sure you want to know how to do it?"

GM to Matt;
"Yes, of course"

Matt to GM:
"OK boss, the way to do it is to give Dave (FC's super) here, money and lots and lots of it. Give him all the money he wants and asks for. And after that give him some more."

And then Matt hits his blackboard and starts to track the cost to go 50%, then the cost to go 75% and then 90%, and then Matt thinks a minute and says---"but to go that last app 7-10% is going to cost real money, lots and lots of it."

TEP,

If you (or Matt Shaeffer) are saying here that Fox Chapel needs to double its maintenance budget to enhance its firm and fast conditioning program I have a couple of questions.
1) What is there budget per hole?
2) What does there current program produce in terms of F&F?
3) What does Matt Shaeffer really think firm and fast means?

[JESII]

Brown, who won four times on the European Tour and played in five Ryder Cups in the 1970s and 1980s was acting as the unofficial spokesman for most of the players on Hootie Johnson's campus.

Hey Matt,

Do you really think Fazio made these decisions himself? Do any of the other people Ken Brown was "unofficially" speaking for think Fazio made these decisions? Do any of you have the balls to make those statements to the guys that do make these decisions?


Explain to me one more time what is so great about letting a guy miss his target by 50 yards and have a clear shot to the green with a short iron.

[Matt_Ward]

JES II:

The simple fact is that Tom Fazio is the architect that Augusta National brought in to do the work. Are there other fingerprints tied to the situation? No doubt -- there are. But Fazio needs to hear it front and center because too many times he has entered the scene and not been held accountable for what he has done.

You want "balls" than I will candidly fire away. Hootie and the Blowfish at Augusta have simply gone off the deep end with their "improvements." The course was fine for so many years and the improvements done pre-Tiger coming onto the scene were clearly a very well thought out evolution for the most part.

Hootie got a major snit because one particular player (Mickelson) hits SW into the 11th hole and ipso facto the 11th needs to be doctored to be nothing more than a tree-infested result that bears little, if any, resemblance to what was originally intended.

Augusta doesn't get a free pass because it's Augusta. Too many people -- until recently with the comments of Whitten and Fields (see GolfWorld) and a few others in the media have now come forward and said what I and others are saying.

When you mention about a guy missing his target 50 yards and having a clear shot to the green -- that wonderful rhetoric but tell me in concrete terms the precise guy and what exactly the score he made in that particular situation. For everyone that you can name in which a superlative score was rendered -- I can name numerous instances where the situation went from bad to worse.

Please knock yourself out and defend for me the thinking -- shall I call it that -- on the "new & improved" 7th and 11th holes at Augusta. Please knock yourself even further out on the silly addition of the "second cut" and the continued bastardization of the Jones / Mackenzie masterpiece. Nothing more than club ego is involved here. Too many people at Augusta are worried about score -- allow the players to play the game and stop with the silly doctoring of such a previously wonderful layout. Was the list of past champions that bad?

The issue I have with the folks at Augusta is that they believe they are beyond criticism -- that they know all and understand more than just about anyone else.

They don't and the continued plastic surgery of the course is simply a clear indicator that they are going more and more in the wrong direction.

[George Pazin]

Explain to me one more time what is so great about letting a guy miss his target by 50 yards and have a clear shot to the green with a short iron.

It depends on the course.

On the typical course, PGA Tour or whatever, I'd say you're correct, but it seems to me that ANGC does a very good job defending itself with its green complexes and angles. How many times have we seen guys hit it into the water from the fairway at ANGC? Heck, Freddie and Tiger have done it the second and first days of the tournament, respectively. Vijay sucked a wedge back off 13 into the hazard yesterday.

I simply think that the trees and the second cut are redundant. They encourage boring punchouts, and discourage taking chances, hitting into greens from the wrong angles. It's penalizing errant play, rather than encouraging bold, but possibly risky, play.

[CHrisB]

I don't have a strong opinion about the changes, but I too didn't enjoy seeing players hitting it way off line and still having wedge into the green. I seem to remember starting to see that in 1997, when Tiger hit it way right on #15 and still had wedge into the green (remember the shot when the little boy comes up to pat him on the shoulder and he slams his club into the ground?).

Did anyone see Fred Couples' shot into #11 yesterday? He hit his tee shot into the trees on the right, and had to hit a big hook over the gallery which ran up onto the green--beautiful shot.

Before, that tee shot would have left him a simple shot in. So this was one instance where I was happy the trees were there--it really was a fun shot to watch.

[Matt_Ward]

Chris B:

There is a clear over reaction when people see one person do something on a golf ocurse and then try to "fix" that issue and simply go way overboard in the other direction.

Everything that has been done at Augusta has been done with the thought of Tiger-proofing the course. The net result?

The ability of the mid-level players -- both in terms of distance and ability level -- has been squeezed out. What's so amusing is that there is no way to Tiger-proof a course because the world's best player has too many weapons in his arsenal to be thrwarted if he is anywhere near to playing his "A" game.

[Bill Gayne]

The ability of the mid-level players -- both in terms of distance and ability level -- has been squeezed out.

The mid level players need to be squeezed out in the major championships. The majors are for top level players and that's who is on the current leaderboard.

[Matt_Ward]

Bill:

The gap between the very elite and mid-level players is not that far apart. Check out the listing of "mid-level" players who have won majors -- might the names of Larry Mize, Scott Simpson, Corey Pavin, Larry Nelson, Mike Weir ring a bell.

Augusta has simply paniced and gone over board in terms of maxing out distance whenever possible. I mean check out the inane "correction" with the 7th hole.

Bill, the Masters used to provide a window in which different player types COULD win the event. That has now been reduced, dare say even eliminated, by this over reaction by the powers-that-be there.

[George Pazin]

While I think it is a little premature to say the middle guys have been squeezed out, I am a little concerned that the presence of all of the big 5 in the top 10 will encourage the powers that be to think that they have done a good thing for the tournament. I don't think it does anyone good in the long run to engineer an outcome. I think Matt's right, in the sense that it's important to allow others an equal opportunity to win.

Of course, this type of thing can only be seen over the course of a few years, one year's results is not a big enough sample. And the increased willingness to change the course significantly every year implies that we won't get a valid sample for quite some time. If I were a member - and I'm sure my application is just lost in the mail somewhere, after all, I'm a corporate CEO, too - I'd ask that there be a moratorium on changes for 5 years, so that we can get a valid sample of results for the changes.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()