... by Kevin R. Mendik is now posted under In My Opinion.
AND THERE IS NO BETTER TIME TO READ IT THAN NOW, before indigestion sets in at the sight of the latest round of design tragedies to befall golf architecture’s second most innovative design.
Author Kevin R. Mendik is an Environmental Protection Specialist with the Northeast Region of the National Park Service in the United States where he has worked since 1990. He contends there six primary causes contributing to the loss of a course’s historic fabric.
Using his criteria to judge Augusta National, its report card would look like this:
1) Landscaping – a once beautiful and uncluttered piece of property is in the process of losing its sense of scale and spaciousness. Parkland golf is the lowest form of golf, well behind links and heathland, yet Augusta is transforming itself more and more into a tight boring parkland course. Who can figure? Layer on the bright green and the property is starting to look deformed. Grade: D
2) Architectural – numerous changes have occurred at Augusta from the start, many while Bob Jones was alive. However, as recently as twenty years ago, the course still retained much of its unique flavor, especially relative to the other courses hosting majors each year. Unfortunately, in the past ten years, MacKenzie’s startlingly brilliant ‘less is more’ design has been systemically eradicated since Tiger blew apart the field for his first green jacket. Whether one should play left or right down the 11th (as has been heroically argued this week
) isn’t the point; rather the point is that the design once offered options with each golfer free to make individual decisions. That is all gone now. Soon Augusta will be so architecturally indifferent that it will be eligible to host a PGA Championship
. Grade: F
3) Technological Advances: Augusta National is in the horrible position of hosting a major every year. No club has caught the brunt of the collapse by the USGA in not shouldering its duty to protect the game more than Augusta National. Grades: USGA: F Augusta National: B Why that high? Despite its horrid fascination with all things green, the club does a outstanding job of relentlessly seeking fast and firm conditions and advancing technology to that end.
4) Personal Preferences of Members, Boards & Committees. No course has to change each and every year which is what Augusta National has devolved down to doing. There is no way around it: so many annual changes is a clear vote of no confidence on the quality of the course from each year prior. They like to say they are taking ‘measured’ steps but it looks panicky at this point. Grade: D
5) Changes to Physical Surroundings: They smartly started with a 400 plus acre parcel of land and have done an outstanding job of continuing to promote the sense of getting away from it all once one is on the grounds. Grade: A
6) Changes to Regulatory Structure – I don’t know why – with all the Club’s considerable resources – they remain content with the formalized pond on the 11th looking so absurdly man-made. Look at old photos (especially in David Owen’s superb book) if you want to cry. Otherwise, changes to regulatory structures haven’t harmed Augusta National near as much as Augusta National has harmed Augusta National. Grade: B
Anyway, I digress and Kevin provides a more interesting case study in his piece. Kevin’s The Challenges of Restoring a Classic American Golf Course is a great, great read and each golf club would be wise to grade itself on the categories above.
Cheers,