Are "options" at ANGC a myth for the PGA Tour player ?

[Mark_Fine]

John,
There were pines on the left but there was also 50 yards of fairway to your right (now there is less than half that). 

[George Pazin]

I greatly prefer Mark's idea of a fairway bunker to the trees on the right.

I really hate the intruding trees pinching the fairway. There have been waaaaaaaay (TM Matt)  too many pitch outs the last few years.

Imho, that green complex is good enough for the rest of the hole to be fairly mundane. Even pros hitting wedges into the 15th don't generally find the shot easy or lacking interest.

[Chip Gaskins]

Listen, I am not trying to defend tightening the golf course up at all.  My point is it simply that it is not that tight.  Those cartoon overheads certainly don't look like reality to me.

Unfortunately all I have from the 200 yard spot off the tee is the mowers, but man that looks pretty wide.  I am standing dead center of the fairway.



The other pic I have is from where my ball was, about 240 from the green and you see the trees we are all talking about 60 yards in front of me to the left.



And lastly, the green



Tight and constricting is not what I think of, sorry.

I am not saying Ben Crenshaw is wrong, I am not that silly, but if it 20 yards wide, the only way I could see that is if they tighten the fairways up more for the Masters versus regular play and that tight spot was between the farthest tree on the left and closed tree on the right.  But you can see from my #2 picture here, there is now way there is only 20 yards there....something just doesn't add up.

[JESII]

Mark,

Apparently you have walked the course about 100 times more than I have, but those trees on the left have been there for much longer than 10 years.

What is the strategic value to letting someone blow it 50 yards off-line with zero consequences? Serious question.


Also...are their any holes at Augusta that have directly comprimised the more aggressive/exciting shot through its reduction in width?

[John_Cullum]

As far as "strategy" and options on 15 for Masters competitors, I doubt anyone in the field is hitting less than driver. If they put it in the right "second cut", they aren't affected terribly, and they can still go for the green if they're close enough. I don't think the second cut really affects the players on the long approaches. If they go a little too far right, they will likely be able to play down the fairway enough to get on  in 3.

That said, I don't like the trees on the right.

[Mark_Fine]

Here is the best photo I have (sorry it is not a very good one) looking back from the green on #15 to the landing area.   This was from 1997. 



The tree on the right (which is left off the tee) is roughly about 300 yards off the tee.  This is the primary landing area for the pros.  There is 50 yards give or take of fairway to the right of that tree.  You can see all those mounds that were supposed to give the player in that area an uneven stance for their second shot to the green (in the 180 to 230 yard range).  That area of fairway is now heavily planted with trees and the trees on the left (off the tee) have been bumped out to further narrow the opening. 
I texted a buddy of mine who is a member and he estimates you have about a 20 yard opening between the trees. 

Chip,
At 200 yards off the tee the fairway is emmense!  So what.  No one is going for the green if they hit it there.  As you move up to where the new trees are (planted in the last several years), the fairway narrows tighter than U.S. Open widths.   Go on Google Earth if you want to see it closer.

Jim,
There are many holes where you stand on the tee (Chip did you play the back tees) and you are hitting through shoots.  Is there still width, sure there is.  But the course has narrowed considerably in the last decade or so and on some of the holes there is no where to spray the ball.  If the course is truly a "second" shot golf course (like many describe it), then let the players hit second shots that are not just pitch outs or layups.  That was what made Augusta exciting especially down the stretch - not conservative down the middle methodical play. 

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Pat,
You are still missing the whole point of that golf hole.  The idea was to get lots of guys going for that green in two, not just the guy who can hit it straight into a 20 yard wide opening!  The idea on that hole and on the 13th hole was to create temptation (not mitigate it)! 

Yes, with 4-woods, not wedges.

I remember taking with Geoff Shackelford one day about the 13th at Augusta National. For many years, the creek fronting the green was a combination of trickling water, pebbles, grass, and an occasional sand bar. This “irregularity” added to the temptations of a player who was not sure whether to risk going for the green in two shots. By offering danger and also the chance of recovery, the hazard in front of No. 13 created major headaches for the best players in the world. But then someone decided the hole would be better served if the creek were filled with several feet of water, thus eliminating the opportunity for those occasional recovery shots. This was supposed to make the short par-5 more difficult (like Pat is suggesting for #15, make it more penal for a bad shot). But raising the water level actually made the hole simpler for the best players in the world. Now that the creek offered no chance of recovery, a good player who was 235 yards away with a hanging lie had virtually no temptation to go for the green. The decision was already made. Had the creek stayed unpredictable with an off-chance of recovery, the same player might well have attempted to reach the green in two. Fortunately, they finally figured this out and portions of that irregular element have been restored to this creek.  Maybe they will eventually figure this out on #15 as well.  A cool Mackenzie style bunker placed properly would help matters in several ways and restore more temptation and excitment to that golf hole.


You're living in a fantasy world.

Guys were hitting 3-wood - 8 iron into # 13 green.

I don't know of a decent golfer who would make his decision as to whether to go for it or not, based on the slim possibility that his ball MIGHT end up on a sand bar in the middle of a stream.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

The trees on the left in this picture have been there since 1934.

They've always been an impediment to those golfers who hooked/drew their ball too much off line.

For Mark to claim that they're new is outrageous.

For someone who's walked the course 100 times, he must have confined his journey to the front nine.

Even in the picture he posted, from the green looking back, you can see those trees in the right side of his photo, shown below



The 15th hole looks nothing like his cartoon representation, which is a total fraud.

Go to Google earth or see if a chronological exhibit is available on JSlonis's site, I think it was classicphotos.com and you'll see that the 15th fairway had pine trees IN the left side of the fairway from 1934.

[Chip Gaskins]

i agree, after playing the course...i am a bit confused.  all i can say is when playing #15 from the members tees, i hit a normal drive down to about 270 yards and had 240 in and hit 3 wood and never thought twice about trees.  not sure i have anymore to add to this debate.  tightness didn't cross my mind.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Pat,
The hole was what it was.  I didn't fabricate anything. 

Baloney, or Bolagna, whichever you prefer.

Since 1934 Pines have been IN the fairway on the left on # 15.
Removing them from your sketch IS a fabrication and NOT what it was.

I was there in 1997 and that fairway was miles wide and those mounds I talked about were cut at fairway height. 

So were the trees on the left side IN the fairway.
Why did you remove them ?

I have a photo of the hole looking back from the green and it is quite clear.  I'm sure if we kept going back in time we could see and document much of the evolution of that golf hole.  It is a fascinating exercise to do.  The bottomline, however, it that #15 has DRAMATICALLY narrowed in the recent past. 

I have access to photos dating back to 1934 and those trees were IN the left portion of the fairway on # 15

You remind me of members at clubs who say to me, "Mr. Fine that tree was always part of the hole.  Why do you want to cut it down?"  I then show them photos of the hole 50 years after the course was built (still with no tree) and they walk away shaking their heads in disbelief finaling realizing that the tree was not as old as they thought it was 

You remind me of someone not in possession of the facts

The only problem with your analogy is that I'M THE ONE WITH THE PHOTOS, and they show the trees.
Those trees were IN the left hand portion of the fairway from the begining.
They weren't put there recently.

When will you admit you're wrong on this issue and that your cartoon/sketch is not an accurate representation of the 15th hole in 1997 ?

 

[Matthew Mollica]

What is the strategic value to letting someone blow it 50 yards off-line with zero consequences? Serious question.

Jim - on #15, at any time in it's life, trees/mounds/ whatever, do you really think that a 50 yard off-line drive provides no consequence? Do you really thik the approach following such a drive would be attractive? Several great courses have fairways of marked width, yet only a segment of the fairway provides an ideal position from which to approach. Usually influenced by hole location.

Hence, since getting to the green in two is not a problem for the PGA Tour Pros, requiring them to hit their drives in the optimal location in order to do so is a reasonable test.

Pat - do you think that Jones and MacKenzie were of this mindset in laying out the course? I suspect they would be content to give someone ample rope, with which to hang themselves. Allowing the chance to go for the green in 2 only after a straight drive seems philosophically different to me.

MM

[Mark_Fine]

Pat,
Your arguments make no sense.  At one point in this thread you said - "The trees on the right were planted in the rough."  Do you think I doctored the photo I posted showing all those mounds in the 50 yard wide fairway to the left of those trees???  I guess that photo (taken right out of the 1997 Masters Program) is a fraud as well??  That area of the mounds (which was fairway) is where they planted all those trees on the right!!!!

Forget the darn trees, just tell me two things - was the 15th fairway ever 50 yards wide (give or take a few yards) in the primary landing area?  And second, is the primary landing area now constricted such that the opening is at most half of what it once was?  If you can't answer these questions correctly, then you being obstinate just to argue. 

By the way Pat, your other bogus arguement about guys hitting "4-woods, not wedges" into #15 has nothing to do with the trees.  They still almost all hit drivers on #15.  The difference is if you don't hit it perfect, you pitch out from the trees.  You really don't know and understand the golf course if you don't see this. 

I know you said you can walk and chew gum at the same time but on your next round down there, don't chew the gum and focus on the golf course because doing two things at a time is your limit 

[Mark_Fine]

Here is one more "cartoon" as some call them.  These are all taken out of the Masters Programs.  Isn't it strange how they never could remember to put Pat's trees into the little diagrams  Heck in this one from 1995, they are so clueless that they show the line of play down the left side right into where Pat says there were trees   And clearly they forgot to neck down the fairway back then as well!

[JESII]

Mark,

Just so we all have this straight...you are taking the position that the trees currently in the left side of the 15th fairway (the ones that block you out if you drive it into the left edge of the fairway) were not in existence in 1997. Very clear yes or no question.

[JESII]

What is the strategic value to letting someone blow it 50 yards off-line with zero consequences? Serious question.

Jim - on #15, at any time in it's life, trees/mounds/ whatever, do you really think that a 50 yard off-line drive provides no consequence? Do you really thik the approach following such a drive would be attractive? Several great courses have fairways of marked width, yet only a segment of the fairway provides an ideal position from which to approach. Usually influenced by hole location.

MM

Matt,

for you and me, yes...not for the best 50 golfers in the world...perhaps sadly, that is where the game has gone. I agree that for each hole location on #15 there is an ideal position to place the drive...I just don't think there was much consequence by missing that spot 50 yards to the right. I would prefer the trees not be there, but I understand them and expect the officials to find the proper balance over time...

[BCrosby]

There have always been some trees on the left. Of course the fw was some 20 to 30 yards wider to the right until Fazio et al. worked their magic.

Bob

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
YES there were ALWAYS trees on the left (but now there are MORE trees on the left as well as on the right) and as Bob said every thing is constricted in the primary landing area to the point where if the drive is not perfect down the middle your option is to pitch out down the fairway.  Not very exciting and not what was intended for the hole.  I remember following Nicklaus many years ago during an early practice round.  Hardly anyone around him.  We were on the tee on #15 and he was chatting with the few of us who were watching.  Someone asked what he tried to do on the tee shot.  He said something like, "Hit it hard, its the next shot that you really have to worry about." 

Frankly there is something very exciting about a golfer hitting a second shot close on a par five (whether it is a 3W or a 6I), it doesn't really matter too much vs. someone hitting a wedge close for their third shot.  If you have ever been too Augusta during the tournament, the roars are very distinctive.  If you haven't been you need to go at least once.
Mark

[Rich Goodale]

All this talk of 20, 30, 40 50, 60 yard etc. fairway widths forgets about R-L or L-R slope.  Courses I know well whose driving areas have signifcant slope can be far narrower (effectively) than they seem.  The 4th at Dornoch (for example) has a 50 yard wide fairway, but if you don't hit the 5-10 yard strip to the left your ball will end up in rough with a longer and significantly more difficult 2nd shot.

Also when quoting Mr. Crenshaw, remember that a 50 yard wide fairway probably looked like 20 yards to him.  Straight off the tee he was not.

[BCrosby]

You live in a different universe from the one I live in if you think any of the following fw's at ANGC are "not narrow" -

- 7th
- 11th
- 15th
- 17th

New trees on the 2nd, 9th and 18th make those holes much more narrow for the first 250 yds off the tee.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, by any measure ANGC is much more narrow than it was not too many years ago. All of which might not matter except for the fact that extremely wide playing corridors was an explicit design objective of MacK.

If you thnk MacK was wrong to have such views or if you thnk such views are inherently wrong, let's debate that. But there can be no serious debate about the recent narrowing of a number of holes at ANGC.

Bob

[John_Cullum]

Why don't they just add some length to 15? That would restore the shot value without the necessity of mucking up 17 or forcing the guys to layup/pitch out from the right

[BCrosby]

Beacuse there is no room to lengthen the 15th. It's maxed out now.

[John_Cullum]

No. It's not. They can add 25-30 yards easy

[Chip Gaskins]

not unless the put the tee in the 11th fairway.

[JESII]

The laser beam focus on "roars" and "excitement" are totally hollow...why not just call all the par fours par fives? Birdies and eagles galore...

Jack Nicklaus had to hit a 1 iron into that green in the 60's or 70's. Today, if Tiger hits his drive straight enough, he would hit a 1 iron over the pond on #16...I'd like to believe the fans at Augusta that generate these roars understand the difference between an eagle putt that resulted from a good drive and a great 1 iron versus a good drive and a good 7 iron...I see no reason not to ask Tiger to hit a really good/great drive in order to hit his 7 iron in.

What would he have to hit off the tee to need 1-iron to reach the green? Even a 3-iron to reach the green? What club would Tiger woods hit off the tee to leave the equivalent approach risk that Jack hit? I think he would reach that green, down that hill, from 245 front with a 3-iron. Call it 255 center on a 530 hole...that's a drive of 275...that is a 3-iron or 5-wood off the tee. How wide is the fairway at 275 from the back tee? It looks like 50 yards in most of those images...

[BCrosby]

How are you going to get traffic from the 10th green to the 11th fw and the 14th green?