Did Augusta Play Too Soft?

[Rick Sides]

I was just curious if most people on the forum prefer to watch major tournament course conditions play harder or a bit softer?  It is amazing how a course can be set up very different by growing out the rough and rolling the greens a lot, and pin placement to name a few.  I wondered if people like seeing the pros struggle like the average Joe or score very low?

[Chuck Brown]

Q.  "Did Augusta (2009) play too soft?"

A.    Yes.

[Bill_McBride]

Q.  "Did Augusta (2009) play too soft?"

A.    Yes.

A.  No.  It was fun to watch the world's best playing well and making birdies and eagles again.

[Jim Colton]

I know they had some rain, but with the Sub-Air systems underneath the greens, can we assume this was the level of softness that they were going for?  Or is there a limit to how much moisture they can suck out of the ground with the Sub-Air systems?

[Kalen Braley]

This has to go to the Mother of all trick questions.   


Have it play fast and firm with high scores and it sucks cause no one is making charges
- Or -
Have it play easier where guys can score/make charges and it sucks cause it was too wet and too easy.

Its a no win situation. 

[jeffwarne]

yes

it rained

[Phil Benedict]

This forum is really psychizophrenic on this topic.  On the one hand fast and firm playing conditions are the standard to which all courses should aspire.  On the other hand, the Masters should produce low scoring, particularly on Sunday, which only happens when conditions are soft.

One example will suffice: Mickelson's great recovery on 7 would never have worked out so well if the greens were firm.  It might have bounced over the green, being that it was a hook from the rough.  Instead, it lands pretty near the hole and stops next to the flag.

[Richard Choi]

Of course it was too soft. When middling iron shots hit by middling players aim directly at the pin and stop it, it is WAAAAAY too soft for a major.

If you want to see birdies, you could have gone two different ways.

A. Soften up the greens so that you can have reasonable birdie putts from anywhere on the fairway (as long as you were not blocked by a tree).

OR

B. Keep the greens firm, take out the trees, get rid of the "2nd cut" so that you reward players who put their drives in the correct side of the fairway.

Obviously, they chose A. I think majority of us would have preferred B.

[Rick Sides]

I asked this question because I know a lot of people like to see low scores and people talked about bringing back the "roars at Augusta"  However, some people like to see scores around par or higher and I think people actually like to watch pros struggle because the average golfer can identify more with the struggle than watching a pro shoot 14 under for a tournament

[Kalen Braley]

Just for kicks, I thought I'd go back and revisit this...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBNAMfXjsaI

If you watch Jack's approach on both 15 and 16, you'll notice his ball checks up pretty quickly on both shots.  And remember his approach on 15 was from over 200 yards away so I doubt he was hitting a short iron.

It didn't look like a fast and firm maintaince meld...if anything those ball reactions looked very familiar to what we just saw a few weeks ago. So is the 86 Masters also "tainted" because it was too soft and easy?

[Phil Benedict]

I bet low scoring at Augusta is generally correlated with soft conditions and benign weather, at least until the 90's, when technology temporarily gave the players the upper hand.  Scoring was consistently low in the 90's, with the winning 10 under or better 7 out of 10 years, and the worst winning score was 8 under.

[Brian Phillips]

Harrington thought the set up was perfect.

So do I. 

[Scott Warren]

It seems there is a real Goldilocks syndrome emerging among golf fans. To firm, too soft; too narrow, too easy... Just right? Only in their dreams.

I can't understand a golf fan wanting to see the world's best struggling. If I want to see shite golf I'll turn the TV off and go out for a hit myself

[C. Squier]

I want to see pros struggle like we do just as much as I want to see NBA players panting like they're dying after 5 mins of game time. 

[Scott Warren]

Great example. Watch the crowd cheer as LeBron throws up brick after brick!

[Phil McDade]

I can't understand a golf fan wanting to see the world's best struggling.

Scott:

I'm one who does, at the US Open. I still like it that the US Open makes these guys work hard for pars, suffer lots of bogeys, and makes doubles pretty easily if they aren't careful. The four days of watching the pros walk on eggshells is fun.

By the same token, I like to watch the pros play a real fast-and-firm links set-up, and whether it results in low scores like at Hoylake, or scores barely under par, as happened at Royal St. George's a few years ago (when Ben Curtis won), is immaterial. It's just fun to watch players take on conditions they truly never face over here.

And I have to say I liked watching the Masters this year, as the tournament seemed to find the right mix of scoring ability but penalizing wayward or loose play. The back nine in particular was enjoyable this year, moreso than in past years.

Each of the four majors, for me, ought to present a different challenge.

[Tags:]

Tags: