Augusta, what to do...

[Chip Gaskins]

Patrick

I agree with your post.  I doubt Fazio was given very much creative license during the Hootie era and I doubt C&C, Doak, etc would have either.  So my question was a bit hypothetical I suppose.  Just to see what some on here would thought another architect might have done. 

After watching those three Masters a few days ago even I was on board with doing "something", though the definition of something is what my post was about.

When talking with a Pine Valley member last summer I asked about Fazio's involvement with PVs on-going tinkering (or lack there of) and how he seemingly has drastically altered ANGC and was he (the member, who personally knows Fazio) concerned with what Fazio may recommend for Pine Valley.  I got a very obvious answer (and one I hear Tom Doak talking about all the time) which was Fazio does what he hired and told to do.  In other words he was asked specifically to do what has been done to Augusta (a bunch) and has done what he as has been asked to do at Pine Valley (very little).  Those who write the checks have the power it sounds like in these situations.  Neat discussion!

Chip

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chip,

I think the danger, for any course, is when a suggestion is made that deviates from, or alters the integrity of the original or current design, assuming that that the current design is an improvement over the original design.

I know that Jeff Brauer will champion the continuum of that process, but, to what point.

Tom MacWood raised an interesting point, one that referenced the architectural high water mark, but, what or who determines that point ?  And, as Jeff would argue, maybe the architectural high water mark lies in future alterations.

I disagree with Jeff to the extent that the continuing alterations tend to obscure the original design integrity or identity.
In addition, I typically oppose any change because of the domino effect that's created, that once one change is made, the golf course becomes open season for unlimited ongoing changes, mostly at the whim of the Green Committee or Board.
There's a tendency to follow fads, constantly altering golf courses until their distinctive life is squeezed out of them, a distinctive style that seperated them from other courses.

At most courses, especially older courses, I lament the softening/flattening of the greens as it's the greens that provide the character, and as they get flattened, they become bland, undifferentiated from their peers.

One of the things that bothers me MOST about golf course architecture is the inability of an architect or a club to state, "we screwed up, our alterations diminished the quality and/or the character of the golf course, and we'll immediately restore and undo that which we messed up".  Usually it takes at least a generation/20 years before that process occurs.

The changes at ANGC might be numerically driven.

In other words, the analysis of scoring, and what can be done to defend it, might be at the heart of architectural changes, but, remember, these changes are solely, repeat SOLELY in the context of PGA Tour golf, and not inspired by membership play.

Thus, to a degree, architectural changes would seem to be a pre-determined outcome driven by tournament results, and not by innovative creative license, or the desire to create interest for the members

End of rant
.

[Chris Wirthwein]

First step would be to do nothing to the course and make it a par 70 -- no par 5s on the back nine. Not having four automatic birdie holes will wear on the golfer, as will making bogey 5s on 13 and 15.

[Tim Gavrich]

Augusta is a course built primarily for players of a different sort of golfer than most of us GCA types.  It's no ultra-strategic Sand Hills or NGLA-type course, but I don't think it aims to be, for better or worse from the GCA.com perspective.

Tim,
Can you explain why NGLA is more "ultra-strategic" than ANGC for players playing appropriate tees?
I would argue that from the back tees for touring pros(at both courses) there is far more strategy at AGNC.
I would also argue that an absence of fairway bunkers at AGNC allows the shorter hitter/member playing appropriate members tees to choose the side of the fairway for optimum approach, rather than having lines chosen and  dictated by fairway bunkers.

Jeff Warne--
"Ultra-strategic" may not be exactly what I meant.  Not having played either course but having seen many many pictures of each, it is apparent that NGLA has much more of the width that creates various playing angles on the same holes, while Augusta is generally narrower and therefore encourages players to play many holes in more the same sorts of ways.  There are options on holes like 13 and 15, but many others seem to command the player to hit one or two relatively similar (from one round to the next) shots.  I can see what you mean with regard to the fairway bunkers, but don't shorter hitters have a much tougher time scoring well, even from the correct sides of the fairways behind bunkers, because they're hitting more club into greens than the pros?

Mike Hendren--
I did not mean to imply that I personally thought ANGC was less than architecturally.  In fact, I find the fact that it produces thrilling tournament golf year in and year out to be proof of its brilliance.  I was defending it against the criticism--a little harsh--that it gets from some people.  I would say a course that is "purely architectural" is one that caters to its members, whereas ANGC exists in large part for the Masters.    That ANGC is not "purely architectural" is not at all a bad thing, to me at least.

[Bruce Katona]

As other have suggested earlier, would slowing down the greenspeeds to bring in more pinable locations that are unrealistic at higher speeds and eliminate the 2nd cut be the answer?  It's pretty easy to run a beta test to see it the hypothesis would work.  Set the course up as described above in late December, early January and bring in two forsomes of former champions for a two day test and get their opinions of said edits.

Why would this work?  Former champions would be thrilled at the invitation and if the new conditions and test were not a rousing success, the superintendant would have more than enough time to get the facility back to what was expected by the masses.

Will it happen....probaly not, but this is the one place where they could try it and have the budget to make the edits if it's not a rousing success.

[Kyle Henderson]

My biggest complaint as an outsider is not directly related to how the course is presented during tournament week. Rather, I lament the loss of the old championship tees. Instead of merely adding new tees each time the course was lengthened, the club removed the old ones as well. Hence, should I ever be so lucky as to play there, I will not have the option to play the course from the same tees that Jones used in the 1930's, or even those Nicklaus played from in 1986. Instead, I will have my brains beaten out of my head by the new "Tiger" tees or move well forward to the member tees (the only other option).

Actually, that is my 2nd biggest complaint. The main problem is that no one I know has a realistic chance of ever playing the course under any circumstances.

[Patrick_Mucci]

First step would be to do nothing to the course and make it a par 70 -- no par 5s on the back nine. Not having four automatic birdie holes will wear on the golfer, as will making bogey 5s on 13 and 15.

Chris,

You must not be familiar with the terrain or the effect of a westerly wind, not to mention viewer satisfaction/excitement.

That's one of the worst suggestions regarding ANGC that I've ever heard.

[Patrick_Mucci]

My biggest complaint as an outsider is not directly related to how the course is presented during tournament week. Rather, I lament the loss of the old championship tees. Instead of merely adding new tees each time the course was lengthened, the club removed the old ones as well. Hence, should I ever be so lucky as to play there, I will not have the option to play the course from the same tees that Jones used in the 1930's, or even those Nicklaus played from in 1986. Instead, I will have my brains beaten out of my head by the new "Tiger" tees or move well forward to the member tees (the only other option).

If you had the opportunity, would you play with the same clubs and ball that Jones used in the 1930's ?
Or the clubs and balls that Nicklaus used in 1986 ?

You still have the option of playing the "Members" tees, which haven't changed that much in 75 years

Actually, that is my 2nd biggest complaint. The main problem is that no one I know has a realistic chance of ever playing the course under any circumstances.

Isn't that true of almost every remote, exclusive, private club ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bruce Katona,

That's an interesting thought.

There may be a fine line between slowing down the greens and retaining their challenge for PGA Tour players.

I don't know what that speed would be, and, it probably varies, depending upon the weather leading up to and during the tournament.

[Mark Pearce]

First step would be to do nothing to the course and make it a par 70 -- no par 5s on the back nine. Not having four automatic birdie holes will wear on the golfer, as will making bogey 5s on 13 and 15.

Chris,

You must not be familiar with the terrain or the effect of a westerly wind, not to mention viewer satisfaction/excitement.

That's one of the worst suggestions regarding ANGC that I've ever heard.

And a terrible idea for the Masters.  That tournament has already mutated into a poor imitation of the US Open, without the back 9 being turned into even more of a funereal procession.  What we need is a return to (at least the possibility of) back 9 charges on a Sunday afternoon.

[Kyle Henderson]

If you had the opportunity, would you play with the same clubs and ball that Jones used in the 1930's ?
Or the clubs and balls that Nicklaus used in 1986 ?

I thought you might ask that.
 

I might, but it's a mute point unless those tees are rebuilt.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kyle,

You can always tee it up where the old Masters tees used to be.

When I first played ANGC I played the Masters Tees and wasn't stressed.
Those tees are now too far back for me and I don't hit the ball that much shorter.
But, don't blame ANGC, blame the ball and equipment, that's the real culprit, ANGC is just responding to the quantum leaps in disstance over the years.

ANGC has only two sets of tees.
Many have lamented and wished for a third set, representative of the course that Nicklaus played in 1986 and other years.

[Bill_McBride]

Kyle,

You can always tee it up where the old Masters tees used to be.

When I first played ANGC I played the Masters Tees and wasn't stressed.
Those tees are now too far back for me and I don't hit the ball that much shorter.
But, don't blame ANGC, blame the ball and equipment, that's the real culprit, ANGC is just responding to the quantum leaps in disstance over the years.

ANGC has only two sets of tees.
Many have lamented and wished for a third set, representative of the course that Nicklaus played in 1986 and other years.

Patrick, assuming the management left the member tees in place, did they scrape the old Masters tees?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,

In some cases you can perform your own interpolation and play from the old Masters Tees, which distance wise, lie within the footpad of those current tees which incorporate both the Members tees and the Masters tees.

On other holes, you'd probably have to tee it up in the short rough between the Members tees and the Masters tees.

[Chip Gaskins]

The current Masters tees are unplayable for anyone over 2-3 handicap....unless you like hitting 3 irons to the hood of your car.

Honestly the members tees are all the golf course you want.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chip,

Agreed.

What many aren't aware of is not just the additional distance, but, the slope of the new DZ for amateurs from the Masters tees.

In many cases you're hitting into a slope, whereas in the olde days, you could carry it or avoid it.

# 1 is a perfect example.

[Mike_Young]

I haven't read all the remarks but I think one thing they could do for the pros...if scoring is the issue....is to lower the height of all areas around the green to .250 inches....misses will roll away further and pressure shots with wedges will come with more misses....the more penal the short side there the tougher the course.....IMHO.....

[Kyle Henderson]

Kyle,

You can always tee it up where the old Masters tees used to be.

When I first played ANGC I played the Masters Tees and wasn't stressed.
Those tees are now too far back for me and I don't hit the ball that much shorter.
But, don't blame ANGC, blame the ball and equipment, that's the real culprit, ANGC is just responding to the quantum leaps in disstance over the years.

ANGC has only two sets of tees.
Many have lamented and wished for a third set, representative of the course that Nicklaus played in 1986 and other years.

Patrick, assuming the management left the member tees in place, did they scrape the old Masters tees?

The old tees were wiped away and made to look like they never existed (at least that's what I've read). So while I could attempt to tee from those spots, I might very well be ankle deep in rough( ) on a 5% downslope trying to belt one out there before someone had me thrown out.

[Doug Wright]

Does anyone know whether the Augusta National leadership has ever considered/discussed a tournament ball?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kyle,

You can always tee it up where the old Masters tees used to be.

When I first played ANGC I played the Masters Tees and wasn't stressed.
Those tees are now too far back for me and I don't hit the ball that much shorter.
But, don't blame ANGC, blame the ball and equipment, that's the real culprit, ANGC is just responding to the quantum leaps in disstance over the years.

ANGC has only two sets of tees.
Many have lamented and wished for a third set, representative of the course that Nicklaus played in 1986 and other years.

Patrick, assuming the management left the member tees in place, did they scrape the old Masters tees?

The old tees were wiped away and made to look like they never existed (at least that's what I've read).

That's not true, some of the footpads were just extended further back, like on # 18.

So while I could attempt to tee from those spots,
I might very well be ankle deep in rough( ) on a 5% downslope trying to belt one out there before someone had me thrown out.

There is NO ankle deep rough.
On what holes are the downslopes you're referencing ?

[Kyle Henderson]

Kyle,

You can always tee it up where the old Masters tees used to be.

When I first played ANGC I played the Masters Tees and wasn't stressed.
Those tees are now too far back for me and I don't hit the ball that much shorter.
But, don't blame ANGC, blame the ball and equipment, that's the real culprit, ANGC is just responding to the quantum leaps in disstance over the years.

ANGC has only two sets of tees.
Many have lamented and wished for a third set, representative of the course that Nicklaus played in 1986 and other years.

Patrick, assuming the management left the member tees in place, did they scrape the old Masters tees?

The old tees were wiped away and made to look like they never existed (at least that's what I've read).

That's not true, some of the footpads were just extended further back, like on # 18.

So while I could attempt to tee from those spots,
I might very well be ankle deep in rough( ) on a 5% downslope trying to belt one out there before someone had me thrown out.

There is NO ankle deep rough.
On what holes are the downslopes you're referencing ?

I do not know which tees have been wiped, and of those that were, I do not know which are now sloping downhill or otherwise, nor do I know at what length the grass is cut over the parcels they once occupied.  My statement was meant to be taken as light-hearted conjecture until such time as i know more. I used the word  'might' to convey my lack of expertise.

Does anyone know which tee boxes were completely removed and graded to match the surrounding slopes in the last 10 years or so? I recall reading a Ron Whitten article that discussed these alterations.

[jeffwarne]

The current Masters tees are unplayable for anyone over 2-3 handicap....unless you like hitting 3 irons to the hood of your car.

Honestly the members tees are all the golf course you want.

should anyone over a 3 handicap be playing tees designed for the best players in the world?
additionally the course "typically" plays way shorter in April for the pros than it does in Dec., Jan, Feb as the temperature rises(which affects the ball) and the overseeded fairways firm up.
They did remove many of the old tee pads which does allow really only 2 choices-and what's left, while not covered in deep rough (the deepest grass out there is about an 3/4 inch--inch (max), they're not particularly level

[Link Walsh]

I haven't read all the remarks but I think one thing they could do for the pros...if scoring is the issue....is to lower the height of all areas around the green to .250 inches....misses will roll away further and pressure shots with wedges will come with more misses....the more penal the short side there the tougher the course.....IMHO.....

My grandfather was a patron out there for years, so I was fortunate enough to go to at least one round of the tournament beginning in the late 80s all the way through Mickelson's first victory save one (I missed Crenshaw's miracle of 95 when I was in Saudi Arabia guarding Riyhad's royal airport from Saddam with our Patriot missiles).

I think one hole that doesn't get mentioned enough as far as how much better it plays now is the 5th hole.  By the earlier part of the 2000s, the players were hitting wedges into the green (a travesty for a green so cool when looking at it from the crosswalk in the fairway that it gives you goosebumps).  So the way they moved the fairway right and deepened up those bunkers when they didn't really have any room to extend the tee worked to make the hole play more like it should.

That being said, I agree totally with Mike Young and what others have said previously that the 2nd cut actually helps the pros around the greens.  The ball doesn't run away as far as it used to, and it provides them a little cushion in which to get their club under the ball easier.  So if they won't just get rid of all the 2nd cut like they should (it was such a cool site walking out there every year and seeing every blade of grass as far you could see be the same height), at least eliminate it around the greens.  Happy New Year everyone.