Top Ten Reasons Cypress Point Club Can't Carry Augusta National Golf Club's Jock

[Jim Nugent]

Is there room to stretch out CPC, if they wanted, to make it a challenge for the pro's?  If so, would the longer course still be great? 

[Garland Bayley]

Can anyone make a semi-serious argument that yesterday's final round would have been better in any way if it has been contested at Cypress Point Club? Aside from the scenery I mean.

Here's the serious side. You are talking about a contest between the world very best golfers on a course that has been "flexiblized" for them.
It is not appropo for golf in general. IMO you cannot use it in a comparison that is appropriate for the rest of the world.

[Brent Hutto]

No, I'm not claiming that Augusta National is a better golf course than Cypress Point just because it produces such a great championship most years. Obviously, Cypress Point is the far superior course all considered. 

But you've got to give Augusta its due. There's no other place that the Masters would be anything at all like the Masters. So you always must remember that you're comparing apples and oranges in a CPC/ANGC thread.

[Garland Bayley]

Is there room to stretch out CPC, if they wanted, to make it a challenge for the pro's?  If so, would the longer course still be great? 

I would have to imagine there would be room to stretch out CPC, because you have to consider what Augusta did. They bought land from a neighboring golf course, they picked up and moved entire holes, they moved complete existing on ground facilities such as the putting green. I hope no one is short sighted enough to take these kind of steps at CPC. The only thing truly more flexible about ANGC is the wealth that makes it possible to flexiblilze, (vandalize?) the golf course.

Furthermore, making ANGC longer made it less great. When you move a bunker to put it in play for the pros, you take it out of play for the vast majority of your golfing clientele.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

As to #7 at ANGC, it is no longer a short par 4 as it was originally designed to be and with that Perry Maxwell green. Even by tour pro standards 450 yards is definitely NOT a short par 4.

And I was very interested to hear Ben Crenshaw going over the history and strategies of some of those ANGC holes when they had him in the Butler Cabin on Friday. He is almost never critical publicly but he did say about #7 that he really believes they have made it too long. The original hole was something like 365 yards.

By the way, that green design and its greenside bunkering was one of Maxwell's virtual "models." I think he did it up to six other times on other courses including on my own course which arguably might have been the first time he did it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

As to #7 at ANGC, it is no longer a short par 4 as it was originally designed to be and with that Perry Maxwell green. Even by tour pro standards 450 yards is definitely NOT a short par 4.

Your wrong.
# 7 remains a short par 4 from the member tees.
Please read my posts more carefully

And I was very interested to hear Ben Crenshaw going over the history and strategies of some of those ANGC holes when they had him in the Butler Cabin on Friday. He is almost never critical publicly but he did say about #7 that he really believes they have made it too long. The original hole was something like 365 yards.

Originally, # 7 was 320 from the Members tees and 340 from the Masters Tees.

By the way, that green design and its greenside bunkering was one of Maxwell's virtual "models." I think he did it up to six other times on other courses including on my own course which arguably might have been the first time he did it.

While some are critical of the changes at ANGC, Maxwell's alterations seem to have been for the better, especially # 10.