Annex Thread - The 7th at Augusta National

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,

It may be 30 yards, or more, but, it's still a hazard and I'll bet golfers have hit into it. 

The OOB right determines play of that hole.  The farther left one bails, the more the Valley of Sin affects the approach shots. 

The burn in front of #1 has nothing to do with play of the hole. 

I never said that it did !

Other than to call it "a hazard!"   .  Doesn't a hazard have to have something to do with the play of the hole?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,

It may be 30 yards, or more, but, it's still a hazard and I'll bet golfers have hit into it. 

The OOB right determines play of that hole.  The farther left one bails, the more the Valley of Sin affects the approach shots. 

The burn in front of #1 has nothing to do with play of the hole. 

I never said that it did !

Other than to call it "a hazard!"   .  Doesn't a hazard have to have something to do with the play of the hole?

Bill, you may not be aware of it, but, the hazard cuts right across the 18th hole, from far right to far left.
And, I'll bet that more than a few balls have found it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill,

I think it may be a 100+ yard carry down the right side, but, I was never good at measuring on Google Earth.

[Matthew Petersen]

I don't think too much needs to be done.

Open up the landing area a bit, and eliminate the fronting bunkers. The bunkers are almost an advantage for the better player--making the area in front a low area of short grass would certainly restore some of that balance of "hard for pros, better for ams," and would be more reminiscent of the original design.

The hole as is doesn't play especially long for current Masters competitors, so it doesn't really need to be shortened, especially if tree removal makes people a little more willing to hit driver. I like the idea of a pro on the tee deciding between driver, which might leave a wedge approach for which the spin will need to be carefully controlled vs. a shorter drive and a potentially longer but less likely to spin iron in.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,

I think it may be a 100+ yard carry down the right side, but, I was never good at measuring on Google Earth.

The photo op bridge is not more than 30 yards in front of the tee.  You may be looking at Granny Whatshername's Wynd.

[V. Kmetz]

Bill

Pat is just about spot on...

from the middle of the tee:

103 yards to carry the burn at its extreme right entrance into the course
85 yards to carry the Swilcan Bridge section of it.

cheers

vk

[Bill_McBride]

Bill

Pat is just about spot on...

from the middle of the tee:

103 yards to carry the burn at its extreme right entrance into the course
85 yards to carry the Swilcan Bridge section of it.

cheers

vk

I hate that.

[V. Kmetz]

VK,

I just feel that the club is too invested in the current 7th to reject it's current form in favor of it's original form.

But, I could see modifications to # 10, 11 and 14 that would retain the overall continuity while enhancing the challenge.

I know it Pat, you're correct (didn't they just have an additional redesign to the back left by ___?___); they are never going to consider it.

As to #10 and #14, I just feel the former holds up well for the present, and the latter might really get into the member's kitchen (that's a tough, awkward tee shot as is for Joe Golfer, if not Tommy Tour Ball).

cheers

vk

[V. Kmetz]

Bill,

I have empathy with your reception of this most unfortunate news...

cheers

vk

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill

Pat is just about spot on...

from the middle of the tee:

103 yards to carry the burn at its extreme right entrance into the course
85 yards to carry the Swilcan Bridge section of it.

cheers

vk

I hate that.

I know,

but it helps make my day 

[Patrick_Mucci]

VK,

Remember, some narrowing has taken place, so why not restore width and bunkering at the same time ?

[V. Kmetz]

Pat,

You mean on #14...?

If so, I'm not up to date on where the member's tee is currently (Masters tee was moved to 445[?] a few years ago) and how much narrowing has gone on to the left.

It's split in my mind because while I feel the Masters pros should have to navigate a pronounced draw over that reverse camber of rising drive zone and would be adequately sanctioned by a restoration (in some form) of that old bunker...I would worry that everyday play is magnetized by that right side and I want everyday players to have (what must be) the wonderful experience of playing to that green from the broad acres of fairway. (After #3, this is my favorite hole on the course).

When I watched an old Billy Casper play that hole in 2001, my instinct was that much could be improved for the everyday player by just placing the member's tee a yard or so further to the right with a re-aim straight down left center.  Perhaps with such an amendment, the restored fairway bunker doesn't trouble the everyday player as much as I would want it to trouble the Masters' player, whose technology and infallible tools are rendering the genius and breathtaking nature of that green and approach, more and more irrelevant each year.

cheers

vk

[Patrick_Mucci]

VK,

# 14 has been narrowed significantly over the years, and when you consider the high left to low right slope of the terrain, it effectively narrows it more.

Removing the trees planted over the last 15 years and reintroducing the large bunker and possibly more bunkers might be more in keeping with the original design principles.

[BCowan]

''Removing the trees planted over the last 15 years and reintroducing the large bunker and possibly more bunkers might be more in keeping with the original design principles.''

   I like your ideas, except one bunker is all that is needed.  A penal bunker is all that is needed, hence it was designed with the Spirit of St Andrews, was it not?  Doing more with less.   

[Mac Plumart]

I hear you guys on trees being bad on a golf course.  But I'm not 100% opposed to them all the time.

Like 7 at Augusta National, 7 at Pasatiempo is a short par 4 lined with trees.  I didn't find Pasa, as a golf course, overly treed.  So, I thought the 7th was a decent change of pace.  Short enough to demand accuracy and not need distance off the tee...and the challenge around the green with the contours and bunker complexes made for a very entertaining hole...per my taste in golf.

I think 7 at Augusta has a very similar feel to it.

I like both holes.  And given the golf course(s) as a whole, I'm not overly put off by the trees on those specific holes.

Also, the trees at both holes are not overly dense as to preclude recovery shots.  

Due to the holes length, driver is not mandated off the tee.  It can be hit to try to get a closer pitch shot into the green, but due to the shortness of both holes (from member tees) a much lesser club could be hit as well...if the tightness of the fairway is an issue for someone's specific game.  Despite the tightness, the tee shot has options due to the length of the holes.

But if your point/argument is that trees are bad...PERIOD.  Okay.  You won't like either hole.  I get it.

As I said in a different thread, I do like the option of having the hole be drivable for the pros playing in The Masters.  The chance for an eagle would be cool and a neat way for someone to try to make up strokes...or give some back to the field if they mess up.  Options/choices/decisions/tactics/strategy.  

[Ken Fry]

I hear you guys on trees being bad on a golf course.  But I'm not 100% opposed to them all the time.

Like 7 at Augusta National, 7 at Pasatiempo is a short par 4 lined with trees.  I didn't find Pasa, as a golf course, overly treed.  So, I thought the 7th was a decent change of pace.  Short enough to demand accuracy and not need distance off the tee...and the challenge around the green with the contours and bunker complexes made for a very entertaining hole...per my taste in golf.

I think 7 at Augusta has a very similar feel to it.

Prior to the changes to #7 tee at ANGC, I would agree with you Mac.  Hole #3 garners a lot of well deserved attention because of the options off the tee and challenge of the green for approach shots and putting.  Once Perry Maxwell made the changes to #7 green, it presented a similar challenge to #3.

There's nothing wrong with challenging the best players with a short drive and pitch hole and #7 at 350 yards accomplished that.  #7 was an easier birdie but never an easy birdie.  Psychologically, if a player missed birdie from 50-100 yards it's a let down.  Great.  So is #10 at Riveria.  Now at 450 yards, the hole has turned into a tough par and lacks much excitement.

Ken

[Mac Plumart]

Ken...

I think you might be right on the 450 yard version of the hole.  However, frankly, I cannot comprehend how the pros play.  I have no idea  if 450 yards is long for them or not.  The hole plays 330 from the members tees.  I could hit driver down to 4 iron off that tee and feel pretty good about my approach shot.  If they could do the same at 450, then I think the hole would be okay.

But, again...I simply cannot grasp how the distances impact the pro game.  Is 450 short for them or not?  If they hit 3 iron off that tee...how far would the ball go?  Then, how far out would they be?  What club would that be for them?

That is Augusta's challenge, right?  Keep it a playable and fun members course, but also keep it relevant for the pros at The Masters.

Great points, Ken.

[Ken Fry]

Mac,

I agree with trying to guess what touring pros hit on each club anymore.  The catch is someone like a Dustin Johnson could hit a 3 iron 250 if he wanted, but there's no way he wants 200 yards into that green even if it's with a 7-8 iron.  If I'm not mistaken, the average length guys were able to go at the green with a 7-8 iron after teeing off with driver.  That's still scary given how shallow the green is.

I agree with Pat that Augusta hosts the Masters and the tournament should try to present a challenging set-up each year.  It's not just the added length of #7.  It's not just the trees and how narrow the corridor is.  It's not the introduction of rough.  It's all of those along with a massive cantor of the fairway from left to right.  #7 use to be an exciting hole because birdies and even close hole outs occurred.  Now, it's usually get by with par and move on.

Ken

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ken,

Agreed.

The hole is fraught with danger and a par is a good score.

While these guys are great, I would doubt that anyone looks at the hole as a birdie hole.

[Mac Plumart]

Is it me or do we all seem to be focused on how the holes play in The Masters?

That is just one week out of the year...the rest is members play.

[BCowan]

''Is it me or do we all seem to be focused on how the holes play in The Masters?''

   I agree with you.  Mac, do you think surrounding a green with bunkers and radically changing its original L shape is good for the members?  Usually surrounding a green with bunkers is easy for a pro to get up and down and makes it harder for the average golfer/member.  It seems as though the 7th hole is better as more of a risk and reward type hole?  I think a modification of the original green shape could lead to very high numbers without any hazards.  Crown and thin out L shaped green with fall out long would be really neat.  Build the green up too and play it at 330 yards?  Under tournament conditions you could have some poorly executed chips going back and forth off the green.  Just my 2 cents...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Is it me or do we all seem to be focused on how the holes play in The Masters?

That is just one week out of the year...the rest is members play.

Mac,

It's a tight and difficult driving hole for mere mortals as well.

The green is challenging and if you miss it, you've got your work cut out for you.

[Jim Nugent]

Is it me or do we all seem to be focused on how the holes play in The Masters?

That is just one week out of the year...the rest is members play.

How much member play does ANGC get?  With a national membership and short season, I'm guessing not much. 

I think we should focus on the tournament.  It's annual and it's the poster child for the high-tech challenge golf course architecture faces. 

Suppose the club did not hold a pro tournament.  Suppose the course was the same now as in 1934.  Wonder where it would stand in the various course rankings? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim,

I think the course would be very highly rated without the tournament, just like Sand Hills, Pacific Dunes and others that don't host events

I don't think there's a shortage of member play.

It's a wonderful golf course

[Patrick_Mucci]

I heard that Billy Payne has implemented a change in culture there and that members are discouraged from coming to the club more than twice or three times a week. Of course, I have no way of verifying that but I wouldn't be massively pleased with that if I was a member living in Atlanta!

Brian S,

It's not your typical local club.

It has a far reaching National membership.

Visiting 2 to 3 times a week seems like alot of golf to me.

What's the source of your statement ?