[DMoriarty]

Come on, Mike.  This is supposed to be a website devoted to frank discussion of golf course architecture.  If the discussion here ruins your viewing experience, maybe you (and others) should tune it out for a few weeks.  

Or maybe Ran should consider branching out into a less critical, "teen" version of the site.  A place where those with nothing but love in their hearts could meet in a "frictionless environment" and post pictures of their latest crushes.  No criticism or frank commentary allowed.  Just pretty pictures and banal discussions about which member of One Direction is cutest.  And no meanies allowed.

One more thought - I think Jones' description of the original course does the present version a tremendous disservice.  I don't think it was ever a geniune homage to The Old Course or links golf in general.

Now this is more like it! Here you are telling us that, when it comes to ANGC, you know better than Bobby Jones and Dr. Mac.   I knew you could be just as critical and cynical as the rest of us.

[MClutterbuck]

Few are familiar with ANGC outside Masters week. The greens are still fast and tough to put, but approaches hold. Further, few are familiar with Member tees. Fairways are wide and the first cut is very playable. The course is really fair for the average golfer.

I don't doubt a word that you wrote.

But how the members tees play outside Masters Week has had an infinitesimal influence on golf in America, while the effect of Masters Week on television has been profound and farreaching.

It does. So we should add a warning to the Masters telecast: "don't try this at home". Some are critiquing ANGC because it is unplayable for the average amateur, and that is certainly not true. The course is fantastic for members and it's guests fromOctober to April while it remains open, and that requires the overseeding. We should not try to copy ANGC. And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

I have played probably 25 courses in the US. ANGC was one of the 2 fairest, one of the 2 most fun, and save for the really tough putting probably one of the most easy to score.

[Matthew Petersen]

Few are familiar with ANGC outside Masters week. The greens are still fast and tough to put, but approaches hold. Further, few are familiar with Member tees. Fairways are wide and the first cut is very playable. The course is really fair for the average golfer.

I don't doubt a word that you wrote.

But how the members tees play outside Masters Week has had an infinitesimal influence on golf in America, while the effect of Masters Week on television has been profound and farreaching.

It does. So we should add a warning to the Masters telecast: "don't try this at home". Some are critiquing ANGC because it is unplayable for the average amateur, and that is certainly not true. The course is fantastic for members and it's guests fromOctober to April while it remains open, and that requires the overseeding. We should not try to copy ANGC. And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

I have played probably 25 courses in the US. ANGC was one of the 2 fairest, one of the 2 most fun, and save for the really tough putting probably one of the most easy to score.

That's one hell of a provision ...

[MClutterbuck]

Few are familiar with ANGC outside Masters week. The greens are still fast and tough to put, but approaches hold. Further, few are familiar with Member tees. Fairways are wide and the first cut is very playable. The course is really fair for the average golfer.

I don't doubt a word that you wrote.

But how the members tees play outside Masters Week has had an infinitesimal influence on golf in America, while the effect of Masters Week on television has been profound and farreaching.

It does. So we should add a warning to the Masters telecast: "don't try this at home". Some are critiquing ANGC because it is unplayable for the average amateur, and that is certainly not true. The course is fantastic for members and it's guests fromOctober to April while it remains open, and that requires the overseeding. We should not try to copy ANGC. And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

I have played probably 25 courses in the US. ANGC was one of the 2 fairest, one of the 2 most fun, and save for the really tough putting probably one of the most easy to score.

That's one hell of a provision ...

The putting? It is, but members know the greens and putt on them much better than guests, therefore scoring well.

[DMoriarty]

And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

Why not?  That "one week a year" is the only ANGC that 99.9999% of golfers know anything about.  So why not discuss it on those terms?

I believe everything you say about how the course plays for members, and agree that it sounds like a treat.  I've no doubt I'd love it.   But almost every only sees it for the one week a year, and that is the course that has all the influence.  Perhaps there is something to be learned about gca by comparing and contrasting our annual snapshots of the course over time.  

Your "warning" is great idea, but it isn't going to happen.  And even if it did, it would be ignored.

[MClutterbuck]

And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

Why not?  That "one week a year" is the only ANGC that 99.9999% of golfers know anything about.  So why not discuss it on those terms?

I believe everything you say about how the course plays for members, and agree that it sounds like a treat.  I've no doubt I'd love it.   But almost every only sees it for the one week a year, and that is the course that has all the influence.  Perhaps there is something to be learned about gca by comparing and contrasting our annual snapshots of the course over time.  

Your "warning" is great idea, but it isn't going to happen.  And even if it did, it would be ignored.

I am just saying we should not talk about unfair design or talk changing the design because amateurs can't play the course, as some we're saying. because they are playing the course fine, except for putting on the greens. And my guess is nobody wants those greens flattened.

Now, as for critiquing course from Masters tees... It is fair game.

[Garland Bayley]

...
One more thought - I think Jones' description of the original course does the present version a tremendous disservice.  I don't think it was ever a geniune homage to The Old Course or links golf in general.  
...

...
I don't know much about golf architecture, ...

Well, at least you got one thing right.

[Tim_Weiman]

MClutterbuck,

I don't recall anyone saying amateurs can't play Augusta. Any criticism of the course from an amateur's perspective has always been highly selective, that is focusing on a very limited number of shots.

[BCowan]

'' And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year. ''

I recall Mr Palmer saying he wished Augusta would go back to Bermuda for the greens used to be much firmer! 

[mike_beene]

Are there any intermediate tees now that the back is stretched so far that there must be a 1000 yard difference. Every person I know who has played it either played the front or the back and no one has ever said they played the in between.

[Colin Macqueen]

Gentlemen,

Sven suggests, and it is what I have read over the years, that

"It is a course originally designed with the Scottish links-style game in mind that has been altered over the years to keep pace."

and Mike Hendren writes

"I don't think it was ever a geniune homage to The Old Course or links golf in general."

My question is what were the specific ideas in regards to St. Andrews that Bobby Jones and Clifford Roberts, using Mackenzie, were trying to emulate? Was it options via width of fairways? Was it free running fairways? Was it reward through precise placement of golf shots? Was it perplexing greens? A mixture of all of these things? Some aspects beyond my ken?

If that is the case are these initial approaches being adhered to or have some of these aspects become redundant or overly emphasised over the years?

The original land and landscape does not seem to me to be ideal as a parcel to "mimic" linksland. Was there ever quotes from players of renown suggesting that it harked back to such?

Cheers Colin

[Mark Bourgeois]

Colin,

Template holes.

Mark

[MClutterbuck]

Are there any intermediate tees now that the back is stretched so far that there must be a 1000 yard difference. Every person I know who has played it either played the front or the back and no one has ever said they played the in between.

No intermediate or shorter tees exist. Just Masters and Member tees1070 yard difference in 15 holes with 3, 6 and 12 being essentially the same tee.

[JC Jones]

And we should not judge it on the basis of Masters tees, and ultra firm greens which is 1 week a year.

Why not?  That "one week a year" is the only ANGC that 99.9999% of golfers know anything about.  So why not discuss it on those terms?

I believe everything you say about how the course plays for members, and agree that it sounds like a treat.  I've no doubt I'd love it.   But almost every only sees it for the one week a year, and that is the course that has all the influence.  Perhaps there is something to be learned about gca by comparing and contrasting our annual snapshots of the course over time.  

Your "warning" is great idea, but it isn't going to happen.  And even if it did, it would be ignored.

I find it interesting that you and all the others blame the influencer and not the influenced.

[BCrosby]

Colin writes:

"The original land and landscape does not seem to me to be ideal as a parcel to "mimic" linksland. Was there ever quotes from players of renown suggesting that it harked back to such?"

If Bobby Jones counts as a "player of renown", I suggest you read virtually anything he wrote about ANGC. Time and again he and MacK make it abundantly clear that the models for holes at ANGC came from TOC and other famous links courses.

I have no idea why anyone would be confused about that.

Bob 

[Lou_Duran]

I find it interesting that you and all the others blame the influencer and not the influenced.

The same thought occurred to me in Mike Young's "marketing has ruined GCA" (loose quote) thread.  Of course, I don't pull a Coors Light off the shelf because all of a sudden I'm going to be transported to Siberia to party with a bunch of Russian models.

[Jason Thurman]

The band Haim claims to be influenced by Kendrick Lamar. I didn't know who they were, but I heard that quote and also heard that they had a song called "The Wire," so I figured I should check them out. It turned out to be incredibly infectious, but not at all a gritty rap about the drug trade that harkened to K-Dot and the Barksdale Clan that I was expecting.

I suspect anyone who showed up at Augusta National on the first day and expecting to see a links-inspired homage to The Old Course felt about the same way I did. Artists say lots of ridiculous things about who or what influenced them. No one would ever have put "Augusta National" and "links" in the same sentence if Jones and Mackenzie hadn't done it first.

[Mike Hendren]

Colin writes:

"The original land and landscape does not seem to me to be ideal as a parcel to "mimic" linksland. Was there ever quotes from players of renown suggesting that it harked back to such?"

If Bobby Jones counts as a "player of renown", I suggest you read virtually anything he wrote about ANGC. Time and again he and MacK make it abundantly clear that the models for holes at ANGC came from TOC and other famous links courses.

I have no idea why anyone would be confused about that.

Bob  

But Bob, is that what they put on the ground?  I think the terms "models" and "templates" are a stretch.  "Inspiration," yes, but models and templates?

Also, even oft-posted black and white photograph looking toward the clubhouse with the 15th in the foreground shows tree plantings early on.

Hence my confusion.

Bogey

[Mark Bourgeois]

Jason,

Have you read what Jones, Mackenzie, or contemporaries such as Grantland Rice actually wrote about the course when it  opened? I get the impression you are arguing simply for the sake of argument, choosing not to encumber yourself with facts.

[Mike Hendren]

Jason,

Have you read what Jones, Mackenzie, or contemporaries such as Grantland Rice actually wrote about the course when it  opened? I get the impression you are arguing simply for the sake of argument, choosing not to encumber yourself with facts.

Mark, perhaps they were in cahoots?

As for facts, look no further than the original 7th green and explain to me how that "models" (to use Ron Whitten's term) the home hole at The Old Course.  I'll even spot you disregarding OB right.

Bogey

[DMoriarty]

I find it interesting that you and all the others blame the influencer and not the influenced.

What are you talking about?  I didn't "blame" anyone.   Did you even read my post?  

[JC Jones]

I find it interesting that you and all the others blame the influencer and not the influenced.

The same thought occurred to me in Mike Young's "marketing has ruined GCA" (loose quote) thread.  Of course, I don't pull a Coors Light off the shelf because all of a sudden I'm going to be transported to Siberia to party with a bunch of Russian models.

Of course not, you do that right there in Texas.

[Jason Thurman]

Mark, as I said, I don't trust that an artist's influences will show up clearly in his work, and I believe Jones and Mackenzie saw the influence of links courses where no one else would. Grantland Rice was Augusta's most noted propagandist during its early years and was prone to making wildly inaccurate claims about the course (he overestimated the attendance of Augusta National's first Masters by the heretofore only-seen-on-Maury-Povich 2000%, for instance).

You told Colin that Augusta used template holes. Can you explain six holes at Augusta, how they fulfilled the requirements of a template hole when the course opened, and offer their counterparts from The Old Course or other noted links courses? I'm open to the idea. I just don't see it myself and need someone to explain it with some specific examples.

[DMoriarty]

No doubt Mike's tongue is firmly in cheek, but the rest of this effort to rewrite the history of ANGC is rather bizarre.    Do we really love the tournament so much that we are willing to discard the history and the architectural intentions of the place just so we don't have to think a critical thought of the current tournament course?

Seems to be a trend around here.

[BCrosby]

Colin writes:

"The original land and landscape does not seem to me to be ideal as a parcel to "mimic" linksland. Was there ever quotes from players of renown suggesting that it harked back to such?"

If Bobby Jones counts as a "player of renown", I suggest you read virtually anything he wrote about ANGC. Time and again he and MacK make it abundantly clear that the models for holes at ANGC came from TOC and other famous links courses.

I have no idea why anyone would be confused about that.

Bob 

But Bob, is that what they put on the ground?

Bogey

Jones and MacK certainly thought so.  

Not that my opinon matters in the grand scheme, but I think they had every right to think they had pulled it off. MacK circa 1935 didn't just use the links templates he said he used. He used them in remarkably original ways. To borrow an expression from the '60's, he built templates on acid. Something few architects had the imagination to pull off. Even more rare, he had a boss who allowed him to do it.  

To dismiss all that is to miss what made ANGC so special then and why it is less special today.

ANGC is nonetheless still a wonderful course. But I weary of those who insist that after all the changes it has gone through, nothing is really different.  

Bob  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()