Sven and GJ,
I have seen all the old photos of ANGC before and have the book chronicling the changes. In short, those very narrow green tongues never struck me as good design. They don't look natural, and would have to be even a harder target to hit with older clubs.
What about those green shapes do you think is good? What about the modifications do you think made the course worse, on a purely functional basis? I love Mac as much as the next guy, but I never liked those freak green shapes, for more than maybe one example per course or nine, and this place was littered with them.
You will note that the long narrow green on 8 for instance, has survived in concept, as has 12 (where the original back bunker is perched very awkwardly up the slope and the front bunker appears to be flood prone) and a few others. Again, where the concepts stood the test of time in tournaments, they stayed (although Cliff Roberts did build a terrible version of 8 before it went back to its original intent, but rebuilt) Where they proved faulty, they were modified.
While we can all question several individual choices over the years, and bemoan the perfect conditioning for other reasons, overall, I think it ended up where it needed to be. The original course had some flaws, and I don't think restoring to original design intent would be a good idea there.
As always, just MHO, but we are here to discuss golf course architecture.....and when I see those photos, but hear "original intent" it reminds me of the old Groucho Marx lline...."Who are you gonna believe? Me, or your own eyes?"