1935 Pictures of All 18 at Augusta National

[Josh Stevens]

I must confess that after seeing these, I fall into the camp of those that suggest maybe not everything the good Doctor did was pure genius.  A lot of those greens seem to reflect some of his early work in the UK in being a wee bit silly looking at times.  Perhaps strategically pure, but aesthetically I do wonder about some of it.

Why is there such variation in his work? Is that because some sites like CP were a bit easier in being sandy and not so hilly, or perhaps because like RM he didn't actually have much to do with the construction.

[Jim Nugent]

Does anyone know how the golfing world took to ANGC in its first several years?  Reactions from the pro's are interesting, but as has been said here countless times, they represent the elite 0.0001% of all golfers.  I doubt many pro's today would rank NGLA or Pac Dunes or Crystal Downs among the world's greatest courses -- and Jack Nicklaus is (in?)famous for calling Royal Melbourne a good members course.  I'm more looking for what people back then like Ran said. 

You guys who are not so impressed with the original course: I think you are basing an awful lot on just one picture of each hole, black & white, from one angle that is usually of the green.  Do you really think you understand how the course played from that?  For me the pictures raise more questions than they do answers. 

ANGC started making changes around 1938.  In many cases they tried to make the holes tougher.  Scores did not go up after 1938 though.  If anything, they went down.  Perhaps they would have gone down even more without the changes? 

I personally like the look of the old course more than today's.  But that's all based on photos.   

[David Davis]

Benjamin,

Thanks very much for this. I love the look of the old course. I feel the same when I see the old photos of courses like Pine Valley. Would be just amazing to play them back then.

Now it seems Augusta is more of a beautiful, perfect garden without a blade of grass out of place.

[Thomas Dai]

Splendid. Well posted Benjamin. Interesting to compare these to photos of other MacKenzie courses photo-toured within GCA.

Would the little 'tongues' of putting surface at the edges of some of the greens have been pin-able - at yesterdays (not todays) HoC and greenspeeds?

atb

[Josh Stevens]

I agree is it not fair to critique by modern standards, but of course we cant help it

What if a course opened tomorrow in some remote far flung mosquito breeding ground in Georgia.  Built on the side of hill with few trees, a hard walk, and green complexes like we see here at 1, 2, 4, 7 , 8 , 9, 18. would we hail it as the greatest golf course since Saint Andrew was a boy?

Maybe, maybe not.  Tastes change I guess

[jeffwarne]

The old version highlights how much diversity and variation were allowable and acceptable before the gradual homogonization of greens has led to very little variety of size and shape.
If the greens "look funny" perhaps you prefer homogonization.

What jumps out a bit to me on a course with only 22 bunkers is that at least 5 or 6 could be eliminated and not impact play at all.

[JSlonis]

The older version seems very odd to me in spots. Especially the old 4th. That green was so narrow & the bunkers are very far removed from the green. Compare that look & characteristics to another great MacKenzie course like Royal Melbourne, and the difference really stands out.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff, the bunker on #1 is one of several that didn't come into play much for real good golfers.  What is your objection to the bunker on #2?  Also, did you mean the bunker 10 feet above 16 (I don't see such a bunker on 10)?  Those bunkers on 16 look mostly decorative to me, especially since the shot to the green was a short iron.

 

Jim,

Sorry I missed this one, but my objection to the bunker on 2 is that the fairway approach just left of it is actually lower than the bunker itself, and it seems like the bunker ought to be in the low spot, the fairway higher, because it makes the bunker shallow and appear to be perched up.

Look at the photo of 10 again.....the back right slope of the bunker shaping hides part of the green indicating it is well above it.  10 feet is just a guess, but I know that the true elevation changes in the field are always more than they look in the photo, and especially since ANGC is famous for having more undulations than you can see visually.

I also missed Peter P statement about ANGC setting the standard for a player, not the course, putting himself in trouble, which is still the mantra of the PGA pros in design.  Or, as JN once said, the course should never hurt you, which is evident everywhere at ANGC, other than perhaps the putting surfaces originally crafted by Mac.

As to the differences between ANGC and RM, how much could have come down to the construction foremen, and/or the input of Bobby Jones?  And, we know Mac didn't make a few final site visits for lack of getting paid, which might have affected things.

And about the comments about the pros opinions vs. the regular guy member, since when has joining ANGC been about regular guys, and/or joining for the architecture, rather than the prestige?  Not to mention the Masters was played near opening day, maybe to attract members, and has always been the focus of changes.  I think they started taking suggestions right after the first tournament from competitors (would have go back and read up) 

[Garland Bayley]

...
And about the comments about the pros opinions vs. the regular guy member, since when has joining ANGC been about regular guys, and/or joining for the architecture, rather than the prestige?  Not to mention the Masters was played near opening day, maybe to attract members, and has always been the focus of changes.  I think they started taking suggestions right after the first tournament from competitors (would have go back and read up) 

It seems to me this might be a bit off on the history. At the start, the club had trouble getting anyone to join. Then, the tournament was of lesser consequence for years at the beginning. Where is Bob Crosby when we need him?

[Ryan Hillenbrand]

How about Rae's Creek on Number 12? More like Rae's River. Surprised the entire green wasn't washed away at some point.

[Jeff_Brauer]

GJ,

It may be an oversimplification and they did have trouble attracting members, but my thought was the tournament had to be good publicity and incentive to join.  And, I had the impression the tournament was a pretty big deal right from the get go, at least with the "shot heard round the world" on 15 by Sarazen. If it wasn't a big deal, how could that shot have gotten so famous so quickly?  I admit it had to have grown in stature, in part because of it, so there could be many interpretations.

Ryan,

I think I recall stories of 12 green flooding, and that pic sure looks like it was close. The front bunker looks like a beach bunker in that photo.  For that matter, it is a small green, and the nearly unplayable lies all around must have quickly suggested more turf behind the green to give at least some bail out.

[Garland Bayley]

Jeff,

The tournament wasn't a big deal from the get go. The albatross heard round the world was probably heard, because it was an albatross in a pro event leading to a win more so than because it was at Augusta. The tournament certainly wasn't called The Masters back then.

In fact, the tournament had trouble getting "patrons" until a swashbuckling young blonde man started drawing attention to golf and The Masters in the mid 50s.

[Benjamin Litman]

Going back to the pictures, the relative smallness/youth of most of the trees on the property jumped out at me. Does anyone know if MacKenzie accounted for the inevitable growth of the trees over time? Putting aside the newly planted stands of trees on, for example, 7, 11, and 15, the mere growth of old trees seems to have reduced the effective width of the course, particularly off the tee, significantly over time. I recall in our recent discussion of Harbour Town someone mentioning that Pete Dye built the course--which has a "narrow" reputation not because of the actual size of the fairways, which are quite wide, but because trees make the effective size much narrower--with trees in mind.

[Michael Whitaker]

How many of the changes from the original do you think were initiated for maintenance reasons rather than to make the course more difficult?

Since the first "Tiger Proofing" nearly all changes have been to toughen the challenge to the pros, but its seems the bunker changes "back in the day" were done to make maintenance easier. True?

[Josh Bills]

Benjamin,

According to this article MacKenzie transplanted over 5,000 trees, so assuming that is true, he must have been aware of their impact when moved to the edges of fairways...

[Garland Bayley]

But pine trees don't bloom! At least not in the sense the article means it would seem.

Presumably the trees are camellias, dogwoods, etc. that the article refers to.

[Benjamin Litman]

Fascinating article, Josh! Thanks for posting, although I agree with GJ's interpretation of it.

[Sean Leary]

3000 members was expected? Wonder what the most they ever had was?

[Chip Gaskins]

some very interesting rees jones mounding around some of those greens.

was #8 trying to be some sort of Dell green?

certainly the routing seems to work over the land they had to work with, and the 5th and 14th greens are pure genius.  but there are a few clunkers in there too.

i suppose a great question would be, being Donald Ross was the potentially first choice as architect and given the course next door (Augusta Country Club) was his work, if the Masters was not played at ANGC how would the two courses compare? (I have not played Augusta CC)

[Tom_Doak]

The thing I wonder when I see the photos is, did MacKenzie really want it to look like that?  He often made drawings with exaggerated shapes, but in general, the finished courses did not look too much like the drawings.

Remember, MacKenzie never saw the finished product of Augusta National ... he never saw these grass lines.

Note:  I don't have an answer for my question, and neither do any of you.  For a course that is so well documented, it's amazing how much we really don't know.

P.S.  I'm off at the crack of dawn for New Zealand.  I'll miss Masters week, but I think it's a good idea to know what my new course looks like on Opening Day!

[Gary Sato]

There are several if not all the holes have changed significantly.  Looking at the 11th, Mackenzie placed the green between the creek and a hill (on the right) which to me allowed ample room for the ground game. 

Does anyone know when the hill was bulldozed?

[Thomas Dai]

.."was #8 trying to be some sort of Dell green?"

Not sure about being a 'Dell' but there are numerous examples of this style of long, very narrow green with pretty severe mounding along both sides and at the rear at a few MacKenzie courses in the UK West Midlands. Worcester still has many of them, it's a real feature there. Walsall as well and Malvern, although it lost half it's MacKenzie holes during WWII, still has a couple too. Any other examples?

In the photos highlighted above it is noticeable that some of the greens have quite wide lowish HoC fringes, eg 4th, 11th, whereas others, eg 8th, 10th, 15th do not. Perhaps the photographer simply arrived at some of the greens before the fringe mower had done its business or would there be another reason?

atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

The thing I wonder when I see the photos is, did MacKenzie really want it to look like that?  He often made drawings with exaggerated shapes, but in general, the finished courses did not look too much like the drawings.

I have wondered that, too.  Not only about Mac, but others. I have the Joe Lee plans for the newer nines at La Costa, and they show no collar between green and bunker, bunkers right to the edge of the green, and some real tight green curves and corners that by the '60s, he would know couldn't have been maintained by then prevalent riding mowers.  Just how close did his drawings replicate his intent?

[MClutterbuck]

Great pictures. I dont know much of the architectural history between 1935 and the 40s and 50s, but I had the chance of seeing a few tournament videos of the 40s and 50s and the bunkers were a lot more interesting visually. They seemed to have more natural edges and some taller grasses.

[Sven Nilsen]

Does anyone have the original Mackenzie hole descriptions?  They would be a nice addition to this thread, especially if paired with the photos of each hole.

Sven