The Masters makes Augusta, not the other way around...

[Frank M]

I know the years first major has come and gone, but I keep thinking about it. I keep thinking about how The Masters Tournament makes Augusta, not the other way around. Am I off? You can throw exclusivity in there, too, but if Augusta National were a $150 golf course that had never hosted a major, I suspect many would just see it as a very well conditioned $150 golf course with some crazy greens.

[John Kavanaugh]

Frank,


What is the best $150 resort or daily fee that you have ever played? For me I'd say Pasatiempo. Not bad at all, but Augusta worthy? I think not.

[Peter Pallotta]

I don't know what makes for good architecture or for great golf courses, though I'm led to believe that Dr. Mackenzie certainly did. But maybe today's top designers are simply more proficient at the craft than he was, and so there are now many $200 resort & destination courses that are better than Augusta, both as architecture and as golf courses.
#All Sand
# No Trees
# Fun for Hacks

[Frank M]

John,

I've had the opportunity to walk the grounds of Augusta National. Taking away all that surrounds it -- its exclusivity, a major, history, etc. -- the course as a whole from a perspective of the golf experience doesn't stand up to many of the golf experiences one can find in many places around the world including the U.S. The $150 dollar rate is really an arbitrary number I threw out there.

I find it difficult to compare the golf only experience of Augusta National to say the likes of Cabot Links or Bandon Dunes strictly from a golf perspective for most golfers. IMO, if you stripped Augusta down to just the golf, I believe most would return to Bandon or Cabot after being there before returning to Augusta. And if you want to price it in the same bracket as the aforementioned resort golf courses...in all honesty...I believe most golfers would venture to either one ahead of Augusta time and time again if we are strictly focused on golf alone.

[Terry Lavin]

Au contraire, mon frere. The course enabled the Masters to insinuate itself into becoming one of the Majors.

[Edward Glidewell]

John,

I've had the opportunity to walk the grounds of Augusta National (and of course watched it on the Tele for eons). Taking away all that surrounds it -- its exclusivity, a major, history, etc. -- the course as a whole from a perspective of the golf experience doesn't stand up to many of the golf experiences one can find in many places around the world including the U.S.

The $150 dollar rate is really an arbitrary number I threw out there as my view of the least you would charge for a higher end golf experience, but the more you want to increase it I think the more negative effect it would have on a stripped down Augusta National.

I find it difficult to compare the golf only experience of Augusta National to say the likes of Cabot Links or Bandon Dunes strictly from a golf perspective for most golfers. IMO, if you stripped Augusta down to just the golf, I believe most would return to Bandon or Cabot after being there before returning to Augusta. And if you want to price it in the same bracket as the aforementioned resort golf courses...in all honesty...I believe most golfers would venture to either one ahead of Augusta time and time again if we are strictly focused on golf alone.

I think you're right that people would go to Bandon or Cabot over Augusta if the Masters didn't exist, but I also think that's entirely because of the ocean. I feel certain people would still consider Augusta one of the top courses in the country, alongside other inland courses like Merion and Sand Hills.

[Garland Bayley]

I'd probably rather go to French Lick.

[Jeff Schley]

I don't know why ANGC is being compared to $150 resort courses.  I think it is awesome both architecturally and historically.

It certainly got a huge advantage from the outset with Bobby Jones, the best player of the day championing it's genesis and creating an invitational tournament.  From there it gotten better with age IMO, from TV coverage to the unobtainable tee time, to overly exclusive membership.  The bio of ANGC creates scarcity for it is so utterly unique. In economics if you have scarcity you have increased demand and ANGC has over the top history, extremely small and limited membership, as well as a permanent place as the years first major for professionals.  Hard to get any better than that IMO. 

Love the course and love the tournament both.

[Garland Bayley]

I don't know why ANGC is being compared to $150 resort courses.  I think it is awesome both architecturally and historically.

It certainly got a huge advantage from the outset with Bobby Jones, the best player of the day championing it's genesis and creating an invitational tournament.
Take that away.
  From there it gotten better with age IMO, from TV coverage to the unobtainable tee time, to overly exclusive membership.
Take that away
  The bio of ANGC creates scarcity for it is so utterly unique.
Take that away.
 In economics if you have scarcity you have increased demand and ANGC has over the top history, extremely small and limited membership, as well as a permanent place as the years first major for professionals.
Take that away.
  Hard to get any better than that IMO. 
With all that gone, I'm now headed to French Lick to play for $125. 

Love the course and love the tournament both.
How many times have you played the course?

[Jeff Schley]

I don't know why ANGC is being compared to $150 resort courses.  I think it is awesome both architecturally and historically.

It certainly got a huge advantage from the outset with Bobby Jones, the best player of the day championing it's genesis and creating an invitational tournament.
Take that away.
  From there it gotten better with age IMO, from TV coverage to the unobtainable tee time, to overly exclusive membership.
Take that away
  The bio of ANGC creates scarcity for it is so utterly unique.
Take that away.
 In economics if you have scarcity you have increased demand and ANGC has over the top history, extremely small and limited membership, as well as a permanent place as the years first major for professionals.
Take that away.
  Hard to get any better than that IMO. 
With all that gone, I'm now headed to French Lick to play for $125. 

Love the course and love the tournament both.
How many times have you played the course?

So you can only comment on a course if you have played it?  Come on Garland.  Is there a course that has been more photographed and televised than ANGC?   

Why take anything away, it is what it is, this hypothetical comparison strips away everything that makes it special.  I love the course and I have never played it or even seen it in person, so discount my opinion in addition to 95% of the rest of this board who haven't played it if need be.

[Tim Leahy]

Using that logic St. Andrews is a cow pasture. Take away the history and no one would fly across the world to play there. The Masters could have been played anywhere just like the USOpen and PGA but what makes it the best Major is Augusta National.

[Sean_A]

Masters and Augusta are inextricably intertwined.  It is certainly true that there may be no Augusta without The Masters.  The club struggled mightily at the start and the tournament went a long way to saving it.  But certainly by the time The Masters was televised, the tournament became very prominent.  The two are now one in the minds of many people.  Even the wingnuts can't think of one without the other.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

I reckon Frank has a point.
Take another private, exclusive even, very small membership club. Play a 4-day top-pro tournament there at the time of year that is most perfect for the courses presentation.......
atb

[Conley Hurst]

You can throw exclusivity in there, too, but if Augusta National were a $150 golf course that had never hosted a major, I suspect many would just see it as a very well conditioned $150 golf course with some crazy greens.

I used to think this until I had the opportunity to attend the Masters last year and walk the entire course. I found the property as a whole to be stunning, and the layout utilizes the internal contours brilliantly.


Everyone talks about the back nine, but I found the opening six holes to be among the strongest on the course. And, again, much of the interest comes from the terrain as well as the greens.


I find it hard to believe that any golfer could play those holes plus 10-13 and 18 and come away thinking that that was just another fancy golf course.

[Carl Rogers]

For the top, let's say 200 golfers in the world, IMO, it is a beguiling - alluring - unique test.
For the rest of off the Member's tees, it is probably a strategic test to stay away from the big number.

[Garland Bayley]

Jeff,

You are reading more into my question than was there. I chose French Lick over Augusta National with out having played either.

[Jason Topp]

Disagree.  If you hypothetically could eliminate all of the exclusivity and mystique and make the tournament a regular tour stop, I believe it would still be compelling  event because of the golf course. 


Watch past final round broadcasts posted on youtube and I think you would agree.

[Kyle Harris]

Isn't Augusta National without The Masters called Old Town?

[jeffwarne]

You can throw exclusivity in there, too, but if Augusta National were a $150 golf course that had never hosted a major, I suspect many would just see it as a very well conditioned $150 golf course with some crazy greens. 

 IMO, if you stripped Augusta down to just the golf I believe most golfers would venture to either one ahead of Augusta time and time again if we are strictly focused on golf alone.

"Most golfers" and "many" do and think many things that aren't very articulate, sophisticated or even listen worthy when it comes to course appreciation and selection.


That's the very reason that this GCA Forum exists, to discuss architecture, great courses and playing experiences for the more discerning afficianado and consumer.


So while you may well be right about the rank and file golf "fan",(to which I would say "who cares") I think you are quite wrong about the audience here.
If you think ANGC is just a well conditioned course with crazy greens, you haven't been paying attention.


Terrain, strategy, topography, variety,scale,surprise, scenery, fun, difficulty,ground game, risk/reward, forgiveness, playability for average golfer, ability to test the best in the world without a major overhaul leading in.....
ANGC has all in spades.


Please list the other $150 courses that I can play that provide these characteristics.

[Peter Pallotta]

The purist/idealist in me sure hopes that Augusta is much more than just a well conditioned course with crazy greens.
I mean: it was created by a genius-level designer working alongside the most architecturally astute golfer of his generation.
If all Mackenzie and Jones could manage to achieve (sans the  Masters, the exclusivity, and the high-end maintenance that came along later) was what Frank suggests they did, what does that say about today's dynamic duo?
Have we all been mislead? Is great architecture dead? Are Coore and Crenshaw actually producing nothing more than exclusive, far flung, expensive to maintain members courses with crazy/fun greens?
If even Mackenzie and Jones, on a topographically interesting site like Augusta could achieve nothing more than that, how is anyone ever achieving anything more that that?
Are 10s actually/objectively only 7s?
What a vaguely depressing thought.

[Mike Hendren]

Like Barney, I immediately thought of Pasatiempo, where I see the fee is now $260.  Using the old GCA match-play format, I have Augusta National up 10 holes at the finish. 

Bogey

[Peter Pallotta]

Bogey - alas, the chickens have come home to roost. After a decade of being told that 'it's all subjective', I've come to finally believe it (or at least to capitulate to my betters in this regard) -- which means that my interest-level in reading *anyone's* opinion (including, of course, my own) about what characterizes top-quality gca has lessened considerably. It sure "feels" to me -- after watching for 3 decades -- that Augusta is a rare and majestic and exceptionally special golf course, but what the hell do I know (or you, or JK)? It's too bad. I like believing that there are many people (scientists, theologians, architects) who know much more than I do and who speak as true experts from whom I can learn and grow.  What's left now, instead, are just the Top 100 lists driven by fleeting tastes and popularity contests and based mainly (apparently) on who can *market* their new courses most effectively.

[Edward Glidewell]

For the top, let's say 200 golfers in the world, IMO, it is a beguiling - alluring - unique test.
For the rest of off the Member's tees, it is probably a strategic test to stay away from the big number.

I said this in another thread, but the two people I know that have played there both absolutely loved the course (they also thought the par 3 course was incredibly fun), and neither really struggled from the member's tees. Having the ANGC caddies helps tremendously, though.

[Derek_Duncan]

Every year I spend 364 days gradually working myself into the opinion that ANGC is overrated and overwrought. Then I go to the Masters and am dumbfounded all over again about how magnificent and incredible the place is. I can't wipe the smile off my face.


The one area where I think the Masters makes ANGC is in the magazine rankings. All the architectural and aesthetic changes over the decades have been done to make the tournament a better competition and viewing experience. Yet, regardless of what's done, the course maintains its top 5 ranking.


So it's ranking and regard seem basically impervious to the alterations, which indicates the course is not really being rated or analyzed on merit but rather on reputation -- of the Masters.

[Adrian_Stiff]

They are the same thing.


$150 golf course?...more like $5000 golf course. It is the most wanted play in the world.


If they allowed a 4 ball a day at 20000 USD to include the par 3 course, lunch and bibbed up caddies..the waiting list would be years.