Augusta and Pinehurst #2 similarities

[Tim Liddy]

Don’t you love how the long slopes within the greens at Augusta protect the smallish hole locations?  It is similar to Pinehurst #2 to me except the slopes are within the green at Augusta instead of around the perimeter at Pinehurst #2. Slightly missed shots roll far away from hole locations, sometimes over 40 feet, a great lesson on how to strategically protect the golf course from the greens back to the tees.

Augusta and Pinehurst #2 and the use of long slopes protecting hole locations are very similar in this design feature.

Your thoughts?

[Mark Bourgeois]

Why do so few (nonlinks) designs use gravity to create these Miyazaka features ("Spirited Away")?  How does a designer reconcile modern maintenance practice (rough, collars, overwatering) to them?

Any course that incorporates and properly maintains these features is a course forever enjoyable.

[Sean_A]

Tim

Augusta looks to have just as difficult recovery chipping (suggestive of slopes and raised greens) as Pinehurst has.  What Pinehurst doesn't have are the nasty putts once on the green.   

One of the neat things about Augusta, well at least for the guys playing in the Masters, is how the technology (super grooved clubs and hot action balls) and course conditioning (soft, receptive greens) can sometimes go against the player if he doesn't land his approach in the right spot depending on if he wants to spin or release or shot. 

Ciao

[Matt_Ward]

Tim:

What makes ANGC and #2 so special is when the former eschewed any rough (second cuts), etc, etc.

#2 followed this procedure for many years too.

Frankly, one can make a case that courses that overdose on rough really do so to protect a design that is truly inferior in one way or the other.

[John Moore II]

Tim:

What makes ANGC and #2 so special is when the former eschewed any rough (second cuts), etc, etc.

#2 followed this procedure for many years too.

Frankly, one can make a case that courses that overdose on rough really do so to protect a design that is truly inferior in one way or the other.

But is Pinehurst #2 really an inferior design? Tom Doak sure doesn't think so; in fact, he seems to think (at least in 1996) that #2 is better than ANGC. Think on that one. Is it not possible that Pinehurst has been led astray by its desire to continue hosting US Open championships and the USGA's insistence that Open courses have mid-calf high rough and such?

The rough question is a very good one. If we can make greens brick hard, isn't mid-length (like at Augusta) rough more of a hazard than high rough since it brings flier lies to the green into play rather than just hack outs?

[Link Walsh]

Don’t you love how the long slopes within the greens at Augusta protect the smallish hole locations?  It is similar to Pinehurst #2 to me except the slopes are within the green at Augusta instead of around the perimeter at Pinehurst #2. Slightly missed shots roll far away from hole locations, sometimes over 40 feet, a great lesson on how to strategically protect the golf course from the greens back to the tees.

Augusta and Pinehurst #2 and the use of long slopes protecting hole locations are very similar in this design feature.

Your thoughts?

Tim,

I've always been a big fan of Rock Hollow by the way. 

Pinehurst and Augusta National are labeled as "2nd shot courses".  They sure make you think a lot harder from the fairway, don't they?  It would be fun to play a course like that over and over.