[Scott Cannon]

I for one like seeing the best players in the world having to thing about the consequences of hitting a bad shot. Yea lots of birdies can be fun to watch, but its should be great when a player makes a birdie, not " Boy Jimmy, making par on that hole he gave up a shot to the field"

[Craig Sweet]

When I see these pro's shooting -20 under, or better, I have got to believe that the course is letting them put their drive right where they want to maximize going right for the pin.

[Glenn Spencer]

I agree with you both. I like to see the winning sore for the week at about 6-7 under. Birdies are out there, but not easy to come by. 67 is an awesome round. If it gets to 17 under and the like, I just lose track of what a great round is. To me, the most exciting thing in golf is when a guy gets 5-6 under on what everyone knows to be an extremely hard golf course.

[Tom_Doak]

You guys are just going to have to revise your thinking if they don't change the equipment rules, otherwise what you are asking for are courses you and I can't finish.

Personally I think it would be more interesting to have a course with more par fives that the players would have to attack with long-iron second shots, and lots of trouble around the greens.  Pete Dye noted years ago that the Tour pros are not much more accurate with their long irons than any other golfer -- they just don't have much call to hit them anymore, except on par-3's where they tee it up.

Now as long as those holes I'm talking about are called par fives, you're going to see lower scores in relation to par, but that's the best of both worlds -- you get to see some -20s, but they have to hit some great shots to get there.

[Mark Brown]

If you hit a good approach shot you should have a birdie putt. At Pebble all the pins were inaccessible so no one could make a run with some birdies. It took the drama out of the whole final round.

There should be a balance of risk-reward shots -- the back 9 at Augusta is a great example.

[Garland Bayley]

To me a golf tournament is a drama that is being written as it occurs, and no one knows the outcome ahead of time, not even the authors. That is why the drama written last weekend at Pebble Beach was boring. Not because someone was in the vicinity of 20 under par. It is interesting to note that Tiger destroying the US Open field at Pebble by a similar margin was incredibily good drama, because it was all new for a major tournament. The drama was answering the question of how much could he win a major tournament by.

There are plenty of valid reasons to rein in the pros and their distance, without relating it to how much under par they are at a tournament.

[Scott Cannon]

If you hit a good approach shot you should have a birdie putt. At Pebble all the pins were inaccessible so no one could make a run with some birdies. It took the drama out of the whole final round.

There should be a balance of risk-reward shots -- the back 9 at Augusta is a great example.

Sorry Mark, I disagree. Golf is not fair. Just because you hit a good shot, that doesn't give the golfer a right to have a "run" at birdie. Sometimes a good shot is 25 ft short.

I would have to go back and watch the AT&T again, but the winner had a good look at birdie on 8,12...then I fell asleep. Oh yea didn't Michael Bolton (the 20 hdcp) have 2 natural birdies on the back? The pin were ok for him:)

[Garland Bayley]

I suppose I should add that even though I have criticized the Masters for lacking in what I feel is important to be a major and to be used for qualifying the greatest golfers, it does provide, as I have noted by saying it is a fabulous spectator event, great drama by allowing golfers to take risks and gain the rewards of mounting a charge on the back nine on Sunday.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()