Most golfers anxiously await the traditional start of the golf season, with their devotion to the Master's Invitational.

The annual classic is held by invitation-qualifying procedure, and the field is limitted.  

It is obviously held on a storied course with great design pedigree, with the greatest golfer of his time collaborating with one of the greatest architects of the time.

The ANGC is a very exclusive club, and access is highly restricted generally only seen during the toon-a-mint, adding to its' mystique.  The membership and the Masters (TM) makes a great deal of money on the TV contract and marketing, that they use for charitable and course upkeep purposes (my understanding).

Now we have a similar great course in Sebonack.  It was designed by a world's greatest golfer and designer, with architectural collaboration with one of the greatest modern architects.  The membership and access to the course is similarly restricted and not many will ever get to see it, unless it is televised in some event.  It is located on a beautiful setting, that would sparkle in early Oct.

http://web.mac.com/larrylambrecht/iWeb/Site/Sebonack%20Golf%20Club.html

While I haven't seen the course, I get the impression that it is sufficiently designed to be set up as a major test of golfing skill.  

The setting is awesome and since they already have held a major next door to it at Shinny several times, the locational logistics should not be a problem.

The NGLA and Shinny are neighbors, and could be enlisted as backup support in shared tournament week facilities of extra practice grounds, club house space, media ad corporate tents and facilities, etc.

Could the Master's (TM) marketing model be used at Sebonack to hold a 5th major to bookend the traditional/sentimental annual opening of the golf year at ANGC with an annual closing event at Sebonack?  Does the course have the bones to support it, and might the membership have the inclination?

interesting Dick

but there's no way the Tour would support it, I bet because:

1. they are stiil trying to get the TPC to be the fifth major

and

2. it would take away from the drama of the Fed Ex Cup

Lay off the Maui Wowie, my friend.  There's no way that the tour would ever embrace something like this.  I'm guessing the membership wouldn't be all that excited about it either, but there are a couple other hurdles.  First, we don't know whether the course would hold up to professional play.  Second, there is very little room on the golf calendar and the Tour is just starting with this FedEx experiment (aka the Vijay Singh endurance tour), so there's really no room in the fall.  Finally there are really only three majors.  (The PGA is pretty weak, IMHO.)  So, I doubt that there would ever be room for another "major".

interesting Dick

but there's no way the Tour would support it, I bet because:

1. they are stiil trying to get the TPC to be the fifth major

and

2. it would take away from the drama of the Fed Ex Cup

I think there should be a separate grouping for all time greats invitationals that can be limited field events such as the Masters. As a limited field event controlled outside the toru, it should create no problem. As many also know, I think the Masters should be dropped as a major and the TPC used to replace it.

Lay off the Maui Wowie, my friend.  There's no way that the tour would ever embrace something like this.  I'm guessing the membership wouldn't be all that excited about it either, but there are a couple other hurdles.  First, we don't know whether the course would hold up to professional play.  Second, there is very little room on the golf calendar and the Tour is just starting with this FedEx experiment (aka the Vijay Singh endurance tour), so there's really no room in the fall.  Finally there are really only three majors.  (The PGA is pretty weak, IMHO.)  So, I doubt that there would ever be room for another "major".

Not sure why the PGA has the perception of being weak?  It has a much stronger field than the Masters and depending on the year has a stronger field than either the U.S. Open or the Open itself. As far as the strongest field, look no further than the players which wins this category every year. If anything it deserves a real shot at being a "major".

I look no further than to 2004.  The PGA tournament at WS was much more enjoyable, less gimacky than the USGA boys had going at SH.

Guys, if there is need for a 5th major (which to me there isn't) then it should definately be somewhere else than in the USA. The USA already has three and it is not as if that many of the worlds top players come from there.

The reference to the PGA being the weakest of the majors stems from the fact that there is much less interest in that event compared to the three earlier majors.  Combine that with the fact that the PGA is hosted on courses that don't measure up to the sites of the other majors and you have an event that pales in comparison.  Does it have a better field?  Sure.  Is the setup more conducive to exciting golf?  Sure.  Does it have the same buzz that the other three majors have?  Nowhere close.

...the PGA is hosted on courses that don't measure up to the sites of the other majors...

Balderdash. The PGA has locked up sites the US Open would like to use, so the US Open is off playing places like Torrey Pines.

There is a 5th major already.

It is called the US Amateur.

If it isn't, then why has it been written that those who have won other "majors" should then consider their Amateur victory as a major?

Nice one there Phillip. I think only a Match play event could become a 5th major and those two courses would make for great drama. Toss in Shinny and OMG it might be too much.

Tom, thanks for your thoughts.  The idea of not skewing the stats with a 5th major is a very strong point of order.

So, that swings me even more so to Phil's observation about the US-Am.  

Could that Am be held later in the year (Oct) and use Sebonack as the one venue, or the triad of the Long Island rota.

I was originally thinking of all the similarities to Sebonack's founding and club characteristics to ANGC.  I was thinking how as an invitational, the business and organization model of the Masters (Tm) would be viable for a club like Sebonack to work off of.  I don't think the AM would generate the kind of following that the Masters does, due to the field of known world greatest.  

But, Tom, are you being modest when you say Sebonack would hold up "okay", or would it be a serious year in and out test with a set up that wouldn't be thought of as tricked up, like they did at Shinny for US Open?  

I agree with Tom. A grand slam clears the bases, of which there are only 4, and add 4 to your total. There should be 4 majors. The Masters is the odd ball. I think it belongs in a grouping of great player associated events. My original suggestion was for the tour to take TPC on the road in May with alternative venues for the fourth major. I have modified that to have a global association of tours rotate the event. E.g. European, South African, Japanese and Asian, US, AustralAsia, so the event would be outside the US four out of five years.

Good thinking Garland, a most acceptable compromise.

Phil, the US amateur along with the British amateur used to be part of the original grand slam until the world of modern professional golf came into being. But these days any one claiming that either should be considered a major is not being very realistic. Although the fields are strong for an amateur event it is not in the league as a top flight PGA event. I have to say I agree with Tiger B in that a matchplay major should be reintroduced. Maybe the USPGA?

The US Am is a differentiator, not a major. If by some quirk of fate, Jack and Tiger end up with 18 majors, Tiger's three ams will be the amunition to conclude Tiger was the greatest of all time.