I've read the usual to and fro about the changes to ANGC from both detractors and defenders.   This week, in talking about the changes with Jen, and telling her a little about the Masters history, it suddenly all became clear to me.

Here's the simple question that I believe is fundamental to what The Masters has historically been to all of those who love golf, and particularly those who love the golf course that Bobby Jones envisioned.

The question?

Would it be possible for a modern-day Jack Nicklaus to put on his 1986 back nine charge on today's course?

Frankly, I don't believe it would be possible, even from near superhuman Tiger Woods.

I'd enjoy hearing others weigh in who believe that the present golf course can be the stage for the type of emotion, drama, and heroics that we witnessed back then.

Didn't Els and Mickelson come pretty close to duplicating the spectacular back nine only 3 years ago?  I know they've continued to make changes, but that wasn't so long ago.  

I doubt it will be replicated this year because of the firm, fast, dry, and windy conditions - but I don't think it is out of the question in the future.  

Does the question mean:

A) To comeback from 6 down on the back 9?

or

B) To shoot 30 on the back 9?


Option A is very possible.  The actual 9 hole score is just an arbitrary number IMO, but it makes option B likely impossible.  But a 6 stroke comeback should be exciting either way.  

CPS

Tim,

I think the most recent changes, particularly the additional lengthening and addition of a ton of new trees, have caused the tipping point effect.  

It would be interesting to plot Nicklaus' 86 shots and see if he'd even have a remote chance.  For instance, his drive on 17, which he birdied, would have been deep in the evergreens on today's course.

Perhaps, but you are overlooking the obvious possibility that Jack might not have hit his drive there on 17 had there been evergreens.  Didn't Phil hit a wonderful recovery on 17 from the middle of nowhere yesterday?  He blew the birdie putt, but he gave himself a shot.

I remind you that just four years ago, Len Mattiace made such a charge, making an eagle and four birdies for a 31 on the back nine and a 65 overall--had he parred the 18th it would have tied the lowest final round by a winner in Masters history. And then the next year Mickelson shot 31 on the back nine to win his first Masters.

In my view, the course changes do not prevent an '86 Nicklaus charge--it's the course setup that allows or doesn't allow it. This year, the firm/fast/windy conditions will prevent it. But if the conditions are even a little softer and the Masters Committee sets up the course to allow scoring (moving a few tees up and having some accessible pins), then a charge is possible.

A great player could do it without birdies on the par 4s some on this site find offensive.

4-4-2-3-4-3-2-4-4 = 30

I would think there are several in today's field who are capable of this outburst.

The only thing that will keep Tiger from shooting 30 on the back nine to win is that it is now obvious he won't need to.  Looks like a smooth 34 will give him a three shot victory.  Of course I told you giys it was over Thursday morning when the wanna be greats all folded early.  Jack needed 30 is why Jack shot 30.

"I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out"

"I went to the Masters and a US Open broke out"

The missing roars of the crowd through the pine trees was deafening.

Let's see what happens tomorrow.

Let's hope the weather isn't like this every year in the future.

Ringer score for the week is 21 under---11 under on the back...

no way if weather conditions stay the same

   If I remember right there was only one sub-par back nine score shot today. There will be no charge tomorrow. After three days of a brutal set up you can't ease up too much without changing the character of the tournament. I feel sorry for the patrons.
   The Masters is saving a lot of money on crystal with only eight eagles.
   Might as well watch Perfect Storm to prepare myself for tomorrow.

You guys have got to be kidding.  

What a bunch of apologists for horrendous decisions regarding changes to the course at ANGC.  

Sheesh...

You talk about the weather as if it was 35mph gusts and driving, sideways rain off the Firth of Forth.   You talk about firm and fast as if it were Shinnecock's 7th green revisited.  

Isn't this the 3rd or 4th year in a row when Augusta suddenly had strange weather that affected the outcome??   It's early April people...I have news!  The Masters has always had unpredictable weather!  

This WAS THe Masters, where individual hole scores would range from eagle to triple bogey in the blink of an eye.   Where swings of 3-4 shots would routinely happen throughout the tournament.   Where Saturday was "Moving Day", meaning that a number of hot players firing with controlled agressiveness would shoot 65-67 to put themselves in position to contend down the stretch.

In the words of Led Zeppelin, "Does anyone remember laughter?"

Instead, we have this dour, funereal march through fairways narrowed so far by pines that the late afternoon sun doesn't permeate them.   We have train wrecks awaiting on virtually every hole where suddenly a 440 yard par four is a reasonable letup, and a hole without a chance at birdie, much less eagle, is the norm.

Have the 1st, 4th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 14th, 15th, 17th, or 18th holes EVER played as they do today???  

Does anyone remember an Eagle?   Does anyone recall a roar?

Perhaps I'm being a bit too nostalgic, but as I peruse a leaderboard with scores that look like the First Flight of the local club championship, I'm left to wonder what happened to what was once the most exciting tournament on the planet?

If the problem is technology, which I truly believe, then the solution as proposed by the 2007 Masters is even worse.

It's similar to extending the Tennis Court at Wimbledon, so that each player is 40 yards from the net.

In some terribly misguided attempt to have today's golfers use the same clubs that their forefather's used, what's been created is some farcical, bizarro world where 320 yard drives to 20 yard wide fairways, followed by 220 yard five irons are deemed to be somehow presenting historically accurate challenges on the same courses.

Yes, it's all because of the weather.  

Some year, we'll get it all right.

The answer is, of course, no.

One thing that I have always understood about Augusta and the Masters was the idea was not necessarily for the course to physically play difficult, even for a PGA Tour player, but for it to mentally play difficult.

Shots such as the second on the 13th and 15th, the tee shot on 10, 11 and 17, and the approach on 14 were not designed to provide a severe physical challenge, but were design to provide enticement for the player to try and make something happened if they dared, and for a variety of options to make that thing happen. The trouble and challenge were apparent, the success was in executed at that moment and at that time (something I call shot urgency - is there no more important shot than the tee shot on 11 to set the stage for the next 2-3 holes?)

However, as I just told Mike on AIM, for every bit of temptation the golf ball makes possible (and coincidentally, risk removeed) the more Augusta removes the oppurtunity for that temptation to combat the ease at which the tempation can now be had.

THIS is the inherent problem I see right now.

Indeed, perhaps no better barometer exists as for the nature and extent to which technological equipment advances have impuned the game as to the changes and results of the changes to Augusta through the years.