Sand Hills vs ANGC...would you move the Masters

« **Reply #25 on:** September 24, 2004, 04:11:31 PM »

Jim,

Holding up fine is hardly of Masters quality.....If you would give the greens at AGNC a 10...what would you rate the greens at Pine Valley. What did it say on your bag btw...the heat really got to me that day..

« **Reply #26 on:** September 24, 2004, 04:15:23 PM »

Quote from: Dan Herrmann on September 24, 2004, 04:11:22 PM

Quote from: John B. Kavanaugh on September 24, 2004, 03:55:10 PM
Dan,

...In all honesty, hasn't that course seen its time come and gone.

You're kidding, right?

Na....I think the straightness of the modern ball and the sanitary nature of the once hazards have de-championized the once great course......not that that takes anything away from its status as a great little members track..It is really tough to be the best in the world as you said..

« **Reply #27 on:** September 24, 2004, 04:20:05 PM »

I'm laughing out loud

That may be the first time anybody has called Pine Valley a "great little member's track"

« **Reply #28 on:** September 24, 2004, 04:46:45 PM »

JB -

I would give the greens at Oakmont an 11 and at PV a 9.5 if Augusta is a 10.

Which bag did I have that day? I think it was the PV Nike bag. I am looking forward to Tom sending me the little Titleist bag with the VN logo on when they arrive.

« **Reply #29 on:** September 24, 2004, 04:59:31 PM »

Mike,

I agree that ANGC is the best championship course in the world. I know it is fashionable on here to rip this change or that change, but what other major is as exciting? It is the major where players can make up ground with birdies--not just hold on for dear life by making pars. All types of numbers can be posted on the course--from birdie to double. Hate the changes if you want, say it doesn't meet Jones' and McKenzies idea of the original course, but don't say it doesn't almost always produce a great tournament.

Adam

Please explain your comment about evolving past the Masters. Do you think your PPV special should replace the Masters as a major, or are you just saying that the Masters is just another tournament in your view?

« **Reply #30 on:** September 25, 2004, 08:50:07 AM »

Quote from: John B. Kavanaugh on September 24, 2004, 04:15:23 PM

I think the straightness of the modern ball

Hasn't the straightness of the modern ball affected ALL golf courses, UNIVERSALLY ?[/color]

and the sanitary nature of the once hazards have de-championized the once great course

How have the hazards become "sanitary" ?
Could you clearly define what you mean by "sanitary" ?

If you could answer these questions on a hole by hole basis, on a hazard by hazard basis, we could have a very interesting discussion.

I would agree that the ball and high tech equipment have de-championized every course over the last 20 years, forcing most of them to be altered by length, vis a vis, original design or re-construction.[/color]

......not that that takes anything away from its status as a great little members track..It is really tough to be the best in the world as you said..

ANGC is unique, as is The Masters.

« **Reply #31 on:** September 25, 2004, 10:47:38 AM »

Quote from: Dale_McCallon on September 24, 2004, 04:59:31 PM

Adam

Please explain your comment about evolving past the Masters. Do you think your PPV special should replace the Masters as a major, or are you just saying that the Masters is just another tournament in your view?

Dale- I'm not saying that it should replace the Masters, as a major, I'm speculating, with my idea, that it would raise the bar. Imagine watching some of the worlds best without all the typical distractions that crowds & media create. The exclusivity of the invite alone would guarantee viewership. And having it be match-play, would only enhance the drama. Having it at Sand Hills, with the possibility of frequently changing weather conditions, personifies the unpredictable nature of nature, and testing the golfers ability to be aware and adapt.

Certainly the Masters has had an effect on everything else. i.e. Arnies Bay Hill event, strives for that same feeling that the masters exudes, right down to the cabin interviews.

Of course, my imagination is beyond traditional television executive's ability to produce such a production. But I'd bet Bill Gates could do it. Or Dick Youngscap, with a little help from Billy Boy.

« **Reply #32 on:** September 27, 2004, 07:18:10 PM »

Pat,

I have only seen Pine Valley and ANGC from the wrong side of the tube....but don't you agree that the straight ball is more benificial at Pine Valley.....Of the two courses which one allows for the wayward drive, which course requires more tee shots to be worked and not placed and which course streotypes its champions before the first shot is ever hit.....

« **Reply #33 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:05:05 AM »

JimF:

If ANGC's greens are a 10, I'd give Oakmont's greens a 9.5 and PVGC's an 11.

JohnB;

From the wrong side of the tube apparently any golf course looks like a nice little members course to you, except perhaps the course you're looking at when you fall out of your chair and almost hurt yourself.

« **Reply #34 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:03:44 PM »

I regret to say that I've not played ANGC, but I have played Sand Hills. In my muddled judgment, Sand Hills, while a marvelous creation on a spectacular plot of land in the middle-of-fricking-nowhere, is not a worthy venue for a major championship. The PGA tour would tear it up. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen: Sir, I've seen Augusta on television, I've read about Augusta and I've walked the fairways of Augusta during the masters and you, Mr. Sand Hills, are no Augusta National Golf Club.

« **Reply #35 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:23:13 PM »

Quote from: tlavin on September 28, 2004, 05:03:44 PM

In my muddled judgment, Sand Hills, while a marvelous creation on a spectacular plot of land in the middle-of-fricking-nowhere, is not a worthy venue for a major championship. The PGA tour would tear it up.

Terry,

Maybe they should bring in Tom Fazio to make Sand Hills major-worthy...

Just curious. WHY do you think Sand Hills is not a worthy venue? WHY do you think The TOUR would tear up Sand Hills? Do you think they'd do so in firm and fast conditions (ie, perhaps not Shinnecock-like, but close) with wind? And why is that important to the question? The Tour's torn up some quite good courses in its day, including ANGC, and they're still quite good courses.

« **Reply #36 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:34:34 PM »

I just don't think that Sand Hills is difficult enough for the pro tour. I think a winning score would probably be in the 20 under region, regardless of the wind. The difficulty that most people would have with the course, it seems to me, is hitting it into the right section of the putting surface to avoid circus putts. Given the length of the touring pros, they would be hitting short irons/wedges into a lot of the par 4's and they would have a two-putt opportunity on all of the par 5's.

The pros also score well at ANGC, no question about it, but the recent changes (lenghth, mature pines creating tunnels) have toughened the course considerably.

I hasten to add that Sand Hills is a treasure. It is one of my top five golf experiences, but I simply don't think it is up to ANGC's standards. The question, remember, was would you move the Masters. Nope, not in a million years, is my reply.

« **Reply #37 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:45:59 PM »

Quote from: John B. Kavanaugh on September 27, 2004, 07:18:10 PM

I have only seen Pine Valley and ANGC from the wrong side of the tube....but don't you agree that the straight ball is more benificial at Pine Valley.....

Straight isn't a relative term, and both courses have fairly wide LZ's, hence the margins for error on the tee shot are generous for both courses. However, the penalty for wildly errant tee shots would be far greater at Pine Valley.

But, do the best players in the world, playing at their best, hit wildly errant tee shots ?

And, does a shorter Pine Valley allow the best players in the world to hit shorter clubs then their drivers off the tee, making them more accurate ?[/color]

Of the two courses which one allows for the wayward drive, which course requires more tee shots to be worked and not placed

Both courses have their share of doglegs, or features which require or predispose one to working the ball.
Pine Valley, being shorter, allows the best players in the world, playing at their best, to hit shorter, more accurate clubs off of the tee.[/color]

and which course streotypes its champions before the first shot is ever hit.....

That's an unfair comment because Pine Valley hasn't hosted a Major tournament, featuring the best players in the world, almost every year, for the last 70 years.

But, it's safe to say that Pine Valley has recognized the deleterious nature of the developments in equipment over the years, and has responded by making architectural changes to the golf course, just like ANGC has done.[/color]

« **Reply #38 on:** September 28, 2004, 05:56:03 PM »

Whether or not the wind at Sand Hills would affect the scoring as much as Doug thinks it would, or as little as tlavin thinks it would, the wind would definitely affect the public's perception of the tournament, and that's what has by and large been missing from this thread.

The Masters is more a state of mind than a golf tournament. It is a placid (yet nerve-wracking) stroll through sun-splashed flower beds on a picture perfect spring day. It is vibrant colors and warm weather and still waters and towering pines that rustle rather than bend. It is the living emodiment of the day most golfers would describe if they could play one more round of golf before they died. Some of us would choose Sand Hills for that final round -- with flat earth tones surrounding the golfing corridors, potentially overcast skies and flapping pants legs, and perhaps a little snot dripping from our nose. Even at its most utterly benign, Sand Hills projects a rough, rugged look, while Augusta National is manicured to a point almost beyond perfection. I suggest that the scoring is largely irrelevant; it's the setting that makes the Masters.

Nicklaus was right: Without Augusta National, there is and can be no Masters.

« **Reply #39 on:** September 29, 2004, 11:43:57 AM »

If they did move it to Sand Hills the pros would complain that the greens are too fast and much too severe. No winking smiley face.

From the 7000 yard markers with the greens the way they are presently and with difficult but not impossible pin placements (of which there are many) and the ever present wind The Sand Hills Golf Club is the greatest test of championship golf in America.

No rough needs to be lengthened, no fairways narrowed, no greens need to be dried out and no new tees need to be built. They may hit wedges in all day long but they'll rarely make the putts.

The course in its present state will swallow 'em whole.

No homer crap. Just ask the last 21 guys who have gone including two PGA pros - its too hard.

That schmoe who wrote in Golf Magazine a few years ago "Where's the challenge" pissed someone off.

But this is all moot - no Augusta, probably no Masters. Maybe Peachtree or East Lake.

« **Reply #40 on:** September 29, 2004, 11:45:40 AM »

Rich:

What a grandiloquent post. Bobby Clampett always strives to summarize the magic of Augusta but generally fails with his scripted, stilted prose. The Masters is truly a state of mind for the average golfer. It represents all of the promise of the game as most of us are getting ready for the season to start in earnest. The blooming flowers and booming golf shots and deafening roars from Amen Corner all combine to wake up the dormant golfers of America. When the Masters is done, the season's begun...

« **Reply #41 on:** September 29, 2004, 11:48:38 AM »

Quote from: Gene Greco on September 29, 2004, 11:43:57 AM

The course in its present state will swallow 'em whole.

No homer crap. Just ask the last 21 guys who have gone including two PGA pros - its too hard.

Gene:

I was at Sand Hills in July and saw the course record posted in the pro shop. I can't remember the golfer or the precise score, but if memory serves it was some guy named Moe and he shot about ten below. Am I right on this? He must have made some putts!

« **Reply #42 on:** September 29, 2004, 11:59:44 AM »

TL:

I knew I'd be hearing from you.

Seven years ago TL. Its not the same course. The greens are harder and faster.

Is Augusta National the same course it was seven years ago? These guys are are still double digit below par.

Shinnecock? Lancaster shot a 29 on the back side during the Open.

Shinnecock has wind but not like Sand Hills and the courses in the UK. In a four day tourney the wind may stop one day and scores would drop but this would be balanced by the day it screams. You'd see 15-20 shot differentials. And alot of grumbling.

« **Reply #43 on:** September 29, 2004, 12:01:18 PM »

Surely it all simply depends on the setup. The most boring simple course in the world can be made to play next to impossible and the toughest course can be setup to play considerably less so.

Who cares what they shoot? I'd love to see anything played there, just so I can see the course. Almost makes me wish they needed the exposure and signed up with SWWOG.

Check that - I hope they resist all impulses and let it remain a slice of heaven on earth

.

« **Reply #44 on:** September 29, 2004, 01:05:23 PM »

tlavin:

My thesaurus lists the following synonyms for "grandiloquent:"

pompous
pretentious
verbose
longwinded
overbearing

Looks like Bobby Clampett and I have something in common, and it's not good golf.

« **Reply #45 on:** September 29, 2004, 02:35:32 PM »

Quote from: Rick Shefchik on September 29, 2004, 01:05:23 PM

tlavin:

My thesaurus lists the following synonyms for "grandiloquent:"

pompous
pretentious
verbose
longwinded
overbearing

Looks like Bobby Clampett and I have something in common, and it's not good golf.

I checked my dictionary (the OED, no less) before I used the word and it said, "lofty or imposing style of writing". I certainly wouldn't imply pomposity! Rather, I thought you were being articulate, perspicacious and flowery!

« **Reply #46 on:** September 29, 2004, 03:57:33 PM »

Now that's more like it! (Although I'd gladly bow to Augusta National in the flowery dept.)

News:

JakaB

JakaB

Dan Herrmann

Jim Franklin

Dale_McCallon

Patrick_Mucci

A_Clay_Man

JakaB

TEPaul

tlavin

Doug Wright

tlavin

Patrick_Mucci

Rick Shefchik

Gene Greco

tlavin

tlavin

Gene Greco

George Pazin

Rick Shefchik

tlavin

Rick Shefchik