News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Aaron Katz

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2006, 05:58:00 PM »
I think scoring would be worse if they removed the second cut.  

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2006, 10:09:35 PM »
David,

It's a difficult question to answer due to the dual nature behind the golf course's creation.

On one hand it was intended to provide a championship venue.
On the other, it was a winter retreat for its members.

And therein lies the conflict.

In 1934 the disparity between those two objectives was far narrower than today, thus the golf course had to follow one of two choices.

Retain its appeal to its members or to provide a challenge for championship golf.

It chose the latter.

Yet, the routing and individual hole designs remain brilliant.

However, the narrowing of the corridors of play have been dramatic.

In some cases holes have been improved over the years.
# 10 and # 16 are good examples, and, # 7 is probably another.   However, the tree planting has taken its toll on the original design principles.

My hope would be that Augusta comes out with a "tournament ball" and returns the playing corridors to their intended width.

T_MacWood

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2006, 10:45:25 PM »
I just purchased Stan Byrdy's book, "Alister Mackenzie's Masterpiece- The Augusta National Golf Club". While I've always known about the significant changes that have been done to the course over the years, I never realized just how significant until I saw the side by side sketches. Byrdy has a sketch of each hole, with a circa 1930 sketch on the left and the hole as it presently is on the right. It's truly astonishing. I've always scoffed every April when I hear the CBS crew go on about Mack.'s design, when in actuality, I don't think the man would recogize the course other than the routing. This book just reinforces that sentiment.

While we all know that Mack. was the real designer there, I get the sense members have really strayed from what Mr. Jones ideas were as to what made a great course. He and Mack. shared a love of TOC and wanted to emulate that the best they could on the property. While it's true the course has had to evolve in reaction to the technology of the game, I wonder how much of the course stills holds true to the concepts that the two men had in trying to duplicate the shots found at TOC. It seems the course is played more and more through the air there. Sure there is oppurtunities to run the ball up, such as at the 14th, but I wonder if they would be pleased if they saw the course today. Any thoughts?

David
I would agree. Not only has the course been altered regarding the gound and air, even more obvious is the change horizontally - width wise. The focus on challenging or penalizing the very best pros has made them stray from the original concept which adressed all levels. The other big change is the loss of the MacKenzie aesthetic.

I wonder if MacKenzie would be surprised the course became an annual major championship venue. I don't think he anticipated that when he designed the course.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2006, 10:46:12 PM by Tom MacWood »

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2006, 11:02:14 PM »
I just purchased Stan Byrdy's book, "Alister Mackenzie's Masterpiece- The Augusta National Golf Club". While I've always known about the significant changes that have been done to the course over the years, I never realized just how significant until I saw the side by side sketches. Byrdy has a sketch of each hole, with a circa 1930 sketch on the left and the hole as it presently is on the right. It's truly astonishing. I've always scoffed every April when I hear the CBS crew go on about Mack.'s design, when in actuality, I don't think the man would recogize the course other than the routing. This book just reinforces that sentiment.

While we all know that Mack. was the real designer there, I get the sense members have really strayed from what Mr. Jones ideas were as to what made a great course. He and Mack. shared a love of TOC and wanted to emulate that the best they could on the property. While it's true the course has had to evolve in reaction to the technology of the game, I wonder how much of the course stills holds true to the concepts that the two men had in trying to duplicate the shots found at TOC. It seems the course is played more and more through the air there. Sure there is oppurtunities to run the ball up, such as at the 14th, but I wonder if they would be pleased if they saw the course today. Any thoughts?

David
I would agree. Not only has the course been altered regarding the gound and air, even more obvious is the change horizontally - width wise. The focus on challenging or penalizing the very best pros has made them stray from the original concept which adressed all levels. The other big change is the loss of the MacKenzie aesthetic.

I wonder if MacKenzie would be surprised the course became an annual major championship venue. I don't think he anticipated that when he designed the course.

Tom, I don't think Jones anticipated that either. This is pure speculation, but it seems to me his reluctance to name the tournament the Masters supports that. In addition, Jones felt that the the 2 opens were the greatest tournaments in golf. I don't believe he ever wavered on that.

Another thing you bring up Tom is something I forgot to. You mentioned the Mackenzie aesthetic. From looking at old photos it's really amazing how little of the Mack. look remains in regards to the bunkers. Generally speaking, this happens because of poor maintenance, which is usually percipitated  by cost concerns. Yet, here we have a club that has been a haven for some of the biggest captains in industry and the bunkers hardly resemble Mackenzie's "baseball glove" looking bunkers. The only one that does, on the 10th, which they go on and on about, it completely non-functional because obviously, it was a green side bunker originally.
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2006, 10:01:34 AM »

On the other, it was a winter retreat for its members.


I was under the impression that most of the membership at Augusta National during the early years was relatively local, mostly Augusta and Atlanta folks. Of course Atlanta was probably 4 or 5 hours way back then. In any event, I was never under the impression it was built for northerners as a winter retreat. Winters in Augusta aren't that good.
"We finally beat Medicare. "

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #30 on: November 28, 2006, 10:57:55 AM »
John -

There was only one founding member from Atlanta. Most were from the NE and Midwest.

Augusta (along with Aiken, S.C.) was a major winter resort for wealthly northerners for several decades. That ended when Florida resorts were developed in the mid-20's. But until then Augusta was a thriving winter resort town. Several major league baseball teams held spring training there before moving to FLA in the '20's.

Bob
« Last Edit: November 28, 2006, 11:08:26 AM by BCrosby »

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #31 on: November 28, 2006, 11:05:44 AM »
John -

There was only one founding member from Atlanta. Most were from the NE and Midwest.

Augusta (along with Aiken, S.C.) was a major winter resort for wealthly northerners for several decades. That ended when Florida resorts was developed in the mid-20's. But until then Augusta was a thriving winter resort town. Several major league baseball teams held spring training there before moving to FLA in the '20's.

Bob

and sportswriters returning from spring training would stop off and cover the Masters
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Andy Doyle

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #32 on: November 28, 2006, 01:42:02 PM »
Did the financial pressures of the Depression start ANGC down this seemingly unintended path right from the beginning?

The sense I got from reading about the beginnings of ANGC was that Jones wanted to build a course that exhibited his architectural ideals in a place out of the limelight where he could relax and play with his friends.

Financial woes led to promoting a casual tournament among friends to the "Masters" to attract members/investors?  It seems the club is more wedded to the tournament than to the principles of its founder.

Andy

Phil Benedict

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #33 on: November 28, 2006, 02:30:17 PM »
Did the financial pressures of the Depression start ANGC down this seemingly unintended path right from the beginning?

The sense I got from reading about the beginnings of ANGC was that Jones wanted to build a course that exhibited his architectural ideals in a place out of the limelight where he could relax and play with his friends.

Financial woes led to promoting a casual tournament among friends to the "Masters" to attract members/investors?  It seems the club is more wedded to the tournament than to the principles of its founder.

Andy

I think this is an important point about the evolution of the club.  Money was a problem in the early years.  It's possible, for example, that financial pressure may have affected the maintenance of those distinctive MacKenzie bunkers.

As to the importance of the tournament relative to the founder's desires, its pretty clear the tournament comes first by a wide margin.  Without the Masters ANGC is another Cypress Point, Seminole or Pine Valley, which ain't bad, but it's the tournament that makes ANGC membership something that CEOs crave above all others.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2006, 08:28:07 PM »
Phil,

CEO"s have little to say about how ANGC and The Master's are run.

Being vocal about how to run things at ANGC may be the quickest exit strategy for members. ;D

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #35 on: November 29, 2006, 10:11:06 AM »
Just an observation: Early photo's of ANGC show it to be quite open with minimal trees.  Today it appears to be very woodsy...at least on TV...and golfers have tee shots down narrow treelined coridors....where in the UK did Jones play such woody courses that inspired Augusta?
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #36 on: November 29, 2006, 10:20:27 AM »
I don't think he did Craig, didn't he design it with MacKenzie to be wide open?

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #37 on: November 29, 2006, 10:35:33 AM »
Thats what I mean...if he designed it to be wide open, why is it so closed in now?
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

Phil Benedict

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #38 on: November 29, 2006, 10:40:48 AM »
Phil,

CEO"s have little to say about how ANGC and The Master's are run.

Being vocal about how to run things at ANGC may be the quickest exit strategy for members. ;D

Pat,

My point is that Augusta's membership is a Who's Who of American business because CEO's want so badly to become members, not that they have any influence once they join, unless they become a club official.  Bill Gates had to wait to become a member for example.  I don't know if he belongs to Cypress Point or Pine Valley.  It's the tournament that provides the extra bit of cache that attracts the likes of Gates, Warren Buffett and Sandy Weill, to name three business all-stars, don't you think?  

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #39 on: November 29, 2006, 10:50:03 AM »
I would be very curious to read an analysis of the modifications to ANGC, and more specifically how they occurred during Jones days of high health, as he became ill, and in the 10 or so years following his passing. Reason being, I think this entire notion of preserving a golf course in a petrified state from a fixed point in time makes no sense to me. The leaders of the club should be able to make the decisions as they see fit for what they view as the betterment of the club.

From the outside looking in, perhaps Andy Doyle's last paragraph 7 or 8 posts ago hit the nail square on the head.

I'd be curious to hear or read Jones position on the evolution of the golf course during his life time. Am I correct in remembering that even during his lifetime the course went through significant changes? I would also be curious to hear what ideas were put forth that he opposed that were perhaps later moved through.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #40 on: November 29, 2006, 10:55:25 AM »
The "leaders" of the club know more than the architect that designed the course?

The "leaders" of ANGC know that the vast majority of people viewing the Masters on TV think Augusta is the most beautiful and most challenging course in the world....so long as they maintain the appearence, 99% of the viewers will not care how the original design has changed....thus they get away with murder.
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #41 on: November 29, 2006, 11:18:46 AM »
Craig,

Using the most crude terminology, the club hired someone to create a golf course for them. It is their golf course not the architects. Do you get to decide what you want to do with your home on your own terms or do you have to ask the guy that designed it?

I have asked the architects on this board several times about retaining influence at their golf courses beyond opening day and the responses were a concern. Regardless, short of providing a road map to deal with any and all issues that may come up over the life of a golf course how can you be certain what the architect might do 75 years after a golf course has been created.

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #42 on: November 29, 2006, 11:25:51 AM »

From the outside looking in, perhaps Andy Doyle's last paragraph 7 or 8 posts ago hit the nail square on the head.

I'd be curious to hear or read Jones position on the evolution of the golf course during his life time. Am I correct in remembering that even during his lifetime the course went through significant changes? I would also be curious to hear what ideas were put forth that he opposed that were perhaps later moved through.

Jim:

The book identified at the beginning of this thread is the best source I have seen for detailing the changes that took place and when as well as the general philosophy behind the course.  I cannot recall Jones' support or opposition to changes being discussed in the book.

I've enjoyed this thread.  My impression is that the current changes very much depart from the original intent behind the course, but raise the following questions:

1.  Is it possible to present a thorough, demanding championship test of golf on a course that is also a pleasure to play for the average golfer given that the spread between the average drive of an amateur and a leading professional has increased from probably around 50 yards in the 50's to more like 100 yards today and the accuracy of the touring professional has increased dramatically while (I suspect) the accuracy of an average player has not?

2.  Has the narrowing of August National made for a more interesting and thorough test of championship golf?

3.  Have the recent changes had much of an effect on the member playing from the members tees?





Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #43 on: November 29, 2006, 11:31:58 AM »
JES...I agree, you can be ceratin of only one thing, and that is change will happen...fairway lines, green contours, bunker shape, and membership...etc. will forever be changing....

However, the original owners commisioned a particuliar design and shouldn't that design be the guide for any future "changes"?

From the photo's I have seen ANGC was a pretty wide open track when it first opened, and today it looks like a southern forest....they don't plant thousands of trees at TOC and change its character, why have they done this at Augusta?
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

Gary Daughters

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #44 on: November 29, 2006, 12:13:12 PM »

Someone who knows more about this than I might be able to comment on the topic of tree growth and tree management, and how they have contributed to the narrowing of ANGC over the decades, and not just in recent years.  

I read somewhere, and it may be in Curt Sampson's book, that many of the older pines are on the course are in decline.  The writer's theory was that a gradual loss of the trees would restore the course to something closer to what Jones and Mackenzie had in mind.
THE NEXT SEVEN:  Alfred E. Tupp Holmes Municipal Golf Course, Willi Plett's Sportspark and Driving Range, Peachtree, Par 56, Browns Mill, Cross Creek, Piedmont Driving Club

John Shimp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #45 on: November 29, 2006, 12:59:09 PM »
Circling back to a sub-thread on the interconnections of Augusta National and Palmetto in Aiken. Here are a couple of excerpts from a recent Palmetto Golf Club history summary about MacKenzie's/Wendell Miller's work and MacKenzie reaction to the work that was completed at Palmetto.  

For those that haven't played it.  The bunkering now that a member of Doak's team was involved with definetely feels and plays very much MacKenzie.

here are the excerpts:

"In 1932, when Dr. Alister MacKenzie had completed the Augusta National Golf Club, he was asked to draw up plans for converting the Palmetto sand greens to grass and lengthening the course. Many of the original Augusta National investors were Winter Colonists from Aiken who also belonged to Palmetto.  Wendell Miller of New York, who had just finished building Augusta National, was contracted to manage the project.  The work at the Palmetto used some excess materials from the Augusta National project.

There were many minor changes, mostly involving tree and bunker work, throughout the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s and 70’s. Rees Jones suggested some bunker renovations, which began in the late 80’s and were completed when the course was re-grassed in 1995. In 2003, Tom Doak, a recognized authority on Dr. MacKenzie’s work, provided recommendations to restore some of the MacKenzie design characteristics on the golf course. This work was completed in 2005 and mainly involved reworking the bunkers and expanding the greens out towards the existing mounds and slopes.  Noted golf course architect Gil Hanse is now serving as resident architect for the Club."

"Probably the highest compliment paid to Palmetto was made by Dr. Alister MacKenzie in the May 1933 edition of the American Golfer Magazine.  MacKenzie said, “The alterations at Palmetto have been such a success that the Chairman of Bobby Jones’ executive committee at the Augusta National writes me saying, ‘We have only one serious complaint to make against you regarding the Augusta National.  That layout you designed at Aiken is liked so well that the Aiken colony does not seem to be the least bit interested in coming over to the Augusta National’.” "

One other thing worth adding is that Gil Hanse and the golf committee recently re-added 6 or 7 original bunkers to the course.  I played there last Friday and they are terrific.  In addition, Gil Hanse and his team are getting ready to do some extensive work on the course this summer which will cause it to close for 4 months.  The work is focused on regrassing the entire course and removing around 100 trees.  The course is not tree choked now but some tree work will help.


Andy Doyle

Re:Augusta National
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2006, 01:20:45 PM »
... I think this entire notion of preserving a golf course in a petrified state from a fixed point in time makes no sense to me. The leaders of the club should be able to make the decisions as they see fit for what they view as the betterment of the club.

JES:

I certainly don't quibble with the idea that the owners/members of a club should be free to do with the course and club as they wish.  I also don't think that they should attempt to keep a course completely unchanged.

The thing I don't care for (like it makes any difference) is how ANGC has made changes to the course that are completely antithetical of Jones' well-documented philosophies and preferences, and they have somehow managed to cloak it in Jones' spirit.

Andy

David Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #47 on: November 29, 2006, 01:37:56 PM »
... I think this entire notion of preserving a golf course in a petrified state from a fixed point in time makes no sense to me. The leaders of the club should be able to make the decisions as they see fit for what they view as the betterment of the club.

JES:

I certainly don't quibble with the idea that the owners/members of a club should be free to do with the course and club as they wish.  I also don't think that they should attempt to keep a course completely unchanged.

The thing I don't care for (like it makes any difference) is how ANGC has made changes to the course that are completely antithetical of Jones' well-documented philosophies and preferences, and they have somehow managed to cloak it in Jones' spirit.

Andy

Andy, precisely!
"The object of golf architecture is to give an intelligent purpose to the striking of a golf ball."- Max Behr

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #48 on: November 29, 2006, 02:54:42 PM »
John Shimp -

Thanks for the exerpts.

Great news about the recent work at Palmetto. What are the closing and opening dates for Hanse's work this summer? I want to get over there after he has finished. Maybe we can get a little group together.

Bob

Tim Copeland

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Augusta National
« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2006, 03:02:54 PM »
John Shimp -

Thanks for the exerpts.

Great news about the recent work at Palmetto. What are the closing and opening dates for Hanse's work this summer? I want to get over there after he has finished. Maybe we can get a little group together.

Bob


Who is the super at Palmetto now??

Rhett Baker was......I hired him at Clemson after he left his accounting job with one of the cart companies to come back to Clemson to pursue his agronomy degree.....

Just wondering
« Last Edit: November 29, 2006, 03:04:15 PM by Tim Copeland »
I need a nickname so I can tell all that I know.....