Mike Young, I do not intend to be a dick here, but how is Barneys statement having never played the course, reconcile with your position agreeing with kelly, on the Rod Whittman Lorne Rubenstein piece ?

Adam,
Thats where we are different on this particular piece...I was trying to be a dick....
Re: the Rubenstein piece....if I remember correctly....I just stated that the article was a PR piece that was requested by his friend Zokol....we all push for those.....all the article was after was ink....so I don't think we should over analyze it.
Merry Christmas,
Mike

Now that my drunk is wearing off I'm wondering if the course is all that much changed from 92...I don't buy that a few yards and a few trees really make a difference in 13 years....I didn't even get to see who won in 92 after typing this and tying the pink sash of my wifes robe into a windsor knot around my neck I didn't see the finish of the telecast.  I can't believe Ian Baker Finch was doing so well...but hell, I know he didn't win.   So, would it be the best course in the country if it still stood as it did in 92....I imagine it would...what the hell does a few yards and a tree or two really make anyway.   My God, Pine Valley has suffered much more in the last 20 years or so and you guys (except redanman) continue to give it a pass..

John,

You've been away too long.

I said PV needed a full blown, close down the course for a a year, bring in the chainsaws, turn off the sand-pros and push them onto the railroad tracks, tell Fazio he can play but not touch, and get some freaking sand back in play RESTORATION.

It's no longer the greatest course in the world in its present state.  Lately, they've been putting a bow tie on a pit bull.

Those of you who think that Barney was drunk when he wrote those posts probably drink far too much (or far too little) yourselves.

The hyperbole in the topic line "....greatest course....", "...liar....", etc. is just that, but also supports a very valid argument.  All but one or two of the participants on this thread have never played the course, and the vast majority of the arguments against relate to added length, and how it has changed "strategy."  Over the past 50 years, there have been very few significant green complex changes, and as Barney rightly implies, its the greens that matter at Augusta, not how far back into the trees they put the tees for their annual Invitation tournament.  For each and every one of the participants on this site (including Mike Clayton), playing from the members tees (at 6800?) would be more than enough to provide a challenge and pique architectural interest.

You all know, of course, that there is another course in the world that gets tested by the best players in the world periodically and has also chosen to move tees back into seemingly ridiculous positions, but can also be played from the more normal tees by 99.9% of the golfers in the world without losing interest, due to the great green complexes.

Yes, a lot of Mackenzie's initial work at ANGC is not there, but a lot of the most interesting of the NLE stuff (e.g. the boomerang green on the 9th) were changed long. long ago, when Bobby Jones was still compos mentis.  Get over it, guys!  These things ain't coming back!  And should they?  Who out there would prefer the old 16th to the new one?

Final point/disclaimer.  I have not played or even seen in person ANGC. However, this just puts it in the same category (for me) as Pine Valley and Royal Melbourne.  I'd love to be able to have the free time to play any one of those three courses, but if I had my choice of the three I'd choose Augusta, in a flash.

So, effectively, I agree with Barney.

Shivas, The man who turned down ANGC must be one pussy wipped individual or a moron with money and position. I am so pumped for 2006. I will see you guys in Chicago once the wind come from the south and the grass turns green.

Augusta is a leading example of American privelege and aristocracy.  The members are generally hugely important men.  There is a great deal of pomp and circumstance, and rules to be followed.  There is still an underlying current of class distinction.  I don't fit in there.  

Huh?


Please elaborate by sharing your experiences there.  Thanks in advance.

Mike

Shivas, I guess is not very holiday like to ask you what negative adjective you would chose to put on a guy who has the ability yet choses not to be a member of ANGC.

Augusta is a leading example of American privelege and aristocracy.  The members are generally hugely important men.  There is a great deal of pomp and circumstance, and rules to be followed.  There is still an underlying current of class distinction.  I don't fit in there.  Here is a short list of places I havn't played that I'd rather play:

Seminole
The Valley Club
Los Angeles CC
Riviera
Cypress Point
Prairie Dunes
Friar's Head
Sebonack
Shinnecock
NGLA

Sorry, but that list above is frequented by "hugely important men" and playing there absolutely involves "a great deal of pomp and circumstance".  Valley Club and Prairie Dunes might be the exception.....but your definitely not changing your shoes in the parking lot there either.

 Over the past 50 years, there have been very few significant green complex changes, and as Barney rightly implies, its the greens that matter at Augusta, not how far back into the trees they put the tees for their annual Invitation tournament.  

Interestingly, fully one third of Augusta's greens have had some degree of alteration in the past 40 years.... This is a course that gets an annual facelift, just like Joan Rivers.
That doesn't make it better or worse -- but it is a continually evolving course, regardless of what a drunken John K. says.