Lessons of Augusta?

[T_MacWood]

The many changes to ANGC over the years has been well documented--Perry Maxwell & RTJ at #7, #10, #16. Cliff Roberts many alterations--including plowing over the mounds at #8. Bob Cupp, Nicklaus, George Cobb and now the complete 180 taken by Fazio--moving a design that historically provided choice and rewarded shot making to a course that demands mechanical precision and removing options/recovery when precission is not met.

Whatever the changes no one can argue that the back nine didn't provided great excitement in the way of birdies and eagles (the Masters sould be given credited for some very favorable pin positions on the back nine--genius). The front nine on the other hand was a little US Openish.

What is the lesson? That these architectural changes were all improvements. Or that the course was so good to start even JakaB & Co. couldn't screw it up (the mostly unaltered 3rd is still probably the best hole on the course). Or something else?

As I looked at the new narrowness of the course via the areial views, I couldn't help but wonder if the membership enjoys the course as they once did--it really must be a bitch.

[James Edwards]

Yes, the pin positions were favourable! indeed! especially 16..

For me, the thing which sets the masters apart from all other tournaments are the par 5's on the back nine.  You always have a chance in picking up 2,3,4 shots on them or dropping shots - I'm still trying to work out whether this is a good thing or a bad thing?

[Mike_Sweeney]

The Pros play a different game than I do. Just looking at the bowling alley of the 18th tee gives me the jimmies. Aerial Bunkers (trees), may be needed in the Pro game. Tom Fazio may know what he is doing in reference to the Pro game. Basically, one golf course cannot fit all, and that is okay.

Obviously I would love to play Augusta National someday, but more so for the entire place, not as much the course. However, there are probably 5 holes (10-13, 15) there on my Top 10 holes I want to play.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Ah, I held my breath since I have not logged in for a few days.  I made it to the sweet 16    42.

I just started reading David Owen's book "The Making of the Masters", and I think it really starts strong.  What a great description of the emotions one has for the tournament that he writes in the beginning.  I may be prejudiced because of his credentials, but it seems very well written for a golf book, most of which are written by amateurs and are poor compared to other contemporary books, but this Owen seems to be a real professional writer.  He does quote Dobereiner as saying that Robert's credo was that "everything about Augusta National Golf Club and the Masters had to be the best, and if it was not the best then it would have to be improved every year until it was."  If the place is like the Vatican and these pronouncements are recorded and held in a an inner sanctum and read each day then we can assume that Hootie is directing Fazio to follow Robert's creed and make it the best.  It seems obvious that the style of game that is being implemented on the course through architectural changes is what they consider to be the best architecture for today's style of game.  It is not so much a desire to maintain the design spirit of Jones, MacKenzie and Roberts as it is a dogma to make the course better, and better means it must keep up with the equipment changes and the challenges they think are necessary to meet the contemporary player.  So if you take Robert's credo to its logical conclusion there may be nothing sacrosanct about the original design, it is all subject to change in the name of making the place the very best.  

[Matthew Mollica]

Tom,

I visited Augusta before the last two or three efforts at course alteration were made. Trees have been planted on many holes since my visit.

Even in it's old form, I walked the front nine, and thought 'how do these guys pick up shots on this side?'

I have since thought that the course is really of two very distinct halves, where 1-9 is a test of discipline and measured execution, and 10-18 gives you a chance to gamble more. I feel the changes are largely consistent with this thought.

Matthew

[James Edwards]

Matthew,

Precisely and that is why The Masters is worth its weight in gold because how many other tournament venues have it this way around tough front 9 / not quite as tough back 9?  Its exciting for the golfers and the viewing public to see 31 shot on the back nine by more than one player... (or 36/37/38?)

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom MacWood- I too was somewhat stunned by the narrowness. Especially on 17 and 18. It reminded me of Butler Nat'l, and was aptly described by one elder rules official as "a hernia". But since ANGC was firm and fast, it may not have felt as long.

I tend to lean towards your latter, the continued greatness and aspects of the original design shine through and are largely responsible for the excitement we witnessed this weekend.

The one aspect that the new additions (trees) takes-away, is the often "stupid" sometimes "heroic" shots that we all have tried and love to see the pros attempt, especially to those greens. Now, prudence is almost always forced upon the errant shot-maker. Reducing the number of times I'll be screaming at the TV " you idiot", or "watch this".

On 11, it seems like that right side slope, was integral to pulling the ball into the pond. How many dunked the ball this year, versus previous years?

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

I think you asked some very fine questions there in that opening post.

What are the lessons learned and how could someone screw up that course and have the changes over the years done that?

As to the Masters those players really are so good that narrowing down really doesn't do much to them. But what is it about that course that allows it to defend itself or let those players go low on it?

I think you hit the nail on the head---it's basically all about the pins arrangements they use and they did hit on a bit of genius setting them as they did on the back nine. Through the tournament some of the players just talked about the various pin set-up from day to day--particularly Mickelson.

Those greens are just so good and so variable with various pin positions! The thing the tourney did though is basically got that course's ideal maintenance meld ratcheting up through the week where they were right on the money of super ideal by Sunday.

The combination FIRMNESS and speed they got on those greens just turned the Kleig lights up to the max on every little nuance of those greens and that course!! I can't help thinking that it's such a fine line they were on that way. A little firmer and a little faster and they would've turned that tourney into a virtual freak show. So it looked to me like they got their ideal maintenance meld right on that really fine line that it needs to be to create various effects from those players. ANGC's tourney committee and their maintenance staff are to be really congratulated for first figuring out exactly what that is and then getting it done as they did---thank God the weather cooperated for them.

But if you ask me, Tom, the greens on that course, with their varied shapes, orientations and particularly their beautifully rolling slopes and contours are just so good that if ANGC for some reason decided to take the trees off that course and expand those fairways out to what they used to be they could still get whatever they wanted to out of those pros by simply doing what they did on that course with those GREENS by just using firmness, speed and pin postions!

That's all they need to regulate on that course the greens are so good---it looks like they understand exactly how to regulate that and move the effect around to get whatever result they're looking for.

It was just amazing to see that in action this week, particularly on Sunday. Those guys are so good on execution it's astounding so for the best of them it just got down to caddie and player really reading that course and its architecture well or not.

Some of the shots I saw from the likes of Els, Choi, Mickelson et al were incredible and so different than we normally see at other tournaments. They obviously understood those teeny little nuances on those greens that required very small spots to be hit to let the ball FILTER! It was almost like the ball was on glass once it started to filter. There wasn't any of their usual pin hunting and they couldn't suck the ball back so it was a whole different strategic situation and amazing to see. The margins for error were so thin right on and all over some of those greens--but perfect shots were perfectly rewarded and those that weren't became almost disasterous. It was just really impressive to me that some of those pros could even figure out what the perfect approach shot and area needed to be and then go do it as well as they did.

I think the lesson I learned is on a really good course, with good architecture and greens like that one has if you fiddle with that maintenance meld just right and set those pins for an effect it's incredible the varied results you can get from players who are as good as those guys are.

Once you learn how to do all that just the way you want I think it's be pretty hard to ever screw up ANGC.

[Dunlop_White]

Exactly! The combination of fast fairways for extra distance, favorable pin locations, and of course, outstanding play accounted for the excitement we enjoyed on Sunday.

Without firm and fast turf, the pros would have been approaching from greater distances, which increases the degree of difficulty, especially with the bold undulations which protect the pins on these greens. The soft, wet conditions of '02 and '03 limited the opportunity for low scores and excitement in this manner.

Without the favorable, accessable pin positions on Sunday, the tournament would have lacked some of the fireworks, and resembled the three earlier rounds.

- Hole 8, Saturday: 10 birdies, no eagles....Sunday: 19 birdies, 2 eagles.
- Hole 11, Saturday: 1 birdie (Langer's 80 foot putt) .... Sunday: 5 birdies, 1 eagle.
- Hole 14, Saturday: 2 birdies; Sunday: 10 birdies
- Hole 16, Saturday: 4 birdies: Sunday: 14 birdies, 2 eagles
- There were 58 birdies 4 eagles on the back on Saturday, while there were 82 birdies and 9 eagles on Sunday.
- Every hole, but 10, on the back 9 had more birdies and eagles on Sunday than on Saturday under similar conditions.
               
   

[A.G._Crockett]

Forgive me if this is a foolish question, but are members and their guests "allowed" to play the tournament tees on a regular basis?  Are the tournament tees even open for member play thoughout the season? Additionally, what is the difference between the members tees and the tournament tees total yardage, and especially on 18?  (I agree with Mike Sweeney; every time they show a view from the 18th tee down that chute, my stomach contracts!  I can't help but feel like I'd by lying 4 or so by the time I exited the trees...)

[Dunlop_White]

Augusta was originally a course that provided choice and rewarded shot making. Yes!  Now it's a course that demands mechanical precision throughout and penalizes the player by removing recovery options when precission is not met. Yes!

Under the old formula, you could almost count on the drama and the theater on Sunday's back 9 most every year. Under the new equation, I think Tom Paul is right. You have to have everything clicking to get the same excitement.... the perfect "maintenance meld" of firm fast fairways, slick greens, cooperating weather, accessable pin positions, and many outstanding players, two of which are in a zone.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

I think you have to differentiate between perceived narrowness and true narrowness.

The rough isn't rough in the sense that most think.
It's rather benign, almost a fairway/rough combination.

I would agree with Kelly Blake Moran's assessment.

I also think the focus of the club is on the Tournament course and not the Member's course, hence I would conclude that for the members, today's golf course is nowhere near as much fun to play as the courses of yesteryear.

Lastly, Fazio is but the instrument of their intent, like so many before him.

[Carlyle Rood]

This discussion astounds me.

[Jfaspen]

I don't think the trees in the 18 chute would provide me as much trouble as the uphill second shot to the green.  I also think that the back tee really brings those bunkers into play.  I would prob take driver.. It would take a damn good shot not to hit the trees and a perfect shot to avoid the bunkers.  

I think it is a perfect finishing/playoff hole.

jf

[Kevin_Reilly]

The Golf Channel last night reported that Tom Fazio and the club were pleased with the course setup, and it was likely that there would not be any changes in the course in advance of next year's tournament.

[T_MacWood]

How many trees have been planted on the course in the last few years? I was astonished by the narrowness of many holes....like #15. I don't recall golfers being forced to layup because of a wall of trees in the past, I have memories of golfers being forced curve the ball around a couple of large trees on the left, but not a forced chip out. Would Seve have had the choice today at #15 that he had in 1986, or would he have been forced to chip out a la Mickelson?

I couldn't tell if #1, #2 or #8 played narrower. #3 is so good rough just gets in the way of its brillance. The rough played havoc at #5. #7 has always been narrow, but now is even narrower with rough. At #9 and #10 has the rough improved these holes? #11 has gone from wide open to incredibly narrow and pinched by trees. There seemed to be very high number of players in the trees on the right at #13....I'm not certain why. #14 is now extremely narrow. #15 has a very small window. #17 and #18 are very very tight.

The course is obviously much more difficult today, but has the price for increased difficulty been at the expense of choice and shot making opportunities?

How would golfers like Palmer and Ballesteros have faired under these new circumstances?

The course was designed by MacKenzie and Jones to test the best golfers, but equally important was providing stimulating thought provoking golf for lesser golfers. The tournament is played one week out of the year, is the narrower more penal design less entertaining, more entertaining or about the same for the membership?

[Bruceski]

Would this discussion be so praising of the course if Mickelson wasn't as unconscious as he was on that back nine? I mean, did the guy even miss ONE shot (except the tee shot at 15) from the 12th hole onward? I think we're overreacting to quite simply one of the best stretches of golf ever played.

[A.G._Crockett]

Carlyle,
Why are you astounded?

Bruce
Good point, and it may take more years yet to fully assess these changes.  If what Fazio and the bosses wanted was par protected, then they certainly got that.  12 players broke par, only 16 at par or better.

I was amazed at the statistic that CBS showed many times on the weekend that the winner had come from the final pairing almost always over the past 15 yrs. or so, which would predate the technology problem significantly.  Was the idea of a back-nine charge something of a myth anyway (and a myth that I, for one, had completely bought into)?  Did Hootie, Fazio, et. al., realize that was a myth and try to protect par without regard back-nine heroics?

Any answers for me about members tee yardages and availability of tournament tees throughout the year?  (see previous post, please!)

[Andy Hughes]

It would take a damn good shot not to hit the trees and a perfect shot to avoid the bunkers.

Jeffrey, the announcers said it was 300 yards up the hill to reach the bunkers on 18. I don't think it would take a perfect shot to avoid the bunkers, but just to reach them!  

[Mike Hendren]

Carlisle,

I too am astounded.  

A. G.,

I am totally speculating, but would not be surprised if the average age of The National's membership exceeds 70.  That would likely answer your question as to which tees are typically in use.  

Do not be deceived folks.  I haven't played with anybody on this site who could break 80 from the back tees in tournament conditions.  

Tom Paul,

You've beaten the maintenance meld horse to death.  The greatness of Augusta National Golf Club is not the prevailing cosmetology.  In my opinion, it's the routing and the greens - both of which have indeed been occasionally altered throughout the course's history - often for the better, I'm guessing.

Mike

[Brian_Gracely]

A.G.,

I believe there are only one set of member's tees and they are ~6300yds.  I only know that because one of the writers from the Detroit Free Press wrote about being selected for the Monday Media Lottery and mentioned the length, http://www.freep.com/sports/othersports/carlos14_20040414.htm

[Peter_Collins]

Perhaps when assessing the quality of the architecture of a golf course which hosts a major tournament every year,   one should consider the course's ability to create good television between 3pm and 6pm on Sunday afternoon.  

If so, I suggest Fazio's design/set-up was a success.  

[George Pazin]

Nice to hear no changes are planned as of now. One of the things that has bothered me most about the recent changes is the seemingly accelerating pace of change, with little time to reflect on the effects of the changes. I'm a big fan of actually running multiple trials of experiments before coming to conclusions, which brings to mind one of the most astounding incidents of ignorance I've ever personally witnessed.

I was working in NYC at a fairly big investment bank and standing in my boss's office with him and 3 executives from a client. One of the bigwigs said to my boss, "I see from your photos that you have 3 daughters. Did you ever wish you had a son?" My boss said no, he loves his girls. The bigwig then asked if my boss ever tried the "choose the sex of your child" method of conception (some mumbo jumbo about temperature indicators, etc.). My boss again said no, and this guy actually said "We did it and it worked. My wife called me up and said her temperature had spiked or whatever, so I rushed home, did my thing, and, boom, 9 months later out popped a baby boy." !! Nothing like a one trial experiment on a 50/50 proposition....

AG -

I'm under the impression that the tournament tees are only used for the tournament. I think I even have seen interviews with pros who mentioned that their first time playing while not in The Masters was from the member tees. Someone can correct me if I'm mistaken.

[Andy Hughes]

Perhaps when assessing the quality of the architecture of a golf course which hosts a major tournament every year,  one should consider the course's ability to create good television between 3pm and 6pm on Sunday afternoon.  
If so, I suggest Fazio's design/set-up was a success.

But that doesn't assess the architecture of the course--it assesses the drama that results.

[Mike_Cirba]

Can someone cite a specific example where the addition of trees increased the excitement of the tournament, or where narrowing of the course enhanced the drama?