Annual Dog Pile On Augusta - A Comparison with Cypress Point Club

[Mike Hendren]

Golf Digest's top ranking for Augusta National Golf Club opens the annual season for bashing the course.  While I don't necessarily believe it is the best course in the country (Shinnecock Hills gets my vote and have not had the pleasure ot seeing Pine Valley), I take issue with those who find that ranking unbelievable. 

I have walked the course on four separate occasions during the tournament, hardly qualifying me to be in the know.  That said, I thought it relevent to compare the individuals golf holes at Cypress Point, a course I have both played and walked (witnessing the brilliance of Messrs. Huckaby, Duran and Cirba and Dr. Childs) with those at Augusta National.  Certainly  golf course architecture is more than the merit of the individuals holes, but Ran hisownself has in the past carried on an architectural match play between courses for what that's worth. 

I have not finished my analysis, but feel compelled to open with these questions:  1) is there a single par 5 at CPC that is superior to the worst (take your pick) par 5 at ANGC?  I think not.  2) Excepting the 16th at CPC the four short holes are ANGC are superior to the remaining three at CPC.  I would also add that for professional tournament play the highly underrated 4th at ANGC is equally challenging to CPC's magnificent 16th.

I'll address the two shot holes later, including the grossly underrated 1st, 5th, 9th and 18th at ANGC. 

Mike

[Tom Huckaby]

Michael:

The true brilliance that day at CPC was witnessed by US, as you picked up my driver and with zero practice, totally cold, disdained the Isthmus of Moriarty and lashed one onto the 16th green.  I still feel honored to witness that.

 

As for your analysis, as you know I have a very deep love for CPC and I am an unabashed homer to boot.

Yet I can find no fault with anything you wrote.

Augusta National to me (as seen only on TV) surely does seem worthy of any accolades one might give.  #1 in the nation seems a bit high to me too (as you know I reserve that perch for Sand Hills) but to me there is also zero doubt it is one of those 10-15 courses that are so great that it is certainly not crazy to call #1.

TH

[Rich Goodale]

...to me there is also zero doubt it is one of those 10-15 courses that are so great that it is certainly not crazy to call #1.

TH

Grasshopper (or is it Huckhopper?)--in that last phrase you say "the thing that is," to paraphrase the Earl of Rochester.  Kudos.

RFG

[Chip Gaskins]

it is really hard to compare these courses unless you compare Augusta from the members tees.  the Masters tees are a totally totally different golf course.  hazards don't even come into play off the tee from back there.

#5 at CPC is by far better than #8 at Augusta

#7 at CPC is by far better than #16 at Augusta

#4 at Augusta is very challenging, but it is all due to the 14 stempmeter speed green, not the actual tee shot.

#1 and #5 at Augusta are both underrated in my opinion.  the tee shot at #1 requires boldness and the green is one of the more interesting on the course.  #5 green maybe the most interesting (holding #14 out) on the course.

[Lou_Duran]

Mike,

I remember that day very well.  35+mph wind, cold, heavily aerated greens and all, it was still a fine day.

CPC is my favorite course (Shinny is #2), and though I have not played ANGC either, I've walked every hole forwards as well as backwards and I agree with your statements.  CPC is a members course.  ANGC is a tournament course of the highest order.

An acquaintance with whom I've played quite a bit of golf used to play ANGC in an annual tournament hosted by one of the large timber companies.  This guy was a club champion at a couple different places and was good enough to have played a few Senior PGA Tour events via the Monday qualifiers.  From the members' tees, he said that ANGC was very playable tee to green, but the greens were absolutely ridiculously difficult, and the pins weren't tucked or running particularly fast during the events.  With all the elevation changes and uneven ground, most of us would probably have a hard time hitting more than a handful of greens.

I am always surprised by the amount of flak that ANGC gets on this site.  It is still relatively open off the tee (the shute on 18 looks menacing but who plays it back there but the pros during the Masters?).  The rough is minimal, and except for 12 and 15 to a lesser extent, whatever water there is can be played around it.  What might keep the course from being at the top of my list are the crazy greens that even the pros can't seem to manage.  It is a the top of my list of courses I long to play.         

[Kalen Braley]

Mike,

While I haven't been to ANGC, based on pics and TV coverage of what I've seen of #2, I would put #5 at CPC up against it any day of the week.

[Jim Nugent]

Excepting the 16th at CPC the four short holes are ANGC are superior to the remaining three at CPC. 

All of ANGC's par 3's are better than #15 at CPC? 

[Garland Bayley]

Isn't #16 at ANGC just normal RTJ penal architecture? The only quirk is that if you hit away from the hole you end up near it.

[Kalen Braley]

Excepting the 16th at CPC the four short holes are ANGC are superior to the remaining three at CPC. 

All of ANGC's par 3's are better than #15 at CPC? 

Jim,

I was thinking I'd also take #7 at CPC over #6 and #16 at ANGC as well.

[Mike Hendren]

#5 at CPC is by far better than #8 at Augusta

#7 at CPC is by far better than #16 at Augusta

"By far" is an interesting opinion that I hope you will support.

Oddly, the only favorable comment I've heard about CPC's 5th is that you can't see the fairway bunkers when looking back from the green.  By comparison, the 8th at Augusta is a great example of a hole who's strategy is dictated by a single fairway bunker.  Challenge it and get home in two heroic shots.  The second there is an intimidating blind uphill shot with the mounds on the left side creating jail if one is short.   Even the layup is strategic - does one attempt to leave the second just short of the green for a routine  pitch or go wide right for a full spinning approach.  Additionally, the greenside mounds subtely affect the internal green contours with the result being a lot of missed short birdie or par putts.

As for the 16th at Augusta, I find it quite ugly compared to the balance of the course.  But it is a brilliant test of iron play as a mere foot on the approach can yield a simple birdie putt or a challenging uphill (front pin) or downhill (back pin) two putt.  RTJ's runway tee also creates great elasticity ranging from a short iron to the devilish front right pin or mid-iron to the typical Sunday placement.  That hole also works well in the routing's sequence and has been memorably pivitol on Masters' Sunday.  By comparison, the 7th at CPC is a simple mid-iron to the middle of the green and casual two putt for par. 

Perhaps I am swayed by the fact that I parred both of those holes rather handily at CPC and doubt I could do the same at the two Augusta holes.  Please persuade me otherwise.  What do I know?

Bogey

[Bob_Huntley]

Excepting the 16th at CPC the four short holes are ANGC are superior to the remaining three at CPC. 

All of ANGC's par 3's are better than #15 at CPC? 

The 4th, 6th and 16th holes at ANGC are more difficult than the 15th at CPC but is anyone of them as visually exciting, as aesthetically pleasing and as architecturally nuanced as is this tiny gem?


Bob

 

[Mike Hendren]

Bob,

I agree with two of the three adjectives, but could use your insight on what is architecturally nuanced about the 15th at CPC.  Seems like a 9-iron and two putts does the trick every time.

Mike

[Tom Huckaby]

Far be it from me to speak for Mr. Huntley....

But I must give my $.02 re 15 CPC....

Methinks in your question lies the answer, Michael.

Seems like a 9-iron and two putts does the trick every time.

It SEEMS that way for sure.  Funny how it doesn't work out that way in practice.. there are some very quirky pin positions that are used, and the green is subtly maddening.. and then there is this thing called WIND, which tends to swirl in that little cove....

All this being said... I have no means to compare with Augusta's threes.  But CPC 15 can stand quite well on its own.  The more I have played it the more amazed I have become.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

I'd tend to agree with Tom and Bob.

I'm not trying to say this is a slouch:



But I wouldn't think its better than this for all the reasons Bob said:



Or this:

[Bob_Huntley]

Bob,

I agree with two of the three adjectives, but could use your insight on what is architecturally nuanced about the 15th at CPC.  Seems like a 9-iron and two putts does the trick every time.

Mike

Michael,

I know you stood on the 16th tee at CPC in your street clothes and nonchantly plonked the ball on the green. However, just earlier you walked off the 14th green with Lou Duran, who was four under par and then saw him airmail this simple little shot onto the water cooler some twenty feet over the green. Admittedly the caddie was at fault but it obviously wasn't a simple nine iron and two putt.

Have a slight right to left wind and let me see you get up and down from the steeply sloping bunkers left and long of the pin.

I think this is just some of your Tennessee trash talk.

Bob
 

[PThomas]

Far be it from me to speak for Mr. Huntley....

But I must give my $.02 re 15 CPC....

Methinks in your question lies the answer, Michael.

Seems like a 9-iron and two putts does the trick every time.

or 3putts

[Mike Hendren]

Kalen,

The fact that you romanticized the 7th at CPC from somewhere other than the tee supports my proposition.



You must see the back right pin at Augusta's 6th to believe it. 

Bob,  there is indeed a little too much mustard on my hot dog.  I'll give you the 15th at CPC being slightly better than the 6th at the National. 

Mike

[Mark Bourgeois]

Mike

Interesting thought experiment.  What criteria are you using to compare, and are you basing it on a particular type or skill level of golfer?

Mark

[Jim Nugent]

Bogey, so do you call the par 3's a draw now? 

[Kalen Braley]

Michael,

I present this alternative then:



The other photo is taken just a few steps left of the tee and is zoomed in a little bit.  Still the same hole big fella and my preference is still for this one over ANGC #6! 

[Mike Hendren]

Bogey, so do you call the par 3's a draw now? 

Jim,  I must equivocate and give Augusta the nod 2.5 to 1.5.  I love making up my own rules

[Mike Hendren]

Mike

Interesting thought experiment.  What criteria are you using to compare, and are you basing it on a particular type or skill level of golfer?

Mark

Mark, yours is the million dollar question all of us should be called upon to answer.  If pressed I suspect many of us would borrow from Justice Potter Stewart and claim to know great golf course architecture when we see it.  That said, here goes:

1.  Does every shot matter?
2.  Must the topography be negotiated or merely traversed?
3.  Is the better player challenged to consciously attempt birdie versus par?
4.  Is the higher capper challenged to consciously attempt par versus bogey?
5.  Are hazards judiciously deployed and are they relevant?
6.  Do green contours extract a 1/4 to 1/2 stroke for an indiffent approach? or
7.  Is the great lag putter rewarded?
8.  Is the deft chipper given an advantage.
9.  Can higher handicappers generally find or retrieve their golf ball?
10.  Are bold recovery shots encouraged?
11.  Do pin locations dictate different plays?

As for my perspective, I was once a 4 and am now a 12 so I don't assume a single skill level but rather a broad spectrum in my analyses.

Just a few thoughts.  Darned good question.

Kindest regards,

Mike

[jkinney]

Augusta can legitimately be ranked #1, though Shinny is my choice for that spot. I suspect that Augusta got to the top because the changes made to the set-up sucessfully defended it from pillaging by the flat bellies at the Masters.

Those changes don't make much of a difference from the members' tees, however, and it is from those tees that Augusta should be compared with Cypress. But doing so, IMO, is a fools errand at best. I can't imagine two more different "feelings" and "impressions" of the golfing ground than one gets at these two gems, irrespective of the fact that they shared the same designer. I've been blessed to play them both numerous times and love them both equally - but for completely different reasons. I will leave it at that.

[Chip Gaskins]

#5 at CPC is by far better than #8 at Augusta

#7 at CPC is by far better than #16 at Augusta

"By far" is an interesting opinion that I hope you will support.

Oddly, the only favorable comment I've heard about CPC's 5th is that you can't see the fairway bunkers when looking back from the green.  By comparison, the 8th at Augusta is a great example of a hole who's strategy is dictated by a single fairway bunker.  Challenge it and get home in two heroic shots.  The second there is an intimidating blind uphill shot with the mounds on the left side creating jail if one is short.   Even the layup is strategic - does one attempt to leave the second just short of the green for a routine  pitch or go wide right for a full spinning approach.  Additionally, the greenside mounds subtely affect the internal green contours with the result being a lot of missed short birdie or par putts.

As for the 16th at Augusta, I find it quite ugly compared to the balance of the course.  But it is a brilliant test of iron play as a mere foot on the approach can yield a simple birdie putt or a challenging uphill (front pin) or downhill (back pin) two putt.  RTJ's runway tee also creates great elasticity ranging from a short iron to the devilish front right pin or mid-iron to the typical Sunday placement.  That hole also works well in the routing's sequence and has been memorably pivitol on Masters' Sunday.  By comparison, the 7th at CPC is a simple mid-iron to the middle of the green and casual two putt for par. 

Perhaps I am swayed by the fact that I parred both of those holes rather handily at CPC and doubt I could do the same at the two Augusta holes.  Please persuade me otherwise.  What do I know?

Bogey

listen, i loved my time at augusta and don't want to end up in the augusta jail....but!

augusta #8 is about as a straightforward of a hole is there is in top-shelf golf.  if you can't hit that mile wide fairway then "strategic fairway hazards" aren't really part of your thought process anyway.  for that matter even from the members' tees it is a poke to get into it.  i am a single digit handicap and didn't get there.  no matter where it ends up, short of the bunker, in the bunker, just past the bunker you are more than likely laying up to a flip wedge.  the green is one of the least interesting on the course in my opinion. 

whereas CPC #5 has you thinking off the tee no matter how long you hit it, then thinking again on your distance and line on the second shot all on top of a green complex with just enough internal slope and surrounding hazard to keep you on your toes.  the green is big enough to actually hit and penal enough to make you think.  sorry, CPC #5 wins hands down in my mind.



augusta #16 is about as straightforward as you get.  if you can hit the green most of the balls end up in the same spot...that front left semi-circle above the bunker.  yes, the best of the best can figure out how to spin the ball enough to end up on that top semi-circle shelf but most will end up short putting up the hill for birdie or par.  classic RTJ.  pretty from the tee, but i can't say the most strategic hole i have ever seen.

where as CPC # 7 has many different options, bail outs, and penalties.  in my opinion you are mandated to hit a much better shot at cpc #7 than augusta #16.

will anyone come see me in the augusta jail now?

[Eric Smith]

Mike

Interesting thought experiment.  What criteria are you using to compare, and are you basing it on a particular type or skill level of golfer?

Mark

Mark, yours is the million dollar question all of us should be called upon to answer.  If pressed I suspect many of us would borrow from Justice Potter Stewart and claim to know great golf course architecture when we see it.  That said, here goes:

1.  Does every shot matter?
2.  Must the topography be negotiated or merely traversed?
3.  Is the better player challenged to consciously attempt birdie versus par?
4.  Is the higher capper challenged to consciously attempt par versus bogey?
5.  Are hazards judiciously deployed and are they relevant?
6.  Do green contours extract a 1/4 to 1/2 stroke for an indiffent approach? or
7.  Is the great lag putter rewarded?
8.  Is the deft chipper given an advantage.
9.  Can higher handicappers generally find or retrieve their golf ball?
10.  Are bold recovery shots encouraged?
11.  Do pin locations dictate different plays?

As for my perspective, I was once a 4 and am now a 12 so I don't assume a single skill level but rather a broad spectrum in my analyses.

Just a few thoughts.  Darned good question.

Kindest regards,

Mike

Cut that out and hang it on your 'frigerator door.

Great stuff Mike - thanks.