With Ray Floyd gone, who is next?

[jim_lewis]

Mike:

You are right, of course. I missed Robbins.

Matt:
I was listing those amateurs among the field in 1955. I do remember both Hyndman and Siderowf, both excellent career amatieurs, but I don't find their names among the 1955 field.

It was interesting to find that William "Dynamite" Goodloe finished 28th in 1955. I have heard Hobart Manley (himself a very good amateur) tell stories about the wild times that he, Harvie Ward, and Goodloe enjoyed as they played in many events together in their youth. I knew Dynamite had to be good to mix it up with those guys, but I had no idea that he was competitive at Augusta.

[Jim Sweeney]

Steve Shaffer:

No one is bound by the USGA/R&A Rules of Golf unless they choose to be. Since there are normally members of the AGNC on the USGA and R&A executive committees, it is highly unlikely they would ever do anything contrary to the Rules of Golf.

It is arguable that a tournament committee could proscribe a competition ball, i.e., one ball for use by all players, and be within the rules if that ball conforms to the rules. It could be a ball currently in use, or it could be larger, lighter, and/or slower. For that matter, they could mandate fewer clubs, for example, and be within the rules.

The complication is not the USGA /R&A rules, but the players and the equipment companies they represent. What would happen if they started a tournament, and nobody came?

[Sean_A]

Jack made a great run at the Masters in his late 50s and I think its a shame a guy like Watson thinks he can't win today because of the course set up and recent changes.  Didn't Player make the cut at something like 65?  To me, when Watson complains this is a problem with the course and not Watson.  Sure, Watson, like Nicklaus and Player, is an improbable competitor on the very last edge of his competitive career, but when we are talking about the best of all time anything can and should be allowed to happen.  There is also the reason the Masters was founded in the first place.  I personally feel that slipping away and with it, my interest in the Masters.  

Ciao  

Sean,

Why was the Masters founded in the first place?

Jim

A pleasant get together in which great golfers can enjoy each other's company for a few days on a different sort of course in a tournament which isn't full on.  By get together, I mean invitational, which of course means the idea of "great" could be stretched as far as the tournament committee wish/ed.  We must remember that the Masters is a major because others said it was.  The event was never meant to be a major (or likely even any sort of tour stop) when originally organized.

Ciao

[JESII]

Sean,

I've never heard that. I have always been of the impression that they gathered the best players they could and let them have at it.

I do think tournament golf in general was different then than it is now for a variety of reasons, so a low key/"different sort" of tournament can still fit within the guidelines of a Championship.

One thing that hasn't changed is that the best playing pros have always only gone where the money is...and they went to Augusta early on.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I've never heard that. I have always been of the impression that they gathered the best players they could and let them have at it.

I do think tournament golf in general was different then than it is now for a variety of reasons, so a low key/"different sort" of tournament can still fit within the guidelines of a Championship.

One thing that hasn't changed is that the best playing pros have always only gone where the money is...and they went to Augusta early on.

Jim

"The Masters" wasn't even invented until sometime after the first event.  They didn't have a cut until the late 50s.  It was a kinder, gentler Masters, which tolerated, well, the Masters of the game.

Ciao

[JESII]

Sean,

Do you think something changed the day they decided to change from Augusta National Invitational to The Masters? If so, what?


If the event had a larger percentage of "ceremonial" players than most other events, I wouldn't disagree with that...but the tournament was always about the best of the best...

[Chuck Brown]

Sean,

Do you think something changed the day they decided to change from Augusta National Invitational to The Masters? If so, what?


If the event had a larger percentage of "ceremonial" players than most other events, I wouldn't disagree with that...but the tournament was always about the best of the best...

Jim - Two things.
One; back in the 30's and 40's there weren't any old or ceremonial past champions to be included in the Masters field, because they were all still young past champions.  I suppose that by the time we got into the 1950's, the fact that Sarazen and Horton Smith still played, established the tradition of the past champions thing, and the fact that as the host, Bob Jones still played even though he had been long out of competitive golf, all pointed in the direction of a less-than-national-championship level of informality. 
Two; about a competition ball.  I do think that the ANGC could dictate a single-design golf ball.  It would be a scandal and a controversy and the golfing story of the year and might even turn into a lawsuit.  And for all of those reasons, and the fact that yes there are a host of interlocking executives at the R&A and the USGA and ANGC (Nicholson, Ridley, Driver, and many, many more), means that if anything were to be done it would be done cooperatively.  For reasons that I can't articulate very well (because I don't think it has ever been tried), I suspect that ANGC would find itself in a very weird position if it mandated a single design golf ball that was not on the conforoming ball list as an approved product.  In other words, I think ANGC could choose a single design under the rules of golf as a Condition of Competition.  I don't think ANGC could dream up its own golf ball and put it into play on its own and still be within the generally accepted Rules of Golf.

[Andy Hughes]

Tom Watson, tied for 2nd through eight holes   

[David_Tepper]

Bernhard Langer -1 thru 13 holes!

Bernie L. now -3 trhu 16 holes!

[Carl Nichols]

Watson leading through 16, with that bomber David Toms one stroke behind. 

[Mike Hendren]

Watson co-leads?  Heat up the grease - it's time to fry up some crow.   Belly up to the table, boys.

Bogey

[Matt Bosela]

And the vets keep putting up numbers...Sandy Lyle with a 69 today!

My goodness!