An historical question - What happened after 1965

[Peter Pallotta]

Threads about target golf and Dustin's 6 iron approach (i.e. about pros hitting it too far) brought this question to mind:

What was done (if anything) to alter Augusta and/or other championship golf courses after Mr. Nicklaus won the 1965 Masters by nine shots over everyone else, and broke Mr. Hogan's scoring record?

I remember reading that JN was routinely hitting the par 5s in two with mid irons in his hand, and that it took 30 more years before his record score was broken (by TW, in 1997, who won by an even bigger margin). But I also seem to remember reading that in those 30 years Augusta had not been significantly lengthened at all. (It was only after 97 that it started to "Tiger proof' the course).

So my question: golfers have been making great old courses 'obsolete' for a long time, at least as far back as JN in 1965 and maybe farther back than that. Did major championship sites and/or the USGA try to counter-act that back then, or is this concern with protecting the great old courses a relatively new phenomenon?

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:

Augusta was lengthened a little bit after Nicklaus first won, but not drastically.  They also moved the fairway bunkers on 18 and a couple of other holes to try and keep the course relevant.  But the Masters committee in that day didn't care if the winning score was -10 or -12, and Nicklaus' -17 was seen [correctly] as an aberration that wouldn't repeat, until Tiger came along.  [Ray Floyd did also shoot -17 in his winning year; shortly afterward they converted the greens to bentgrass and started to make them faster.]

The USGA contented itself with adding a couple of back tees for each new tournament and converting a couple of par-5's to par-4's.  The Open Championship did the same thing on the other side of the pond.

[jeffwarne]

Actually what happened was Nicklaus won the next year with even par 288.(weather)
a real even par not a USGA cop out par of 280.

Nicklaus used to blast his drive on 18 out into the old practice fairway on the left, which is why they put in those awkward bunkers on the outside of the dogleg and planted trees up the left side. (when players began carrying the bunkers they built the new back tee more recently)
There has been a history of change over the years at ANGC, but with only 1 guy(Nicklaus) bombing it AND winning, (there have always been bombers) it was not seen as a reason to change dramatically, and the committee seemed less concerned with a high winning score-tournaments were WON at Augusta.
Now they engineer it a bit on Sundays with a few funnel pins.

There have always been big hitters, just not so many, and as distances the ball travels, being a long hitter begins to lose its advantage, as fewer and fewer drivers are hit, which is why a 60 year old can compete in a major on a firm links as he can hit drivers where others hit hybrids to the desired areas.

[Tom_Doak]

I was going to amend my first post to say that they have always added a few yards to courses here and there, but there wasn't a big jump until the clubs and shafts and ball all started being optimized for the pros, in the mid to late 90's.  That's when the driving distances spiked suddenly.

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks gents. I didn't know much about the particulars you mentioned, but what you describe was my general impression too. And, while I understand that, once upon a time the long bomber like JN was an outlier whereas today almost everyone hits it (too?) far, it does seem to me that for a long time neither Augusta nor the USGA nor the R&A had the same (almost) desperate desire to protect the architecture as we see today, or that they equated -- as they seem to do today -- lower scores with a failure of the design. It just seems to me that something else has changed, but I can't put my finger on it.

Peter

[Mike_Young]

I think the daily conditioning of courses such as ANGC varied much more than they did after the mid 70's.  For example ANGC was overseeded over common bermuda grass and fairways were mowed at over 1/2 inch until around the mid 80's.  I'm not sure of the weather conditions in 1965 but there were years when it was hot and dry and the ball would roll out much further on the red clay base.  the rye grass would be thinner also.  When JN was reaching some of these holes in 2 it had to be factors other than the ball and club...Bobby Jones would often hit 300 yard drives.
Once we obtained modern conditions that would have less variable day to day it became much easier for guys to put together four low rounds in one week.  I just think conditions had to be right during the 60's for those records to be set.  Today the variable are much more consistent and make it easier.  And I stil say fiarway height is never mentioned enough when discussing the modern distance issues...

[DMoriarty]

. It just seems to me that something else has changed, but I can't put my finger on it.

Peter

What changed was the equipment.  The equipment driven performance changes by top golfers in the 1990's and early 2000's dwarfed all other equipment improvements over the past century, maybe longer.

[John Burnes]

I agree.  I hit our longest par 5 in two this year and though maybe my swing was slightly improved, not enough to do that.  I called my buddy on the way home, with new driver and ball in the trunk, and told him as such.  Juiced face and ball era is here (and has been).
 

[Keith Grande]

What I find interesting, is that in almost every major sport: Football; baseball; hockey; basketball; the leagues have conspired to produce MORE scoring - by changing the rules, bringing in the fences, etc. However, in golf there is an aversion to scoring in the name of protecting par.  Who cares if the score is one over or 25 under, as long as the competition is stiff?  Is it the sadist/masochist within the powers that be, and the nature of golfers around the world?

[Patrick_Mucci]

What I find interesting, is that in almost every major sport: Football; baseball; hockey; basketball; the leagues have conspired to produce MORE scoring - by changing the rules, bringing in the fences, etc. However, in golf there is an aversion to scoring in the name of protecting par.  Who cares if the score is one over or 25 under, as long as the competition is stiff?  Is it the sadist/masochist within the powers that be, and the nature of golfers around the world?

NO, it's to identify the best players by presenting a challenge commensurate with their abilities by providing a field of play consistent with that endeavor.

[Jim Nugent]

What I find interesting, is that in almost every major sport: Football; baseball; hockey; basketball; the leagues have conspired to produce MORE scoring - by changing the rules, bringing in the fences, etc. However, in golf there is an aversion to scoring in the name of protecting par.  Who cares if the score is one over or 25 under, as long as the competition is stiff?  Is it the sadist/masochist within the powers that be, and the nature of golfers around the world?

It's not just protecting par.  They don't want the majors to turn into drive, pitch and putt contests.  Tiger's demolition of ANGC in 1997 -- where he hit wedges into #15 on his 2nd shot -- set off the alarm bells.