[Patrick_Mucci]

What makes you think that intentions for # 15 were solely AM's, absent any input from Jones ?

Because some moron once told me it wasn't a collaboration.

Some moron told you that the entire course wasn't' a collaboration or just the 15th hole ?

There's a huge difference between a collaboration and input

And, do you know what AM's intentions were?

I know what the quote attributed to Mackenzie said in the program for the inaugural tournament.

Did that quote reference the trees, or was it silent on them ?

[Sven Nilsen]

Pat:

There were three trees in the fairway.

His intentions were that players could maneuver for position from the tee onwards, as he wrote.

Sven

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

There were three trees in the fairway.

Not according to the schematic at the bottom of the page

His intentions were that players could maneuver for position from the tee onwards, as he wrote.

I know what he wrote.

I'm waiting for you to detail what, exactly, he meant and what his intentions were for the hole's future.

Are you now claiming it was a collaboration?

Your reading comprehension skills are fading, go back and reread what I typed

Sven

[Sven Nilsen]

According to your little schematic, there are also trees in front of the green.  It's called a side view, and it could be depicting more than just the trees in the fairway.  All accounts note that there were three trees in the fairway, including the photo posted in this thread.   Two of those trees survive today as part of the much larger copse of trees that extend into the fairway from the left side.

As for his intentions, I stated I thought he would have hated the trees as they are now on the left.  If you disagree, go ahead and tell us why you think he would have liked them.  And then tell us if you think he would have liked the trees added on 11.  There's a difference between anticipating that the holes would end up with defined corridors and having tree lines that impinge upon the corridors of play that were intended.

Sven

[Sven Nilsen]

And speaking of altering tradition, what are your thoughts on ND installing artificial turf?

[Patrick_Mucci]

According to your little schematic, there are also trees in front of the green. 
It's called a side view, and it could be depicting more than just the trees in the fairway. 

I don't think that's the case given the yardage markers that those trees appear at, in conjunction with the slope of the land at that spot./color]

All accounts note that there were three trees in the fairway, including the photo posted in this thread.   

The photo in this thread shows four objects in the fairway.
In addition, that photo only shows the trees that existed in that fairway on the date the photo was taken, it does not show the trees planted a week, month, year or decade after the photo was taken.  The photo shows the creek on # 1 and many of the greens without bunkers.
Was that AM's ultimate intent ?


Two of those trees survive today as part of the much larger copse of trees that extend into the fairway from the left side.



In the photo, There aren't the cluster of small pines between # 9 and # 1 down by the creek.
Small pines that are visible in other early photos circa 1934/5/6.
So does that mean that AM never intended for trees to be there ?

As for his intentions, I stated I thought he would have hated the trees as they are now on the left. 
If you disagree, go ahead and tell us why you think he would have liked them. 

I can only channel CBM and SR.
I have no idea as to what AM's intentions were on each hole at ANGC and neither do you.

And then tell us if you think he would have liked the trees added on 11. 

# 11 has nothing to do with # 15 and the issue at hand.
If you want to start a new thread about # 11, please feel free to do so.

There's a difference between anticipating that the holes would end up with defined corridors and having tree lines that impinge upon the corridors of play that were intended.

Except that you don't know what was intended

[Sven Nilsen]

Four objects, three of which are trees.

I know Mackenzie wanted the golfer to be able to maneuver their ball from the tee to set up angles.  I may not know exactly what he intended for the surrounds of the hole, but i can prudently assume it wasn't meant to impinge upon those options, other than as may occur over time as the trees he left grew.

In this case, the three trees had become a "nuisance" by 1949, something I believe Mackenzie anticipated.  What he didn't anticipate, and didn't intend, was the further addition of trees on both the left and right sides of the hole effectively limiting the options off of the tee.

Here's what I wrote on the hole a couple of years ago:

"I actually think that this is one hole at Augusta where placing a premium on placement of the tee shot is appropriate (the method of doing so is still up for debate).  The reward is a shot at the green, the penalty for poor execution is to have to lay up (with birdie still an option).  That being said, the second into the 15th green is one of a few standout moments in the closing stretch of the tournament.  There's a fine line between building up the excitement and still asking the golfer to execute shots in order to be in a position to make a move.

As we've seen in recent years, the tournament committee has the ability to change the conditioning around the 15th to make the hole easier or harder, depending on the intentions of the year.  With a bit of rough on the bank, the penalty for a miss short is alleviated slightly.  Of course, if you haven't maneuvered through the obstacle course in the fairway, the length of the grass on the bank has little effect.

Reading Dan's comments makes me think that the nature of this hole should be dominated by the pin positions, and the fairway should be set up so that the player has the opportunity to place their tee shot in the ideal position for attacking the day's location.  I think I'd rather hear the commentators discussing how Player A's drive leaves them a tough angle into the narrow left side of the green, as opposed to hearing them discuss how they are going to play their layup from the pine straw."

[Patrick_Mucci]

Four objects, three of which are trees.

What's the other object

I know Mackenzie wanted the golfer to be able to maneuver their ball from the tee to set up angles. 

Isn't that true of every par 4 and par 5 at ANGC ?

I may not know exactly what he intended for the surrounds of the hole, but i can prudently assume it wasn't meant to impinge upon those options, other than as may occur over time as the trees he left grew.

What you fail to understand is the impact of the maturing trees on the left side of the fairway and how they blocked play from the left of the fairway/rough as they matured.

Go to HistoricAerials.com and you'll see how far the trees had invaded the playing corridors in 1962, 1971 and 2006/7.
Then, go to Google Earth to see how they impact play today..

In this case, the three trees had become a "nuisance" by 1949, something I believe Mackenzie anticipated.  What he didn't anticipate, and didn't intend, was the further addition of trees on both the left and right sides of the hole effectively limiting the options off of the tee.

Here's what I wrote on the hole a couple of years ago:

"I actually think that this is one hole at Augusta where placing a premium on placement of the tee shot is appropriate (the method of doing so is still up for debate).  The reward is a shot at the green, the penalty for poor execution is to have to lay up (with birdie still an option).  That being said, the second into the 15th green is one of a few standout moments in the closing stretch of the tournament.  There's a fine line between building up the excitement and still asking the golfer to execute shots in order to be in a position to make a move.

Isn't part of the reward, being able to drive the ball into the optimal DZ, and not just being able to spray it anywhere ?

As we've seen in recent years, the tournament committee has the ability to change the conditioning around the 15th to make the hole easier or harder, depending on the intentions of the year.  With a bit of rough on the bank, the penalty for a miss short is alleviated slightly.  Of course, if you haven't maneuvered through the obstacle course in the fairway, the length of the grass on the bank has little effect.

Reading Dan's comments makes me think that the nature of this hole should be dominated by the pin positions, and the fairway should be set up so that the player has the opportunity to place their tee shot in the ideal position for attacking the day's location.  I think I'd rather hear the commentators discussing how Player A's drive leaves them a tough angle into the narrow left side of the green, as opposed to hearing them discuss how they are going to play their layup from the pine straw."

I think you're also unaware of the sloping nature of the left side of the fairway and how it integrates with the left side trees.

Look at HistoricAerials.com and let me know if you change your mind.

[Sven Nilsen]

Pat:

Three trees, even the Olmsted plan has them marked.  (And clearly noted in Whitten's rough schematics of the hole over the years -  http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/georgia/augusta-changes). 

Compare to Dan Wexler's description of the changes:  "Of course, nothing has affected the fifteenth quite so much as the effect of trees along its fairway – and not just those installed around the new millennium.  Once upon a time, the plain that encompasses parts of the second, third, seventh, fifteenth and seventeenth fairways was largely a wide open stretch, dotted only with the occasional pine tree.  Two of those original pines formed the foundation of the large cluster of trees that now cuts into the left side of the fifteenth’s driving zone – so that particular copse is not entirely contrived – but the budding mini-forest which now occupies a stretch of former right-side fairway most certainly is."

Part of the reason for the invasion was due to the addition of trees, not just the growth of existing trees.

Sven

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

Three trees, even the Olmsted plan has them marked.  (And clearly noted in Whitten's rough schematics of the hole over the years -  http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/georgia/augusta-changes).

Sven,

While the Olmsted schematic is a nice rendering, it should not be regarded as definitive.
But, since you presented it, please note the current 11th hole and the centerline bunker.
Inserted by none other than Bobby Jones, hence, he did have some input  
It was later removed

As to Ron Whitten, who's terrific, he also declared the clubhouse at Jasna Polana to be mundane, and the course a "modern day Winged Foot"

Compare to Dan Wexler's description of the changes:  "Of course, nothing has affected the fifteenth quite so much as the effect of trees along its fairway [/b]– and not just those installed around the new millennium.

Note the words, "along it's fairway".  Those are the same trees I'm refering to.
And, they've dramatically affected play as they matured.
Again, that fairway and rough slope to the left, bringing the left side more into play.

Did you go to HistoricAerials.com and see the progressive invasive nature of the left side trees.
Trees that have nothing to do with the trees in the center in the old photo.

By the way, the three or four trees in that old photo are in a linear alignment, and spaced out.
That's a far cry from what existed in 1962 and earlier.

I suspect that more trees were planted not long after the photo and in a clump, not spread out as they are in the photo.

Once upon a time, the plain that encompasses parts of the second, third, seventh, fifteenth and seventeenth fairways was largely a wide open stretch, dotted only with the occasional pine tree.  

But, if you look closely, you can see all the saplings or small trees that were planted to create separation or isolation.

Two of those original pines formed the foundation of the large cluster of trees that now cuts into the left side of the fifteenth’s driving zone – so that particular copse is not entirely contrived – but the budding mini-forest which now occupies a stretch of former right-side fairway most certainly is."

I'm not so sure that I understand the location you're referencing.
Are you talking about to the right of the fairway ?
Remember, there used to be big mounds that the golfers would hit draws into to catapult their ball further down the fairway.
They were removed, and subsequently, trees were planted.

Part of the reason for the invasion was due to the addition of trees, not just the growth of existing trees.

But, the planting occured prior to 1962, probably in the late 30's to early 40's.

[Sven Nilsen]

The Jones bunker was on the 11th, not 10.

I have reviewed the historicaerials images, and I think you are confusing shadows for trees in many cases.  The 1971 aerial is of particular interest, as according to your analysis half the green would have been covered in pines.

The 1971 photo still depicts the small group of trees in the fairway (that being the copse on the left side).

Check your prescription, Pat, because your eyes are as lacking as you claim my reading comprehension to be.

Also, get a refresher on quotation marks.  Dan, not I, is the source of the language you seem to be confused by.

Sven

[Sven Nilsen]

1971 aerial:

[Sven Nilsen]

2002 aerial:

[Patrick_Mucci]

The Jones bunker was on the 11th, not 10.

I have reviewed the historicaerials images, and I think you are confusing shadows for trees in many cases. 

Not at all

The 1971 aerial is of particular interest, as according to your analysis half the green would have been covered in pines.

Not at all

The 1971 photo still depicts the small group of trees in the fairway (that being the copse on the left side).

That's no small group, that's a large stand of trees and that stand will only get taller and wider in the intervening 45 years.

Check your prescription, Pat, because your eyes are as lacking as you claim my reading comprehension to be.

Not at all

Also, get a refresher on quotation marks.  Dan, not I, is the source of the language you seem to be confused by.

I'm aware of that, and Dan and I agree on the invasive nature of the trees flanking the left side of the fairway.
The maturing of the trees on the left side greatly reduced any chance of playing left of the stand of trees, especially when you consider the slope in that area.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()