[archie_struthers]

 




Actually the new equipment might make this shot harder .  . The old guys didn't have to worry about the bunker as much (don't know if they moved it ) and they could hit that low blistering tee shot . Don't see many of them today

[Thomas Dai]

I’m pretty sure I can recall those left hand trees being hit from the tee in recent years, although not very often. Can’t recall who or when but I recall watching folks searching for balls and second shots from around that area. Over the decades I imagine the trees have also got taller. Can’t see much reason for them to be there really.
Atb

[Kalen Braley]

A quick look on Svens retro thread reveals that group of trees have been there since day one.


But the tee was much closer to that corridor making the angles a lot more doable, compared with the current tee some 60 yards back where its a much tighter chute/tunnel.


Perhaps thinning and pruning are in order....

[Bruce Bearer]

"I don't see any need for a tree on a golf course." -  Bobby Jones

[Jeff_Brauer]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.


It is terrible architecture.  Vertical hazards are gimmicks.  So many other ways to "protect and make the hole challenging."

Lynn,


While I agree there are many, many ways to protect a hole, a relatively straight shot is one challenge, isn't it?  On an open site, you wouldn't go out of your way to create that shot, but on a wooded site, I can't see NOT having one of those where it is offered, perhaps even two, one favoring a fade and the other a draw.


Just because some old Scots started golf on virtually treeless terrain doesn't mean any one comment about treeless courses being the only acceptable kind is right.  If Bobby Jones didn't see the need for a tree on any course, why the heck did he pick a tree nursery, with several native areas of pines to boot, for his ideal course?

Yes, you can architecturally suggest certain shots with ground hazards, but forcing a curved shot can only be done with trees.  Of the tee with a controlled starting point seems preferable to an approach shot which might be coming from a wide variety of angles.  And, most pros I know think its okay, but prefer the tree (s) at about 180-200 yards to match the apex of their curve (both height and horizontally). 

Agree that moving the tee back 50-60 yards over the years puts that narrow chute at a tougher place,

but again, hitting a straight shot off the tee is certainly a viable challenge, one accomplished about 430 times out of 431 this week.

Short version, love it because it was natural there and it only occurs once on that course. 18 straight times (like Olympic, where you have to hug the inside, high edge just to hold the fairway) would be boring.  At least 18 at ANGC uses the trees, dog leg and hazard placement to suggest a fade.  At one time, the course was considered so draw dominant, the shot fit in that way, too, to provide some variety and balance.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,


Isn't a fade the preferred shot type on 1, 8, 11, 15, and 18?


P.S.  Spieth hit those trees on the left hand side twice this tournament. 

[noonan]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.


It is terrible architecture.  Vertical hazards are gimmicks.  So many other ways to "protect and make the hole challenging."

Exactly. It does not fit the rest of the course.

[John Kavanaugh]

Vertical hazards are gimmicks says the finest basketball player I ever met. Please.

[noonan]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.


It is terrible architecture.  Vertical hazards are gimmicks.  So many other ways to "protect and make the hole challenging."

Lynn,


While I agree there are many, many ways to protect a hole, a relatively straight shot is one challenge, isn't it?  On an open site, you wouldn't go out of your way to create that shot, but on a wooded site, I can't see NOT having one of those where it is offered, perhaps even two, one favoring a fade and the other a draw.


Just because some old Scots started golf on virtually treeless terrain doesn't mean any one comment about treeless courses being the only acceptable kind is right.  If Bobby Jones didn't see the need for a tree on any course, why the heck did he pick a tree nursery, with several native areas of pines to boot, for his ideal course?

Yes, you can architecturally suggest certain shots with ground hazards, but forcing a curved shot can only be done with trees.  Of the tee with a controlled starting point seems preferable to an approach shot which might be coming from a wide variety of angles.  And, most pros I know think its okay, but prefer the tree (s) at about 180-200 yards to match the apex of their curve (both height and horizontally). 

Agree that moving the tee back 50-60 yards over the years puts that narrow chute at a tougher place,

but again, hitting a straight shot off the tee is certainly a viable challenge, one accomplished about 430 times out of 431 this week.

Short version, love it because it was natural there and it only occurs once on that course. 18 straight times (like Olympic, where you have to hug the inside, high edge just to hold the fairway) would be boring.  At least 18 at ANGC uses the trees, dog leg and hazard placement to suggest a fade.  At one time, the course was considered so draw dominant, the shot fit in that way, too, to provide some variety and balance.

Anywhere but 18. Just like 17 on Sawgrass. Too late in the round.
Isn't it a consensus here the island green at 17 on Sawgrass ok...it it were only on the front 9. Why have those trees/chute on 18. If it were on 7...ok.

[Garland Bayley]

Everyone had to negotiate the trees, so they are fair. Now could it be that questioning them could be an admission of a chink in the purity of the course that has been highly lauded here in the run up to the tournament?

[Mike Hendren]

I would vote for cutting all those trees on the left of 18 tee way way back. Always give the golfer a recovery shot.

Can't recall who, but Saturday someone (Rahm?) made 4 from the toilets.

Bogey

[Mike Hendren]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.

Then why didn't they do so at inception?  Look at Sven's old aerials and you'll see that the chute was there day one.  Only made problematic by the extension of the runway tee backward and to the right.

Bogey

[Thomas Dai]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.

Then why didn't they do so at inception?  Look at Sven's old aerials and you'll see that the chute was there day one.  Only made problematic by the extension of the runway tee backward and to the right.
Bogey

There are various photos of Bobby Jones standing on or near piles of cut down trees during the construction of ANGC.
Why weren't more trees cut down? One speculation could be lack of money?
atb

[Doug Hodgson]

I don't see any problem with asking top pros to be able to negotiate a chute of trees.   The degree of precision they have in their games is so high these days that it makes sense to present them with challenges that would seem utterly unreasonable for we regular amateurs.  Things like fast greens, difficult pin placements, deep rough, and shaved banks leading to water hazards, are all reasonable for the pros but not for anyone else.  The nice thing is that all these difficulty factors can be eliminated once the pros leave town by moving up the tees, cutting the pins away from hazards and steeper slopes, and cutting grass higher on greens and on slopes above hazards.   
Of course when the PGA Tour came to Royal Montreal in 2014, almost nothing was changed in the conditions relative to what we deal with every day, except that the rough might have been lowered a bit.  They even hit from members' tees on some of the longer holes...

[Kalen Braley]

What would Alister MacKenzie and Bobby Jones do?  They would take trees out.

Then why didn't they do so at inception?  Look at Sven's old aerials and you'll see that the chute was there day one.  Only made problematic by the extension of the runway tee backward and to the right.

Bogey

Bogey,


While this is true, go back and look where the tee placement was in relation to that chute.  In its original proximity, there was plenty of room for even lesser players to negotiate.  Now at 60 yards back, the angles to avoid have become far more severe...

[Tommy Williamsen]

AGNC   Augusta Georgia National Club?

[Thomas Dai]

From this link - https://www.fastcodesign.com/1669422/100-ways-augusta-changed-to-make-the-masters-harder-infographic - which has been referred to on another current thread, it would seem that the area of trees on the left side of the 18th hole has changed quite appreciably. The right side as well.
Atb

[Jeff Schley]

From this link - https://www.fastcodesign.com/1669422/100-ways-augusta-changed-to-make-the-masters-harder-infographic - which has been referred to on another current thread, it would seem that the area of trees on the left side of the 18th hole has changed quite appreciably. The right side as well.
Atb

Indeed.  Pruning needs to happen and 18 is an easy target, which was highlighted by Speith's tee ball getting brushed to the ground. 

[Garland Bayley]

From this link - https://www.fastcodesign.com/1669422/100-ways-augusta-changed-to-make-the-masters-harder-infographic - which has been referred to on another current thread, it would seem that the area of trees on the left side of the 18th hole has changed quite appreciably. The right side as well.
Atb

Indeed.  Pruning needs to happen and 18 is an easy target, which was highlighted by Speith's tee ball getting brushed to the ground.

The best place to prune is about 12-24 inches above the ground.

[Thomas Dai]

Some might consider one of these to be appropriate - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A-PS4HtU5zo
Atb

[Sean_A]

For The Masters I think its fine, not great, but fine to have a back tee which creates an architecturally stupid chute issue. 

To me the bigger issue by far is the green.  I recall the green came much more forward back in the day.  Architecturally, there is no question 18 has been seriously compromised, but I don't understand why green alterations were part of the deal.

Ciao   

[jeffwarne]

For The Masters I think its fine, not great, but fine to have a back tee which creates an architecturally stupid chute issue. 

To me the bigger issue by far is the green.  I recall the green came much more forward back in the day.  Architecturally, there is no question 18 has been seriously compromised, but I don't understand why green alterations were part of the deal.

Ciao   

Greenspeed baby.Nearly all have been altered.


Because the Greencoats and 99.99 % of the golf world can't draw the distinction between fast greens (overall stimp) and fast putts (slope and tilt)

[Tom Bacsanyi]

The helicopter fade won the tournament. Has anyone else invented a new shot to go on and win the Masters since Ray Floyd and his five wood?

Bernhard Langer has always employed the helicopter finish.

[Rich Goodale]

There is a particularly ugly group of 3 trees left and long well past where Speight hit the pines. It was put in after Woosie won by playing WAY left onto open ground well wide of the fairway bunkers on the 18th on Sunday.  This strategy was not liked by the powers that be.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()