The Masters makes Augusta, not the other way around...

[Peter Flory]

I think that even the order of the nines at AGNC has helped to make the Masters what it is.

So they can have such a lame finish at 17 and 18?
Pebble doesn't have a lame finish.

The way that I do agree that the tournament makes the course is in the repeated viewings of it.  There aren't any other courses in golf where the viewers get so familiar with a course.  Holes become more interesting for viewers because they start to know them almost like a member knows the subtleties on his home course and comes to love it even more.  We know how dicey certain shots are.  We know which misses are dead.  We know how the ridge can be used on 16 to filter shots.  We remember famous shots through the years. 


If the US Open decided that it would be held at Pebble Beach every year, I think that the appreciation for the course would also rise with increased familiarity. 

[Joe Zucker]

I agree with Peter that the repeated viewings enhance the tournament, but I also think that the course is perfect for TV, which has augmented it's status.  The slopes and risk/reward choices at Augusta are so obvious and severe that they can be appreciated on a TV, whereas a lot of the other great courses are muted in the TV medium.


We all know about the bowl on 16, the false front on 9, the tight corner to navigate off the tee on 13, the fear of being long or short on 15, etc.... Since the ball moves so dramatically on slightly missed shots, it's easier to appreciate the difficulties of the course. 

[Garland Bayley]

I agree with Peter that the repeated viewings enhance the tournament, but I also think that the course is perfect for TV, which has augmented it's status. 

TV has augmented it's status. Isn't that part of Frank's opening argument?

The slopes and risk/reward choices at Augusta are so obvious and severe that they can be appreciated on a TV, whereas a lot of the other great courses are muted in the TV medium.

The slopes were never so obvious before HDTV. In fact, in the early years CBS did such a poor job of showing the slopes that ABC made a concerted effort to poach the broadcast from them using that argument. Eubanks, Augusta

We all know about the bowl on 16, the false front on 9, the tight corner to navigate off the tee on 13, the fear of being long or short on 15, etc.... Since the ball moves so dramatically on slightly missed shots, it's easier to appreciate the difficulties of the course.

We'll mark you down as a supporter of Frank's original thesis for the thread then. Thanks!

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,
Do I really need to answer that  [size=78%]  [/size]


If there is one tournament that is about the golf course it is The Masters.  The Players has the three finishing holes at The TPC at Sawgrass but outside of that most people (even on this site) would struggle to identify a handful of the other golf holes.  That is not the case at all at Augusta National. 


If they moved the Masters to any other venue, it would lose its appeal very quickly.  The Masters is without question all about the history/the golf course.   

First of all, it is not about moving the Masters to another venue. It is about if the history of the Masters had happened at another fine venue, such as Riviera, then Riviera would be celebrated, not ANGC.

The Masters has certainly gained momentum. In my youth most golfers I knew could tell you far more about Cypress Point and Pebble Beach than about Augusta. The Crosby was must watch TV more than the Masters.

[Mark_Fine]

Garland,
We will never know what would have happened if The Masters was played at another venue?  What we do know is that for longer than I can remember (probably dates to 1935 and Sarazen's double eagle on #15), the phrase "The tournament doesn't begin until the back nine on Sunday" holds pretty darn true.  Maybe we'd be saying the same thing if Sarazen made that shot at ____ Golf Club?  Maybe not  [size=78%] [/size]

[Joe Zucker]

I agree with Peter that the repeated viewings enhance the tournament, but I also think that the course is perfect for TV, which has augmented it's status. 

TV has augmented it's status. Isn't that part of Frank's opening argument?

The slopes and risk/reward choices at Augusta are so obvious and severe that they can be appreciated on a TV, whereas a lot of the other great courses are muted in the TV medium.

The slopes were never so obvious before HDTV. In fact, in the early years CBS did such a poor job of showing the slopes that ABC made a concerted effort to poach the broadcast from them using that argument. Eubanks, Augusta

We all know about the bowl on 16, the false front on 9, the tight corner to navigate off the tee on 13, the fear of being long or short on 15, etc.... Since the ball moves so dramatically on slightly missed shots, it's easier to appreciate the difficulties of the course.

We'll mark you down as a supporter of Frank's original thesis for the thread then. Thanks!

Thanks for scoring my opinion, Garland. And no, TV was not mentioned in the opening post.

[Mike Wagner]

George,

I've got to take you to task. In what way did the course elevate the event? What is special about the course that elevated the event that is not present in other equal courses who's events haven't been elevated?

Exactly how high are you when you ask questions like this?

[MClutterbuck]

For the top, let's say 200 golfers in the world, IMO, it is a beguiling - alluring - unique test.
For the rest of off the Member's tees, it is probably a strategic test to stay away from the big number.

Carl, I do not agree. From the members tees it is a beguiling - alluring - unique test to try to score pars and birdies. Big numbers never on the mind really.

[MClutterbuck]

I think that even the order of the nines at AGNC has helped to make the Masters what it is.

So they can have such a lame finish at 17 and 18?
Pebble doesn't have a lame finish.

It has a lame start and a so so stretch before the finish. ANGC is a more enjoyable course than PBGL. It beats it in match play by 3-4 holes in my evaluation. I would play them 8-2 if I could choose. I would also drop anything I am doing, buy the last airplane ticket available, even if it were $9,000 first class, and be there tomorrow to play ANGC, if I got invited. I would not do that for PBGL. 


Also, under tournament conditions, ANGC is 10x more enjoyable for low to medium handicap player than PBGL, from the appropriate tees.

[Frank M]

It’s interesting to see that the vast majority of responses that oppose my original point do so based on the exact points and reasons I’m trying to strip away from the golf course. There are one or two that don’t, but everyone else struggles mightily to separate Augusta National from The Masters, and to say this is unable to be done is essentially saying people in life cannot analyze anything but the whole, which is IMO a rediculous stance with all due respect to everyone who has argued this. To this point I’m actually feeling more and more confident my view is indeed a fair one.

[Mike Wagner]

Having gone through responses to this point, it’s interesting to see that the vast majority of responses that oppose my original point do so based on the exact points and reasons I’m trying to strip away from the golf course.


There are one or two that don’t, but everyone else struggles mightily to separate Augusta National from The Masters, and to say this is unable to be done is essentially saying people in life cannot analyze anything but the whole, which is IMO a rediculous stance with all due respect to everyone who has argued this.


To this point I’m actually feeling more and more confident my view is indeed true.

Frank, of the courses you've played, what which one would you say required the most absolute precision with regards to approach shots? 

[Frank M]

Frank, of the courses you've played, what which one would you say required the most absolute precision with regards to approach shots?

Every single one since my goal is to always get as close as possible to the hole 

I could list a bunch of courses really, but The National Golf Club of Canada is almost in my back yard and is pretty exacting, so I'll start there. No. 2..that's...um...2....Pebble requires pretty precise approaches with its small greens. I can go on but I don't see the point of the question.

[Kalen Braley]

I think Franks point is indeed being lost in this thread.


The reason why for example Pine Valley isn't busting at the gates for people to get in during Crump Cup:


1)  It hasn't been on TV every spring for the last how many decades
2)  It doesn't have the long list of the games best of the best who have won green jackets
3)  It doesn't have all the exposure of tens of millions watching the games best go at it hole after hole, year after year.
4)  It doesn't seem to (I don't know for sure) have the near infinite bucket of resources, cash and personel to transform it into a pristine Disneyland type place.
5)  It doesn't have Jim Nantz putting on his knee pads and kissing its arse as everyone comes out of winter hibernation.
6)  It doesn't have the over the top media exposure year in and year out.
etc, etc.


If Pine Valley had all that, along with a handful of other storied old course in the US, there's no doubt it would be just as prestigious....

[Sean_A]

I think Franks point is indeed being lost in this thread.

Not at all, I simply disagree.  I don't much see the point in trying to unravel Augusta and The Masters...its a unique symbiosis in golf.  Its good enough for me say Augusta is an elite course among many elite courses.  When a course is elite it brings its own sui generis to the table.  Folks can choose which story (or myth) they prefer.  The really smart folks choose all of them.

I am certainly not buying that the Augusta I saw is comparable to any $150 public or private course I have seen.

Ciao 

[Kalen Braley]

Sean,


Fair enough, I will certainly agree that the tournament and the venue are so inter-twined its impossible to disconnect them and analyze them individually.


At the same time the formula or paradigm could have certainly worked with other elite courses.  The system has been created and tweaked by a group of extremely smart and very capable people with several savvy moves to make it is what it is today. But I don't doubt for a second they couldn't have done it elsewhere...

[Sven Nilsen]

The Masters is the perfect confluence of a great golf course, history and mother nature.  Nothing looks more like Spring than the green grass and Azaleas in Augusta.  Renewal, rebirth and fresh hope every year, as clockwork as Easter.  It could happen elsewhere, but the perfect alignment of factors would be hard to replicate.


Why it survived when the other great invitationals of the 30's and 40's did not is a testament to the draw it had on the players, and the emergence of professional over amateur golf during that era.


From the get go Clifford Roberts created an atmosphere of importance (call it haughtiness if you will).  Having Bobby Jones as the living icon to draw in the attendees was the clincher.  Bay Hill will always be Arnie's, just as the Memorial will always be Jack's, and guys will still show up to pay their respects long after both of them are gone.  But Bobby Jones was there first, America's greatest golfing icon, and his tournament will outlast all of them.


My only critique is that today we've lost the little old ladies at the front gate walking briskly to put their chairs by the 18th green.  They've been replaced by hordes of Vineyard Vines catalog wannabe's who will pay the piper to feel like they are part of a grown up Sigma Alpha Epsilon house.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

At the same time the formula or paradigm could have certainly worked with other elite courses.  The system has been created and tweaked by a group of extremely smart and very capable people with several savvy moves to make it is what it is today. But I don't doubt for a second they couldn't have done it elsewhere...

Sure, the difference with Augusta is they had B Jones (and a willing management team willing to use the fame of Jones) as its de facto marketing man when nobody on the planet could market a course like he could.  There was no great club in the US that could even touch this machine. There are courses/clubs with terrific history (at least equally as compelling imo), but only Augusta gave over the course to the event. In fact, it can be argued that the most famous course in the world is at least as famous for doing the opposite of Augusta in that it was given over to the public. Hosting The Open is indeed a major feather in the cap, but the public access is priceless. Whatever we may think of government activity, it was probably the greatest gift to golf when the UK Parliament didn't allow the R&A to buy TOC from then owner J Cheape.  When we think of the time period circa 1890ish, it was an incredible decision to over-rule the uppercrust R&A.   

Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Sean,

At the same time the formula or paradigm could have certainly worked with other elite courses.  The system has been created and tweaked by a group of extremely smart and very capable people with several savvy moves to make it is what it is today. But I don't doubt for a second they couldn't have done it elsewhere...

Sure, the difference with Augusta is they had B Jones (and a willing management team willing to use the fame of Jones) as its de facto marketing man when nobody on the planet could market a course like he could.  There was no great club in the US that could even touch this machine. There are courses/clubs with terrific history (at least equally as compelling imo), but only Augusta gave over the course to the event. In fact, it can be argued that the most famous course in the world is at least as famous for doing the opposite of Augusta in that it was given over to the public. Hosting The Open is indeed a major feather in the cap, but the public access is priceless. Whatever we may think of government activity, it was probably the greatest gift to golf when the UK Parliament didn't allow the R&A to buy TOC from then owner J Cheape.  When we think of the time period circa 1890ish, it was an incredible decision to over-rule the uppercrust R&A.   

Ciao

Sean,


 Some very interesting points, and I wish we'd do a little more of the government stepping in now and then,  pushing back on Corporate 'Murica run amok, but I won't dive into that mess!


Off the top of my head, A few courses that I think could have achieved a similar status to Augusta and were around to my knowledge in the same time frame.


Pebble, Cypress, Riviera, Pine Valley, Shinnecock, NGLA, Oakmont, perhaps even PasaTiempo. 


Obviously all of the ownership details would have had to be worked out as well as the vision, money backing, etc.  But IMO those courses all have a good enough pedigree where if they had gone thru the same evolution of The Masters experience + <Insert Course>, I think the American public would be salivating over them just as much...

[Frank M]

Not at all, I simply disagree.  I don't much see the point in trying to unravel Augusta and The Masters...its a unique symbiosis in golf. Its good enough for me say Augusta is an elite course among many elite courses.  When a course is elite it brings its own sui generis to the table.  Folks can choose which story (or myth) they prefer.  The really smart folks choose all of them.

I am certainly not buying that the Augusta I saw is comparable to any $150 public or private course I have seen.

Ciao

Sean,

What you are saying is that you disagree with the conversation, not the premise of the conversation.

You don't care to break the "whole" into its parts because you are fine with the whole as it is...and that's definitely your prerogative. But to be clear, that doesn't mean you disagree with me, you simply aren't open to entertaining the thought...and "the really smart folks" analyze everything not just accept everything.

Thankfully, there are many open to diving deeper into conversations and various forms of thought/analysis in this world as otherwise our understanding of things would be very limited.

[Sean_A]

Not at all, I simply disagree.  I don't much see the point in trying to unravel Augusta and The Masters...its a unique symbiosis in golf. Its good enough for me say Augusta is an elite course among many elite courses.  When a course is elite it brings its own sui generis to the table.  Folks can choose which story (or myth) they prefer.  The really smart folks choose all of them.

I am certainly not buying that the Augusta I saw is comparable to any $150 public or private course I have seen.

Ciao

Sean,

What you are saying is that you disagree with the conversation, not the premise of the conversation.

You don't care to break the "whole" into its parts because you are fine with the whole as it is...and that's definitely your prerogative. But to be clear, that doesn't mean you disagree with me, you simply aren't open to entertaining the thought...and "the really smart folks" analyze everything not just accept everything.

Thankfully, there are many open to diving deeper into conversations and various forms of thought/analysis in this world as otherwise our understanding of things would be very limited.

Frank


Since I haven't played Augusta it makes it difficult to properly compare it with courses I have played. I suspect most folks are in the same position as me.
Ciao

[George Pazin]

Simple question: Would any other $150 resort course produce the drama and finishes Augusta does, year in and year out? My money says no. Not even close. Riviera is a fantastic course, by all counts. And it regularly draws a top tier field - not as good as The Masters, but top notch nevertheless. How many fantastic finishes does ANYONE (besides Geoff Shack and Tommy N ) remember there?


Lord knows I love Tom D, am a charter member of the BB club, having invested in a course on the other side of the world that it's looking like I'll never even see let along play, but how in the wide wide world of sports is ANGC not a 10? What hole would anyone skip over and feel like they didn't miss anything? I disagree entirely with the current presentation of the course, with the second cut, and the added trees, the silly driving corridors of 7, 11, 18, but good Lord, if you don't think every hole at ANGC does stir something, doesn't provide a shot or three worth savoring, well, all I can say is you are flat out spoiled, or the courses listed as 10s must be beyond crazy good, so good I can't even imagine any golf course being that good. I've seen plenty of posters criticise holes on just about every 10 (except PV, to my recollection).


17 and 18 Pebble versus ANGC is ANGC 2-0 in my book, if only because of the greens and topography. (That might change slightly if Pebble ever returned to the sandscape version with a realistic green size for 17 at Pebble....) Pebble's strongest holes, the stretch of 6-10, well, those aren't even ANGCs strong holes and they still give them a run for the money. As breathtaking as the 8th at Pebble is, I'd argue the 8th at ANGC is every bit as compelling.


And no, I haven't played either, I've walked Pebble twice and watched ANGC a billion times, so my opinions are equally uninformed on both!


I'm the only Pete Dye critic on this entire board of 1500 people, yet I still recognize that Sawgrass HAS produced some thrilling tournaments and thrilling finishes. Does The Players make Sawgrass or the other way around? My money says the golf course provides the thrills that have resulted in The Players being the unofficial 5th Major (it's the 4th major to me, but again, I'm weird like that).


Terry Lavin is dead on right in his much earlier post - Augusta the course MADE The Masters into a major, and arguably the most consistently compelling major at that. The fact that so few of us will ever get to play it is an issue related to the membership, not the golf course.


-----


Just wanted to add, excellent post, VK, a few posts back.

[Kalen Braley]

George,


Interesting post.  Like you I've been to Pebble a few times, walked it and never played it and ditto on ANGC.


But I would put 17/18 for Pebble 2-0...and its not even close, both knockouts on the card.  I get that 17 and 18 at ANGC are famous, but only because of position in the round.  Everyone is tuned in, drama and all that is running high, guys are trying to either go par par to squeak in or go 3, 3 to win.  But the holes themselves looks non-compelling from where I sit. 

[Matthew Essig]

I think "makes" is the wrong word, but I do think The Masters contributes to the prestige of ANGC more than the other way around.


Bobby Jones fell in love with the work of Mackenzie after playing Pasatiempo and sharing their love of the Old Course, right?


What if (and I know these are big what ifs) Bobby Jones never saw that piece of property in Augusta? What if Bobby Jones set up his "First Annual Invitation Tournament" in 1934 to be held at Pasatiempo, and it never left? What does Pasatiempo have that ANGC doesn't?


If your only answer is "green as green can be grass and the azaleas," then you are kind of proving my point. The first TV broadcast of ANGC was in 1956, and the first color broadcast was in 1966. Jack won 2 Masters and Arnie won 4 Masters in that 10 year frame. There were 22 years where the tournament grew in popularity and it was never seen on TV and another 10 where no one knew how green the grass was or what colors the flowers were. It is said that Arnie came up with what we know now as "The Modern Slam" in 1960, 6 years before the Masters was ever in color on TV.


The "green as green can be grass and the azaleas" is a product of The Masters not ANGC. The perfectly manicured azalea bushes, the perfectly laid pine straw, no blade of grass out of place, no squirrels, piped in through the broadcast bird noises, and the too green to be real over-seed and the green paint mixed into the normal sprayer are all a result of the Masters.


If the Masters was at Pasatiempo, you don't think it's possible it could have formed the Masters prestige before it went to color TV? The course is arguably just as good. For modern TV, it could possibly be even more popular because that would put it in primetime. Do you think the course couldn't also withstand the test of time? It has the Mackenzie bunkering, the Mackenzie green complexes with their quick speeds and insane slopes, and more thinking off the tee than you do at ANGC.

What would be the downsides?
-It ends on a par 3? Maybe the idea of starting or ending with a par 3 would be more accepted as a result of its popularity?
-Fitting all the people in? Possible, but I'm sure they would have made changes throughout the years to accommodate the traffic flow and the viewing.
-The roars not echoing through the trees? You might lose it, but has a test ever been done to see if the canyons wouldn't also make the roars echo around each nine?

What if ANGC was built a year after the "First Annual Invitation Tournament" at Pasatiempo and Bobby Jones never moved it over?  Would ANGC be the course ranked around #25 and Pasatiempo be in the Top 5 in the world?

These are incredibly difficult questions to answer, and I'm not asking anyone to answer them (unless you really want to), but I think they do point towards the Masters making ANGC more than the other way around.

[Kalen Braley]

Excellent post Matt.


Pasatiempo was neglected for so long until its relatively recent renovation and restoration....and that place sparkles with "minimal investment"


Imagine what the green jackets could have done with it, including buying out all the property around it (like current venue)..and putting in some fantastic viewing areas.  Like that nob that butts up to 2, 3, 4 tee, 6, 7 and 8.  Or all that high ground above many of the early back 9 holes and 17 and 18.  And imagine how awesome/cool it would be restore Dr. MacKs house and do Sunday interviews from there.


Then throw in a location only a few miles from the ocean, close proximity to massive population areas like San Jose and San Fran and the Masters would have likely been an even bigger event..

[Matthew Essig]

Excellent post Matt.


Pasatiempo was neglected for so long until its relatively recent renovation and restoration....and that place sparkles with "minimal investment"


Imagine what the green jackets could have done with it, including buying out all the property around it (like current venue)..and putting in some fantastic viewing areas.  Like that nob that butts up to 2, 3, 4 tee, 6, 7 and 8.  Or all that high ground above many of the early back 9 holes and 17 and 18.  And imagine how awesome/cool it would be restore Dr. MacKs house and do Sunday interviews from there.


Then throw in a location only a few miles from the ocean, close proximity to massive population areas like San Jose and San Fran and the Masters would have likely been an even bigger event..

Thanks!


To your credit, you just made my hypothetical questions sound 2x cooler with those suggestions!