Is the Masters good for the game of golf?

[Ian Mackenzie]

I'm serious and curious and I've had this debate with some buddies recently.


IMO, it is not.


- Excessive emphasis on length
- Ridiculously elitist private venue that defines class bifurcation
- It's an "invitational" and not a tourney for which you can enter a qualifier
- Extreme focus on pristine and unrealistic playing conditions
- It's a private event veiled in financial secrecy


If the game seeks growth across ages, classes and genders, is this the example we want? It defines "cost-no-object" golf.


Is it an anomaly that benefits the game or an albatross that draws attention to division?


Yes, yes...the purity, the beauty, the tradition unlike any other...I've been watching since I was 5. I'm sure there are healthy charity donations, too.


But, isn't really just a cash-cow for the members who use this event to fund their playground?

[Tim Leahy]

The Masters is the Superbowl of golf. The best of the best. I will never attend a Superbowl but I was able to fly across the country to walk Augusta National and see the Par 3 tournament and would do it again. It is the only major I know every hole and watch every hole.

[Kyle Casella]

- Excessive emphasis on length  excessive emphasis on maintaining shot values for the world's top professionals
[/color]- Ridiculously elitist private venue that defines class bifurcation is generally regarded as one of the best run, most family friendly, and top spectator experiences in all of sport
[/color]- It's an "invitational" and not a tourney for which you can enter a qualifier that requires an extremely high level of play to enter while honoring the traditions of the elite amateur golfer
[/color]- Extreme focus on pristine and unrealistic playing conditions playing conditions that challenge the world's best golfers
[/color]- It's a private event veiled in financial secrecy and like many other global private events (Super Bowl, Coachella Festival, etc.) chooses to keep its affairs private


I think it's a very worthwhile debate. And I wholeheartedly agree with you that it sets an unrealistic standard marker for playing conditions that has set US golf way back. I also view many of the course changes as silly. On the whole, I think that the global attention it brings to golf from casual non-fans is unparalleled with any other event and that is immeasurably important for the game. It's not perfect but their approach to continual improvement should also be commended.

[jim_lewis]

Many, many golfers say their initial interest in game was triggered by watching the Masters on tv. That alone makes it good for the game of golf.

[Mike Wagner]

Yeah, the greatest event of the year is bad for golf.  C'mon, get a grip.

[V. Kmetz]

what does anyone care what opinion I or Jaiem Diaz or Brandel Chamblee or Geoff Schackeford have?... it's all defending one's sentiment, which is borne of a million other things besides the Masters

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER? It's hot air!

And this "good for the game" jazz... what does the Masters cost anybody on the public end? Point to one fucking concrete thing in your own golf and endeavors where the Masters set US golf back...from where, what place, what time, what revenue, what property. what project, what failure...not some whining generalization ..."the courses are so long"

Just please, let's keep these meaningless sentiments in our gob and go look at the Kenney Park thread or a animal shelter site or something.


The question should be: Is social media, like this board, good for anything?

[Kalen Braley]

VK,

Fair enough on most of those points.  But can you honestly say the "pristine playing conditions" arms-race that so many courses world-wide pursue, (which the USGA recently railed on) isn't mostly attributable to what is presented at ANGC?

[V. Kmetz]

VK,

Fair enough on most of those points.  But can you honestly say the "pristine playing conditions" arms-race that so many courses world-wide pursue, (which the USGA recently railed on) isn't mostly attributable to what is presented at ANGC?

KB, I'm not goign to submit and engage the very wasteful thing which is the problem here... so let';s say you and anyone else are absolutely, 1000% percent correct and Jesus comes down wit hthe data to say so... the Masters isn't good for the game...

So what comes next? Eliminate it?  Close the club? Make them grow the greens and fairways to a greater height at the point of a gun?


And moreover, the game is INANIMATE... it has no conscience, nor intellect, no memory, no ambition... everytime I hear this phrase associated wit hthe game is supposed to be this, the good of the game that...whether its walking or rules or bifurcation, if anythign the game is a SERVANT not a master.

[Kalen Braley]

VK,

A few points of clarification.

- The question only asked for "Yes or No".  I understand your point with what's next, and who knows...but that wasn't asked...

-  And while I also agree that the game is inanimate, ANGC is not.  Its a living, breathing organization...and a very deliberate and calculated one at that.  And to think it doesn't have a huge impact on several facets of the game is a huge under-estimation.

[A.G._Crockett]

- Excessive emphasis on length
- Ridiculously elitist private venue that defines class bifurcation
- It's an "invitational" and not a tourney for which you can enter a qualifier
- Extreme focus on pristine and unrealistic playing conditions
- It's a private event veiled in financial secrecy

Ian,

You have just described private club golf in America, and in only 5 sentences.

[Kalen Braley]

I don't think the timing of this release was by accident...


http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/course-care/forethegolfer/2019/how-to-put-a-golf-course-out-of-business.html

[Ian Mackenzie]

Yeah, the greatest event of the year is bad for golf.  C'mon, get a grip.

Appreciate the reply.
Thanks for the opinion.


My grip is firm.
Didn’t say I don’t enjoy the tourney.


Just wondering if it has some contagion that is sometimes hard to quantify.


Has it caused some courses to have Masters perfection as a goal?
Does that contribute to sky rocketing fees and memberships?


Does that then make it prohibitive for the game to reach new markets effectively?


Or, I could just be flippant...

[Ian Mackenzie]

- Excessive emphasis on length
- Ridiculously elitist private venue that defines class bifurcation
- It's an "invitational" and not a tourney for which you can enter a qualifier
- Extreme focus on pristine and unrealistic playing conditions
- It's a private event veiled in financial secrecy

Ian,

You have just described private club golf in America, and in only 5 sentences.

AG,
That’s kinda my point. And, given current economic dynamic at US private clubs, it draws renewed reflection on the influence of the marquee events on golf culture in the US.


If club culture takes some cue from AGNC and the Masters, I would be curious to hear about the positive effect the Masters does have.


The US Open I get for sure, at least IMO.

[Ian Mackenzie]

what does anyone care what opinion I or Jaiem Diaz or Brandel Chamblee or Geoff Schackeford have?... it's all defending one's sentiment, which is borne of a million other things besides the Masters

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER? It's hot air!

And this "good for the game" jazz... what does the Masters cost anybody on the public end? Point to one fucking concrete thing in your own golf and endeavors where the Masters set US golf back...from where, what place, what time, what revenue, what property. what project, what failure...not some whining generalization ..."the courses are so long"

Just please, let's keep these meaningless sentiments in our gob and go look at the Kenney Park thread or a animal shelter site or something.


The question should be: Is social media, like this board, good for anything?

Wow...sorry, dude.
Go take a walk.


You miss the point.

[Mike Sweeney]

- It's a private event veiled in financial secrecy

Ian,


The financial secrecy was un-veiled in 2015 - https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-masters-finances-ron-sirak


Like many things in America, The Masters is probably overdone. That is the tricky balance where we (USA) always try to make things "better" and "bigger" to the point that they then get worse.


Obviously I will be watching!! 

"Nobody goes there anymore. It’s too crowded." Yogi Berra

[Edward Glidewell]

I think the US Open has been much worse for golf than the Masters. It's been changing recently, but the tight fairways, thick rough, etc. (and it has pushed length even more than the Masters, IMO) has influenced far more clubs than Augusta in my experience. I've never personally been there but I've read both here and in other places that it essentially ruined Bethpage Black, for one.


The Masters has been going in the wrong direction with the addition of a second cut among other things, but overall I think most courses/clubs realize Augusta is a unique place and not something they can emulate. They can absolutely tighten up their fairways and grow 3 inch rough, though, and that's been happening for a long time.

[V. Kmetz]

what does anyone care what opinion I or Jaiem Diaz or Brandel Chamblee or Geoff Schackeford have?... it's all defending one's sentiment, which is borne of a million other things besides the Masters

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER? It's hot air!

And this "good for the game" jazz... what does the Masters cost anybody on the public end? Point to one fucking concrete thing in your own golf and endeavors where the Masters set US golf back...from where, what place, what time, what revenue, what property. what project, what failure...not some whining generalization ..."the courses are so long"

Just please, let's keep these meaningless sentiments in our gob and go look at the Kenney Park thread or a animal shelter site or something.


The question should be: Is social media, like this board, good for anything?

Wow...sorry, dude.
Go take a walk.


You miss the point.

What's the point Ian...and what truth of what point means what exactly?

[Ian Mackenzie]

what does anyone care what opinion I or Jaiem Diaz or Brandel Chamblee or Geoff Schackeford have?... it's all defending one's sentiment, which is borne of a million other things besides the Masters

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER? It's hot air!

And this "good for the game" jazz... what does the Masters cost anybody on the public end? Point to one fucking concrete thing in your own golf and endeavors where the Masters set US golf back...from where, what place, what time, what revenue, what property. what project, what failure...not some whining generalization ..."the courses are so long"

Just please, let's keep these meaningless sentiments in our gob and go look at the Kenney Park thread or a animal shelter site or something.


The question should be: Is social media, like this board, good for anything?

Wow...sorry, dude.
Go take a walk.


You miss the point.

What's the point Ian...and what truth of what point means what exactly?

The point?
May mean different things to different people.


I’m always curious about what is good for hobbies and sports that are important to me and my family and friends.


Tiger Woods? He’s been good for the game. When he was out, the game last fans. He returned, there was the “Tiger bump”.


When the Dallas Stars moved from Minnesota, it was good for youth hockey in DFW. It was measured in new player participation.


If the Masters ceased to exist, would it even have the same impact on the game as just one player....like Tiger Woods...?


ANGC is like a supermodel that is skimpily flaunted in front of legions of aspiring fans.
But, I just wonder, like fashion and even politics, if we are not better served by less celebrity and more pure substance.


So, back on point...what I mean specifically as a subset of this is, as an example, did the ridiculous ANGC greens serve as the Helen of Troy moment that launched 1000 clubs to seek green speeds of 12+?


Is that good for the game?

[archie_struthers]

 


Golf doesn't have to be socially correct on every level, it evolved as anything but that. It was a game for the elite and Augusta stands at the pinnacle in many respects.


The Masters is showtime, it's the Lakers with Magic and Kareem the Knicks in their heyday the Yankees all the time. It has been painstakingly choreographed to show off both the venue and the sport, an awesome tribute to those who conceived and polished it !


I love watching it probably more than almost any sporting event that doesn't include my beloved Eagles, Phillies or Sixers, A homer forever is my curse, or blessing.


Had a chance to play Augusta in my youth missed it now it is likely above my station. That's ok, many of my favorite haunts would be a tough fit for most of the membership there. So enjoy it, imagine having the putts that the great players have made and missed. Root for your favorite or silently enjoy the trouble that surely can befall your less cherished.


Leave it alone as a wonderful anachronism, something that might not be accepted forever, yet we are intrigued by the peek behind the curtain. The British have accepted the concept of royalty and appear to have great fun with it
Consider the Masters as such , enjoy it for what it is.

[jeffwarne]

yes-emphatically

[Mike_Young]

The question should be: Is social media, like this board, good for anything?

Amen...it has created more "bad for golf" than anything else...

[V. Kmetz]

The point?
May mean different things to different people.
No, to you...what's the point to you?...this speculation is pointless to me, becasuse it's a subjective truth, no one is changing your mind and nothing about your changed or unchanged mind is going to mean anything when the thread is done. It was never an honest question on your part; you should change the title to The Masters is bad for golf...and let people argue/agree with you about it as they will.

I’m always curious about what is good for hobbies and sports that are important to me and my family and friends.
Why? Why is the opinion of others informative, decisive or worthy, when nobody on this board is giving you an answer Ian...why don't you follow what you think is good and avoid what is bad in your own sphere of judgment?

Tiger Woods? He’s been good for the game. When he was out, the game last fans. He returned, there was the “Tiger bump”.
The game would be there whether he was or not... it is debatable, not a fact...for every revenue or ad number you could easily point to, I can give you the unquantifiable You da' man bullshit...the Phoenix stadium bullshit... Billion dollar bullshit...the tabloid bullshit...the glorification of very plain, often flawed, people for beating a ball around.

When the Dallas Stars moved from Minnesota, it was good for youth hockey in DFW. It was measured in new player participation.
And devastating for thousands who had their historic associations with the North Stars, and who says good for youth hockey in one town is good for the game in another or the game as a whole or anything measurable beyond sentiment... I see a lot of shit behavior from f'ed up sports parents, hockey a major venue for such transgressors,...what's so good about those potentials?

If the Masters ceased to exist, would it even have the same impact on the game as just one player....like Tiger Woods...?
What makes the Masters different in thsi regard than the Open Championship or anyother major, long-time tournament

ANGC is like a supermodel that is skimpily flaunted in front of legions of aspiring fans.
But, I just wonder, like fashion and even politics, if we are not better served by less celebrity and more pure substance.
I thought you just said Tiger Woods was good for the game...I mean he is substance, but if he is not celebrity run amok over his sport, what is?

So, back on point...what I mean specifically as a subset of this is, as an example, did the ridiculous ANGC greens serve as the Helen of Troy moment that launched 1000 clubs to seek green speeds of 12+? Where, when..what were the green speeds in 1958 and 78 and 88 and 98...when did they become faster or slower than Oakmonts or Merions or Quaker Ridges?

Is that good for the game?
What question do you have?  This ain't it!

[Steve Wilson]

I innocently opened this thread never dreaming I would stumble onto a prime example of why I always opposed an
amendment to the constitution banning flag burning.

[Mike Sweeney]

Masters week in da Bronx:




50 degrees - Pelham Golf Course, Bronx, New York - April 9, 2019

[Joe Leenheer]

What's "good" for the game of golf is obviously subjective.


The Masters is the most watched tournament....so great exposure to the game of golf to millions who don't normally watch or even play.


The Drive, Chip, and Putt finals being hosted in conjunction with the tournament has been a tremendous success driving participation numbers.  This will continue to add to a new base of golfers.  DC&P wasn't on anyone's radar before.


The Women's Amateur event is really special.  While it will likely always remain in the shadow, it will become (if not already is) THE most coveted title in Amateur golf....for men or women.


I consider myself someone who sorta "gets" the nature of the golf industry, and the Masters has a tremendous POSITIVE impact at the local level driving customers and members to the course, getting said individuals excited for the season, and bringing new faces to the game.


If anyone is comparing their home course or club to ANGC and what they do at the Masters then they are likely leaving three clubs on the range, loosing two head covers during the round, are two holes behind the group in front of them, plumbobbing 2 foot putts, and using beads to count their score.