Masters Golf Course Thoughts

[Jason Topp]

1.  Two green is one of my favorites.  It appears as if they just mowed the ground as it existed.  The slopes lead to so many interesting shots.


2.  I have seen several people replace divots.  I thought that was a bad thing to do on overseeded rye.  Any turf types have a comment?


3.  I am a bit confused by the three trees they left on the right side of 11.  The bailout near the green looks impossible.  It seems that if you want to bail out you need to leave it short.

[Matt_Cohn]

I'm curious whether Augusta is still considered the supremely conditioned golf course relative to all others. I mean, it's obviously in the top 1% or whatever. And certainly the attention to detail, especially around the periphery, is way beyond what other courses are able to achieve. But are the tees, fairways, and greens better than all other PGA Tour courses? Or are all those courses at such a high standard now that the playing conditions at Augusta aren't significantly better than what they are at those other venues?


And does this answer change for Masters week vs. the rest of the year at Augusta, compared to the rest of the year at other places?

[Matthew Rose]

Is the pond on #11 bigger? It sure looks like it.

I also feel like the second cut is less prominent than past years.

[Thomas Dai]

Worth a read - https://dfmodern.com/blogs/community/the-grass-isn-t-always-greener-and-it-shouldn-t-be
atb

[Cal Seifert]

Is the pond on #11 bigger? It sure looks like it.

I also feel like the second cut is less prominent than past years.

Fred Ridley mentioned something about minimizing the second cut going forward to help balls hit offline run further offline. Not sure about the lake on #11 but I know the right side of the green was deepened about 2’ to make an up and down more difficult from that bailout area.

[Matt MacIver]

I think Rory commented the pond on 11 used to end at the edge of the green but now extends past and into the fairway.

[Cal Carlisle]

I'm curious whether Augusta is still considered the supremely conditioned golf course relative to all others. I mean, it's obviously in the top 1% or whatever. And certainly the attention to detail, especially around the periphery, is way beyond what other courses are able to achieve. But are the tees, fairways, and greens better than all other PGA Tour courses? Or are all those courses at such a high standard now that the playing conditions at Augusta aren't significantly better than what they are at those other venues?


And does this answer change for Masters week vs. the rest of the year at Augusta, compared to the rest of the year at other places?

Conditioning-wise there are a lot of courses that are right there. The only thing I've seen that really sets them apart is the size of their nursery/landscape staff. I think people overlook just how much time, money, and expertise goes into maintaining their landscape.



ANGC looks a little different in the summertime.

https://golf.com/travel/augusta-national-dormant-photos-masters-course/

[Jim_Coleman]

   I don’t understand how the “trees = bad architecture” crowd can explain the greatness of Augusta. And please don’t say money can overcome anything. Trees are probably the most important (not only, obviously) defense the course offers

[Cal Carlisle]

   I don’t understand how the “trees = bad architecture” crowd can explain the greatness of Augusta. And please don’t say money can overcome anything. Trees are probably the most important (not only, obviously) defense the course offers

The greens (and their pace) are the main defense.

[Jason Topp]

I'm curious whether Augusta is still considered the supremely conditioned golf course relative to all others. I mean, it's obviously in the top 1% or whatever. And certainly the attention to detail, especially around the periphery, is way beyond what other courses are able to achieve. But are the tees, fairways, and greens better than all other PGA Tour courses? Or are all those courses at such a high standard now that the playing conditions at Augusta aren't significantly better than what they are at those other venues?


And does this answer change for Masters week vs. the rest of the year at Augusta, compared to the rest of the year at other places?

Conditioning-wise there are a lot of courses that are right there. The only thing I've seen that really sets them apart is the size of their nursery/landscape staff. I think people overlook just how much time, money, and expertise goes into maintaining their landscape.



ANGC looks a little different in the summertime.

https://golf.com/travel/augusta-national-dormant-photos-masters-course/

I also think maintaining the course as a winter course means that it plays pretty soft most of the year.  A guy from Minnesota qualified one year and panicked on his first visit because of how long it played Mid-Winter.  He went out and bought hybrids that he did not need when the course firmed up for the event.

[Jeff Schley]

   I don’t understand how the “trees = bad architecture” crowd can explain the greatness of Augusta. And please don’t say money can overcome anything. Trees are probably the most important (not only, obviously) defense the course offers

The greens (and their pace) are the main defense.

I have to agree with Cal here, the green complexes are not only very tough to hit and hold, but those undulations to put on are frightening downhill.

[Tim_Weiman]

   I don’t understand how the “trees = bad architecture” crowd can explain the greatness of Augusta. And please don’t say money can overcome anything. Trees are probably the most important (not only, obviously) defense the course offers

Jim,


I have never heard anyone suggest trees are the most important defense Augusta offers. Can you explain why you believe this? Specifically, can you explain why you believe trees are more important than Augusta’s greens?

[Kalen Braley]

I think on some holes like 7 yes the trees are the primary defense.

But if I was ranking the deterrents to scoring at Augusta, it would be something like this:

1)  Undulating greens
2)  Undulating property in general with sidehill, uphill, downhill lies
3)  The length from the back tees.
4)  Hitting shots from the pine straw
5) Ponds/water
.
.
.
6)  Trees

[Ben Hollerbach]

   I don’t understand how the “trees = bad architecture” crowd can explain the greatness of Augusta. And please don’t say money can overcome anything. Trees are probably the most important (not only, obviously) defense the course offers

Jim,


I have never heard anyone suggest trees are the most important defense Augusta offers. Can you explain why you believe this? Specifically, can you explain why you believe trees are more important than Augusta’s greens?

A few years ago I measured the fairway widths at Augusta at an average of 40 yards wide. With the mowing line changes for this year they are even wider. At times trees can come into play, but I can't see how they would be considered the most important defense.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Watching the players hit shots into four and six makes me wonder where the pins are for everyday play. Shots that are off just a bit are punished. I can't imagine members would like shots that are online but ten feet short of the hole repelled and end up forty feet away.

[Jim Sherma]

Watching the players hit shots into four and six makes me wonder where the pins are for everyday play. Shots that are off just a bit are punished. I can't imagine members would like shots that are online but ten feet short of the hole repelled and end up forty feet away.

How much of that is a function of green speeds. At slower speeds and slightly softer surfaces I'd imagine that the repelling/run out is significantly less.

[Jim_Coleman]

   Of course the greens are incredible and are the one thing that distinguishes Augusta from most courses. But missing the fairway is death, and it’s death because of trees, not rough. I wonder if they have a statistic for in what percentage of bogeys a tree affected a second shot. Greater than 50% I would guess.
   I suspect if they removed most of the trees to open up vistas, provide more air and light, and offer more opportunities for saving shots (the usual anti tree mantra), many would call the before and after pictures beautiful and praise the wonderful changes. But I think scores would drop and Augusta wouldn’t be Augusta. Trees had little or nothing to do with Oakmont’s architecture; they very much do with Augusta’s.

[Jeff Kallberg]

Aren't most (all?) of the holes at Augusta named after species of trees?  That would seem to support the importance of trees to the identity of the course.

[Ben Hollerbach]

   Of course the greens are incredible and are the one thing that distinguishes Augusta from most courses. But missing the fairway is death, and it’s death because of trees, not rough. I wonder if they have a statistic for in what percentage of bogeys a tree affected a second shot. Greater than 50% I would guess.
   I suspect if they removed most of the trees to open up vistas, provide more air and light, and offer more opportunities for saving shots (the usual anti tree mantra), many would call the before and after pictures beautiful and praise the wonderful changes. But I think scores would drop and Augusta wouldn’t be Augusta. Trees had little or nothing to do with Oakmont’s architecture; they very much do with Augusta’s.

Jim,

your comment assumes that if the trees were not there the play into the green would have little to no increase in challenge than a shot from the current fairway. And the addition of the trees is what makes it death. Watching players navigate the course day by day, regulating their driving lines and distances strictly to better play at certain pin positions, it seems clear that Augusta is a course that still demands the use of proper approach angles by the worlds best to score well. If angles are still critical when playing into a 40 yard wide fairway, wouldn't it be safe to assume that they would be even more critical when playing from 10 yard off of the fairway?

Oakmont's fairways are 10+ yards more narrow than Augusta. When a missed fairway at Oakmont  may still be a hit fairway at Augusta, how are trees impacting either drive?

[Jason Topp]

I do like seeing these guys face approaches from over 200 yards into par 4s.  It seems exceedingly rare for the long guys to face such shots.

[Ben Hollerbach]

How critical is the balance between the undulation on and around the green and the pace the greens and surrounds are cut, in relationship to the overall design effectiveness an challenge of the course?
If the greens and surrounds were cut to roll 2' less, would the undulations be able to hold up the design and challenge? If the course is slower are there new pin positions that could be used to keep the challenge up? Or does the modern formula of the course begin to fall apart if the course is not kept as fast?

[Jim_Coleman]

   I am always amused by the argument that removing trees doesn’t increase difficulty because the angle of approach presents comparable challenge. Of course it’s better to hit into a green from a fairway. But it’s also always better to hit into a green when you don’t have to negotiate a shot around a tree.

[Jason Thurman]

Topp, are you sure you've seen divots replaced? Is it possible they're just picking them up and keeping the joint looking pristine?

[Ben Hollerbach]

   I am always amused by the argument that removing trees doesn’t increase difficulty because the angle of approach presents comparable challenge. Of course it’s better to hit into a green from a fairway. But it’s also always better to hit into a green when you don’t have to negotiate a shot around a tree.

Jim,

Reread my comment. I did not say that the angle presented a comparable challenge. You hypothesized that the presents of trees in a players second at Augusta would account for more than 50% of bogeys recorded. But you did not specify what other elements of increase challenge may be there. If angles at Augusta did not matter from the fairway, then it may be safe to say that trees were the only factor to an increase bogey percentage from the trees. But since they do, wouldn't you need to know the impact of an improper angle on scoring to understand the impact of the trees?

[Jim_Coleman]

Ben: I suppose some questions don’t have answers. But I have heard on more than one occasion that removing trees does not necessarily make a hole easier. I respectfully disagree and believe trees play an important part in golf architecture, particularly for parkland courses.