ANGC Course Changes

123457

Comments

  • Bluefan75Bluefan75 Members Posts: 3,855 ✭✭
    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    It could be hole locations. It seems they are never as close to the pond as they were before. Maybe the camera angles are different from back then, but it seems, as delmer said, that the hole doesn't strike the fear it once did.



    Actually, scratch that. What I mean is that it has simply become a very hard hole. Maybe this is selective memory, but 11 seemed more of a hole along the lines of 13, 15. Not necessarily as much as the "par 4 1/2," but now it's simply a very difficult hole, without much real opportunity to make something happen without getting very lucky.



    Maybe the trees on the right forced the pins away from the water more. I'm not sure.



    I want to say it was 2008 when the course was so toughened up that nothing happened on the back nine. While a lot of that has been undone, 11 seems a remnant of that era, when it could be so much more.
  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX
    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    I'm not sure. I've just observed that it just seems to lack the thrill that it once had. I think it could be done with hole locations but the second shot doesn't seem as brutal as it was in years past.



    It sounds like they're going to put some more teeth into 10 so I guess it will be more of a 1-2 punch now before they get to 12.
  • Bluefan75Bluefan75 Members Posts: 3,855 ✭✭
    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    I'm not sure. I've just observed that it just seems to lack the thrill that it once had. I think it could be done with hole locations but the second shot doesn't seem as brutal as it was in years past.



    It sounds like they're going to put some more teeth into 10 so I guess it will be more of a 1-2 punch now before they get to 12.




    They need more teeth in 10? That green is diabolical. The only change I ever want to see to 10 is keeping the speed slot in the landing area, so maybe the tee has to go back. It's a big disadvantage if you miss it.



    This is why the Masters(forgetting the Major designation, history, etc for a moment), even though there can be a ton of birdies, is so much better than a tour event. Tour events are setup to make it somewhat easy for a couple of guys to shoot -20 over 4 days, you really just need the putter working. ANGC, on the other hand, has opportunities, but at the same time, if you miss, you are in a heap of trouble. It can be very easy to be very close to the hole, but it doesn't take much to end up very far away from the hole as well.
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 AustinMembers Posts: 5,066 ✭✭
    Bluefan75 wrote:


    This makes a lot of sense. Lowering the ball flight would change the dynamics dramatically. My other question would be, how much faster are the greens compared to then? I know they used to be Bermuda I believe, and so you had to give a good rap to make it travel. Now a butterfly hovering over top can send it 20 feet.




    ANGC Stimps were 7'll" in 1978. Thats a HUGE difference.



    https://www.thoughtco.com/how-much-have-green-speeds-increased-in-golf-1563536
  • cardoustiecardoustie haha, we don't play for 5's Members Posts: 11,604 ✭✭
    Regarding 11, I think it has become so long that most guys are so far back they can't fire at the green from 200. The penalty is too stiff on the left with the aqua



    I think more water balls were in play to waterside pins when the players were inside 150



    I've said you just have to add a little trouble right of that green (a pine with a big watch of pine straw underneath) to force guys to take a more aggressive line. Likely won't do it because it could impede the sightlines from the grandstands behind 12 tee. Adding a trap there makes it easier is my guess



    I really can't believe more posters here don't want to see the implementation of original AM bunker contouring and shaping like Rangersgoalie and I suggested
    Ping G400 LST 11* Mitsu TI BB Matte 53x
    Callaway GBB 3w 14* Mitsu Blueboard 63x
    Ping G400 5w 17* Fubuki Tour 73x
    Callaway V-series Hwood Fuji TS 8.2s
    Callaway Apex 4h 23* Fujikura 904HBs
    Ping Rapture 5-PW Aldila NV MLTi Pro105x
    Ping iWedge 50* Aldila NV 105x
    Ping Glide SS 53* & ES 59* Wrx SF125s
    Piretti Matera Elite (torched)
  • Nard_SNard_S Members Posts: 3,114 ✭✭
    I think 11 can be improved by putting a higher spine (middle ish, front to back) on green, making up & down from right harder and forcing a shot to right side of green more appealing. Hole then can become more dynamic depending on pin location too. Birdie or bogey "good".
  • umassgolferumassgolfer Posts: 769 ✭✭
    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    What about an extension of Ray's Creek that splits the green in 2? Or make it an island green! (KIDDING!)



    To me IF there is a change to make the answer is a combination of two suggestions above, added width on the right of the fairway so approach angles bring the water back into play, and putting 8-iron or less back into most players hands to bring a more aggressive option back into play. That should bring a bigger volatility of scores back into the equation, and isn't that what we're talking about here? Not making it harder, per se, but making it more interesting.
  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX

    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    What about an extension of Ray's Creek that splits the green in 2? Or make it an island green! (KIDDING!)



    To me IF there is a change to make the answer is a combination of two suggestions above, added width on the right of the fairway so approach angles bring the water back into play, and putting 8-iron or less back into most players hands to bring a more aggressive option back into play. That should bring a bigger volatility of scores back into the equation, and isn't that what we're talking about here? Not making it harder, per se, but making it more interesting.




    That would make sense. A little shorter and a little more aggressive hole locations. It just seems like tons of people make 4 or 5 by going super conservative and it just kind of makes for a bland hole now.



    Last year there were zero birdies in R3 and 3 birdies in R4. There were only 5 doubles on the weekend so like 80% of the players made 4.
  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX

    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    What about an extension of Ray's Creek that splits the green in 2? Or make it an island green! (KIDDING!)



    To me IF there is a change to make the answer is a combination of two suggestions above, added width on the right of the fairway so approach angles bring the water back into play, and putting 8-iron or less back into most players hands to bring a more aggressive option back into play. That should bring a bigger volatility of scores back into the equation, and isn't that what we're talking about here? Not making it harder, per se, but making it more interesting.




    That's not too far fetched. Rae's creek used to run in front of the green so you couldn't run a shot up.
  • augustgolfaugustgolf Golf with dignity Coastal NCMembers Posts: 3,891 ✭✭
    delmer wrote:


    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Y'all do realize that number 11 is year in and year out one of the three toughest holes every year at ANGC if not the toughest, just because a ball isn't going in the water isn't a sign it's easy or playing easier.




    It's the hardest or second hardest usually but the guys at the top of their game don't nearly seem as scared of it as they once did. This year it looks like the last 4 groups played it 1 over with Reed being the only one to bogey it which didn't affect the outcome.



    I hear you that it's a really hard hole but it just doesn't seem to be as big of a swing hole as it used to be. That could just be my perception too.




    I have neither the time nor motivation to do the numbers for all the past Masters champions, but I'd imagine they have played all the holes including 11 historically quite well hence their being atop the leaderboard.



    So what would the solution be then on 11 specifically?




    What about an extension of Ray's Creek that splits the green in 2? Or make it an island green! (KIDDING!)



    To me IF there is a change to make the answer is a combination of two suggestions above, added width on the right of the fairway so approach angles bring the water back into play, and putting 8-iron or less back into most players hands to bring a more aggressive option back into play. That should bring a bigger volatility of scores back into the equation, and isn't that what we're talking about here? Not making it harder, per se, but making it more interesting.




    That would make sense. A little shorter and a little more aggressive hole locations. It just seems like tons of people make 4 or 5 by going super conservative and it just kind of makes for a bland hole now.



    Last year there were zero birdies in R3 and 3 birdies in R4. There were only 5 doubles on the weekend so like 80% of the players made 4.




    And I would be more than willing to bet that each and every one of the players who made par was very thankful...the way that a difficult hole should be.



    Just one old man's humble opinion...YMMV
    Pings from the beginning

    OGA member 1415
    or is it 1514...
    I don't remember exactly
  • BNGLBNGL Members Posts: 1,557 ✭✭
    Here’s a rabbit hole for y’all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I’ve ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn’t bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.



  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX
    BNGL wrote:


    Here's a rabbit hole for y'all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I've ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    I think the great part about the back nine out there is as you make the turn the key to the first third of the nine it to not make a mistake, the middle third is moving time, and the final third is either hang on or attack if you need to.



    The way 11 plays holds to that but when you look at the scoring if you want to nitpick you can say there is almost no parody on the hole itself.



    I think that giving 10 a little more bite will help restore the start to the 9. Historically the 10th hole is the hardest hole on the course and last year in the final round it was the 5th easiest hole. I think that 10 playing so easy may have made guys go a little more conservative on 11 and led to almost nobody making birdie to try to bounce back from a bogey on 10.



    If you get 10 back to playing the way it should you'll have the hardest hole, 10, the 2nd hardest hole, 11 and the 4th hardest hole 12 to start the back nine.
  • BNGLBNGL Members Posts: 1,557 ✭✭
    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Here's a rabbit hole for y'all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I've ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    I think the great part about the back nine out there is as you make the turn the key to the first third of the nine it to not make a mistake, the middle third is moving time, and the final third is either hang on or attack if you need to.



    The way 11 plays holds to that but when you look at the scoring if you want to nitpick you can say there is almost no parody on the hole itself.



    I think that giving 10 a little more bite will help restore the start to the 9. Historically the 10th hole is the hardest hole on the course and last year in the final round it was the 5th easiest hole. I think that 10 playing so easy may have made guys go a little more conservative on 11 and led to almost nobody making birdie to try to bounce back from a bogey on 10.



    If you get 10 back to playing the way it should you'll have the hardest hole, 10, the 2nd hardest hole, 11 and the 4th hardest hole 12 to start the back nine.




    The biggest irritant to me about this whole idea is there’s few solutions being offered...it’s only ideas. Half completed ideas at that...give 10 more bite. Ok how? Lengthen it, grow the rough, how would you add more bite to it. That’s what I want to know and debate.



    And it’s parity...not parody.
  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX
    edited Nov 28, 2018 #195
    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Here's a rabbit hole for y'all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I've ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    I think the great part about the back nine out there is as you make the turn the key to the first third of the nine it to not make a mistake, the middle third is moving time, and the final third is either hang on or attack if you need to.



    The way 11 plays holds to that but when you look at the scoring if you want to nitpick you can say there is almost no parody on the hole itself.



    I think that giving 10 a little more bite will help restore the start to the 9. Historically the 10th hole is the hardest hole on the course and last year in the final round it was the 5th easiest hole. I think that 10 playing so easy may have made guys go a little more conservative on 11 and led to almost nobody making birdie to try to bounce back from a bogey on 10.



    If you get 10 back to playing the way it should you'll have the hardest hole, 10, the 2nd hardest hole, 11 and the 4th hardest hole 12 to start the back nine.




    The biggest irritant to me about this whole idea is there's few solutions being offered...it's only ideas. Half completed ideas at that...give 10 more bite. Ok how? Lengthen it, grow the rough, how would you add more bite to it. That's what I want to know and debate.



    And it's parity...not parody.




    Autocorrect kept changing that back on me. I do know the difference between parody and parity but thanks for the grammar lesson. I love when a guy who plays at Augusta with a former champion offers me a free 3rd grade English lesson.



    You've got selective reading. I think the idea of putting a spine from the front right to the back left of the 11th green would be something to explore. Depending upon the hole location it would penalize a pin high bailout and would get more guys who get out of position off the tee to lay-up well short of the green. It would also entice more guys to attack the pin with their second. The downside would be that if they put the pin back and right it would make the bailout right the play.



    As far as 10 is concerned I would try to steer more balls into the right bunker. That's always fun to watch guys try to get up and down from there so making the runoffs left and short more dramatic would be a start. I don't remember if there was a new hole location this year on Sunday but it played to a 3.8 average. That's bad news for the hole that is historically the hardest the course has to offer.



    Like I said earlier I think that 10 returning to the hardest hole on the course would make 11 play a lot differently too so I would figure that one out first.



    And again this is more of a theoretical debate, I'm not knocking the course. They don't care what you think, what I think or what anybody who chimes in on this thinks so no need to take it seriously or demand people only give complete ideas.
  • BNGLBNGL Members Posts: 1,557 ✭✭
    edited Nov 28, 2018 #196
    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Here's a rabbit hole for y'all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I've ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    I think the great part about the back nine out there is as you make the turn the key to the first third of the nine it to not make a mistake, the middle third is moving time, and the final third is either hang on or attack if you need to.



    The way 11 plays holds to that but when you look at the scoring if you want to nitpick you can say there is almost no parody on the hole itself.



    I think that giving 10 a little more bite will help restore the start to the 9. Historically the 10th hole is the hardest hole on the course and last year in the final round it was the 5th easiest hole. I think that 10 playing so easy may have made guys go a little more conservative on 11 and led to almost nobody making birdie to try to bounce back from a bogey on 10.



    If you get 10 back to playing the way it should you'll have the hardest hole, 10, the 2nd hardest hole, 11 and the 4th hardest hole 12 to start the back nine.




    The biggest irritant to me about this whole idea is there's few solutions being offered...it's only ideas. Half completed ideas at that...give 10 more bite. Ok how? Lengthen it, grow the rough, how would you add more bite to it. That's what I want to know and debate.



    And it's parity...not parody.




    Autocorrect kept changing that back on me. I do know the difference between parody and parity but thanks for the grammar lesson. I love when a guy who plays at Augusta with a former champion offers me a free 3rd grade English lesson.



    You've got selective reading. I think the idea of putting a spine from the front right to the back left of the 11th green would be something to explore. Depending upon the hole location it would penalize a pin high bailout and would get more guys who get out of position off the tee to lay-up well short of the green. It would also entice more guys to attack the pin with their second. The downside would be that if they put the pin back and right it would make the bailout right the play.



    As far as 10 is concerned I would try to steer more balls into the right bunker. That's always fun to watch guys try to get up and down from there so making the runoffs left and short more dramatic would be a start. I don't remember if there was a new hole location this year on Sunday but it played to a 3.8 average. That's bad news for the hole that is historically the hardest the course has to offer.



    Like I said earlier I think that 10 returning to the hardest hole on the course would make 11 play a lot differently too so I would figure that one out first.



    And again this is more of a theoretical debate, I'm not knocking the course. They don't care what you think, what I think or what anybody who chimes in on this thinks so no need to take it seriously or demand people only give complete ideas.




    You are welcome.



    And I know they don’t, nor should they. The Masters is the most perfect thing I have seen and I look forward to it every year. And whatever decision made by the chair and committee will be executed so flawlessly that hardly anyone will notice or think it hadn’t been done before. You’re correct that it’s a theoretical debate, but complete the idea or prepare to be challenged on it. I want to understand why you think what you think, so that I can give an informed opine as to why I either agree or disagree. Because only through the presentation of a thesis and antithesis will you get a synthesis.



  • delmerdelmer ClubWRX Posts: 439 ClubWRX
    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:

    delmer wrote:

    BNGL wrote:


    Here's a rabbit hole for y'all to ponder...



    Imagine they redo par at ANGC, lengths stay the exact same only thing changes is the card. They switch 11 (make it a par 5) and make 15 a par 4. Does that change your idea of the holes being too easy or difficult or unexciting or whatever?



    The whole thing that ANGC does better than any course I've ever played, is give you half pars and someone mentioned it earlier. But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    I think the great part about the back nine out there is as you make the turn the key to the first third of the nine it to not make a mistake, the middle third is moving time, and the final third is either hang on or attack if you need to.



    The way 11 plays holds to that but when you look at the scoring if you want to nitpick you can say there is almost no parody on the hole itself.



    I think that giving 10 a little more bite will help restore the start to the 9. Historically the 10th hole is the hardest hole on the course and last year in the final round it was the 5th easiest hole. I think that 10 playing so easy may have made guys go a little more conservative on 11 and led to almost nobody making birdie to try to bounce back from a bogey on 10.



    If you get 10 back to playing the way it should you'll have the hardest hole, 10, the 2nd hardest hole, 11 and the 4th hardest hole 12 to start the back nine.




    The biggest irritant to me about this whole idea is there's few solutions being offered...it's only ideas. Half completed ideas at that...give 10 more bite. Ok how? Lengthen it, grow the rough, how would you add more bite to it. That's what I want to know and debate.



    And it's parity...not parody.




    Autocorrect kept changing that back on me. I do know the difference between parody and parity but thanks for the grammar lesson. I love when a guy who plays at Augusta with a former champion offers me a free 3rd grade English lesson.



    You've got selective reading. I think the idea of putting a spine from the front right to the back left of the 11th green would be something to explore. Depending upon the hole location it would penalize a pin high bailout and would get more guys who get out of position off the tee to lay-up well short of the green. It would also entice more guys to attack the pin with their second. The downside would be that if they put the pin back and right it would make the bailout right the play.



    As far as 10 is concerned I would try to steer more balls into the right bunker. That's always fun to watch guys try to get up and down from there so making the runoffs left and short more dramatic would be a start. I don't remember if there was a new hole location this year on Sunday but it played to a 3.8 average. That's bad news for the hole that is historically the hardest the course has to offer.



    Like I said earlier I think that 10 returning to the hardest hole on the course would make 11 play a lot differently too so I would figure that one out first.



    And again this is more of a theoretical debate, I'm not knocking the course. They don't care what you think, what I think or what anybody who chimes in on this thinks so no need to take it seriously or demand people only give complete ideas.




    You are welcome.



    And I know they don't, nor should they. The Masters is the most perfect thing I have seen and I look forward to it every year. And whatever decision made by the chair and committee will be executed so flawlessly that hardly anyone will notice or think it hadn't been done before. You're correct that it's a theoretical debate, but complete the idea or prepare to be challenged on it. I want to understand why you think what you think, so that I can give an informed opine as to why I either agree or disagree. Because only through the presentation of a thesis and antithesis will you get a synthesis.




    You've officially turned a fun thread into homework. It was fun while it lasted.
  • cardoustiecardoustie haha, we don't play for 5's Members Posts: 11,604 ✭✭
    Is there room to back up 10 tee?



    Could they flatten out a portion of the landing area to shorten drives?



    Maybe a tree or 2 in the left rough to penalize over drawing it ? Keep players further right to see longer iron approaches again?
    Ping G400 LST 11* Mitsu TI BB Matte 53x
    Callaway GBB 3w 14* Mitsu Blueboard 63x
    Ping G400 5w 17* Fubuki Tour 73x
    Callaway V-series Hwood Fuji TS 8.2s
    Callaway Apex 4h 23* Fujikura 904HBs
    Ping Rapture 5-PW Aldila NV MLTi Pro105x
    Ping iWedge 50* Aldila NV 105x
    Ping Glide SS 53* & ES 59* Wrx SF125s
    Piretti Matera Elite (torched)
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 AustinMembers Posts: 5,066 ✭✭
    BNGL wrote:
    But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    No way. They are not competing against par. They are competing against the field. So par is totally meaningless.
  • BNGLBNGL Members Posts: 1,557 ✭✭
    cardoustie wrote:


    Is there room to back up 10 tee?



    Could they flatten out a portion of the landing area to shorten drives?



    Maybe a tree or 2 in the left rough to penalize over drawing it ? Keep players further right to see longer iron approaches again?






    There’s a little bit of room, but not much. You’d have to remove some trees or move patrons around 18 green as players would be close to going right over them if I remember correctly where the real estate would be.



    Flattering it out could work, but I’m not sure that would be best. A lot of people don’t know, realize, that 10 fairway is the wettest one on the course every time. For whatever reason it’s wet I don’t know why or how. Not like cart path only wet, but it holds moisture better than other fairways even with its slope. I’m not sure drainage would flow, eventually it would work out because ANGC would just figure it out, but in the immediate masters following flattening the fairway it could be a total mess. Strictly conjecture based on what I have seen, experienced, heard talking from members and players.
  • BNGLBNGL Members Posts: 1,557 ✭✭

    BNGL wrote:
    But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    No way. They are not competing against par. They are competing against the field. So par is totally meaningless.




    While I agree it the lowest score that matters, I am not quite sure what to tell you. What I said was inferred from conversations with players and members about hole 15 if it were a par 4 instead of a par 5. So going off that information, I made the inference that 11 being a par 5 strategy would change because it WOULD change on 15 if it were a par 4 instead of a par 5.
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 AustinMembers Posts: 5,066 ✭✭
    BNGL wrote:


    BNGL wrote:
    But if par changes on those two holes, they will be played entirely differently. Guys will suddenly start attacking 11, not playing conservatively as I agree a lot of players do tip toe around 11 and feel good with a par (which isn't bad). Because they know they could save par with a great wedge. Conversely guys will start laying up on 15 to make 4 the hard way, or at worse probably 5 because they could hit a good wedge and leave a makeable putt for par.




    No way. They are not competing against par. They are competing against the field. So par is totally meaningless.




    While I agree it the lowest score that matters, I am not quite sure what to tell you. What I said was inferred from conversations with players and members about hole 15 if it were a par 4 instead of a par 5. So going off that information, I made the inference that 11 being a par 5 strategy would change because it WOULD change on 15 if it were a par 4 instead of a par 5.




    There isn't a pro in the world who would play a hole different based on par.
  • JarlaxleJarlaxle Members Posts: 462 ✭✭
    Back to the topic at hand, I agree that 11 needs to be tweaked to encourage more risk/reward. Right now its almost all risk, if you go for at the flag and are off by more than a fraction, you are almost certain to make a bogey so most guys play for par, even from the middle of the fairway. I'd like to see guys that hit a good drive tempted to go at the flag.



    I also like the idea of increasing the fairway width down the right side creating angles that bring the water into play more often. I would be in favor of also thinning those trees significantly (they weren't there at all when I used to go to the tournament). Idea being that if you hit it over there, you can still make a play at the green but have just enough trees to probably force you to play up, over or around one but not so many that all you can do is chip/punch it out.



    Reading about ANGC has got me fired up! Is it April yet?!?!?!?
    "We're not here for a long time... we're here for a good time."

    Mizuno JPX 900 Driver w/ Speeder Evo II 661 Stiff
    Mizuno JPX 900 3W w/ Speeder Evo II 661 Stiff
    Titleist AP3 4 & 5 Iron w/ Project X LZ 6.0
    Titleist AP2 6 - PW w/ Project X LZ 6.0
    Miura Y Grind 51 w/ Project X 5.5
    Miura C Grind 55 w/ Project X 5.5
    Miura C Grind 59 w/ Project X 5.5
    Custom Edel E3
    Titleist Lightweight Stand Bag
  • umassgolferumassgolfer Posts: 769 ✭✭
    Man...I just spent too much time looking at this complete history of course changes. https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-complete-changes-to-augusta-national. Apologies if it has already been posted in this thread.



    Seems to me that other than the routing, a lot of the MacKenzie is gone from the current course - the open layout allowing for multiple strategies, green complexes, bunker styling, turf conditions allowing/requiring a ground game, etc.



    Don't get me wrong, the course as it is now is stunning and I have enjoyed every second I have been lucky enough to walk around it. And I know, I know...changes in the name of progress and as the game develops...that's not what I am arguing. Simply that looking at all of these changes it is hard to truly call it a MacKenzie course anymore?
  • MountainGoatMountainGoat Mid-MarylandMembers Posts: 1,582 ✭✭


    Man...I just spent too much time looking at this complete history of course changes. https://www.golfdige...ugusta-national. Apologies if it has already been posted in this thread.



    Seems to me that other than the routing, a lot of the MacKenzie is gone from the current course - the open layout allowing for multiple strategies, green complexes, bunker styling, turf conditions allowing/requiring a ground game, etc.



    Don't get me wrong, the course as it is now is stunning and I have enjoyed every second I have been lucky enough to walk around it. And I know, I know...changes in the name of progress and as the game develops...that's not what I am arguing. Simply that looking at all of these changes it is hard to truly call it a MacKenzie course anymore?




    What a great website! Thanks for sharing it.
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 AustinMembers Posts: 5,066 ✭✭


    Man...I just spent too much time looking at this complete history of course changes. https://www.golfdige...ugusta-national. Apologies if it has already been posted in this thread.



    Seems to me that other than the routing, a lot of the MacKenzie is gone from the current course - the open layout allowing for multiple strategies, green complexes, bunker styling, turf conditions allowing/requiring a ground game, etc.



    Don't get me wrong, the course as it is now is stunning and I have enjoyed every second I have been lucky enough to walk around it. And I know, I know...changes in the name of progress and as the game develops...that's not what I am arguing. Simply that looking at all of these changes it is hard to truly call it a MacKenzie course anymore?




    Wow! Nice website.



    Regarding MacKenzie, I've never cared much for preserving the original golf course designs. If changes improve the course, that's fine with me.
  • mark mmark m Members Posts: 2,481 ✭✭
    edited Dec 6, 2018 #207
    Links Magazine had a good article a couple of years ago called The Lost MacKenzie Drawings. Included talk of #13 and #16. He had #13 as a par 4. And the alternative drawing for #16 was the blueprint for the changes later made to the hole.



    https://www.linksmag...gusta_national/



    Quote:



    [background=transparent]“Their dad told them that he was having lunch with Bobby Jones when the subject was brought up,” Young says. “[Bobby] Jones took a napkin and had Trent sketch how he—Bobby—wanted the hole to look after it was rebuilt.” Curiously, it was exactly the same design as MacKenzie’s Alternative Plan.[/background]



    [background=transparent]There can be no question that Bobby Jones knew where the design had come from: In his letter to Scott-Taylor that accompanied the drawings, MacKenzie said it was Jones who requested a second concept and he signed the drawing of it.[/background]

    7054.jpg?x66510

    It's a great layout. The guy was genius IMO.
    Fit at Totally Driven:
    Titleist 910D3 8.5, Oban Devotion 05Flex 65g
    TM Aeroburner TP 3W, Oban Devotion 05Flex 75g
    TM R15 TP #3 (19*), Fujikura Speeder 869 X
    Mizuno JPX 900 Forged 4-PW, KBS C-Taper X
    Cleveland RTX-3 CB 50/10
    Cleveland RTX-3 56/11
    Vokey SM6 60/08
    Newport 2.5
  • jmconnell4jmconnell4 Posts: 96 ✭✭
    Do we have any clue what #13 will look like this year? Curious to see how much yardage they added. I am in favor of a little length. It is a little absurd to watch guys hit short irons into a par 5
  • KRAMER1997KRAMER1997 Members Posts: 34
    jmconnell4 wrote:


    Do we have any clue what #13 will look like this year? Curious to see how much yardage they added. I am in favor of a little length. It is a little absurd to watch guys hit short irons into a par 5
    Did they makes changes to 13?
  • augustgolfaugustgolf Golf with dignity Coastal NCMembers Posts: 3,891 ✭✭
    edited Dec 19, 2018 #210
    Why not make it simple with regards to #'s 13 & 15, since most of the field hits into the green with their 2nd shot.



    I know it sounds sacreligious, but make each of those holes a par 4. No lengthening, And, the winning "under par" record could be protected as well.



    Not that any of that actually makes common sense



    [sharedmedia=core:attachments:4812432]
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Pings from the beginning

    OGA member 1415
    or is it 1514...
    I don't remember exactly
  • Hawkeye77Hawkeye77 Countdown to The Masters! ClubWRX Posts: 17,366 ClubWRX
    BNGL wrote:


    Be on the lookout for new additions to include potential housing and museums. Have heard an extreme rumor of an additional 18 holes way way down the road.




    Like Florida? Couldn't resist, sorry.



    I'm going to ask 1000 people where they should put it!
Sign In or Register to comment.