LENGTHEN 11, NOT 13 AT AUGUSTA NATIONAL

[markakirchner]

why lengthen hole 13, when it would be simply easier to leave the hole alone and turn it into a very hard par 4. then lengthen number 11 and make that a greater risk/reward par 5 hole. bring the water hazard more into play on 2nd/3rd shot. still remains a par 72 course. plenty of room behind 11 tee (at least it looks like it).

[tiderider]

Absolutely horrible idea

[Whiskey_fire]

Leave the course alone.  Why do people care so much about the winning score?  

[Hawkeye77]

More than a horrible idea, it's dumb.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[MtlJeff]

I've always though they should add a ferris wheel to the 8th hole , and the 14th you should have to play only with your feet, and the 16th should have 70's disco music and you should hit your shot wearing roller blades

[Krt22]

3 minutes ago, Whiskey_fire said:

Leave the course alone.  Why do people care so much about the winning score?  

The soul of the game resides in the ether between the winning score and par. If young guys beat old standing records, old guys get grumpy that the golfers of yore are being shown in a poor light. It's hard to cling onto the romantic idea that golfers in the past were better "players" than current pros, when the scores keep falling. The artistic nature of the game is a risk, if we lose that, we lose it all and might as well play pickle ball!

[stingerfade]

12 minutes ago, Whiskey_fire said:

Leave the course alone.  Why do people care so much about the winning score?  

The course changes every year 

[tiderider]

59 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

I've always though they should add a ferris wheel to the 8th hole , and the 14th you should have to play only with your feet, and the 16th should have 70's disco music and you should hit your shot wearing roller blades

seriously? ... disco music? ... at augusta? ... 

[Hawkeye77]

A few guys thought the hard card notice, "Turn off your brain on the tee on 12 on Sunday" was for real in '19.

 

Tiger didn't fall for it!

[mark m]

I don't like the idea either, but #13 was originally designed to be a 440 yard par 4:

 

Here, an older article with drawings: 

The Lost MacKenzie Drawings of Augusta National | LINKS Magazine

 

Also, in this months issue, Bradley Klein produces ideas to lengthen numerous holes. He says distance has increased 15+%, but course length is just 8% longer:

 

11 Holes Where Augusta National Can Add Distance | LINKS Magazine

 

(He does not lengthen #11, but has the extra 40 yards on #13 on land already acquired.)

Edited April 8, 2021 by mark m

[MMB1500]

Lengthening 13 is not necessary. They just need to significantly lower the tee box. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by MMB1500

[tiderider]

20 minutes ago, mark m said:

I don't like the idea either, but #13 was originally designed to be a 440 yard par 4:

 

Here, an older article with drawings: 

The Lost MacKenzie Drawings of Augusta National | LINKS Magazine

 

Also, in this months issue, Bradley Klein produces ideas to lengthen numerous holes. He says distance has increased 15+%, but course length is just 8% longer:

 

11 Holes Where Augusta National Can Add Distance | LINKS Magazine

 

(He does not lengthen #11, but has the extra 40 yards on #13 on land already acquired.)

no issue lengthening holes ... heard ridley say today/yesterday that the 2nd shot at 13 was, essentially, a bit too easy (in recent years or something like that) ... it's been way too easy for 24 years or so ... that it was originally a par 4 is completely irrelevant ... it's history is a par 5 ... if they need, plant redwoods at the bend so they can't go over (no idea if those are tall enough) ... or plant trees close to the tees to force them to work the ball more ... i don't know ... but it's a par 5 ... can't change that ... 

Edited April 8, 2021 by tiderider

[stingerfade]

1 hour ago, tiderider said:

seriously? ... disco music? ... at augusta? ... 

think the batteries are dead on your sarcasm meter

[tiderider]

Just now, stingerfade said:

think the batteries are dead on your sarcasm meter

nah, i was being sarcastic myself ... 

[mark m]

1 minute ago, tiderider said:

no issue lengthening holes ... heard ridley say today/yesterday that the 2nd shot at 13 was, essentially, a bit too easy (in recent years or something like that) ... it's been way too easy for 24 years or so ... that it was originally a par 4 is completely irrelevant ... it's history is a par 5 ... if they need, plant redwoods at the bend so they can't go over (no idea if those are tall enough) ... or plant trees close to the tees to force them to work the ball more ... i don't know ... but it's a par 5 ... can't change that ... 

I don’t like the idea either. I like the risk/reward shots on the back side for some action. But it’s a very short par 5 in today’s game. So go back on the land acquired. They may have to do some sculpting to get the corner right. 
 

Mackenzie often had some great long 4’s on his courses, but also many of his par 5’s have been lengthened because they were/are too short for the modern game. But the man was brilliant. Wish he was around now. 

[getitdaily]

It's not a bad idea. It would keep both holes as pivotal holes. Would have to bring the water more in front of 11 and do something with that right side bailout area. 

 

Plenty of room to do it...

Edited April 8, 2021 by getitdaily

[Soloman1]

6 hours ago, Krt22 said:

The soul of the game resides in the ether between the winning score and par. If young guys beat old standing records, old guys get grumpy that the golfers of yore are being shown in a poor light. It's hard to cling onto the romantic idea that golfers in the past were better "players" than current pros, when the scores keep falling.

 

Scoring leader average is about the same as 20-30 years ago. #10 scoring average is about one stroke difference.

 

Grumpy? Maybe we're grumpy about youthful delusions of superiority?

[anth]

What have they had to do to the course in that time to maintain that scoring average though? What do you think the scoring average would be if they were playing the course as it was in 1991?

[3whacker]

to quote the late Ken Venturi: "...when you get to 13, you're thinking 3, you'll settle for 4, but you bring the numbers 6 and 7 into the equation".....

 

#13 and #15 are what makes Sunday...no where else I=on the course can you make up strokes on the field or possibly ice the tournament away...its real life Tin Cup

Edited April 8, 2021 by 3whacker

[Hankshank]

This is a Kapok Kid problem (Catch-22) when we got the two worst finishing holes compared to the rest of the last 9 on the course in golf. Party over after 16th green. All probably because of the 9 hole switch.

[MattyO1984]

Let’s lengthen the 17th at the Old Course even further and turn it into a 5 as well 😂

[Bad9]

4 hours ago, anth said:

What have they had to do to the course in that time to maintain that scoring average though? What do you think the scoring average would be if they were playing the course as it was in 1991?

Why 1991? Why not go back to the way it was designed?

[JDCON]

While we’re at it, let’s mandate everyone use a balata ball.

[Bad9]

25 minutes ago, JDCON said:

While we’re at it, let’s mandate everyone use a balata ball.

Wound and to 1930's specs and quality for when the course was designed

[gvogel]

7 hours ago, anth said:

What have they had to do to the course in that time to maintain that scoring average though? What do you think the scoring average would be if they were playing the course as it was in 1991?

Furthermore, what do you think the scoring average would be if the greens were a bit softer, and not as fast?

[gvogel]

I happen to agree with Fred Ridley, who dodges the issue with a vanilla statement, but who really wants the USGA/R&A to provide a condition of competition (ball and clubface) so that the 13th can retain the risk reward component that it used to have.

[TiScape]

20 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

More than a horrible idea, it's dumb.

I remember in school when the teacher would ask if anyone had a question and all the kids were sitting on their hands, afraid to ask... The teacher would say “it’s ok kids, there are no dumb questions. Nobody will judge you.” Obviously Hawk isn’t a teacher! 🤣 Hang in there Mark!

[MUNIGRIT]

20 hours ago, markakirchner said:

why lengthen hole 13, when it would be simply easier to leave the hole alone and turn it into a very hard par 4. then lengthen number 11 and make that a greater risk/reward par 5 hole. bring the water hazard more into play on 2nd/3rd shot. still remains a par 72 course. plenty of room behind 11 tee (at least it looks like it).

I got a better idea. Just make 2 par 5s par 4 and have the 18 at 70. No need to change the course and then the fans will think they made the course harder when they did nothing.

[Hawkeye77]

35 minutes ago, TiScape said:

I remember in school when the teacher would ask if anyone had a question and all the kids were sitting on their hands, afraid to ask... The teacher would say “it’s ok kids, there are no dumb questions. Nobody will judge you.” Obviously Hawk isn’t a teacher! 🤣 Hang in there Mark!

My wife is! I spend a lot of time in the principal's office.

 

But just to be accurate - OP didn't ask a question!  

 

I do truly believe amateur off the cuff fiddling with two of the greatest holes in golf with no analysis provided at all, or appreciation for what goes into making those holes great, the size/design/intended purpose of the greens, the real difficulties and folly in "deeming" 11 a par 5 by simply making it longer (lol) and "deeming" 13 a par 4 is dumb. 11 has already been lengthened, is one of the toughest holes now and historically the 2nd hardest - not a recipe for making changes, especially silly ones. Fred Ridley would agree!  

 

Passions run high during Masters week!  

Edited April 8, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[Krt22]

12 hours ago, anth said:

What have they had to do to the course in that time to maintain that scoring average though? What do you think the scoring average would be if they were playing the course as it was in 1991?

Only 600 or so extra yards, and surely firmer and faster greens. But that is clearly just because of the equipment, the players and the sport as a whole have not evolved a smidge