LENGTHEN 11, NOT 13 AT AUGUSTA NATIONAL

[smashdn]

I think 13 has been one hole most changed in terms of how it can play due to distance.  Used to be a spot in the fairway that was flatter than the rest which kept you from having a hanging lie with which to better hit a wood.  Farther down the fairway you would have to contend with that hanging lie.  Go for green and risk the creek or do you lay up right to the flat spot and hit a wedge on?

 

Now who cares about a hanging lie?  If you bomb it around the corner you are holding a 7 or 8 iron.  You'd be daft not to go for the green in two.

[imakaveli]

If ANGC is concerned with the score against par it should make the course narrower, not longer. Long wide courses are easy. Call Valderrama (not USGA) for any advice.

Edited October 11, 2021 by imakaveli

[farmer]

The Masters and ANGC is the premier spectacle in golf.  The powers that be will tweak from time to time, but never will they completely alter the flow of the course.

[Chunked]

If they changed the 2 finishing holes then it would need another change from a routing standpoint. 
 

First 6 stay

17 becomes 7

18 becomes 8

10 becomes 9

11-16 all drop back 1 so that 16 is now 15. 
7 becomes 16

8 becomes 17

9 becomes 18

 

Thats a lot of changes to history that I’m not sure anyone is comfortable with but it would be more entertaining of a finish. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Chunked

[Hankshank]

What if....
The Eisenhower Tree was re-planted(The guys can move any tree anywhere these days), and the green moved back to just beyond it? Tee adjusted to make it drivable par four. With hazards of suitable kind on other sides of the green.  Really bring the tree into play. That tree was what made the hole. 

Ike will haunt me for this...

Edited October 14, 2021 by Hankshank

[m d g]

On 4/7/2021 at 6:29 PM, mark m said:

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.

So does he...

[smashdn]

On 10/11/2021 at 4:32 PM, imakaveli said:

If ANGC is concerned with the score against par it should make the course narrower, not longer. Long wide courses are easy. Call Valderrama (not USGA) for any advice.

 

Are they though?

 

I think sometimes that is a point that is brought up in the lengthening and distance debates here that isn't always clearly spelled out.

 

I cna only speak for myself but the tour guys obliterating a course is secondary to how they play the course.  I expect certain things from a golf course in general, let alone a professional event venue.  One of those things is that I am using all/most clubs in my bag in different situations.  I don't want a long iron in my hand on all the par threes nor do I want that the only scenario I have one in my hand either.  Same with woods.  I like one really long and testing par five.  One shorter with a green fraught with peril if you don't hit it.  Make me make a decision to go or not to go for it in two.

 

Same deal with the par fours.  Give me some variety.  A 470 yard par four should be a pretty good poke.  If you drive it 350 though...

[Duct Tape]

Re: 13:  The net effect of any change on the entire field is zero. Only position relative to par might change. But from the crowd perspective, a birdie on a par five 13th is much more exciting than the same four if it is a par four. You’ll never hear the electrifying crowd roar for a par. 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Duct Tape

[woodriff]

On 10/7/2021 at 4:22 AM, Hankshank said:

11 and 13 are just fine. Take a look at 17 and 18, and possibly 14. By far the most lackluster holes on the course.

Agree. 17 needs something, and 18 is an uphill finishing hole. Maybe bunkers on the right of 18 fairway. Players always try to fade off the right side. They’d have to thread the drive. 
Overall, what is the Augusta strategy of not growing the rough a little deeper.