Overall, I think the changes were good, but three of the holes concern me..
4 - maybe it needed to be lengthen to 220/225 instead of 240. Make the green slightly wider if needed.
7 - It was designed for a wedge. Keeping it at 410 was good. Expanding the green was good.
17 - I don't know about lengthening it. Adding some more trees beyond the Eisenhower tree would have been just as effective.
I would like to see these two holes changed...
12 - lengthened to 170/175, so pros would be hitting 6/7 irons instead of 7/8/9 irons to the holes like they used to do.
16 - expand the tee to 200/205 for the back left pin placement only to put the water back into play. It is too easy when the pin is in the back left or middle left pin placement.
12 - lengthened to 170/175, so pros would be hitting 6/7 irons instead of 7/8/9 irons to the holes like they used to do.
16 - expand the tee to 200/205 for the back left pin placement only to put the water back into play. It is too easy when the pin is in the back left or middle left pin placement.
I'm with you on your other ideas but I like these 2 the way they are. 12 is tough enough as it is. It's one of the most famous holes in golf. You don't mess with a classic. I like the fact that 16 is an easy hole, especially with the traditional Sunday pin. 15 and 16 provide a chance for that last final charge by those who are up to it.
I'm with you on your other ideas but I like these 2 the way they are. 12 is tough enough as it is. It's one of the most famous holes in golf. You don't mess with a classic. I like the fact that 16 is an easy hole, especially with the traditional Sunday pin. 15 and 16 provide a chance for that last final charge by those who are up to it.
12 is tough only with the wind. It used to be a 5/6/7 iron even in the 1980's without the wind. Now, it is a 7/8/9 iron. I would like to see it go back to a 5/6/7 iron.
16 used to be a 4/5 iron in the 1970's and 1980's. Now it is a 6/7/8 iron. The water does not come into play as much as it did. I would like to see the water come into play more. It looks more like a decoration piece or a hazard for overshot approaches on 15.
I'm with Waz on this - DON'T change 12. In fact, I'm against this last round of changes completely. Last year was a fantastic tournament, the year before was outstanding. There was no reason to change anything whatsoever.
12 is tough only with the wind. It used to be a 5/6/7 iron even in the 1980's without the wind. Now, it is a 7/8/9 iron. I would like to see it go back to a 5/6/7 iron.
16 used to be a 4/5 iron in the 1970's and 1980's. Now it is a 6/7/8 iron. The water does not come into play as much as it did. I would like to see the water come into play more. It looks more like a decoration piece or a hazard for overshot approaches on 15.
5/6/7 irons in the 1980s ARE 7/8/9 irons today. Check the club lofts of classic irons vs. those of today and you'll find that this is in fact the case.
The 12th and 16th at Augusta are monuments of the game and lenghtening will do nothing to enhance their status...I'd say it'd diminish it, because there wouldn't be as many birdies thrown in there.
5/6/7 irons in the 1980s ARE 7/8/9 irons today. Check the club lofts of classic irons vs. those of today and you'll find that this is in fact the case.
The 12th and 16th at Augusta are monuments of the game and lenghtening will do nothing to enhance their status...I'd say it'd diminish it, because there wouldn't be as many birdies thrown in there.
I definitely am a proponent of regulating club lofts for that reason.
I'm with Waz on this - DON'T change 12. In fact, I'm against this last round of changes completely. Last year was a fantastic tournament, the year before was outstanding. There was no reason to change anything whatsoever.
I think the course was fine as it was last year. So what if the winner shoots 16 under instead of 8 under.
I think the quality of the leaderboard today validated the changes ANGC made to the course. The boys got the kind of tournament they wanted and in the end, that's what matters.
I agree. It will never happen. In fact look what is happening with fairway woods. Some manufactures don't even put a club number on the bottom they just put the loft.
I think Nicklaus was more wrong than right with his criticisms of the course changes. I still believe he wanted to be consulted, and feels slighted in some way. It's amazing to see few people attacking Nicklaus for his comments.
The course will keep changing and Hootie and crew have done a great job in the past. The course will stand the test of time thanks to the changes they continually make.
Tim Clark and others in the top 10 were not long hitters by any means. Length helps and should always help, but keeping the approach shots in the right places is still critical.
I think Nicklaus was more wrong than right with his criticisms of the course changes. I still believe he wanted to be consulted, and feels slighted in some way. It's amazing to see few people attacking Nicklaus for his comments....Bravo to Hootie. Boo to Jack.
I couldn't agree more. And I was one of the most vocal criticizers of Jack's statements. It would be refreshing to see/hear Jack, Nick Price, John Cook and all the other "experts" come out and eat some very public crow on this one. But I won't hold my breath.
April 8th, 2006, 08:31 AM
What difference does it make if you hit a Mizuno 7 iron and I hit a PING 6 iron and they are both the same loft?
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
