Am i alone in finding the masters a real let down this year ? I do not want to see the best players on the planet struggle to make par . They way the course was setup and the winner coming from the player likely to make less errors rather than more great shots just left me cold. Congratulations to Zach Johnson though great mental strength a lesson to us all.
i actually enjoyed it immensely........probably b/c i'm currently addicted to golf, but i still thought the conditions were great.....sure, they're usually saved for the Open, but this is what they wanted the masters to become after Tiger shredded the course, now we finally got to watch it w/o rain softening the greens......how do you not like watching a pro chip it twice, or hit it into the water two times in a row.......to me, it's a Major, the course SHOULD play tough, i can watch them light up the scoreboard on any weekend......4 tournaments a year that play extremely tough is not that bad in my book
I kind of agree with mid70s. This was a different Masters, with cooler temperatures and no rain. It made shots run, as they probably have set it up to do over the last few years but with the rains it never happened. I think the course did well. Tiger was in contention, as were Goosen and Singh until late, so the best golfers were there at the end. I think the course actually played more fair than it has in a long time. Zach didn't drive it long, so shorter hitters were still in the game. He just played what was given to him. That's what golf is supposed to be - play the course as it is layed out for you. Every other golfer in the field played under the same conditions on the same course. Johnson just did a better job of handling it. Tiger had opportunities, but couldn't make anything happen. Driver was him nemesis. Boring, maybe a bit, but not unfair. Due to the fact that several top players were in contention, I think it played very fair. How does the saying go - any given Sunday...
I enjoyed watching the great players struggle a little. Some of the camera shots on the players' faces made it clear that due to the course, they were often confused about what to try next. A lot different that the "bomb & gouge" tournaments that we usually get to see.
Seeing the hard, dry conditions and how the players had to deal with them made me think of a lot of the conditions we hacks are used to on a weekly basis (although not nearly as beautiful). How many of us get to play perfectly manicured fairways and have butter soft greens to throw darts at? This is the first tournament in a long while where they had to play a lot of bump and run shots because the greens wouldn't hold the approaches.
I think it was one of the more exciting Masters ever. The scores were high because of the weather. If it wasn't cold, windy and drier than a desert, we'd see a winning score close to 10-under. ANd at one point Sunday on the back nine, you had like 5 guys tied for the lead. You had the big names like Tiger and Retief in there, even Appleby, mixed in with a couple Cinderellas. And Zach Johnson just went on a birdie run there and broke from the pack. It was tremendous golf.
You can say it was unfair, or too US Open like, but you can't say it was boring. It was still up in that air until the very end. I mean, there were at least a dozen players in striking distance on Sunday. I enjoy tough tournaments like this (and the Open), but there were times that the course wasn't fair.
I don't think Sunday was boring, but you could make a strong case for Thursday-Saturday. Nor was the course unfair, at least not if you agree with the numerous pros like Woods, Mickelson, et al, who said it was tough but fair.
What I have a problem with is the numerous trees Fazio planted. First cut, OK, whatever, that's actually a restoration since they did have a first cut befor Nicklaus came along. Lengthening makes sense. Now we have a course where Tiger hits the same approach as Jack did 40 years ago, and Tim Clark is using the same approach shots as Ben Crenshaw 20 years ago.
But the narrowing of 11, 15 and 17 altered the strategic nature of ANGC. Without them, Tiger doesn't break a club on 11, he's got a clear shot at that back left pin. On 15 he's going for it in two, and doesn't have to try a superman shot to do it. Justin Rose has a shot at the very accessible pin on 17. I could go on and on. What the hundreds of new trees robbed us of is the very drama which sets the Masters apart from the other majors.
The second 9 on Sunday could have been a roller coaster with twice as many lead changes (think there 6 on Sunday). Instead we have a winner who lays up on every par 5. We have 70% of the field playing 13 as a three shotter.
Personally, I enjoyed this tournament a lot. Especially the final round on Sunday. Couldn't have asked for more there. The first three days just had some bad weather that made conditions even more tough. I think that had a lot to do with things.
I watched the whole time and had a feeling that something big/amazing was about to happen, I don't think it ever did, but watching tiger comeback was entertaining, I would have loved it if he could have forced a playoff with zach. ratief was also impressive I thought he had it because he seemed unflappable. in the end I was entertained but maybe felt a little empty without a clear "memorable shot" to win the masters, sadly the first shot that comes to mind when I think of zach johnson is his 3 putt from about 3 feet out on friday(or sat?) but coming back from that says a lot about him.
I enjoyed Sunday the most. It's true that the game was a struggle on thursday through Staurday, but it was mostly due to the greens speed, wind, and coldness. The course setup was not what caused 77 stroke averages on Saturday.
If the weather had been like Sunday on the other days, we would have seen 5 - 10 under win the tourney. That is in line with many Masters before.
There were legitimately 5 or 6 players with chances to win on Sunday. 2 of those were in the Big 5. Tiger was essentially eliminated until the 17th hole.
As for Tiger, he should probably hit his 3 wood off the tees like he did at the british open last year. His iron play was also less than stellar, so I would not say his driver did him in by itself. He missed greens from the fairway at key points.
I found it one the best I've ever seen. I find bomb and gouge and 24-under boring. The Masters required shot making, course management, and patience. Don't see that on tour much anymore. Driver/wedge...yawn...
I actually think it is sad they have had to make any changes to Augusta over the years. I think it is more about tradition than trying to make it even more challenging. Of course I hate the fact that the change any course just to make it harder for the pro. I don't care if they are 50 under, it is just a shame they have to alter a course with the history of Augusta just to make it harder than it already was.
The first three days at The Masters were very disappointing. We all know that we are watching the best players in the world but when the officials set the course up so difficult they are made to look like mere amateurs. Thankfully common sense took over and they eased the conditions for Sunday. It was great viewing made so by the fact that birdies and eagles became a possibility. When the #1 player in the world cannot better par for four rounds you have have got to query the thoughts of the officials who set this course up.
April 10th, 2007, 04:41 AM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
