First Masters Question: What To Restore Next?
/I watched the Masters in its entirety and honestly can't remember the second cut impacting more than a handful of shots. And most of those were balls near the tree lines in what was more of a transitional cut than an orchestrated layer of rough. That's pretty amazing compared to where the course was a few years ago.
Furthermore, Fred Ridley deserves great praise for easing up the setup in key spots and on Thursday. More subtly, the agronomy division of ANGC LLC probably deserves a pat on the back not only for a job well done grooming the place, but for also taking down the speed of the course a smidgen. The tiny bit of added softness and slowness kept a few balls on lake banks, prevented a few balls from rolling off greens, and in general may have made players just a little less cautious in their approach. That's a great thing at Augusta, because we know the more risks they take, the more eagles and doubles we see.
It never did take a genius to see that the post-1997 Hootie Johnson-Tom Fazio revisions took their toll on fun, skill and the essence of the Masters, yet the power of Augusta and dreams of Major Masters Media Lifetime Achievement Awards or whatever it is that turns normally sane observers into Augusta Glee club members, somehow prevented too many people from accepting the obvious: a national treasure was unnecessarily damaged.
Now that anyone with a pulse can see just how vital it is to respect the original design values and set up the Masters a certain way, what next? Because the widening, softening and kinder setup work this year proved that this quiet restoration is working to the benefit of the club, the tournament and the game.
I'll nominate the removal of ALL trees planted in the dark ages of 1998-2003. That means the silly row down the right of No. 5, the swarms on 11, 15 and 17, and yes, throw in the extras added inside the forests on 1, 7, 9, 10, 13, and 18.
It's not just their impact on strategy, but the way they look. As one reader wrote to me after attending this week:
It's just amazing that with several years behind them the trees at 7, 15/17 and 11 still look like a budget-conscious, suburban atlanta residential job. You'd think they'd get at least that part of the equation.
They may get it, but politics are more likely the issue here.
Thoughts?