When one comes to the quality of the bunkers and other hazards we pass into realm of much dispute and argument. Primarily bunkers should be sand bunkers purely, not composed of gravel, stones or dirt. Whether this or that bunker is well placed, has caused more intensely heated arguments outside of the realms of religion, than has ever been my lot to listen to. C.B. MACDONALD
Available via Amazon (US): Golf Architecture For Normal People
Barnes And Noble (online and in stores)
Bookshop.org option to support local independent bookstores.
Reviews:
"Golf Architecture for Normal People . . . should be required reading for those who are not ashamed to admit they know little about the subject, and for those who think they do . . . . Golf course architecture geeks have trouble slimming their thoughts down to bite-sized chunks, but Shackelford has achieved a remarkable success here." —Independent (Ireland)
"From the relative newcomer who’s slowly getting hooked to those that have played the game for most of their lives and think they know a thing or two, Golf Architecture for Normal People provides a solid and sober perspective that will help everyone recognize why some golf courses are worth playing more than once while a single trip around others is all you’re ever likely to want or need." —Links Magazine.
“It’s a wonderful book. An easy read that arrives just in time for your summer reading list. If you’ve never thought about how an appreciation for course design could heighten your enjoyment of the game, you must check this out.”—The Peterborough Examiner
"As in his prior publications, in his newest book Shackelford shows a deep appreciation for what can be done to create a golf course that appeals to the broadest possible golfing audience…Shackelford’s prose is succinct, often witty, and accessible."—Cape Gazette
"Author, blogger and golf architecture expert Geoff Shackelford, who helped Gil Hanse design Rustic Canyon and restore 2023 U.S. Open host Los Angeles Country Club, taps into his passion by creating a guide that helps every golfer understand the nuances of course design. Published by Tatra Press, the 164-page hardcover book is a must-read for every golfer to better understand the game they love." —Golf Pass
"Shackelford provides an informative picture [and]...sprinkles in history lessons about those who planted the game's architectural roots, defines common terms and helps you hone your eyes when it comes to identifying some of the tricks of the trade."—FORE Magazine
"This new book does a great job demystifying golf course design ideas for average players, but can also be a beneficial read fro PGA Professionals and other golf course employees to get a better understanding of their home courses." —PGA Magazine
This AP notes column reports on David Toms' critical comments this week, and this caught my eye:
Toms had no problem with the golf course, even though he missed the cut after shooting two rounds of 76. Augusta National was longer than ever, and though Toms said he played poorly, he said he could compete when conditions were firm and fast.That's quite a contrast to how he actually sounded early in the week.
"I think they're on the right track," he said.
The boys SI heaped plenty of praise on Hootie Johnson for his course changes. It occurs to me that in all of the post event praise (and from the Golf World headline on Jaime Diaz's story, the cheerleading buzz is contagious), no one is considering the ramifications of Augusta's narrowing efforts both for the home of the Masters, or for the game in general.
The overall theme seems to be, "see, it's okay to change the courses to deal with distance increases and some people's determination to not let the players actually progress in the scoring department."
Anyway, Gary Van Sickle, who will be forgiven for this transgression because he caused a wonderful stir at the Golf Writer's meeting and normally is spot on, writes:
The par-4 7th, 410 yards before the alterations, used to give players a breather. They could lay up off the tee and hit a wedge in. Now it runs 450 yards with trees on both sides of the fairway, so the players are forced to hit driver and hit it straight. Seven's a terrific hole now.
Super...loved the photo in SI. Can't wait to see it when the trees grow up and there is actually no fairway! Oh, and what's wrong with a breather hole after 4, 5 and 6?
Well, he gets bonus points for mentioning this:
Only at the storied 11th was there a questionable change. While the 11th remains the National's hardest-won par -- one player jokingly called the 505-yard par-4 the easiest par-5 on the course -- the more than 50 pines planted to the right of the fairway also make it Augusta's most unsightly hole. Were that many trees really necessary? "Instead of having U.S. Open rough, you have a forest," says Phil Mickelson. "You don't have the ability to hit a shot from there. You can only try to get the ball back in play."
A handful of smartly planted trees, instead of the forest, might have accomplished the same goal and tempted players into trying heroic -- and dangerous -- recoveries. The sideways chip-out, the least exciting shot in golf, has never been a Masters staple, but it's now an everyday play at 11.
Ah, a different take in SI's "Big Play," where teacher T.J. Tomasi writes, "The course changes sucked the excitement out of the Masters. The tournament looked like the U.S. Open, with guys playing scared."
Jim McCabe writes about Ben Crenshaw's decision to observe a moment of silence for Herbert Warren Wind at last week's Champions Dinner, and recalls Wind's ties to Augusta National.John Hawkins says the long ball talk going into the Masters turned out to be overrated because, among other things, Tim Clark finished second.
"Put that on your soapbox, Mr. Nicklaus," Hawkins blogs, though wouldn't it be fun to see him say that to Nicklaus's face!
"The course is a better test than ever, modernized to premium effect and willing to reward players of all shapes and sizes."
No mention of the narrowness possibly stripping the course of its identity (and unique place in the Grand Slam concept of differing tests), nor consideration of the overall effort to put players on the defensive to counteract a game out of whack.
I know, picky, picky.
We're not the only ones saying it after seeing it: The final round of the Masters was boring, because there weren't nearly enough red numbers. Responsibility for that widespread characterization falls at the feet of club official Hootie Johnson and the guys who authorized the course changes. In fact, the whole week was rather flat from a fireworks perspective. Of the players who made the cut, a not-so-grand total of 15 broke 70 for the entire week -- and none of them did it twice. Way to go, Hootie.
My latest GolfOberserver column is now posted.
Bob Dicesare in the Buffalo News, writing about the general brilliance of changes at Augusta National:
Someone has to stand up to technology. Someone has to protect the integrity of the course and the tournament.In other news, Dicesare writes that steroids should be welcomed back into in baseball as long as they raise the fences and grow infield rough to protect the integrity of the game.
Thanks to reader Steve and Robert for the heads up on David Toms' Hilton Head gathering with da medja. Lots of interesting stuff here:
Q. And secondly, if you were to have an audience with Hootie this afternoon and he says that you can change one thing about Augusta National, your answer would be --
DAVID TOMS: -- so many rules.
Q. What do you mean by that?
DAVID TOMS: Well, to me it's still a place where the players walk around on eggshells, and you know, not knowing if they are in the right place; they are worried about their cell phone being on; having to stop by the little place, the hut on the way in, to scan your ticket; to making sure you only have one parking pass and somebody else doesn't get in there; to making sure that the wrong person doesn't get your pass and get thrown in jail and try to sell it to somebody else; to not signing autographs in a certain spots or not asking for an autograph in a certain spot; or sitting down at the table too long. It's just one thing after another. It's like, you know, the only place all year where the players don't feel like they are the most important thing there. That's the way I see it and I don't think that I'm the single opinion on that. So that would be the only thing.
And this fine follow up...
Q. You mentioned stopping by the hut to scan the ticket; did you guys have to do that?
DAVID TOMS: Yeah, when you pull in the parking lot you go by this little hut on the way in to scan your ticket. I don't even know what it's all about. It's like CIA stuff, you know what I mean. I don't know, to me it's just uncalled for. It's not, you know, you can't have your instructor here, you've got a major championship and you can't have your instructor walk down the fairway with you to prepare for the golf tournament. You know, it's just one after another. It's like the book of rules and I just think it's a little over the top, that's all I'll say.Q. Do you think Tiger has ever had to stop and get his ticket scanned?
DAVID TOMS: You know, that's the thing. That's the thing, if he doesn't, why is he any different than me or the Pub Links Champion? But, you know, I just feel it's that way.
In a way, it makes it different and it makes it special and it makes it just kind of unique, but then again, it's still a golf tournament in the end. It's the players that make that tournament. It's Phil Mickelson and Tiger Woods battling down the stretch that headaches that event successful on television around the world. It's not how green the grass is on No. 1 fairway. So, you know, we'll see, but I don't see that changing, either. I don't think I'm going to get my time in front of him until I win the tournament.
Q. Another Masters question, on the back nine on Sunday, we didn't get that jolt that just makes it feel like The Masters, and I wonder how much of that was the design or just guys not taking advantage of the opportunity, any opinion there?
DAVID TOMS: It is the design. You know, it's just different, and I don't think you're going to see that anymore. You know, you saw it the year that Ernie and Phil were battling down the stretch because you're talking about two of the longest hitters in the game and two of the best players, so they were able to have some dramatics and have the power to do it.
You know, when I'm on 15, I hit a good drive and I still was almost 250 yards out from the middle of the fairway, not only is the chance of eagle not very good, but the chance of birdie is not very good, either. So it's just the golf course is different nowadays and you're not ever going to see a whole lot of heroics from at least half the field. You have a handful of players that can create it, but at the same time, it's even more difficult for them.
I don't think you're going to see that a whole lot more, the back nine. You might see somebody collapse on the back nine because the holes are more difficult but I don't see a big charge. I don't see myself shooting 29 on the back nine ever again like I did in '98, and I don't see anybody else doing it, either. So you know, we'll see, and could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Q. So were guys right in saying it feels more like a U.S. Open, the guys that said that?
DAVID TOMS: Oh, sure, if you brought in the fairways another five yards on both sides and grew that rough up to where it was four inches, that's exactly what you would have. You'd have a Masters/Open because the corridors are getting awfully tight with all of the trees they are putting in. Who knows 20 years from now what it's going to look like with all of the new trees. And the greens are obviously, they can firm them up because of the sub-air system and they can make it play as difficult as they want.
You're thinking, this guy's on a roll. Maybe his take on this trend in all golf course setup, or what he feels is driving this mentality that the players need to be humiliated?
Q. Just to change the subject, I'm doing a piece on hole-in-ones, and just kind of asking guys what their first hole in one is and their most memorable hole-in-one. I'm pretty sure I can guess your most memorable?Now that is a rally killer!
"The changes are better than I thought," said Mike Weir, the 2003 winner. "I would like to see them shorten the rough just a little more, especially on No. 11. Other than that, the changes are great."
Padraig Harrington, who couldn't escape damaging double bogeys, said the course "played great" and put a premium on execution, the way it should be.
"The difference between a shot coming off and not coming off is a birdie to double bogey," he said.
Davis Love is a golf course architect when he's not playing major championships around the globe or on the PGA Tour.
"I like the changes," he said. "As an architect, I have some suggestions about the trees."
The opening tee shot, Love said, "is perfect, it fits."
..."spaz" in the British Isles without lighting up the switchboards? Mike Aitken reports and defends Tiger Woods.
Bob Spear breaks out the pom-poms for Hootie's home state paper and declares that the changes were a huge success. (I believe Spear also wrote in an earlier piece that "Jones and MacKenzie would now doubt approve" of the changes).
The layout that some of golf's treasured champions claimed had been ruined with its added length joined the winner in sharing the spotlight in the 70th Masters.
After these past four days, the claims from Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer sound absurd.
I'd love to see Spear that say that to their faces. Maybe when they're are wearing their green jackets!
Remember the rhetoric? With the changes, thrilling finishes would be passe, run-away winners would be more likely and only the longest hitters need apply for contention.
Isn't that kind of what happened?
Historians insist the Masters does not begin until the back nine on Sunday, but they're wrong. The tournament "started" long before - thanks to the changes that both challenged the world's best golfers and also yielded to quality play.
I liked it better when it started on the back nine Sunday.
Mark this down: At 4:10 p.m., 17 players stood within three strokes of the lead.
That's not incredible. That's impossible.
Case closed!
Before he did, however, the tournament "got pretty exciting out there," Couples said. "For a player to win on this course now, (every part of his game) has to click."
Intentionally or not, he described what a major championship test should be, and perhaps now more than ever, Augusta National fit the definition.
That's right. All of those jackets won prior to the changes? Tainted! Take 'em back!
Remember all of the pre-tournament talk of Augusta National's "rhythm" restoration?
A reader made this observation after attending the Masters this weekend:
I was most disappointed by the change to the fourth. The tee is now so elevated, the hole resembles the sixth which I’m sure was not the MacKenzie /Jones intention. For a duck hook off four’s back tee, the third green is a dangerous place to be; a bit like the 2nd tee/1st green situation at Swinley Forest. A hole location in the rear lobe of the third green didn’t help matters. Players had to wait on #3 to putt out while the group ahead hit their tee shots from the fourth tee.
To see a full size view of the tee (where you can also see a slice of 3 green on the left edge), check out this Golf Digest image.
Down a bit from last year...
Next to an L.A. Times jump headline saying "Length Wasn't a Factor," was this Ben Crenshaw quote:
"The course gets longer and longer, but I had a great time," he said. "I had a ball."
Crenshaw said the 7,445-yard Augusta National course played even longer because of Saturday's rain.
"It's a huge, huge, huge advantage to hit it so far," he said. "Length is a major, major, major factor."
Geoff Shackelford is a Senior Writer for Golfweek magazine, a weekly contributor to Golf Channel's Morning
Copyright © 2022, Geoff Shackelford. All rights reserved.
