260 yards for Tiger is what you said in your post.....is that what Jack said???

Are you sure?

If true then I don't agree with that...(if true).

...

BY "THEY" I mean THEY who set up the golf courses.

Obviously! (duh! duh! ;))

Puppets!
 

There is no way Jack and Arnie make those comments without the express consent of Augusta National. They are paving the way for a "Masters" ball.

We know Jack is in favor of it. But "ruined the course" is not something Hootie would approve of.

It's all relative
 

Everyone tees it up from the same spot and plays the same coures so who cares about any of this? All golfers have the same equipment and balls. It's all relative. The best guy wins today and the the best guy won 30 years ago. Create a "Masters ball" and the best guy will win again.

If they want to favor long hitters, keep the rough low. If they want to favor accuracy let it grow! Rough is a great neutralizer. :cool:

The course has been wet pretty much every year since the lastest major changes were made. Wait until they get some windy/dry conditions. :o

re: Augusta changes-again
 

My view on Augusta is simple and based on my golf experience.
I play with a long hitter regularly.He swings 2 clubs less on every shot.We have played over 300 rounds together in the last 10 years and I win 60% of them.Why and how?I don't care what he has in his hand first of all .After the tee shot he has to make the next shot because I'm tight from 140yds in.I hit my 7 iron as high and as long as he hits his 9 iron.(It's only numbers on a club!)
If I really want to mess him up I take our next game(we alternate) to a short,tight course(6200)where his power game is restricted.
Now,if you can see where I'm going with this,good,because the only way to bring the rest of the field back into the game is to keep the course short.The power hitters cannot run away with it because everyone on tour has as good a short game.Personally,I'd set up the course for the likes of Jeff Sluman and let everyone else sweat their club selection.After all, if they all make it in two,the odds favour no one.

I aggree...the funny thing is
Isn't that the very reason they lengthened courses so a guy called Tiger wouldn't overdominated everyone on "short" courses?
They complain when it's too short. Complain when it's too long. Just face it. He's the best.

JFrank

I like your thinking. I enjoy playing with guys that drive the ball 300. I enjoy taking their money too. I make them bet closest to the pin. That shuts them up.

I always thought that by lengthening the course and growing the rough that the course settup people were reducing Tigers advantage. The other day, I was watching the Golf Channel (oops) and someone said that by lengthening the course and growing the rough, they gave him an advantage. Which is it? I believe that on any given day Tiger can win on any Golf Course under any conditions. It's purely up to him.

The problem is Television. I would love to see a shorter course so that two or more (the more the better) players are in a play-off. The player with the best control of his game, nerves and swing will win. Very exciting. However this could take much more time than Television Broadcasting Companies allow. It' also nerve-racking on the viewers too.

I wonder if this holds up to # of playoffs per season from 1925 til today.

I think it's an advantage....cause the longer guys can hit 7 iron while the shorter guys hit 4 or 5 or w/e.

Lengthening the course does NOTHING but eliminate the shorter guys, IMO.

I agree!
 

I followed Tiger around at the '96 Texas Open. I was about 20 feet from him when he hit a 265yd 2-iron, uphill to about 4 feet. The shot was higher than my PW!

I want to see these guys hit long irons into greens, especially in the majors.

At my home course we have 3 par threes over 200 yds at the tips. One plays 235yds and when the wind is up I can't get there with a 3 wood. I was on the box the other day thinking a PGA guy is probably hitting 5 irons from where I was hitting 5 wood. I like it when those guys are challenged.

What do folks think the Masters would look like if they used the 'new' course as it stands, but with a 'Master's' ball that is equal in performance to the Titleist Professional 100 of 1980 (but with a better cover and manufacturing process to eliminate the out of round, and torn cover potential these had).

And as an added bonus, now take away square grooves as Miller has suggested.....