Augusta still showing a thirst for change in its ongoing evolution

PHILIP REID on how Augusta National is far from the one envisaged by its original designer

PHILIP REIDon how Augusta National is far from the one envisaged by its original designer

SOME ATTEST it to be a golfing paradise, but the course which has evolved at Augusta National – by convoluted design rather than any accident – is far from the one envisaged by its original designer Alister MacKenzie and founder Bobby Jones. When the course opened for play in 1932 and played host to the first Masters tournament in 1934, the onus was on ground shots, akin to those played on seaside links courses.

Although MacKenzie is credited as the course architect, it is estimated up to 15 different designers have, at one stage or another, played a part in its evolution. Indeed, the urge for change was apparent from the start. After the inaugural 1934 Masters, the two nines were reversed and, for the next number of years, after the death of MacKenzie, it was Jones who oversaw workers with shovels and pickaxes who made modifications to the course.

Over the years, the ground-game doctrine of MacKenzie and Jones was eroded. An example of this was the decision as early as 1938 to construct a wall of bunkers across the seventh green. By the 1980s, the pace of the greens had become so fast that any chances of ground shots were negated: the emphasis was very much on high, floated shots as alterations were made to address playability, agronomics, spectator convenience and, more recently, club and ball technology.

READ MORE

The first Masters was played on a course which measured 6,600 yards which lengthened to 6,925 yards by 1999 when, in the first phase of so-called “Tiger-proofing”, another 60 yards were added. The major change was implemented for the 2002 tournament when it was lengthened to 7,270 yards and, over the past number of years, some additional tweaking has left it playing at 7,435 yards.

The two minor changes for this latest edition of the Masters have seen alterations to the eighth and 16th greens to enable extra pin placements, although Pádraig Harrington made the point the other day that – traditionally – the new positions aren’t used in the first year and, so, didn’t enormously affect players’ preparations.

There has always been a thirst for change, however slight, in Augusta National’s evolution. The par-five eighth hole is an example. Originally the 17th hole, MacKenzie hid the green in a punchbowl surrounded by hillocks and the green came to be known as “Jane Russell”. In 1957, the club chairman Clifford Roberts knocked down the hillocks to improve spectator visibility and, the following year, brought in architect George Cobb to redesign the green. He made it flatter and wider and added two bunkers but didn’t rebuild the mounds.

In 1980, a year after Roberts’ death, Cobb was approached to recreate the original MacKenzie green but he couldn’t remember the design. Instead, Byron Nelson was approached and, together with Joseph Finger, recreated the green from memory and the use of old photographs and restored the hillocks. In 1997, Tom Fazio added a new back-right shelf and, for this year’s tournament, slight alterations have made the back-right pin more accessible.

“It’s much flatter, a lot more room there,” observed Phil Mickelson. “You can be a bit more aggressive into that pin (position).”

Jack Nicklaus, a six-time Masters champion and hugely respected course architect in his own right, has stated the changes through the years led to a course “totally different” to what MacKenzie originally started.

Nicklaus explained: “He was very much the St Andrews type philosophy; fairly wide off the tee, put the ball in the proper side of the fairway, get the angle to the green or to the angle of the pin . . . now, as the equipment change and golfers started playing better, the scores started getting lower, things had to be done . . . they had to adjust it to the modern golf (game). I am not sure the golf course today would be the golf course that Jones would have done, because I don’t think his philosophy was the same.”