I am interested in opinions on the continual tinkering of ANGC in a misguided attempt to protect par for the course. To advertise that the course is a Dr Mackenzie design is false advertising at best IMO, with the exception of the routing and his one remaining bunker on the 10th (which is not really in play!), I think the good doctor would be horrified at what the course has become. The wide open expanses enabling limitless playing options have been narrowed by “rough” and planting of pines and the course has been lengthened to such an extent to further erode the strategy of positioning yourself around the course. Originally there was a paucity of well integrated bunkers, now there are many more deep traps that make no attempt to blend into the natural surrounds. the ground game option has been removed from play at ANGC, once again going against the original concept. Furthermore I think Dr Mackenzie would be horrified at the importance the club puts on the presentation and asethetics of the course to the uniform greeness, gardens and perfect white sand. Presentation and image has become more important than playability.

What do you think Tony? .... Tony???

Buggera,

They did not even pay me the full fee for doing the course. The men at Augusta never promote the course as a work of mine, but attribute it instead to Bob Jones. Just as well as the course today is atrocious.

Alister

Buggera,

They did not even pay me the full fee for doing the course. The men at Augusta never promote the course as a work of mine, but attribute it instead to Bob Jones. Just as well as the course today is atrocious.

Alister

“It by no means follows that what appears to be attractive at first sight will be so permanently. A good golf course grows on one like a good painting, good music, or any other artistic creation.” – me

I think they still like to claim your name as the designer, in conjunction with Jones
If so many educated people question the layout and design (notwithstanding the aesthetics, which should not be considered in terms of good design) why is there such an over the top reverance to the course???

Bobby Jones would be horrified with what they have done to it. It’s just like playing the U.S.Open – long and tight, not many options or bailouts, not much risk and reward, just smash it long.

Buggera,

The course and Club are revered because of the wealthy and influencial membership.

Alister

I agree it doesn’t have the same feel as it used to. But they had to do something otherwise you’d be seeing some embarrassing winning totals. The same process happened in the 60’s. I’d like to see the 15th shortened a little to encourage going for the green. There were too many lay ups this year for my liking.

As far as the aesthetics go, I love it. It’s the only tournament which seems to have a mythical feel. Most of that is down to the golf course. But I don’t think that presentation detracts from playability.

As far as the aesthetics go, I love it. It’s the only tournament which seems to have a mythical feel. Most of that is down to the golf course. But I don’t think that presentation detracts from playability.

I don’t believe that presentation detracts from playability, in fact well conditioned and manicured playing surfaces in conjuction with beautiful surrounds all add to the golfing experience. However I would always choose a well designed course with average presentation and conditioning (within reason) over a poorly designed course with immaculate aesthetics.

haha i posted 2 years ago it was not worthy of its ranking in world golf and felt it was not a top 100 course anymore and got howled down by some…