We've launched the new forums! Read more here

A One Ball Masters...

CAA_Beat

CAA_Beat

Active member
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
17,949
Reaction score
3
Location
Maryland
Handicap
17.7
Ok, so I just read the blog by The Recreational golfer posted in the Master's Becoming Obsolete thread.

The author said there was no fix to make the course more challenging for the pros. So I wonder what everyone's thought is on a "rolled back" ball just for The Masters.

There has been off and on discussion before about rolling back the ball for USGA standards, and most seem to think the OEM's would never go for it and it would be a fight with the USGA that probably neither side would end up winning.

But as we all know The Masters isn't governed by any of golf's ruling bodies. The club makes it's own rules for the most part.

So what if they had all the ball companies submit a rolled back, limited flight..whatever you want to call it...ball and chose that to be the competition ball for The Masters. Sure the players would complain and it certainly could affect more than just their driving distance.

But I think it would be interesting to see how it went and how if at all different the results would be both from a score (which I don't think is out of line anyway) and the players that would be in contention.

For the record, I think The Masters is just fine and only getting better, but I think if the idea with such as ball was ever going to be considered, this might be the place to do it. Or I might just be completely off my rocker as well.

Interested to hear everyone else's thoughts.
 
If you're going to do that, you might as well make them play with the same clubs.
 
Nah. It's as compelling a tournament as you'll ever find in professional sports. As long as somebody doesn't lap the field. I don't care if it finishes -1 or -15.
 
I'd rather not watch a major tournament where all the players are struggling because of a different ball. If you thought there was slow play before, how long would it take for everyone to recalculate every shot they have to take and continuously second guess everything?
 
The two lowest winning scores in Masters history were in 1965 and 1977, from the very get go the scores at August have been under par the vast majority of the time. I don't see what is different today that would necessitate any change at all. Last year the PGA and British Open winner finished lower than Augusta, and that wasn't an anomaly. It's not the US Open, it never has been. But I see nothing wrong with the scoring at the Masters.
 
I like the idea but not for the masters. Keep the masters as is and do it at another tournament
 
There are ways to make Augusta play longer and harder but they won't do it for what ever reason. Its as simple as watering the fairways over night and cutting the fairways just a bit higher. Instead of the ball landing hard then rolling out like its on a pool table they won't go as far and that will make their approaches just that much more difficult.
 
AG47 said:
There are ways to make Augusta play longer and harder but they won't do it for what ever reason. Its as simple as watering the fairways over night and cutting the fairways just a bit higher. Instead of the ball landing hard then rolling out like its on a pool table they won't go as far and that will make their approaches just that much more difficult.
Click to expand...

Augusta was designed to play hard and fast, why change what's not broke?
 
A One Ball Masters...

greggdrews said:
I like the idea but not for the masters. Keep the masters as is and do it at another tournament
Click to expand...

Perhaps the Mayakoba classic in Mexico, where it wouldn't get much attention :)
 
I think the Master's does a better job year after year of identifying the best golfer than the Open Championship or PGA Championship does. It's certainly a second shot golf course but to win at Augusta your iron game and short game must be more precise than most any other venue.
 
I'm pretty sure they (tournament committee) can make this course as hard or easy for them as they want! These greens are no joke, so I don't care how far you hit the ball if you can't putt or chip you don't have a chance at Augusta
 
2000s-9.9
1990s-11.5
1980s-7.4
1970s-9.5
1960s-7.9
1950s-4.9
1940s-7.4

I think the average winning scores are pretty comparable over the years. Tiger's (-18) in '97 might skew the 90s number high a bit. It seems like every 5 or 10 years they make a subtle change to stiffen the course some without changing its fundamentals. When did they start mowing toward the tee on all fairways so the rollout would stop? I think before that it was half down the hole and half up the hole and players were taking advantage of it to easily.
 
i like your thought process Rob, but i just don't see a need for a change. I think many fans have been accustomed to the -20s we see almost weekly at the non majors and get upset when tournaments aren't scoring like that, so if you made the players change balls for 1 week some people will be upset.

until we see consistent winning scores at -18 or better at the Masters no need to change anything.
 
If I want to watch golfers struggle around the course, I'll video tape myself and watch that.

I hate watching pros shoot even par. It's beyond boring golf
 
When I first read the thread title I thought it was going to be about using one ball all four days. Put it in the water, your done. Scuff it up on a tree, deal with it. Lose it in the woods, your going home. That would be interesting in my book.
 
ForeOnFour said:
When I first read the thread title I thought it was going to be about using one ball all four days. Put it in the water, your done. Scuff it up on a tree, deal with it. Lose it in the woods, your going home. That would be interesting in my book.
Click to expand...

Now that would be interesting.

A group of us played a round with a similar concept a few years back. First one to lose a ball bought drinks the rest of the round.

I was tempted to use a 7 iron all the way around. Ha
 
Don't change a thing.

I imagine doing that would drive a lot of pros to steer clear of the tournament. Having to learn all new clubs, trajectories, etc. for one tournament would drive several of them nuts. The pros used to use a smaller ball in the British Open, and I am sure the adjustment going over and then back wasn't much fun.
 
Last edited:
Wake said:
Augusta was designed to play hard and fast, why change what's not broke?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Other than those two things (hard & fast) The Masters is sort of the anti-Open... First its a closed field. Taking away the amatuers, the past winners, the winners of the foreign tour events, its the smallest field of true competitors for winning there is. Unlike the US Open, there's almost no rough, plenty of pine straw, but nowhere near as penal as the 6" shag at Merion. And unlike the Open Championship (formerly the British Open) which can play relatively short & tame on certain courses then turn into a murderous round with inclement weather moving in. The Masters almost always (by design) plays exactly the same, perfect conditions, flawless surfaces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top