This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Carl:How is the version of ANGC we see today better than what was there previously ?You say WF/W is no way a legitimate candidate. Really? I'll tell you this -- WF/W can be played as is and does just fine. One of the really under-appreciated four round totals in all of golf is what Davis Love shot there in winning the '97 PGA. WF/W can be played with stellar golf and those who do it have won there. The problem is that so much of the lore of the place is tied to the massacre story in '74. If Lefty had won there -- of course he blew it by his execution on the 72nd hole -- things would be seen differently by quite a few people.You can easily make a case for PD in Kansas -- but Carl, please don't prove take your ignorance there and make a stupid comment that says "seems unlikely" PD is a fantastic course and has demonstrated that in a range of ways -- including woman and senior major events.Carl, with all due respect, people bump up ANGC because it's The Masters -- look deeper and ask is the course we see today really the one that made you can't wait for the telecast as it did when Nicklaus and Watson were in their primes? I think the answer is obvious and the resulting "improvements" we have seen recently have only distorted what was there previously in my mind.Mike:Live in the world you wish -- if you see the existing ANGC as the best version of what can be then by all means lives comfortably in your world of ignorance.If you had your eyes open when you were there 20 years ago you would have noticed the kind of layout that made a clear statement on why winning there was so special. You must have skipped what I wrote before -- let me try it again for your benefit. After Tiger lit the place up in '97 the folks there wanted to Tiger-proof the place. That's when the silly "second cut" and the bowling alley fairway widths with silly pines being planted along with fake mounds that would make Anna Nicole Smith proud happened. People running the show had a major beef against seeing just a few players hit short irons into a few holes -- they made it sound like Cory Pavin and Larry Mize were doing it too.Mike, for what it's worth -- ANGC was the signature course for strategic design -- it encouraged the bold play and when executed flawlessly rewarded it -- that doesn't happen anywhere close to what it did previously. Like I said the folks who run the show HAD to soften the pins for the weekend or you'd get those hot and exciting rounds of 1 or 2 under par and everyone playing that edge-of-your-seat chair 3rd shot into the 13th and 15th holes. Mike, ANGC didn't need to be changed -- it worked well minus the lengthening of just a few holes. End of story ...
I haven't played many of the courses in the top 20, but from what I saw of ANGC in my one and only site visit a year ago I wouldn't drop it. Yes, there are issues with what they have done (in particular I think #7 is a disaster), but the greens and greensites are still amazing.
I have seen ANGC a couple of times as a spectator, and of course, on TV. I am a member at Prairie Dunes. I cannot see PD ever being ahead of ANGC, and I think PD could be top 10.
Carl:I can appreciate your take but when one analyzes golf courses and you say, "Augusta just looks that good" -- what are you speaking about? I would hope you are talking more than just the flowers and the scenery. You also need to explain to me how WF/W is less so -- given all the smart moves made there recently in eliminating the profusion of trees and the like. Keep this in mind, places like ANGC and Pebble Beach benefit from the added exposure. WF/W is only seen every ten years or so.Carl, I readily concede that the pre-'97 ANGC version is better than WF/W but I'll take the Mamaroneck layout now over the one that has been twisted in so many ways from the version you see today.