That finish will inspire a bunch of young lads that dreams indeed can come true. "I'm Zach Johnson, and I'm from Cedar Rapids Iowa... I'm just a normal guy" If that didn't warm your heart, nothing will.

This place will always be my favorite course in the world, even though I know I'll never be able to play it. I applaud them for keeping pace with technology.

Tiger Woods:

"Be aggressive? Here? On this golf course? Not in these conditions," Tiger Woods said Friday after his 73-74 -- 147 total left him just five shots behind co-leaders Brett Wetterich and Tim Clark at a humble, uninspiring 2 under par. "No, you just plod along. Try to put the ball in the right spot if you can. If you can't, somehow just don't have any wrecks out there."

Henrik Stenson is not a fan based on these comments as reported by Herb Gould in the Chicago Sun-Times:

"The course is ridiculous,'' he told the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. ''It feels like I'm walking around for five hours and someone is whipping me on the back. The only way to have fun on Augusta National is to play with your buddies and have a few beers.''

Here's one from Lee Westwood:

"Do I like this place? Not really, not any more," said the Englishman, who had just been desperately trying to make up for his first-round 79. "It just asks too many questions that there are no answers to. It used to be a shotmaker's course but now I don't think it is. When it was shorter, more of us would have had an answer, but now there are only six or seven people in the field that can win. It's not the type of golf I want to play."

Are all of you that were bored, also bored watching the US open?

The U.S. Open is expected to be a grind. The Masters is not.

+Handicap said on April 9, 2007:

What bores me is the -20 to -25 shootouts throughout the year.

Care to name the last time we reached -20 on the PGA Tour? Tell me again what score won at the Honda? At Doral? At even the PODS Championship?

+Handicap said on April 9, 2007:

It's refreshing to see an event in which anybody who makes the cut has a legitimate chance to win as Goosen proved by nearly winning. The course is now a superior test of golf and course management.

That's a matter of the ten-shot rule, not the course setup. If other events had that rule you'd occasionally see someone who barely makes the cut make a run. Brad Faxon won after making the cut on the number last year - that doesn't mean the course was set up for it. It means he played really well after playing really poorly.

+Handicap said on April 9, 2007:

I don't understand how berating Jerry Kelly or Bradley Dredge validates any argument.

Because they're not major-winner quality players, and The Masters has consistently produced the best list of major winners of any of the majors. They have less fluke winners than any other.

+Handicap said on April 9, 2007:

All players earned their way into a limited prestigious field. It's interesting I didn't hear of any players complaining (as many often do), only self proclaimed golf "experts" who can't win the Net of the C flight in their club championship.

Why muddy your argument by insulting me, particularly when you're wrong? I play in the scratch division.

Furthermore, Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer have gone so far as to berate the changes at Augusta. Very few current players would bemoan the changes - and yet some have, like Geoff Ogilvy. Henrik Stenson - who was around the lead for quite awhile - said "I have only been here twice, but they seem to be taking out the good slopes, the ones that can help the players, and putting more awkward ones in. It is on the edge of being ridiculous, if it’s not ridiculous already."

Why would Tiger Woods talk badly about a course he has to play? Gary Player is famous once for saying "I love slow greens" one week and telling a guy "I love fast greens" the next because, as a pro, you have to love and embrace whatever the conditions are in order to succeed. I loved playing in foul weather because I knew it would bother my opponents more than it would bother me - and that gave me an edge. I could also use a Jack Nicklaus quote here about how if he ever heard someone complaining about the course setup, he would cross them off the 'potential winner' list in his mind.

So no, the "no players complain about it" reasoning doesn't work. Past winners at Augusta have complained (Nicklaus, Palmer), some current players have (Ogilvy), and current players have no reason to complain and many big reasons not to.

Andy Greenwald said on April 8, 2007:

It was exciting today, was it not?

Eh, not really - not like Masters past. I do think watering the greens helped - it allowed for some eagle opportunities (and we saw some made). But a 69 to win (and the low round of the day)? Tiger shooting 72? A scoring average north of 74? No. That's not terribly exciting. It was better than the first three days (see "they watered the greens"), but not like Masters past.

Is 7500 yards long by today's standards? Sure, but for the Pro's it is not extreme. Rewarding bad tee shots is extreme and also makes watching TV golf extremely boring.

It gets so bad some weekends, it is like watching these guys playing a par 3 course. No great skill required (keyword is great, as in PGA grade great) . The bombers just his it as hard as they can, and they still have a 50% chance to reach the green from the woods or 1st cut at 235 yards out. Where is the fun in that?

If the par 5's are going to play like that; just replace the par 5's with some long par 3's and lets speed up the play. As far as I am concerned, the Masters wanted to bring the accuracy game back to Augusta without taking away the bombers chances.

Zach and Rose made a decent showing along with the bombers. We had at least 5 or 6 players that were in contention right up until they played the 16th, in some cases the 17th, hole. How much closer can it get? When was the last time we had a US Open with that many in contention with only three holes to play? This was a lot of fun to watch; Mission accomplished!

I would term the course set up as "marginal" and something that can at least be addressed in future years. I question whether the Committee was truly pleased with this year's carnage any more than the rest of us. Thus, the watering down of greens overnight.

My standard for course set up insanity was Shinnecock Hills for the 2004 Open. That was over the top. Although I don't believe Augusta achieved quite that level of absurdity this year, it is clear that that is hardly the direction in which one wants to go.

What is not being addressed here is how much more difficult a course should be when hosting a major. A little bit more? Hell of a lot? And, more importantly, how do you quantify that in terms of length of rough, stimpmeter, etc.?

Since I seriously doubt anyone is going to favor a "formula" for course set ups, I suspect we are going to be grousing about this matter everytime a train wreck occurs.