Greg Norman on The Masters today.

Norman shocked by Augusta changes
Greg Norman has admitted that changes made at Augusta since he last played in the Masters left him stunned.
The double Open champion, a three-time runner-up at Augusta, played there ahead of his first Masters since 2002.
"Since then they've added about 420 yards, and I was absolutely shocked to tell you the truth," said the Aussie. "There are phenomenal changes right from the first hole. If the weather stayed the same as when I played last week it bodes well for longer hitters."
Norman, 54, qualified for a return to Augusta with his spectacular third-place finish in last year's Open.
He said: "I was just surprised by what they did to some of the great short holes. I can understand the par fives but, for example, the seventh hole was one of the great classic risk-reward short holes.
I used to try to drive the ball way up in front of the green and pitch it up, and that's gone now.

"I loved the challenges in the old days of the short holes of Augusta. They can either bite you in the rear end or not. I remember somebody could come into the back nine holes six or seven or eight shots off the lead and feel they could win it. That was a great feeling, (but) I think it's going to be a lot more difficult now."

As for how he might fare, Norman said: "Not having played (in the Masters) for seven years, I want to make sure that everybody manages their expectations and I manage mine. There's a lot of interest in my return and that's wonderful, but at the same time I'm going into this tournament just trying to enjoy myself."


I think it's fair to say The Masters isn't the tournament it once was - last year's was just dull - but does he have a point or is he just part of sporting 'it-wasn't-like-this-in-my-day' brigade?

I think they have changed the course to its detriment. It is not really the length as all of the players hit the ball further now, but with changes to driving lines and added trees etc on so many holes the players can't afford to take the risk of going for eagles on the back nine par 5's as they no they can't make up a blowup as there are not obvious birdie holes anymore.

As 23Rounder said the attitude of the whole tournament has changed. The players are scared to try for an eagle because if they end up with a double bogey there isn't enough chances to get those strokes back. Everyone is out there to protect par.

The Masters is still my favorite tournament to watch, but since they made the changes, it has lacked the excitement it once did. As many in the media have pointed out, the Sunday roars are not nearly as frequent as in past years.

Norman is right on. Listened to a good interview with Gary Player on Augusta National and he and many others would agree with Norman. Some decent articles on that subject as well.

They've taken the birdie barrage possibilities away and turned the back nine into a making par, U.S. Open yawn fest on Sunday.

Supposedly, there are some steps being taken this year and in the future to deal with some of this, and getting away from some of Augusta's post-Tiger overreaction. If the players aren't left with realistic risk/reward opportunities at 13 and 15, they'll just lay up, and we won't see balls dribbling into the creek or eagles, for that matter.

For me, it's still the greated tournament to watch.

Instead of changing courses, I think the distance the ball goes should be scaled back.

To me I'd prefer to see the greatest players in the world play the hardest courses in the world. I don't care if I see someone shoot -40. I'd prefer to watch tournaments like what we just had in the Transitions. I like to see scrambling and calculated risks. Yeah it's great to watch people hole hunt, but we all know they can do it. This separates a champion from a TRUE champion. You gotta earn a major.

Well, I didn't think last year's Master was boring at all -- I thought it was a great four days, and Immelman and Snedeker were a great final pairing. Nice to see some new faces bring it.

As far as the changes to the course go, I think that it was a retarded move. Who designed the course now? MacKenzie? Trent Jones? A committee? It's like rebuilding a boat: after you put a new mast in, and a new deck, and repair the hull, and gut the cabins and rebuild them, swap in new sailcloth, a new motor, replace the screw, and repaint it, does it really matter that you still call it The Minnow? It's a new, different boat, with some of the same lines, maybe, but it's not the same.

Augusta National has been changed constantly over the years, sometimes minor changes and sometimes major ones. The changes up until the last major lengthening did not modify the overall character of the course (just stretched it out a bit,) but the new added length of the last few years has taken a great deal of the drama out of what was once the most exciting tournament of all (at least for me.) Many of the options have been changed. A hole like number 11, for example, is nothing like the original intent. A great short hole like 7 used to be, is now just another "make sure you make par" hole, and these are a dime a dozen on tour. Why do that?

Augusta's defense was its unparalleled greens, and the way the missed shots always gained speed rolling down to the water or collection areas. But if someone got a hot hand and into the putting zone, a real charge could be mounted. Now there are many holes where if the ball winds up close enough for a reasonable birdie (or those great par five eagles) is much more a matter of luck. Sure it takes amazing skill to attack some of the longer holes, but even if someone is striking it great, getting a full-out charge going is much less likely. Today, it is more of a "play it safe and don't lose" on the Sunday back nine or last few holes. That is a US Open philosophy, not the traditional Augusta National we have all grown to love.

Count me as one who does not like the latest changes and who would prefer the drama of the previous risk-reward nature of this great event. It is no longer a shot-maker's course with putting terror, it is a bomber's course with putting terror -- but the bombers mostly turn to defensive golfers on Sunday. The soul of Augusta has changed. Trust me, the course could have easily have kept its defenses with faster and firmer greens, and the excitement factor would be much higher than it is now.

^^^^^^^^^
I absolutely agree.

On a side note, lengthening the course hurts the players that don't hit the ball long, they are forced to try and hit long irons into blazing fast greens and then make the ball stop on these greens.

The game of golf has changed, a long drive makes a big difference now(and you don't have to be as accurate). IMO more emphasis needs to be put on iron play and putting.

They all hit it pretty long. Last years Masters Champ Immelman was ranked 62nd in driving distance at the Transitions, which is a tight course.

I think streching a course makes it very boring for all (Players and Spectators). They all seem to hit driver within 20 yards of each other, a lot of it depends on WHERE it lands for a good bounce, etc...