2015 Masters Discussion Thread

[Natural Patrick]

Not sure I'd agree that Tiger's short game is back.  A 3 putt on 1 is not great.  On 3, he chipped 7 yards past the hole on a straightforward chip.  On 4, with lots of green to work with, he blasted out across and off the green, about 20' from the hole (to his credit, he got up and down from there -- I guess that is an up and up and down).  After that, he did do well -- I was impressed with his up and down on 11 and hope he draws a lot of confidence from it.

His full swing looks rushed, especially when compared to his driving range tempo -- I suspect his driver will get a lot more wild if he doesn't get some tempo back.

I am the ultimate tiger nutsack hanger-from, but am not as encouraged as the press accounts.

How about his swings where he comes out of his stance, Yep, his back issue's are over.

[iacas]

Not sure I'd agree that Tiger's short game is back.

Uhhhh… did we watch the same tournament?

A three-putt is not a shanked wedge. His short game was world class today. A few Bs but a lot of A+s.

P.S. There's really no such thing as a straightforward chip on #3. That green has a LOT of slope to it, especially on the left-hand side.

[jamo]

P.S. There's really no such thing as a straightforward chip on #3. That green has a LOT of slope to it, especially on the left-hand side.

This. That's the whole point of that hole. It's so short that if chips into that green were easy, the field would average a 3.

[Natural Patrick]

You heard wrong.

Heck, Nick Faldo was six shots back after the first round (and the third) and won in 1996.

Tiger's driving, short game, and putting were all an A (a few A+ shots, a few Bs). His approach shots, well, I guess when you work on your short game quite a bit that's what happens to your irons…

I knew it and I'm pretty darn sure, that in the History of the Masters. Faldo is not the only exception.

[iacas]

I knew it and I'm pretty darn sure, that in the History of the Masters. Faldo is not the only exception.

He's not. He's just the first one I thought was right and so I looked it up and busted the myth.

[Natural Patrick]

He's not. He's just the first one I thought was right and so I looked it up and busted the myth.

Well done iacas, well done indeed.

[joekelly]

Um.  One poorly researched and careless comment does not make a 'myth'.  That said, no need to have  wrong ideas floating around either.

And Erik, have you ever played, or even walked, ANGC?  Your comment about chipping on #3 implies you have played/walked that hole, at least something more than TV observation.  Of course, maybe JMiller or LTrevino messed up years ago on #3 and so that myth (no good chip on 3) gets born.

I'll try to watch a few holes, delayed, at the pub today.  Go Sergio.

[saturday]

Um.  One poorly researched and careless comment does not make a 'myth'.  That said, no need to have  wrong ideas floating around either.  And Erik, have you ever played, or even walked, ANGC?  Your comment about chipping on #3 implies you have played/walked that hole, at least something more than TV observation.  Of course, maybe JMiller or LTrevino messed up years ago on #3 and so that myth (no good chip on 3) gets born.  I'll try to watch a few holes, delayed, at the pub today.  Go Sergio.

Actually if you look at the poster of the myths pretty much everything he's mentioned today is inaccurate.

[Fourputt]

Um.  One poorly researched and careless comment does not make a 'myth'.  That said, no need to have  wrong ideas floating around either.

And Erik, have you ever played, or even walked, ANGC?  Your comment about chipping on #3 implies you have played/walked that hole, at least something more than TV observation.  Of course, maybe JMiller or LTrevino messed up years ago on #3 and so that myth (no good chip on 3) gets born.

I'll try to watch a few holes, delayed, at the pub today.  Go Sergio.

#3 is actually designed so that it can be more difficult to chip the ball close than it is to hit a full wedge for most pin locations.   The entire course is actually playing softer and faster than we are used to seeing it.  Augusta National normally requires great precision on chips and pitches, and even when played quite well will often leave 6-8 feet.  Some hole locations are truly evil unless you hit your approach to the right spot.

I'll qualify this by stating that much of my information comes from talking to a friend who lives in North Augusta, South Carolina, who has both played the course and has attended the Masters for many years.  He worked with a couple of other guys designing the course for the computer game Links 2003.  They walked the course during the practice rounds and took 1000's of photos to work from.  They updated the course each time that AN made changes (my current version is 2009), and they made the computer version so well that it plays as close to the real thing as a computer game can - I've even duplicated the Tiger chip on 16, although it took me about 25 tries in practice mode to make it work, the shot is that hard.

[MacDutch]

I am happy Tiger is back. Saw some nice shots:-)

[Dave2512]

Well done. [quote name="Fourputt" url="/t/80870/2015-masters-discussion-thread/630#post_1126542"] #3 is actually designed so that it can be more difficult to chip the ball close than it is to hit a full wedge for most pin locations.   The entire course is actually playing softer and faster than we are used to seeing it.  Augusta National normally requires great precision on chips and pitches, and even when played quite well will often leave 6-8 feet.  Some hole locations are truly evil unless you hit your approach to the right spot. I'll qualify this by stating that much of my information comes from talking to a friend who lives in North Augusta, South Carolina, who has both played the course and has attended the Masters for many years.  He worked with a couple of other guys designing the course for the computer game Links 2003.  They walked the course during the practice rounds and took 1000's of photos to work from.  They updated the course each time that AN made changes (my current version is 2009), and they made the computer version so well that it plays as close to the real thing as a computer game can - I've even duplicated the Tiger chip on 16, although it took me about 25 tries in practice mode to make it work, the shot is that hard. [/quote]

[Hardballs]

41st... not bad. 41st place is the 42nd loser.

Hilarious! Intentional or not.

[tdiii]

Uhhhh… did we watch the same tournament?

A three-putt is not a shanked wedge. His short game was world class today. A few Bs but a lot of A+s.

P.S. There's really no such thing as a straightforward chip on #3. That green has a LOT of slope to it, especially on the left-hand side.

Wrong.

[iacas]

Wrong.

Look, you can disagree, that's cool and all, but add more to the discussion than that.

But hey, what do I know. I'm just an instructor, and my opinion only aligns with just about everyone who had a microphone today.

[Club Rat]

Not sure if this photo was taken this week at the club, but it's too funny not to share....

Club Rat

[Huddo]

What a right pair........the photo bombers that is!

[Rick Martin]

I am happy Tiger is back. Saw some nice shots:-)

I don't think "he's back" - there were some atrocious shots out there (although that shot on 4th hole what nostaligic TW). As for his short game, the yips seem to creep up when they're least expected and can disappear for a short period of time before it shows its ugly face......

[inthehole]

Not sure if this photo was taken this week at the club, but it's too funny not to share....

Club Rat

LOVE IT !!   LOLOLOL