Should the Masters be a Major

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Pardon me ? Sorry for not remembering every single hole on a course I have never played and holes i rarely see

Actually with you on this one - I was thinking just last might that I couldn't recall the 1st hole - then found I didn't have any impressions of any of the front 9 (in my mind I worked backwards from Amen corner and didn't get very far)

 

[Tongo]

Agreed.
I can picture every hole on the back 9 as I've seen them dozens and dozens of times over the years...
I can picture the 2nd hole, mainly due to Louis's albatross and PhillyMick and the leaf on the line but that's all...can't picture 1 or 3-9 at all...

It's the first thing that should change

As with all the over the majors

There should be wall to wall coverage from the first tee shot to the last shot

Only hole I can recall on the front 9 is the one Louis got an eagle on

Seriously the only hole - so you can't remember the dog leg par 4 9th which goes down hill at the dogleg then steeply up hill so that the ball can spin off the front of the green (Greg Norman), or the 8th par 5 up hill with a big bunker on the right hand side of the fairway at about 300 yrds with a dog leg at the end with big banks around the green, or the 7th a really straight par 4 with a green surrounded by bunkers and heavily sloped front to back, the Par 3 6th with a big slope in the green and big deep bunker short right and a funny shaped green like a pinched in triangle, or the 5 th a dog leg left par 4 with bunkers on the left hand side of the fairway, or the downhill par 3 4th with its heavily bunkered green, or the 3rd an almost drivable par 4 with a ridiculous sloping fast little green that the pros can get too close to from the tee so a lot of them use a long iron which brings a couple of bunkers into play, or the heavily down hill par 5 second which doglegs viciously to the left and has a small triangular green with big bunkers leaving a really small entrance to the green, or the first a fairly innocuous par 4 dog leg to the right with a couple of bunkers at the dogleg on the right hand side of the fairway and a green that Tiger hit a 15ft putt that finished off the green the first time he played in a competitive round.

Or were you just trying to make a point that didnt exist.

Ditto Freddie.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Do you get to see every court at Wimbledon? Or just a select few?

People may look at the Masters and think its not doing golf any good, however I suspect that the viewing figures counteract that. People who know nothing about golf have heard of the Masters, know what a Green Jacket represents.

Personally I simply do not see anything wrong with the way that The Masters do things. I think they are adapting nicely (they didn't show any of the front 9 at all till about the 90's!) and are IMHO leading the way with their online set up and apps and social media coverage. It is like the rest of The Masters, it's done very well.

The media love the place, the "patrons" (granted I hate that) love the place, they nicely escort people from the premises if they are caught shouting stuff out.

For me, there's also the "Joycie effect". My mum (Joyce) will probably watch the last bit of The Open, however she'll happily sit through all 4 days of the Masters.

On red button you can pretty much take your pick of watching every court

I think more should be shown instead of 3 hours per night with a bit more on the final day. A lot of times a number of players have already completed their rounds by the time the live pictures start on the Thursday and Friday.

 

[Tongo]

I can only ever remember on the front 9 the hole that Louis got his 2 on the par 5

Can remember the 11th onwards , can't remember the 17th though

You can't remember the 10th? Where Hoch missed that short putt, Bubba played that amazing shot out of the trees and Scott won his Masters a couple of years ago?

 

[Hacker Khan]

I think it's a great tournament despite the BS regarding not showing all of on TV (mystique my arse, just being awkward and old fashioned for the sake of it more like) , calling spectators 'patrons' and the immense amount of obsequiousness that seems to be prominent in the media coverage.

Get rid of all that and it would be even better, but I really enjoy it anyway.

As for picturing the holes then I play it on Tiger Woods on the PS3 and that helps.

 

[USER1999]

Wimbledon has most of the other courts on the red button, in fuzzy vision.

OK, the masters now has amen corner in fuzzy, and two selected groups also. Wow, how flipping generous of them.

It's a major, show it all. If people aren't interested, they won't watch it. But they will never find out.

Oh, and it's not on my bucket list. I think without the crowds, it would be an empty soulless patch of grass, with not a lot of definition. Many of the greens are in the middle of nowhere. Not my style of course at all.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You can't remember the 10th? Where Hoch missed that short putt, Bubba played that amazing shot out of the trees and Scott won his Masters a couple of years ago?

Correct I can't remember the layout of the hole - sorry.

 

[upsidedown]

I read the replies that want more coverage and to me it smacks of the " I want it now culture " that unfortunately we now seem to be living in. Having been brought up when there was very little live sport on the tele and radio was king I do think that sometimes less is more and this how I see the Masters. The less I see of it the more I want to watch it.

 

[Tongo]

I read the replies that want more coverage and to me it smacks of the " I want it now culture " that unfortunately we now seem to be living in. Having been brought up when there was very little live sport on the tele and radio was king I do think that sometimes less is more and this how I see the Masters. The less I see of it the more I want to watch it.

I agree. But be prepared for a backlash to your comment from people who want the coverage to start the moment the first player gets out of bed and scratches his derriere!

 

[Duckster]

On red button you can pretty much take your pick of watching every court

I think more should be shown instead of 3 hours per night with a bit more on the final day. A lot of times a number of players have already completed their rounds by the time the live pictures start on the Thursday and Friday.

And on the red button for the masters you can watch featured groups do most of their rounds or sit down and watch the groups come through Amen Corner.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

And on the red button for the masters you can watch featured groups do most of their rounds or sit down and watch the groups come through Amen Corner.

Yep and a lot of times the red button is showing nothing at they wait for the groups to come through and last year the red button still didn't show them on a lot of holes through the front 9

 

[freddielong]

Pardon me ? Sorry for not remembering every single hole on a course I have never played and holes i rarely see

Ok, sorry but I do not believe you.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

No.

its a comp run by and exclusive members club with its own agenda. its only been going since the 30's so its not that long, so not even a historical comp like the others.

No reason it can't be on the tour , but def not a major.

In its current strokeplay format the USPGA has only been going since the 50's and is only 20 years older than the Masters in any event.

As I have said before, to me, only the competitors themselves can truly judge if an event is a Major. There is no world governing body to dictate the criteria.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I read the replies that want more coverage and to me it smacks of the " I want it now culture " that unfortunately we now seem to be living in. Having been brought up when there was very little live sport on the tele and radio was king I do think that sometimes less is more and this how I see the Masters. The less I see of it the more I want to watch it.

But the trouble is that if the game is going to attract new viewers in 2016 when like it or not, everything is available straight away, then they are probably going to find the concept of not being able to see all the action of a major sporting event live at best a bit strange. And at worst bloody annoying and not worth bothering with.

Harking back to 1983 is probably not the best media strategy. IMHO.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I read the replies that want more coverage and to me it smacks of the " I want it now culture " that unfortunately we now seem to be living in. Having been brought up when there was very little live sport on the tele and radio was king I do think that sometimes less is more and this how I see the Masters. The less I see of it the more I want to watch it.

The less that is shown that the less people that get to see the sport - that doesn't help the sport attract people.

Yes we are very lucky now that we can see so much sport than we used to in the past

The Olympics in 2012 helped boost so many sports with it being on telly

Golf viewing has already been reduced over the past 12 months with Sky picking up all the golf.

Golf is reducing in numbers - need to find a way to increase numbers - having limited exposure of the first major of the year doesn't help IMO.

 

[upsidedown]

Yes but there is more coverage of The Masters than there was 10 years ago but still golfers numbers have fallen so that doesn't stack up. Falling numbers is down to any number of reasons.Lack of coverage is just one possible cause

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yes but there is more coverage of The Masters than there was 10 years ago but still golfers numbers have fallen so that doesn't stack up. Falling numbers is down to any number of reasons.Lack of coverage is just one possible cause

Well less people are able to watch the Masters on the Thursday and Friday due to it moving to sky and the amount of extra coverage isn't a great deal. You still manage to miss half the field on both days. But yes coverage is prob only a small part in reduction of participants

 

[USER1999]

I read the replies that want more coverage and to me it smacks of the " I want it now culture " that unfortunately we now seem to be living in. Having been brought up when there was very little live sport on the tele and radio was king I do think that sometimes less is more and this how I see the Masters. The less I see of it the more I want to watch it.

But if it was on, you wouldn't be forced at gun point to watch it. You could restrict your viewing, or follow it on the wireless.

For those selfish few who do want to climb out of the 1950s, proper coverage is a must for any major sporting event.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

The effect of TV coverage upon participation levels is often exaggerated.

I believe that despite wall to wall coverage of Wimbledon each year the number of active players has fallen and since London 2012 there has been a fall in people playing all sports.

It would seem we are increasingly a nation of armchair sports enthusiasts.

 

[Tongo]

Yes but there is more coverage of The Masters than there was 10 years ago but still golfers numbers have fallen so that doesn't stack up. Falling numbers is down to any number of reasons.Lack of coverage is just one possible cause

Indeed. The sport with the most marked increase in this country in recent years (cycling) cant be contributed to TV coverage. The TdF has been the only major event consistently covered for decades and is still the only major event of the main cycling tour / calendar to be covered.