Should the Masters be a Major

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date

Should the Masters be a Major

  • Total voters
    146
Actually that presents possibly a good idea - bag cam ?

One of our swindle members have a camera mounted on his bag to film the round ? Maybe the players could have something like that on their bag ?
 
For me definitely no, some of the reasons have already been mentioned on here re the way its run and its attitudes, but for me its because its played on the same parkland course with tricked up greens, dyed water, no rough and fairways that even Bubba Watson can't miss ! Its boring !

The reason the pros say they love it is because if anyone says anything close to being critical they run the risk of not being invited back, the "good ol boys" don't take kindly to complaints.
Its is the youngest of all the majors (1934) to me that is not a major that should be supported by the comment of its "history"
 
JP58 said:
For me definitely no, some of the reasons have already been mentioned on here re the way its run and its attitudes, but for me its because its played on the same parkland course with tricked up greens, dyed water, no rough and fairways that even Bubba Watson can't miss ! Its boring !

The reason the pros say they love it is because if anyone says anything close to being critical they run the risk of not being invited back, the "good ol boys" don't take kindly to complaints.
Its is the youngest of all the majors (1934) to me that is not a major that should be supported by the comment of its "history"
Click to expand...

A balanced and reasonable argument. However it's one I disagree with. Some of the fairways aren't that wide, especially given the cambers and it rewards those who can get their approaches into the right place as opposed to just shoot for the pin you see on tour most weeks. I don't know many, including those who won't get an invite again, who have ever had too much to say negatively so I do think by and large most pros like the opportunity to play in it
 
JP58 said:
For me definitely no, some of the reasons have already been mentioned on here re the way its run and its attitudes, but for me its because its played on the same parkland course with tricked up greens, dyed water, no rough and fairways that even Bubba Watson can't miss ! Its boring !

The reason the pros say they love it is because if anyone says anything close to being critical they run the risk of not being invited back, the "good ol boys" don't take kindly to complaints.
Its is the youngest of all the majors (1934) to me that is not a major that should be supported by the comment of its "history"
Click to expand...


Well the USGA have been known to trick up the odd green or two in their time.
 
JP58 said:
For me definitely no, some of the reasons have already been mentioned on here re the way its run and its attitudes, but for me its because its played on the same parkland course with tricked up greens, dyed water, no rough and fairways that even Bubba Watson can't miss ! Its boring !

The reason the pros say they love it is because if anyone says anything close to being critical they run the risk of not being invited back, the "good ol boys" don't take kindly to complaints.
Its is the youngest of all the majors (1934) to me that is not a major that should be supported by the comment of its "history"
Click to expand...

The Dinah Shore, or ANA Inspiration as it is now, has been played on the same course since its inception whilst the Ladies PGA Championship has spent time at one course for extended periods so the Masters is not alone on that front.
 
HomerJSimpson said:
A balanced and reasonable argument. However it's one I disagree with. Some of the fairways aren't that wide, especially given the cambers and it rewards those who can get their approaches into the right place as opposed to just shoot for the pin you see on tour most weeks. I don't know many, including those who won't get an invite again, who have ever had too much to say negatively so I do think by and large most pros like the opportunity to play in it
Click to expand...

It's not balanced at all! That would be presenting both sides and then concluding. He stated his position at the outset, which he is entitled to, and then argued it one way and one way only. Which is fine. But it's not balanced!
 
TheDiablo said:
It's not balanced at all! That would be presenting both sides and then concluding. He stated his position at the outset, which he is entitled to, and then argued it one way and one way only. Which is fine. But it's not balanced!
Click to expand...

Whatever. Rationally put whichever way you cut it. He doesn't like it and explained why. More than we sometimes get!
 
Just a few thoughts re some of the responses to my post,

Yes the USGA have been known to "trick up" greens in the past, but imo not to the extent the Masters committee do, as they are the only real defence the course has, to my mind its not pro golf when a player can pitch in to a few feet and watch his ball disappear off the green !

I don't think any pro or come to that tv company wants to risk not getting invited back because of a critical comment, remember the "bikini waxed" comment from Gary McCord, the committee threatened to pull CBS's contract if he wasn't removed, contrast that with the pro's criticism of Carnoustie's rough in 1999, would they have said similar things about Augusta, I think not.

That's just one example of the "bubble" that the committee live in and unfortunately they are moving steadily away from the vision Bobby Jones's had for his course and have effectively created a "made for tv major", and yes I will still be watching it and hoping Peter Alliss doesn't give a damn and says what he thinks !
 
Snelly said:
As an aside, I disagree with all those who say the past champions should not be allowed to play. They are there because they earned their place. End of story.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that past champions should not be allowed to play Snelly. I'm saying that there should be a cut off point. As I mentioned earlier, seeing old boys struggling to score two rounds in the 80's does not, for me, a "major" make.
Larry Mize, for instance...as nice as guy as he may be, he picked up a green jacket courtesy of a flukey chip nearly 30 years ago. In his last 15 Masters, he has failed to make the cut 12 times!!
 
Smiffy said:
I'm not saying that past champions should not be allowed to play Snelly. I'm saying that there should be a cut off point. As I mentioned earlier, seeing old boys struggling to score two rounds in the 80's does not, for me, a "major" make.
Larry Mize, for instance...as nice as guy as he may be, he picked up a green jacket courtesy of a flukey chip nearly 30 years ago. In his last 15 Masters, he has failed to make the cut 12 times!!
Click to expand...

Dagnamit, I think I got him in the office sweep!
 
Fun debate with some interesting thoughts.

I'm pretty much with MetalMickie that as long as the players consider it a Major (and in many cases it's the one they most want to win) then that's good enough for me.

I think each Major should be different and have it's own character and quirks, whether that is only playing on links or having club pros or penal rough or playing the same course, having crazy greens and inviting past winners for life. Makes for some variety in what could otherwise be endless run of 72 hole 7,200 yard slog fests (I can't honestly tell the difference between a lot of regular Tour or WCG events).

The invitation thing is a red herring in my view. Criteria to get an "invite" is not that different to exemptions at other Majors. OK so no separate dedicated qualifying process but players know what they need to do to get an invite, and they are all "earned" in some sense.

Field is smaller but that makes it more exclusive (arguably no bad thing for an elite event - it's called the "Masters" after all so I'd expect it to be more exclusive that something called an "Open"). Might also partly be that there's simply less daylight in early April in Georgia to get a big field round in time.

Whilst I agree TV coverage might be better that could never be a reason for it not to be classed as a Major. I'd love to see someone tell the guys in the locker room this week or at the Champions Dinner that it doesn't deserve to be a Major because some blokes on a golf forum can't watch every hole live on the Red Button! :D

As for history, well it might be the youngest Major but it it's still over 80 years old, was the brainchild of one of the greatest players in the history of the game, and has been coveted, revered and won, by just about all the greats since then.
 
Snooker's Masters is invite only, non-ranking and a limited field but it is still viewed as one of the most prestigious tournaments in the calendar and part of the triple crown occasionally referred to.
 
Sat here watching the Par 3. Player just got a hole in one and my excitement for a weekend of great golf is building to palpable levels.

Yup. Definitely worthy of a major to me.
 
palindromicbob said:
Sat here watching the Par 3. Player just got a hole in one and my excitement for a weekend of great golf is building to palpable levels.

Yup. Definitely worthy of a major to me.
Click to expand...

Where as I have turned it off and watching a film - it started to bore me tbh. The only thing that made it enjoyable was Butch who is clearly on form this year - some quality quotes from him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
The difficulties in arranging golf holidays for groups. Spain or Portugal or somewhere else. Everyone has different opinions on the golf courses...
2 3
Replies
40
Views
8K
gopher99
G
T
Deep in the stat cave
Replies
3
Views
2K
HomerJSimpson
HomerJSimpson
D
  • Poll Poll
10. Should the Masters be a major?
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Ethan
Ethan
rystaman
Time for a new coach?
2 3
Replies
58
Views
9K
Deleted member 21784
D
MarkT
Will Tiger play in the 2022 Masters?
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
19K
Tashyboy
Tashyboy
Top