04/25/24
April 07, 2006
Masterful Numbers: Just how much of an impact did the course changes at Augusta National have on the scores yesterday? Sportsfilter columnist JJ takes a look at the first round of the Masters.
No teeth in the course yesterday, either. I expect the scores to rise if the course stays dry, and the more dastardly pin positions come into play. Great first round action, though. If Vijay keeps the flat stick going, he will be tough to beat, and Mickelson looks very confident. Biggest surprise? Gentle Ben @ -1, first round under par at Augusta since he won in '95. No realistic chance to win, but a great round for a great guy.
posted by mjkredliner at 12:22 PM on April 07, 2006
What is lost in these numbers is the fact this is the first Masters since 2002 (I think) where the weather wasn't a factor. The past four years they have had some sort of weather delay in the first or second round. Dry and firm plays shorter than in the wet. Again we will see after the whole tournament is complete. We can crunch the numbers then and see what affect the changes have had. I remember there was a lot of talk in my circles about the changes in 2002. I work in the golf industry. Maybe just as much talk as this year. However, Jack and Arnie didn't make statements like they did this year.
posted by chuck'n'duck at 02:39 PM on April 07, 2006
It would be interesting to add a few more things to this statistical analysis - driving distance and fairways hit. Courses are getting longer, but player's tee shots are going further, too. If the average driving distance is going up, then this reaction to lengthen the course just seems like a way to nullify longer tee shots. Understanding if fairways hit has changed lets us know if these longer tee shots are any more/less accurate.
posted by bailzzz at 07:15 PM on April 07, 2006
"Lengthening of the course" often seems to be a lame way of making a course "tougher." There are so many variables that make a course tough on a given day. The idea Crenshaw has played so well for two days shows a good, crafty golfer that knows Augusta and is swinging well can have good results on that course. Other majors look to toughen things with narrow fairways and ridiculous rough. The second cut at Augusta still gives players good lies. Yesterday, the wind at the course seemed to be the biggest obtacle, and it seems that's always one of the most difficult aspects of the Masters. Problems off the tee may be a factor with some of the guys that fail to make the cut, but the guys in contention will have to do the same thing required in all majors: Keep the ball in play, control your approaches, lag-putt well, don't miss the shorter putts, make some longer ones, adapt to the conditions, and handle the pressure. It will be interesting on Saturday to see who ends up in the final group for Sunday with so many guys bunched up behind Campbell. Maybe this is the year the "Final group" winner thing comes to a halt.
posted by dyams at 08:06 AM on April 08, 2006
I'm going to spend the next two days rooting for Stephen Ames, but only because I picked up a bunch of his autographed 8x10 Upper Deck cards for $.99 a few months ago. Well, that and he's Canadian.
posted by wfrazerjr at 08:54 AM on April 08, 2006
Just wondering...did anyone check to see if Tiger packed a red shirt?
posted by wolfdad at 10:23 AM on April 08, 2006
One part of the analysis that is missing at first glance. Is the scoring comparison tihis year to last comparable for its lack of diffirence at other courses that weren't lengthened? In other words, Augusta may have been lenthened with no discernable pattern to the change in scoring, but if others events with substantailly the same field have shown reductions in scoring compared to last year, then the lengthening could be said to have had an effect. Common wisdom, which is neither commmon nor often wise, says that "Tiger-proofing" a course by lengthening it does just the opposite, it benefits the long hitters in that they will be the only ones who have ANY chance of reaching a long par-4 in two.
posted by elovrich at 11:13 PM on April 08, 2006
Reviewing the numbers you submitted, it actually appears that scoring has improved. Attribute it to equipment, better conditioning of the players or whatever, the additional yards don't seem to have a negative effect, at least through round 1. Thanks for the post.