David Barrett

Golf with David
April 20th, 2008

Long-time golf journalist David Barrett covered the Masters for us this year.

- GolfObserver editors

Masters analysis off the mark

OK, if I read one more story about how this was the second straight dull Sunday at the Masters, I'm going to scream.

Photo: © Timothy A. ClaryAFP Winner Trevor Immelman shot in the 60s in the first three rounds before a tough Sunday sent scores soaring.

It actually started in the run-up to the Masters when I saw this quote from 2006 U.S. Open champion Geoff Ogilvy. "Last year the place was dead quiet; there were no roars at all."

Not to pick on Ogilvy, because countless writers have gone on to make a similar point. I think a review of last year's Masters final round is in order.

First Retief Goosen made three straight birdies on the front nine and shot a 32 to take the lead. Then Rory Sabbatini eagled the eighth hole with a long putt to move in front. Zach Johnson took control with birdies on 13 and 14. Tiger Woods put the pressure on with an eagle at 13. Johnson responded with his third birdie on four holes at 16 and claimed the title after a round during which five players had at least a share of the lead, and all had their up and down moments. The winner and two of the three runner-up finishers shot 69s.

Dull? Anything but. And there were a lot of roars. In fact, the first question posed to Johnson at his press conference afterward was, "What's going through your mind when you back off your shot on 15, you hear the roars for the eagle that Tiger made and obviously you have to execute?"

It was the first three rounds that didn't produce much excitement in 2007. And that was because high winds combined with frigid temperatures and an exceedingly dry run-up to the tournament made for freakishly difficult scoring conditions.

This year, it was pretty much the opposite. For the first three days, there were plenty of red numbers on the scoreboard. Trevor Immelman had three rounds in the 60s on the way to an 11-under 205 total through 54 holes--a total that has been bettered only four times in the last 28 years and eight times in the history of the Masters. The cut came at 147, the lowest since 2002.

The greens were reasonably receptive as the course remained in the same condition as on Wedneday when Masters chairman Billy Payne said it was playing just the way Augusta wanted it. Then on Sunday, the winds came and scoring became difficult. Hey, it happens.

It also happens sometimes that one player pulls away from the field and there is little drama on the closing holes. In this case, we were unfortunate enough to have both scenarios on Sunday--difficult conditions and the leader well out front. So, it made for a lack of final-round excitement.

That doesn't mean that the current version of Augusta National can't produce theatrics on Sunday. It did in 2007. And if the scoring conditions of the first three rounds had prevailed on Sunday this year, it certainly would have had the potential for excitement. (Indeed, if Tiger Woods hadn't missed so many putts inside 10 feet, we would have had theatrics, with a final-round charge by the best player in the game putting pressure on a relatively inexperienced front-runner.)

Photo: © Harry How/ Tiger Woods putter didn't create any excitement especially on the 13th hole here when Woods missed a short birdie putt.

This was the first truly dull Sunday in the seven years since the course changes began in earnest in 2002. Granted, there weren't a whole lot of final-round fireworks when Woods won in 2002 and Phil Mickelson in 2006, but that was ameliorated by the identity of the winners. In 2003, Len Mattiace shot a 65 and Mike Weir a 68 to reach a playoff. In 2004, Mickelson shot a 31 on the back nine to beat out Ernie Els, who had a 67 on the day. In 2005, Chris DiMarco shot a 68 to catch Tiger Woods in an epic duel before losing a playoff.

So why do we keep hearing about how dull the Masters has become? Because it's coming from people who don't agree with the course changes to Augusta National and want to tear them down any way they can.

In making an argument, it is somewhat understandable to selectively use evidence that supports your side. But to change the facts by saying that 2007 Masters Sunday was devoid of roars is something else again.

I say all this as someone who shares the concerns that Augusta National not be allowed to become so difficult that final-round birdie runs are a thing of the past. The best thing about the Masters, for me, has always been the leaderboard volatility that the tournament exhibits on the final day thanks to the knife's edge possibilities of eagles and birdies on one side and disasters on the other.

I'm just saying that the totality of evidence from 2002-8 doesn't show a large swing in the wrong direction. Has the balance shifted somewhat from the birdie side of the equation towards the bogey side? Probably so, especially if we compare it to the late 1990s when players were hitting wedges into nearly all of the par fours. But maybe not, if we go a little further back into history--and I don't mean ancient history, but the late 1980s-early 1990s.

The other thing I've noticed lately is a mischaracterization of the way Augusta National used to play. You would almost think that it was once a non-stop birdie-fest where players were always attacking.

It was never so. The Augusta National graveyard is littered with players through the decades who started the final round a couple of strokes back, decided to fire at the pins, and ended up shooting somewhere north of 75. But they are long forgotten, while we remember Gary Player shooting 64 in 1978 or Jack Nicklaus 65 in 1986, both with 30s on the back nine.

It's not like there used to be a memorable charge to the title every year. Player won with a 40 on the back nine in 1961, Craig Stadler with a 39 in 1982. In 1972, Jack Nicklaus won perhaps the dullest Sunday ever, with a 74 producing a three-stroke win at 286. If it hadn't been Nicklaus winning, you would have had to pass out No-Doz.

Augusta National has always been a difficult course capable of dealing out punishment to players whose shots or stategy are a little bit off. The trick at the Masters has always been to know when to be aggressive and when to be careful. And the beauty of Augusta National as a tournament venue has been that it rewards good play with red numbers, while still being a tough test. (Let's not forget that the volatility of the leaderboard is due not only to the fact that someone can shoot a 30 on the back nine, but also that the leader could shoot a 40).

Is there less chance of shooting a 30 for nine holes or a 64 for the round these days? Probably. But scoring feats are still possible. In 2005, Woods tied the tournament record with seven straight birdies in the third round. He set a record with an extraordinary 21 birdies over the course of three consecutive rounds (second through fourth). Mickelson birdied five of the last seven holes in 2004.

Augusta officials have a recent track record of helping things along by using the most accessible hole locations on Sunday. That's undoubtedly what Payne meant when he said it was the goal to have excitement on the weekend. This year, the weather didn't cooperate.

Perhaps the template for a Masters on the new Augusta National is the 1987 tournament, where Greg Norman and Seve Ballesteros fell to Larry Mize in a playoff. It was a wild final day, with runs up and down the leaderboard by a host of contenders. The winning score: 3-under 285.

No, you don't need double-digit under-par totals to create excitement. You do need birdies, but when the course is also dangerous enough to produce bogeys it makes for the kind of two-shot swings that can change the tournament in a heartbeat. Norman shot an even-par 72 that day, but it was anything but ho-hum. It consisted of six birdies, six pars, and six bogeys.

Me, I would settle for a bunch of "dull" final rounds like the one we witnessed in 2007.

Back to top