The Masters

[SecondCor521]

Did anyone else think that the way Sergio took his 2 club lengths for his unplayable out of the bush on the left side of 13 (?) was a little sloppy?

Normally I've seen players leave the ball where it is, lay down then mark the first club length with a tee, move the club, mark the second length with a tee, then pick up the ball and drop it.

What I thought I saw was Sergio pick up his ball first, *not* lay down the club all the way, I didn't see him even mark the first club length, then move the club to mark the second club length with a tee.

I don't like the notion of fans calling in penalties, and I'm glad for Sergio that he won, and CBS was filming it really well and they certainly know how an unplayable should be handled, so it's really more of a matter of curiosity if I'm missing something or not. I wouldn't think that the 2 club lengths of an unplayable is handled differently from an immovable obstruction, but maybe I'm all wet.

[Big_Hitter]

^ we don't do it that way at crane creek, js

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecondCor521 Did anyone else think that the way Sergio took his 2 club lengths for his unplayable out of the bush on the left side of 13 (?) was a little sloppy? Normally I've seen players leave the ball where it is, lay down then mark the first club length with a tee, move the club, mark the second length with a tee, then pick up the ball and drop it. What I thought I saw was Sergio pick up his ball first, *not* lay down the club all the way, I didn't see him even mark the first club length, then move the club to mark the second club length with a tee. I don't like the notion of fans calling in penalties, and I'm glad for Sergio that he won, and CBS was filming it really well and they certainly know how an unplayable should be handled, so it's really more of a matter of curiosity if I'm missing something or not. I wouldn't think that the 2 club lengths of an unplayable is handled differently from an immovable obstruction, but maybe I'm all wet.

I concede that what he did was different from what my understanding.... that you measure the two club lengths and mark before removing the ball and then remove the ball and drop... so what Sergio did was a bit odd... however a rules official was right there and I don't think the end result was any different so other than process I'm not sure there is much to complain about.

When he picked the ball up right away I though he was going to opt to take it back in line with the pin as far as he wanted and then drop but then he got out the club.

[ponyboy]

Ah the Masters...the lease competitive major yet its the most coveted. Gotta love seeing 50+ year olds playing who have zero chance of winning, lol. Glad to see Sergio pull through...finally got that monkey off his back.

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyboy Ah the Masters...the lease competitive major yet its the most coveted. Gotta love seeing 50+ year olds playing who have zero chance of winning, lol. Glad to see Sergio pull through...finally got that monkey off his back.

if you make the cut you have a chance to win

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyboy Ah the Masters...the lease competitive major yet its the most coveted.

I'd love to hear more about that claim, it's the least competitive why?

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack I'd love to hear more about that claim, it's the least competitive why?

+1

[ponyboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack I'd love to hear more about that claim, it's the least competitive why?

Because the masters has a lifetime exemption...meaning if you win the masters...you can play the masters until you die. If you're 90 and can still walk and swing a club...you can play. What that means is it takes away a slot from a healthy 25 year old pro who can actually be competitive. Say whatever you want but if Jack tee'd it up at the masters he'd be lucky to break 100...yet he's still allowed to play if he wants.

All the other majors have deeper fields in terms of talent. No one ever thinks about this because they're too busy oohing and ahhing on how pretty the course looks.

[frayne]

I love the Masters because it is the same track, year after year and only the conditions change. Personally if I had the choice to win only one major, it would be the Masters.

Not to mention that it is always the first major and kind of kicks off golf season in the US.

[SecondCor521]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyboy Because the masters has a lifetime exemption...meaning if you win the masters...you can play the masters until you die. If you're 90 and can still walk and swing a club...you can play. What that means is it takes away a slot from a healthy 25 year old pro who can actually be competitive. Say whatever you want but if Jack tee'd it up at the masters he'd be lucky to break 100...yet he's still allowed to play if he wants. All the other majors have deeper fields in terms of talent. No one ever thinks about this because they're too busy oohing and ahhing on how pretty the course looks.

Emphasis mine.

Yes and no. There are a number of ways to qualify into the Masters, and whoever meets those qualifications and decides to play gets to play; the size of the field is not limited to a specific number of players. So, for example, whether Jordan Spieth or Tiger Woods decides to show up and play on their lifetime exemptions has no bearing on whether the winner of the Shell Houston Open gets to play also.

That being said, Augusta National probably reserves the right to change the qualifications from year to year, and I read an article saying that they like to keep the field size around 100 or less, so if, over time, all the past Masters winners decided to show up and play, they could indirectly affect Augusta National's decision about the qualifications and thus deprive someone of a slot.

I do agree with you that the course is really pretty.

[Music Lover]

I believe that only the top 50 world rankings are guaranteed a spot in the field, along with past Masters winners (including those too old to be competitive), and also those who get a 5 year (I think??) exemption for winning a previous major, plus those who have won on the PGA tour in the last year. It is one of the weakest PGA events as most events allow in at least the top 125, and most majors will attract at least 95 of the top 100 in the field.

[John Galt III]

I was surprised by the paucity of commercials! Anyone else notice?

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyboy Ah the Masters...the lease competitive major yet its the most coveted. Gotta love seeing 50+ year olds playing who have zero chance of winning, lol. Glad to see Sergio pull through...finally got that monkey off his back. Quote: Originally Posted by ponyboy Because the masters has a lifetime exemption...meaning if you win the masters...you can play the masters until you die. If you're 90 and can still walk and swing a club...you can play. What that means is it takes away a slot from a healthy 25 year old pro who can actually be competitive. Say whatever you want but if Jack tee'd it up at the masters he'd be lucky to break 100...yet he's still allowed to play if he wants. All the other majors have deeper fields in terms of talent. No one ever thinks about this because they're too busy oohing and ahhing on how pretty the course looks. Quote: Originally Posted by Music Lover I believe that only the top 50 world rankings are guaranteed a spot in the field, along with past Masters winners (including those too old to be competitive), and also those who get a 5 year (I think??) exemption for winning a previous major, plus those who have won on the PGA tour in the last year. It is one of the weakest PGA events as most events allow in at least the top 125, and most majors will attract at least 95 of the top 100 in the field.

I'm not sure how having the 51st thru 125th ranked players makes other events more competitive, but OK. Occasionally yes, but more often not. If you could show us how often that group wins other majors, or any other events where the top 50 are playing for that matter, it might add credibility to your POV.

As for the legacy players, if they're no longer competitive they get to fly home Fri night like many other tournaments.

http://www.cbssports.com/golf/news/t...-open-winners/

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt III I was surprised by the paucity of commercials! Anyone else notice?

not really but they didn't have that many

[ponyboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack I'm not sure how having the 51st thru 125th ranked players makes other events more competitive, but OK.

Uhh...because they're better golfers at the moment. Pretty cut and dry.

Tiger woods can play in the masters if he wants. Hes currently ranked 780 in the world. There would be a better chance of world ranked 125 winning than tiger woods who is ranked at 780. Tiger can barely walk let along swing a club. Make sense?

[Music Lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack I'm not sure how having the 51st thru 125th ranked players makes other events more competitive, but OK. If you could show us how many times that group wins other majors, or any other events where the top 50 are playing for that matter, it might make something of your POV. As for the legacy players, if they're no longer comoetitivd they get to fly home Fri night like many other tournaments. The average world ranking of US Open winners - CBSSports.com

The talent on the PGA field is deep and those ranked 50 - 100 can win in any given week. A couple of lucky shots combined with a hot putter and #98 can be competitive that week. Take him out of the field and there are less people to beat...the best players only have to beat 10 people with a hot putter instead of 20.

[ponyboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Music Lover I believe that only the top 50 world rankings are guaranteed a spot in the field, along with past Masters winners (including those too old to be competitive), and also those who get a 5 year (I think??) exemption for winning a previous major, plus those who have won on the PGA tour in the last year. It is one of the weakest PGA events as most events allow in at least the top 125, and most majors will attract at least 95 of the top 100 in the field.

Dont bother trying to explain. I have a feeling there are some on here who have an opinion and never golfed before. Or you have your run of the mill hackers who cant break 100 yet seem to know everything about golf.

[Music Lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt III I was surprised by the paucity of commercials! Anyone else notice?

The Masters committee only allows I think 4 minutes of commercials per hour. They make far less money than they could, but they do it by choice. The Masters is private and not an actual PGA event...in fact, there is a corresponding PGA event going on at the same time.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack I'm not sure how having the 51st thru 125th ranked players makes other events more competitive, but OK. Occasionally yes, but more often not. If you could show us how often that group wins other majors, or any other events where the top 50 are playing for that matter, it might add credibility to your POV. Quote: Originally Posted by ponyboy Uhh...because they're better golfers at the moment. Pretty cut and dry.

Obviously not better than the top 50 "at the moment" where the winner will come from more often than not. Who else is there outside the top 50 won't make any difference more often than not, they're mostly going home Fri night anyway.

I started playing and following golf in the mid-60's. The only two rounds over 100 I've shot since I was a teenager were on Cog Hill and Muirfield both playing from the tips, but that doesn't mean anything - not sure why you went there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponyboy I have a feeling there are some on here who have an opinion and never golfed before. Or you have your run of the mill hackers who cant break 100 yet seem to know everything about golf.

Show us some evidence that winners often come from 51st thru 125th in tournaments where the top 50 are playing, and we'll gladly concede your point.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Music Lover The talent on the PGA field is deep and those ranked 50 - 100 can win in any given week. A couple of lucky shots combined with a hot putter and #98 can be competitive that week. Take him out of the field and there are less people to beat...the best players only have to beat 10 people with a hot putter instead of 20.

Of course, but please show us how often than happens when the top 50 are also playing so we can gauge how much difference it makes.