Architects Roundtable: 2023 Masters

Pro golfers and pundits frequently share their opinions on Augusta National Golf Club, but what do actual course architects think?

I posed four questions about Augusta National to three architects I admire: Mike Cocking, co-founder of OCM Golf with Geoff Ogilvy and Ashley Mead; James Duncan, a seasoned Coore & Crenshaw associate overseeing the Brambles project in Northern California; and Andy Staples, the designer behind the Meadowbrook Country Club renovation and the Community Links concept.

Read on for their insights, presented in a roundtable format.

1. What is your favorite green at Augusta National?

James Duncan: Hard to choose just one! If I had to pick a favorite, it might be No. 2. Its outline is so distinctive, and I love how that shape and the slopes of the green combine to encourage and reward feeding shots towards the hole, as evidenced not least by Lous Oosthuizen’s final round albatross in 2012.

Mike Cocking: 14. I’m always a sucker for great bunkerless greens, as I think they’re much harder to get right than when you can incorporate more formal hazards. All the strategy must really be done through contour, plus it’s generally more difficult to create an appealing-looking approach when you can’t rely on bunkers or say, a creek, to add some visual interest.

The 14th has also done a brilliant job of staying relevant throughout the years, even though golfers are now playing shorter clubs and typically flying the ball at the green instead of hitting a longer, running approach as I suspect was the original intent. I always thought it looked interesting even as a kid watching on TV, but I really fell in love with that green when I eventually saw it first hand. The challenge is to build it somewhere!

Andy Staples: It’s probably a popular choice, but I have to say 14. Its incredible slope, along with being bunkerless, provides tremendous strategy and interest. Every time I’ve seen it, I just stare at it. I try to use it as inspiration for my designs. It also provides proof that a severely sloping green with that awesome false front can be not only functional but considered great. Greens like this just don’t happen enough anymore! It takes a trustworthy owner to take risks like that these days.

The 14th green at Augusta National (courtesy of Augusta National)

2. If an aspiring architect were to attend the Masters this year, what would you tell her to pay attention to in the design and presentation of Augusta National?

Staples: I’d tell her to go right to the greens and learn how their slope and angles make for such strategy and interest. Nos. 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 17 jump out to me. Also notice how interesting and strategic short grass can be.

Duncan: First, check out the master class in routing a course on a hilly piece of property. Study the lovely sequence of uphill, downhill, and sidehill holes, using the best natural features along the way, notably Rae’s Creek.

Second, the relative scarcity of bunkers. Study how each bunker matters. They’re not fillers or eye candy.

Third, the bold, simple concepts for the holes and the greens. Each hole and green has its own striking personality, which is generally achieved by the simplest of means.

Fourth, the relative absence of rough and the simple mowing patterns.

Predictably, all four are straight out of the MacKenzie-Jones playbook on what constitutes good architecture for golf.

Cocking: There are so many takeaways from a visit to Augusta as an aspiring designer.

Pay close attention to the green complexes, and not just the more famous ones but greens like the first, third, fifth, and sixth, which are some of my favorites. Spend some time studying the relationship between the green designs, the placement of the hazards, and the width of the fairways in creating angles and strategy. Notice how the difference between a back left and a back right pin on a hole like the second completely alters the best angle for the approach. Look at the use of short grass: there are no strips of rough separating bunkers from the fairway as there are on so many parkland courses in the U.S. Also note some of the contours well short of the greens—the humps at the fifth, eighth, or 11th, which were built so that those playing a longer approach could use the slopes to help shoulder a ball toward the putting surface.

The 11th hole at Augusta National (courtesy of Augusta National)

Taking a deeper dive, look at how well the holes have been laid out over what is a really hilly site. Look at how MacKenzie managed to get the golfer from the lowest section of the property, down near the 11th and 12th, back to the clubhouse by criss-crossing his way up the big hill to avoid too many difficult walks. Look at how well the course uses slope and the creek to add interest, avoiding the need for many fairway bunkers. Can you think of another major tournament venue with fairway bunkers on just one hole on the back nine? And yet it is perhaps the most entertaining nine holes in all golf. On a few holes, the slopes are also a reverse camber to the direction of the dogleg and green, making the tee shot and approach especially difficult (see: No. 2, especially with the pin on the left, as well as 9, 13, and 14).

But also look at the bigger picture. Augusta has such a wonderful feel. It’s a beautiful space. Trees are wonderfully distributed throughout the course to give the feeling of openness and to emphasize the views, but it’s also very intimate, with really short green-to-tee walks and holes that are, for the most part, quite close together.

3. What’s more challenging for an architect, in your opinion: consulting for a course with relatively few resources, or consulting for a club, like Augusta National, with an enormous amount of resources (and the attendant pressure from members and the public)?

Duncan: The latter, by a wide margin. Strong leadership is key, and they do a stellar job at Augusta National. They make bold moves and take heat for some of those, but they are also prepared to change if, on reflection, they feel the need for course correction. Easy to say but very hard to do, especially with that level of public scrutiny.

Staples: My honest answer is that both are challenging! In my experience, at clubs with less resources, it can be easier to come up with risky, fun ideas but much harder to bring them to fruition or get them built in a quality manner. The clubs with huge resources present much greater scrutiny over the ideas and the issue of whether the design solutions fit the course or membership. Getting plans approved takes a lot of effort. When given the green light, projects tend to be much easier to implement, with some exceptions. (Did I answer the question?)

Cocking: That’s a great question. We’ve worked with all sorts of clubs, including the two scenarios you’ve mentioned. I’d probably say a club with fewer resources is the more challenging, as you may not ever get to a position where you can realize the potential of the course. At least with a larger profile club and a good budget you might be able to make some major changes, such as re-routing a part of the course.

And to be honest, I think we feel the same pressure from memberships in both instances. Maybe not so much from the public, but at each club, the cost of a renovation is relative, really. $20 million for a wealthy club might be the same financial burden as $1 or $2 million for a small club, and therefore both will be just as critical if they feel the results aren’t up to their or their members’ expectations.

4. If you could alter one hole at Augusta National, which hole would it be, and what would you do?

Staples: 11 is a sneaky hole that gets a bit lost in the Amen Corner conversation. I’ve not played the course yet, but I think this hole has a few shortcomings.

First, the water along the left rarely comes into play, based on a generous bail-out to the right. There’s also a back right bunker that is never played from. I’d love to see the right side of the green complex tweaked to tighten up the strategy and to make players have to aim more for the green. I’d also like to see the green modified a bit to put the water more in play—maybe a ridge or spine that could hold balls up along the middle of the green to bring the bunker into play or run into the water. I’m also not a fan of the pond there, and restoring a natural creek feature would be cool.

The 11th green at Augusta National in 1935

I’m enamored with the centerline bunkers that MacKenzie had on 11 in his original plans. I also think No. 10 is visually striking because of this type of hazard. Holes 2, 11, and 14 appear to have bunkers built into the middle of the fairway from the tee to either provide visual deception or shot-making strategy, similar to what exists on 10. I’d love to see the bunkers restored in the middle of the 11th fairway to set up the strategy off the tee and eliminate the need for the trees on the right.

Last year’s tree removal was a good start, but making the fairway wider to the right, and protecting the right side approach with those old centerline bunkers would place a premium on angle into the green based on pin location.

Cocking: I’d have to say the 11th. It’s a wonderful green, and I’ve no problem with how the hole has been lengthened over the years, as its critical that players hit a long-iron approach, ideally using the mound short and right (as I mentioned earlier).

It’s a fairly common discussion point but my main issue is the narrowing down the right. It’s better now than it was a few years ago but could still be widened a little more. I guess the question is whether or not a ground hazard might be worth adding. The back nine tends to be dominated by holes favoring shots shaped right to left. Amazingly, there really aren’t any fairway bunkers other than on 18, and these are on the outside of the dogleg, so 11 could offer the chance to add some variety with something built on the inside and into the hill on the right. There was once actually a couple of small central bunkers here and that could also be an interesting proposition, although in our experience, central bunkers are rarely well received and maybe that’s why they didn’t last very long!

Duncan: I’d throw that question to Dr. MacKenzie. As most Fried Egg readers probably know, MacKenzie died just after the course was completed, and significant changes were made just a few years after his death. If he went back out there tomorrow and could pick one thing to change, what might it be? My guess is he’d be happy with many of the changes but might be wondering what happened to the old boomerang green on the ninth.

The ninth green at Augusta National in 1935

Many thanks to Andy, James, and Mike for participating. Do you have your own answers to the questions? Let us know in the comment section below.