The Round Table with final thoughts on the Masters
Each week, we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.
In winning his second green jacket, Rory McIlroy certainly made things interesting, squandering a six-shot lead from Friday and almost blowing it with a wayward drive on the final hole on Sunday. In between were more ups and downs than Rory’s usual roller-coaster performances. It’s not a textbook winning formula but it makes for great TV. Will this Masters be remembered as one of the great ones?
Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): I think it’ll be remembered as one of the better ones. We all remember Jack in ’86, and Faldo (vs. Norman) in ’96, Tiger in 2001, Weir in 2003, Bubba in 2012, Scott in 2013, and McIlroy last year — those were truly memorable. But there have been many other great nail-biters along the way that have now faded from memory. And personally, I go back to having watched my first Masters in 1957 (winner Doug Ford, not the Premier), and there have been so many great victories and great cliff-hangers along the way. Rory’s victory this year belongs in that category – exciting, angst-ridden, popular winner for sure, but probably not one for the ages.
Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): I think it will go down as a really good entertaining Masters but not a classic. It had everything you want, look at the drama, Saturday and Sunday, back 9, leaderboard changes (4 different leaders on Sunday), top ranked players in the world all sniffing, a hole in one, hole outs for eagles, we got all the drama. Squandering a big lead is a thing at the Masters, they’re memorable, but so is recovering repeatedly, and surviving a chaotic final hole that’s Augusta National. Fans/Patrons were on the edge of their seat right to the final hole, what more can one want, other than a playoff?
Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: I don’t think it reaches “great”. Scoring was about average and the weather was perfect. I picked Rory, so I’m pleased. I thought Sluman did a good job as an announcer.
TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): I don’t think it will be top of mind for best Masters. Although he only won by one, he had room to play on the last, thankfully for him. That being said, the names at the top of the leaderboard are the who’s who of golf in 2026. It was great to see the World #1 make a weekend push, and fan favourite Justin Rose in contention again. It was a very good Masters Sunday but won’t be remembered as being a top 5 Masters overall in my mind.
Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: It will be remembered, but great? Not so much. It wouldn’t even have been interesting if Rory hadn’t forgotten how to hit driver or if Young hadn’t figured out which branches to hit. Among the memories will be Rory becoming the Celtic Seve; Scheffler’s unrequited magnificent weekend; and Rose’s inspiring run until very near the finish line. Viewers complained mightily online about CBS losing the balls on Rory and Young’s approaches on the 72nd hole. The whiners obviously not of a generation that started watching The Masters in black and white, with coverage starting on the 16th — on Saturday. They have no idea.
Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine: The great ones typically feature a head-to-head battle between two or more elite players. This one was more like a batch of lobsters all trying to get out of the pot and falling back in. It should have been over on Saturday. Only Scheffler distinguished himself on the weekend. Everyone else just hung on … or didn’t.
Much was made about the lack of rain leading up to the Masters and the firmness of the course, especially the greens. Augusta National has probably the most advanced system in the world for maintaining their golf course. Did they get it right?
Deeks: I think they got it righter than ever! The course looked majestic as always, but the greens seemed to be set at a fairer speed, with no balls (that I saw) landing on greens then spinning back 60 yards, which I think is silly and unfair.
Loughry: Augusta National got the setup right for the weather that was delivered (the only thing ANGC doesn’t control). Firm conditions exposed nerves and rewarded well struck shots and did not reward poorly struck shots, which is exactly what Augusta aims to do. The greens were demanding without becoming unfair in my opinion, and recovery shots mattered more than just pure raw power. Some hole locations bordered on severe (lots of feeder hole locations on Sunday though), but overall, the course asked championship‑level play and identified the most complete player in its Champion.
Schurman: I thought the course was in rough shape. There were a lot of ‘brown’ patches around and on the greens.
Rule: I think they got it right. 12 under is a good winning score, and there were many players in contention come the back nine on Sunday. I didn’t see any shots that were unfair to play due to course conditions, the course played firm and fast, but the greens were fair. It just took good shots to hold certain greens. I’m always amazed when players hit a long iron off a downslope to the 15th green and still hold that surface. As the Tour says, these guys are good. And they were challenged appropriately last weekend.
Quinn: Scheffler certainly didn’t think so, especially on Friday. But every event is different for the morning and afternoon groups, and this Masters was no different. Seemed that the greens were accepting great shots — as always — and rejecting marginal ones — as always — on a collection of greens like “no other.” There were 65s and an 80. Don’t think hi tech agronomy could — or should — change that.
Mumford: It was on the edge. I can’t recall seeing so may balls bouncing or rolling over the 13th and 15th greens. They were ‘al dente’. Great shots were still rewarded but marginal shots were overly penalized in my mind. I’d prefer to see Augusta National a little softer.
Prior to Sunday’s final, Phil Mickelson penned a comment bemoaning the lack of excitement on the 13th hole where there were virtually no eagle putts. According to Phil, the added distance on the hole had rendered it a three-shot hole. Is Phil correct?
Deeks: I don’t think the tournament suffered because 13 is longer. Yes, fewer eagle putts but I bet there was a similar number of birdies compared to other years. And I don’t think 11 or 15 have suffered because of added distance. And I don’t mean to be mean, but I didn’t mind Phil’s absence this year, to be honest.
Loughry: Ah Mickelson, just can’t help himself to focus on one hole versus the whole course or Championship. But I’ll say he’s partially right, lengthening the 13th has clearly changed how the hole played from the tips, but I don’t want to see 10-15 eagles made there each round. It cheapens eagles, they shouldn’t be a regular occurrence. Players still have chances to reach it in two with the right drive and conditions. But maybe Augusta could have pushed the tees forward on Saturday or Friday (I’d hesitate to do it on Sunday), just to mix the tee set up and let players have at it.
Schurman: It is a 3-shot hole. If you can hit a perfect drive the green is reachable from a lie with a ball 6″ above your feet to a small target with water across the front. If you lay-up you get one of the most awkward pitch shots in all of golf. One thing I noticed and liked is how short the fairway over the green was cut. Is that about the end of Phil?
Rule: I thought that when they purchased that extra land to extend the hole. I know they were worried about guys like Bryson cutting the corner and having wedge into the green, but at least many of the players could go for the green, which is one of the best risk-reward shots in the world of golf. I don’t think it needs much of a change but maybe move the tee up 20 yards on a couple of the days to make it more interesting. I think it’s the best hole on the course, and still a great hole when players have to lay up, but better when most at least have the option of taking it on with a long iron.
Quinn: Throughout his career, but more so lately, Phil blurts or types before any synapses have a chance. There were a tonne of second shots, great/good/bad, into 13. Superb tee shots were rewarded with 2nd shot looks, wayward ones — well except for Rory — were punished. Always self-absorbed, was Phil just bemoaning the current state of his game?
Mumford: As noted in my answer to the previous question, the firmness of the greens may be at fault as much as the added distance. I suppose ANGC was never happy that players could hit wedges and short irons into 13 for their second shot but eagle putts are exciting and that has always been part of the Masters drama. The hole still demands a good drive but it sure was strange to see so many laying up for a short pitch.
