I don't think the fact that he broke the four day record means all that much in the grand scheme. I think the fact that the course was playing the same for everyone, and he won by 4 strokes, and really never allowed anyone to get close to him is what's truly impressive. I was one of the first folks to point out how easy the course was playing, but let's not make it sound like it's the local municipal either. If it were that easy, then why wasn't the rest of the field, arguably one of the best in the history of the Masters, able to score better and get within four shots of the kid?
To me, a four shot victory on an easy course is harder to do than a 6 or 7 shot victory on a harder course, because eventually, there is a ceiling. Guys aren't going to go out and shoot -25 at Augusta no matter how easy it's playing. It seems to me folks are saying that for this to compare to be truly impressive and historic, Spieth should have blitzed the field, but that would have required him shooting like -27 or something, and that's not realistic on that course unless they start taking out some hills and flattening the greens. Yeah, it was playing easy, but it was playing easy for everyone, and only one guy won by 4 shots. That's not to be ignored entirely.
To me, a four shot victory on an easy course is harder to do than a 6 or 7 shot victory on a harder course, because eventually, there is a ceiling. Guys aren't going to go out and shoot -25 at Augusta no matter how easy it's playing. It seems to me folks are saying that for this to compare to be truly impressive and historic, Spieth should have blitzed the field, but that would have required him shooting like -27 or something, and that's not realistic on that course unless they start taking out some hills and flattening the greens. Yeah, it was playing easy, but it was playing easy for everyone, and only one guy won by 4 shots. That's not to be ignored entirely.