Caddie's Role:A few days of post-major wind down gave me time to reflect on what was the toughest Masters I have experienced. You would not last long if you had to endure those conditions each week. All of my colleagues felt the same way too.

There has been a tradition at the Masters that double figures under par wins the Green Jacket. This respectable score was shattered by Tiger Woods in 1997 (18-under) and ever since the "tradition" has become less traditional.

Rough was introduced to the previously widest fairways in golf, then the course architects were called in to lengthen all of the holes. Trees have been added in the interim to narrow the driving area for the world's longest hitters.

Phil Mickelson won his second Green Jacket with a seven-under-par total last year and two weeks ago Zach Johnson won with a one-over-par total. So the question must be asked. Is the course too tough for the best in the world and have the organisers gone too far in their punitive course set-up?

At the end of our second practice round my boss, Retief Goosen, suggested level par would win the 71st Masters. On a new golf course nobody is too sure what the winning score may be. On a track like Augusta National, which is familiar to annual contestants like Goosen, there is an innate awareness of how the course was and played in previous years, and how that has been altered in the present year. Given the analytical nature of my boss, I knew he knew what he was talking about. He had based his judgment on the firmness of the greens and the weather that was forecast for the remainder of the week; it was going to be dry, windy and cold. The forecast was very accurate with only a light sprinkle of rain barely covering the course on the Wednesday evening.

Although Augusta at almost 7,500 yards is not lacking distance there is only one effective way to challenge a top golfer and that is by presenting a hard and fast course. Given Augusta's undulating greens, this presented an even greater challenge than at any other major course.

Nothing happens by chance at Augusta, and the likelihood is the green-jacketed gentlemen that run the Masters decided it was time for these constant par-breakers to learn a little humility. In recent years the problem has been that of extracting moisture from the greens, which has been aided though the sophisticated drainage system. The sprinklers were seemingly set at off until Saturday night when the severity of the putting surfaces was most apparent after the highest average round recorded at 77 during the third round.

Professional golf, of course, should entertain its spectators.

The Masters has in the past been an amphitheatre of drama, met with the vocal appreciation of its patrons. Nowhere in the golfing world is the stage set more dramatically than at the aptly named Amen Corner of the 11th, 12th and 13th holes. There is a greater distance between the crowd and the players at Amen Corner than at any other course yet the intensity is unparalleled.

The volume had been turned down considerably this year. There were a lot of expectant "ooohs" followed mostly by disappointed "aaahs". Augusta had been muted not by a sudden lack of skill by the golfers but by a less exciting reward system set up by the organisers. Pars were the new birdies in Augusta.

I do not think this is such a bad thing. However, on speaking to people in the crowd and those watching on television the consensus was that it was not really that entertaining to watch. The majority preferred birdie golf or at least realistic birdie chances being created. The average golfer knows all about putting for par. They don't really want to see the true exponents struggle to do the same.

Majors are a media feast. There are millions of words written about them, with traditionally non-golfing scribes adding a welcome outside view to what can sometimes be a mundane sport. I got to read some professional opinions, trying to make their sense of what must have seemed like a goalless draw in a cup final with six attempted shots at goal in the 90 minutes and extra-time.

Some pined for the glory days of Nicklaus, Palmer and Watson of the 1960s and 1970s or in recent decades the finesse of Ballesteros, Langer or Faldo. Of course it is pure nostalgia.

Despite the equipment changes and improved standard of living and therefore play today, none of the above would have broken par on such speedy greens and inaccessible pins as played a couple of weeks ago. The speed of the greens has increased dramatically in recent years.

There is also an indirect gripe that such an "unknown" in Zach Johnson won the Green Jacket. Perhaps we are all programmed to expect the superstars to win the big ones. There is a suggestion given the size of the average purse the competitors have lost their winning edge. Holing a putt under pressure is still more difficult than making a print deadline. I have seen the fear in golfers' eyes and heard the tremble of their voice too many times to be complacent about how difficult it is to win.

There is a depth of talent on the US Tour in particular that provides way more potential winners each week than in the Golden Bear era. Golf is different now but no less talented than 25 years ago. The organisers present the weekly challenge, the players make the most of the circumstances.

The contenders wilted quicker than azalea petals in a cold-snap on the back nine at Augusta. This was not due to lack of talent or commitment. It was purely the demands presented by the course and its guardians are daunting even to the best.