The lead up to the Masters never fails to conjure excitement among the golfing masses on a scale that is unmatched in our sport, but once again the television coverage has proven to be a let down.
I shared that I was fed up with the Masters tv coverage twelve months ago, and while there have been some improvements with the announcement of a new broadcast deal with Amazon Prime, I still spent the first few hours of day one feeling underwhelmed.
As I outlined in our Masters preview, which you can watch below, I can't believe we still censor our flagship event.
While I can appreciate the importance of tradition at the Masters and understand the part that exclusivity plays in the narrative, I believe shielding full coverage of our main event is not good for the game...
I Find The Masters TV Coverage So Frustrating
I may sound like a bit of a broken record, but I am tired of the excitement around the Masters being completely sapped out of me by the false start created by the early coverage.
I have said in the past that you wouldn't see the first twenty minutes of the World Cup Final or the Super Bowl being withheld or restricted to highlights only, so why are we holding back when other Majors in golf already offer wall-to-wall, first ball to last ball coverage.
My main gripe at the 2026 Masters Tournament is one that has lingered for some time - featured group coverage.
This isn't a criticism of Sky Sports, Amazon Prime or any other broadcaster - as I believe they do their best with the scope and content they are given. The problem lies with the current parameters set around the broadcasting of one golf's biggest events.
The Masters app is one of the best around, providing video coverage of every shot hit by every player and perhaps, bizarrely, represents the best option for how to watch the Masters.
It has its flaws, like the delay in getting the footage uploaded, but it still provides a greater insight to tournament play than the tedious early featured group coverage.
Also, I don't want to watch every shot on my phone. I want to sit back, turn the television on and watch the action unfold - including all the turbulence, jeopardy and drama.
The app is a great supplement, but it's not a suitable replacement for a fully immersive viewing experience.
In the early coverage today, Patrick Reed made two eagles to surge into a two shot lead after eight holes.
I only saw a handful of his shots because he wasn't part of the featured groups, instead having to make do with a fleeting appearance when he passed through the 'featured holes'.
The same can be said for top-10 player in the world Tommy Fleetwood, who was contending at the top of the leaderboard - but you could be forgiven for missing that based on the limited coverage.
The same thing happened last year, when golf fans fumed over a lack of Bryson DeChambeau on the tv coverage - meaning we missed one of the early leaders dazzling on the biggest stage.
I'd love to hear you thoughts on the matter again, as I'd be interested to see if your opinion has changed or remained the same twelve months on, so drop me a comment at the bottom of this article to join the conversation.
My stance is clear, while featured groups are a good option... they shouldn't be the default.
Coverage has to be reactive to the changing leaderboard, dynamic to the jostling of the field and able to abandon the plan of showing every shot from amateur Mason Howell or a struggling Fitzpatrick - in favour of following guys seven or eight shots better off on the day.
It's not that I don't want to watch those players, it's more that I want to watch more of the field - especially those that are surging... not just the 'golden boys' of featured group coverage.
At the time of writing this, I literally heard Butch Harmon commentate on how Fleetwood made another birdie to get to four-under, followed by a swift check of the leaderboard, but there was no actual footage of the putt that got him there for some time.
We know that modern golf television coverage has the ability and capacity to cover a larger pool of players, like it does at the Open Championship, and evidenced by every player in the field being recorded taking every shot on the app, so it really comes down to a conscious decision to prevent it.
In the US, viewers are expected to have multiple paid subscriptions to watch the entirety of the coverage this week - limiting inclusivity and increasing cost for the average golf fan.
It almost feels like an extension of the gatekeeping we see with the main feed coverage.
In reality, the television coverage is totally wrong for many reasons, but the fault lies with those making the decisions to protect this 'less is more' approach.
I am certain that just as many people would pay for a ticket to Augusta National if you were to show full coverage from ball one, as the majesty and beauty of the location is the stuff of dreams for so many. It's a true bucket list experience.
But, disadvantaging those who aren't fortunate enough to attend is unfair. Many will argue that the Masters doesn't need to change, because it's the Masters at Augusta National Golf Club, and in many ways I am inclined to agree.
However, the television coverage is not befitting of the pinnacle of our sport. While I appreciate the additional two hours of full coverage on day one and two, as part of the new broadcast deal with Amazon, we still have a long way to go.
As I publish this, the full main coverage has just got underway and things have already improved drastically - I just question why we can't see the brilliance of the Masters in its entirety from the start.
