[Dr. Donald Blair Morris]

JJSE and JIM,

So we are curteous to the amatuers but we tie the hands of the pros? What game are you two playing? How do we practically monitor the curteous, mushing of the sand? Enough of the fingerpointing, tell me how in practical terms you can enforce this curteous mushing and how will you arrive at the standard? If there is no standard, then a pro might end up in a deep rut left byAndy Bean as he drags his size 14 shoes through a bunker at the end of another long round. Is this your idea of golf? Just a question. Now have a terrific day.

By the way, for a group that likes to point out how concerned golfers are for fairness, I have never heard so much concern for what is fair or unfair anywhere else as I do here from GCA participants. So who is most concerned? The player shooting birdie or the designer who scratches his head trying desperately to defend par? How about disallowing tees when teeing off? How about making pros wear wool jackets like they used to as a means of hampering their backswings? Of course these restrictions should only be for the pros. We would not ourselves want to restrict our own games out of a sense of, shall we say, fairness? Again, make it a good day!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dr. Who?

If you want to use a rake, be my guest.
If all sandy areas on a course become through-the-green it eliminates all questions on how to proceed. If these sandy areas are less than pristine and footprints are present then so what, they're hazards!
I think very few contributors here are worried about what is or isn't fair. Golf would suffer immensely if random nature of playing a game over uneven terrain were missing.

[Dr. Who?]

Jim,

Not all hazards are created equal. Not in design, not in the rules, not in the way they are played.

This just in: World Music Critics Complain About Pianists' Skill

Classical pianists have become so skillful that some critics are calling for the piano keys to be reconfigured so that these professionals cannot have such an easy go of it. Some are asking that the professionals, who have admittedly honed their skills through hours of practice, play cross handed or actually give up using some of their fingers. Stay tuned (no pun intended).

[tonyt]

Yes, back in the days when bunkers were "positioned' around the golf course by animals retreating from poor weather, they had a random nature, a pure hazard quality about them that admittedly, is far different to what we see today. But neccessity is the mother of invention, and Gene found that his design of a rather nifty new stick could often counter the perils of the sand.

Thus designers looked to water, more deliberate use of encroaching rough, mounding and other uninviting terrain etc to replace the bunker as a potentially penal feature. Through this evolution, just like over a hundred years ago, we still have holes with good areas to play to, safe areas, more difficult spots, and terrible spots. The bunker's role in that picture may have changed, but so be it.

One way to slightly toughen up the bunkers is with new sand. Some critics of the pros should be aware that for a vast majority of US, European and Australian Tour events, new sand is generously provided for the players' frustrations. When I was caddying, I would have loved a dollar for every Tuesday curse of the player walking into a fluffy, recently filled trap. They really are more difficult than the more firmly bedded down versions we play on a few months later.

[James Edwards]

Dr CBM,

How many shots do you lose if you go in a water hazard?  I bet you drop your ball (maybe a few choice words) and play on under a shot penalty.... Hit it in a bunker and suddenly, everyone is up in arms if the bunker, isn't perfectly smooth and advantageous to there precious scorecard.

It's a haazzzzaaarrrrrrddd!  What does hazard mean in a dictionary?  Hazard:- A Hazard is a bunker found on golf courses that are always fairly raked and shallow in depth with little lip, and par must be easily salvaged every time.

Read my post 4 before.  I don't see why professionals hit at bunkers - answer the question? or give us a solution? or change the definition?

Just a question..Have a great day!

[Dr. Sandman]

JJSE--"everybody up in arms"--that is an exaggeration. I don't doubt that a few people looking for something to complain about are up in arms about a lot of things relating to golf courses. But "everybody'? Exaggerations don't make for good arguments.

I don't see the problem with hitting toward a bunker. I am sorry that that concept has you "up in arms." Hoping a pro will hit into a footprint does not sound like strategic golf design to me. But you do what you gotta do. Here's hoping they will get a little stomach flu too just to take a little distance off their long irons.

[TEPaul]

Dr. Sandman says;

"I don't see the problem with hitting toward a bunker. I am sorry that that concept has you "up in arms."

Dr. Sandman;

You and a number of other golfers don't see a problem with that it seems. Like many others you apparently don't really see the forest from the tree or the tree from the forest either. All that's being discussed here are various ways to hopefully return a bit more of its necessary function to the bunker feature in golf. The bunker feature happened to be one of architecture's primary ways to create strategy. To create strategy the bunker feature sort of needs to be avoided. If that doesn't happen because bunkering becomes so strategically non-functional golfers actually begin to play their shots into bunkers on purpose various strategies become weakened and sort of non-functional too.

Is that what you want?

[A_Clay_Man]

Tonyt makes a valid point about the amount of sand and I agree less sand is easier. But for the average joe I think they think the opposite.

As for the archies turning to water as a penal design feature, I think that most of those man made lakes and ponds seem so manufactured that it does take away from the subconscience feeling that makes natural golf so spiritual. Exceptions would be less manicure water hazards ala the 8th at Spanish when the reeds are long and seeing the green is sporadic or the ponds at Spyglass. Juxtaposed to the almost fake feeling the lake on #10 at the stadium course (pga west) gives you when you make the turn. WHen Tommy and I toured it last, I was struck by the thought of 'where the hell did that come from'. Grant it, as you play the back the introduction had to happen sometime. But with the rock lining so uniform it just seems forced. MO

[Dr. Sandman]

TPaul,

Golf greens have contours to add strategy. The pros are very good at putting over and around those contours. So what are going to do to make the pros pay for being able to putt well?

You say that you want to add strategy to the bunker. Funny, the way I see it is that the pros have definitely made the bunker more strategic. By practicing the sand shot to the point where they might get up and down half the time (notice I did not say all the time, we are not talking about an onslaught of bunker saves any more than we are talking about pros holing every birdie putt they face) they HAVE ADDED OPTIONS TO THEIR GAMES! Yes, they now (I say now, but the pros have been good at sand play forever) have another way, an OPTION, of playing an approach shot. Do you have a problem with that? If you cannot see how more options add more strategy then you cannot see the bunker for the sand, with all due respect.

Here is how I see this. The golf designer designs in a bunker. We will call that bunker a "lemon". The golf designer says to his friend, "Now watch when the pro hits in that bunker, when he gets the lemon. He cannot readily eat the lemon. Watch the sour look on his face."

The pro then evolves his digestive system and makes lemonade out of the lemon. The friend looks at the golf designer and finds that it is he who has the sour look. So the golf designer, not content to allow the pro to hone his skill and exhibit his talent, the golf designer gets up in arms and decrys the pro's use of the sand and decides to add something to the lemonade. But what? Grapefruit juice? True, the grapefruit is sour and the pros will have to work harder to digest it. But it will still be digestable. No, I suggest the golf designer go straight for the tastebuds way at the back of the mouth. Go ahead and just add your SOUR GRAPES.

A few other ways to make the game more "strategic":

Since this bunker issue is really about making a mountain out of a molehill (the pros' abilities to get up and down here is grossly exaggerated), how about actual molehills in the fairway?

Maybe we should all be allowed to yell "Noonan!" when the pros are putting.

Speaking of sand consistency, there is always quicksand instead of the firmer version currently being used on the tour.

Rather than making the bunkers so deep that the subsequent shot to the green is blind, why not just blindfold the pros to begin with?

And my favorite would be to let loose a thousand cats before and during each tournament. We all know what cats do in the sand.  

All kidding aside, have a great day!

[ForkaB]

Dr. S

Great stuff.

We'll stop those "card and pencil" guys in their tracks if we adopt your ideas!  Someday, some genius will come along that finds a way to make golf a complete game of chance, no skill required or even encouraged.  That'll be a new "Golden Age" now, won't it?

The precursor of this putative Messiah?  None other than our old pal Rees Jones.  I've played his Tallamore in NC, and the use of llamas for caddies there is remarkably prescient.  Probably not as good as as CB's "herd of elephants," mind you, but those Andean loopers and poopers could surely take the "fair" out of golf if allowed to fun free.  Unless to you "fair" means midwestern county fair............

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dr.,
Short par 3 on a top 100 course, green slopes from back to front, deep frontal bunker where a shot could once remain stick on a downhill or uphill lie or in some heavy stuff around the edge of the bunker. Percentage shot to a front placement was to the center of the green with spin. No spin just left a longer putt.
Bunker floor was raised 4, maybe 5'. The edges were cleaned up and the floor is more level. The shot directly at a front pin now offers little worry as the fronting bunker is now easy to get out of and get it close.
Another option? The hole was much better when going in that front bunker was more of an oops-tion!

[Dr. ??????]

Jim,

That example does not really change my mind in the least. If the golfer wants to bail out into that bunker instead of hitting into the rough or whatever on a short par 3, then he/she needs to move up a set of tees. Let me know what percentage of golfers are aiming for or missing toward that bunker when you get a chance (as that is at least part of this discussion). I do trust you that you believe that the hole was better before the changes. And I don't have a problem with that idea. (I assume in either case the bunker was raked?)Each hole has to have its unique difficulty as part of the course. But shallow or deep, I don't see the value in pursuing a strategic golf philosophy that puts any emphasis at all on footjoy footprints. I just don't see it.

[TEPaul]

Dr. Sandman:

I read your post carefully and other than your fascinatating description of lemons and lemonade sounding a good deal like Glenn W. Turner when one wants to discover why the game has become relatively diluted they should also read your post carefully.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dr. Soandso,

You misread me. Before the bunker was softened and the floor raised it was rare to challenge a front pin as that bunker in front was something to think about. The shot was to the middle with spin and let the ball come back down the slope or if no spin, stay in the middle of the green.
The bunker was a lot deeper, had a more ragged edge and the sand was more uneven than in the present configuration.
The bunker now is a flat bottomed affair at nearly green height. The front pin will get shot at more directly now because there is little risk to a shot hit short that finds this so called "bunker".

I've never advocated zero maintenance, just less fuss.  Go play WW and you'll see what I'm talking about. You may get a less than perfect lie in a greenside sand pit but it will make a better player out of you in the long run. My major concern is over what I see as the softening of bunkers due to maintenance and fairness issues. If the procedure for taking relief when in a bunker were brought in line with those for the other hazards then I think we'd see tougher bunkers. If the rules don't change then the next best alternative is to remove the hazard designation, turn them into "waste" areas and play them through the green. This allows the poor sand player a way out without returning to the tee, same as for any other hazard, allowing designers to be less concerned with fairness issues and letting them create more hazardous hazards.
It also would lessen the need for maintenance by the crews because we'd get used to a "carry in, carry out" mentality and would not be so preoccupied with pristine sand traps. This frees up the crews for more meaningful work, rather than going around in circles on their Sand-Pros. It is so damn silly to me to know that many bunkers are built on the turning radius of a Sand- Pro. I'd rather be chest deep in a nasty, unraked pit with the green at eye level than be standing in a shallow, flatbottom bunker that's maintained like a Zen garden which my 79 year old Mother-in-law who's never picked up a club could get out of with her damn cane!
If you don't see that then we really need not continue the discussion as I have no more to say, thank you very much.
By the way, don't ever change your mind, I'm sure someone loves you just as you are.
    

[Dr. Someonelovesme]

Jim,

Someone loves me just as I am? How nice of you to care. I take it that your mother-in-law loves you despite your characterization of her cane.

Now on to the point of this thread, at least I think it is the point as I read it in the first post, which is to stop raking the sand for the pros. So here is the question I have for you: take the 12th at Augusta and tell me how that front bunker would be maintained for one month up to and including the tournament. Pay specific attention to the day of the tournament on which the flag is placed behind the bunker. Now, if you would, also tell me what would happen in this situation. I am in one of the first groups and I hit the ball into the bunker. My lie is buried somewhat in the face of the bunker. I dig in good and deep, hit my shot, do some mushing and leave a mess behind as I exit the bunker. So far so good. Tough lies all around for those who follow me. Is that what you are advocating?

What if I haven't mushed enough? Will we need a marshal at each hole to monitor the mushing? Maybe we should forego mushing altogether so that there can be no mistaking anyone's intention. But then we might get a lie where the ball is four inches deep in a dug-in footprint. The ball could even theoretically hit right into one of those footprints and have the sand cave in on top of it. So how do we deal with this?

[James Edwards]

Dr, Rich,

Next time you're playing a medal, (that is, if you play golf?) let me know what your playing partners react like if they find their ball in anything other than a perfectly raked bunker?  

"Up in Arms" - lets just see?  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dr. Itain'tmebabe,
We love each other dearly, even though she has threatened my un-shiny parts with that cane and I have threatened to never divorce her daughter.

You have your opinion, I have mine. Let's leave it at that. Thanks  

[Dr.]

Jim, that is a good compromise.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()