Jeff hits it on the head, proficient golfers don't concern themselves w/frontal hazards for the most part. Plus, golf is predominently an air game these days (with much shorter grass) so reflecting on Ross etc. is just an exercise in nostalga. Rarely do we see players intentially playing a bump and run from iron distances. Most run-ons are on longer approach shots (for many different reasons - and most no good ones). So, we can surmise that the only players who have need for wide, unencumbered approaches are the same ones who are fearful of frontal hazards. So, why add insult to injury and give them addition grief when they finally get on the green.
Actually, it is more prudent for the architect to arrive at a solution that can, at the same time, be as forgiving for the less proficent player while challanging the better better player. This is evidenced by a pencent for back to front sloping greens and no bunkers behind greens. But just as good players would back-spin their shots off the front, we have the problem with water draining to the fronts and saturating the soil in the approaches - leading to a host of other issues. With the super-short greens and double digit greens speeds, the way various shots react on putting surfaces are different today than they were 20 years ago, let alone 80. Putting enough back to front slope to stop a hot run-on isn't prudent in many cases. Not only will putts carry off the front of the green, but the popped up rears of the greens look foolish. So architects now tend to put ridges and decks into greens to provide some backstop while leaving the rest of the green at managable slopes. These ridges and decks also partition the various areas of the greens requiring the more proficient players to be more precise with their aerial attack.