time to vote: furrowed bunkers, yes or no?

[Marty Bonnar]

No.
At least not in the form we saw them this weekend.

1. Horribly artificial tramlines in the sand - nice in Zen Gardens, but probably not on golf courses.
2. Unrealistic to believe that ordinary golf courses and golfers would EVER maintain bunkers this well.
3. Trade-in values on SandPros would PLUMMET...

FBD.

[Marty Bonnar]

Thanks -- now do you have any suggestions for how to get Diet Coke out of one's nose?

Too, too funny, that.

Yeah, Mark,
try snorting with FAT COKE in the future...!

FBD.

[Ryan Farrow]

Yes. and Yes only at a certain course. and no for the rest.

[paul cowley]

Yes, if they are raked in a natural pattern that each bunker has....not in a directional manner to control the lie.

Non directional furrowed raked bunkers and un raked bunkers have the most similarities as per play character.....un raked or minimally maintained bunkers are less costly to maintain [why did I bother to type that?].

[paul cowley]

Redanman ...what are those appealing little things floating generally next to your name...a cocktail party in perspective or aliens on parade?.......just curious

[Chris Kane]

YES and YES.  They are meant to be a hazard.

[TEPaul]

"Redanman ...what are those appealing little things floating generally next to your name...a cocktail party in perspective or aliens on parade?.......just curious  

Jeeesus, I'm just now  getting up off the floor I was laughing so hard.

[Jim Sweeney]

No and No.

Unnatural, adds expense, will slow play- if golfers would even consider trying to rake the furrows back at all.

Keep bunker maintanence to a minimum and teach golfers to respect the course and each other by raking as needed, just like it's been done for decades.

[Joe Hancock]

I'd have to go with no and no.

I'd like to see less intense bunker maintenance along with more use of indigenous sands. That should provide more variability in what the tour guys see.

Joe

[jeffwarne]

kudos to Jack for trying something to put the hazard back into a bunker.
That said they looked silly and fake.
Watching the guy slowly,meticulously rake the furrows seemed to defeat the purpose of the furrows.

yes to furrows, but rake more randomly
yes to fewer,more penal  bunkers
yes to less maintenance

[Jason McNamara]

Yes.

No (pace of play).

Jason

[Rob_Waldron]

That is just what golf course owners need....additional maintenance expense to hand rake furrows. Be sure to instruct the maintanance staff to rake fairway bunkers East to West (or is that West to East?) and greenside bunkers North to South.

BTW I am sure all players will take the time to meticulously return the bunkers to their furrowed condition after they hack their ball out of the sand.

Of course we will need to add an additional category to the USGA course rating system to account for Furrowgate!

Can I say NNNNNOOOOOOO to both any louder???

[Mark_Fine]

The greenside bunkers were so perfectly manicured yesterday at Canoe Brook for the U.S. Open qualifying that it looked like you could practice putt in them.  Some "hazards" they were    

[Dan Kelly]

yes to furrows, but rake more randomly
yes to fewer,more penal  bunkers

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!

[ForkaB]

yes to furrows, but rake more randomly
yes to fewer,more penal  bunkers

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!

Nice Molly Bloom imitation, Dan...........

[JESII]

Can we find a link to that video Rich?

[ForkaB]

I doubt it Jim.  Could I offer you a slug instead?

[JESII]

Slug???

[George Pazin]

Big thumbs up to the sentiment, small thumbs up to the execution. I think if they had made it a little more haphazard, it would have performed as well or better, and not prompted some of the criticism about maintaining a newer, higher standard for raking.

Of course, it would have resulted in an even greater uproar from the players, so maybe this is simply a case of taking baby steps to a better future.

[Dan Kelly]

Big thumbs up to the sentiment, small thumbs up to the execution.

How many thumbs you got there, George?

(Reminds me of a college teacher of mine who noted, in the margin of one of my papers, near where I'd somehow constructed an "On one side of the coin ... on the other side of the coin ... on the other side of the coin" construction: "Either you've devised an exceedingly strange coin, or I'm not following your argument.")

[Tom_Doak]

For Tour play, I don't care.  If they are going to use them, I think the courses should be reduced to 50-60 bunkers maximum.  Otherwise, they're just adding penalty, not strategy.

For average golf, no, because if the bunkers were furrowed the members would demand they were done as perfectly as Muirfield Village, and every superintendent in America worth his salt would quit on the spot.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
I won't argue with you too much about furrowed bunkers for average golf.  However, your comment about reducing tournament courses to 50-60 bunkers surprises me.  Are there that many courses where there are 50-60 bunkers that are truly in play for the pros to begin with?  It is not that hard to figure out which bunkers are truly hazards (or should be hazards for them) don't you think?    

I was at Canoe Brook yesterday and those bunkers (particularly the greenside bunkers) posed little to no hazard value to the players.  They weren't trying to get bunker shots close, they were trying to make them.  A friend of my son who is a senior at Emmaus high school was happy when his tee shot on one hole slipped into the bunker rather than hung up in the rough.  His subsequent bunker shot just lipped out.  Some hazard.  

[Ryan Farrow]

For Tour play, I don't care.  If they are going to use them, I think the courses should be reduced to 50-60 bunkers maximum.  Otherwise, they're just adding penalty, not strategy.

For average golf, no, because if the bunkers were furrowed the members would demand they were done as perfectly as Muirfield Village, and every superintendent in America worth his salt would quit on the spot.

What exactly is wrong with a penal golf course every once and while? After spending some time at Oakmont I was immediately shocked by the 200 plus bunkers and wondered which ones are really necessary. Why did they have to line both sides of the fairway? Why were greens completely surrounded by bunkers? Why is there so little room to play safe?
I have learned to just accept it for what it is, a truly penal golf course with strategy abound. I think Mr. Fownes would defiantly want furrowed rakes to return for the Open. For the sake of variety once every 10 years or so when Oakmont gets the US Open let the course play as it was meant.

[Jack_Marr]

Yes for the pros and no for the Joes.