My Latest GCA Discovery

[Jordan Wall]

Today I had another tournament at a new course.  The course playd firm and fast, which was nice.

On the eleventh hole, my second of the day, I bombed a drive and had 55 yards to a back pin.  Sounds easy, right?  Well, I hit a good pitch, it landed a foot from the pin, and landed in an unexpected bunker which was a lot closer to the back of the green than I had though.  As a result, I was left with a downhill, ticklish greenside bunker shot of about five yards.

The course was short, and there were some definite shot holes.  One of the ways par was protected, besides the fact the course was full of very small greens, was placing back pins on short holes which had bunkers directly behind the green.  In some cases there was nothing except fringe seperating the green from the back bunker.  I consider myself a decent player, and I know that I had to really be tender with my pitch shots and wedge shots to those back pins.  Most of the time I would take a club that would fire lower and land on the front of the green, purposely.

This strategy of placing bunkers very close to the back of greens worked very well, and made wedge shots very ticklish.

Why isn't this design philosophy used more.

What are other courses which use this strategy well?

Is the result of this strategy working so well due to firm and fast conditions?

What are peoples views on placing bunkers very close to the edges of the greens?

I would love to see this feature used more on golf courses.
It worked great.

[Paul Carey]

Jordan,

I find the shot to a back pin with trouble behind is one of the most intimidating shots to play.  Hazards short of the target are much more comfortable to negotiate.

Put a bunker (deep) or water behind a green you will spook me more than a hazard short.  

I do agree it is an under used design element by architects.

PC

[Michael Blake]

I'm usually unaffected by bunkers behind the green and close to the edge.

As a mid-handicapper I'm never hitting enough club into the green and therefore leave most approach shots short.  

I think that design element probably only affects better players who usually hit "the right" club (translation: enough club) or are accurate enough to fly it at the flag.

[igrowgrass]

Learn how to spin it!

[Jordan Wall]

Sean R.,

I am a good player, and know how to spin the ball.
However, with playing conditions as they should be, firm and fast, landing a wedge shot and stopping it on a dime is not so easy.
A pitch shot from 50 or 60 yards is even harder to stop by spinning.
That is why you have to run the ball up, at least a little, which is why the back bunkers work so well.

Even so, landing a ball at a back pin location some five yards from an intimidating bunker while trying to spin may be even harder than running it up.  By putting spin on the ball, the back bunker would force the shot to be even more precise than simply running it up.  I think a back bunker or hazard close to greens on shorter holes is a great way to defend an easy birdie.

[Jim Johnson]

I would agree with Michael above, I'm a mid-handicapper and I very rarely end up past a green. If I have, I've probably skulled a short iron and in doing so, any hazard behind the green wouldn't have affected my shot-making decision.

JJ

[Gordon Oneil]

Jordan
You absolutely have a point.  And most average players never experience and probably don't even notice (GCA'ers excluded) trouble/hazards long.
With the exception of mishits that are low on the club/high on the ball, I'd think that as many as 90% of golf shots come up short of the intended target.
Everyone always expects to hit the career 178 yard 7 iron EVERY time.
At my place, the course is at it's most challenging when set up as you describe in those very conditions.  Firm greens on a windy day, those less than full wedge shots into so many par fours made drive and a pitch by technology turn your mindset from green light/make birdie into having to consider protecting against bogey.
As the USGA loves to say "it's all about controlling your golf ball.

[Doug Siebert]

Something wrong with leaving the ball 15-20 feet short?  My home course has back bunkers and/or steep fall offs behind almost every green, which are mostly very steeply slope back to front so we have a name for back pins -- "sucker pins!"  A 20 foot uphill putt is a lot easier than a 5 foot downhill sidehill slider.

[Jeff Doerr]

Jordan,

The mystery of what is behind the hole is always challenging.

With most greens sloping back to front, the back recovery is always feared. Pumpkin Ridge (Ghost) has a back mime finish where hole after hole is not good if you go long.
11 - Back bunker/green slopes to the front with creek
12 - Back position is small. a chip risks going way long leading to a 3 putt return
14 - Appears severe back to front, but really not that bad
15 - Another tiny upper level where a long shot leaves a delicate chip out of rough to a small area and a chance to roll out a long ways
16 - Small volcano green surrounded by bunkers and sloping hard to the front
17 - Short 4 with a tiny upper level and sloping down to lower or even the pond

That hollow, bunker, whatever... on the back side is scary!

The best players choose their side to miss, which is often front or side. There is a short redanish par 3 at The Reserve South/Fought (14) that is actually best to bail out long, but that is rare (and hard to get yourself to do).

[Steve_Lovett]

Jordan - where did you play?  It's been magnificent weather in the northwest, I just returned from a week-and-a-half there.  No surprise it's fast & firm this time of year.

Question - you described the bunker as "unexpected".  Did you know the bunker was there, or was it just closer than you thought?  If you had known the bunker's proximity to the back of the green, would you have played the shot differently?  

If you weren't aware of the bunkers presence or proximity and you played the shot you played thinking "a little over the back isn't bad", then the course fooled you into thinking you made the right play.  Would it be better to have that bunker more overtly visible to more clearly show the strategy & consequences - or is the fact the bunker was "unexpected" better?

[Mark Pearce]

I thought the third at Oakmont with a steep run off behind the green was a fantastic hole with the pin at the back as it was on the Saturday (I think it was the Saturday).

I tend to agree with Doug, though, I'd rather leave the ball 15 feet below the hole than try to get clever and risk running over the back, unless I know that there's a good chance of a straightforward chip back.

[Jordan Wall]

Jordan - where did you play?  It's been magnificent weather in the northwest, I just returned from a week-and-a-half there.  No surprise it's fast & firm this time of year.

Question - you described the bunker as "unexpected".  Did you know the bunker was there, or was it just closer than you thought?  If you had known the bunker's proximity to the back of the green, would you have played the shot differently?  

If you weren't aware of the bunkers presence or proximity and you played the shot you played thinking "a little over the back isn't bad", then the course fooled you into thinking you made the right play.  Would it be better to have that bunker more overtly visible to more clearly show the strategy & consequences - or is the fact the bunker was "unexpected" better?

Steve,

I played, for the first time, Skagit Country Club, and it was surprisingly good, and I would venture to say very good in some places.

However, the course featured very small greens, which it needed due to it's lack of length, and it only had two par-4's over 400 yards.  The 11th hole was 343 yards and I hit a good drive and was left with a little 55 yard pitch.  The pin was back, and though I saw the bunker behind the green, I was not aware of it's proximity.
I hit a pitch exactly how I wanted, it one hopped into the bunker.  My ball mark couldn't have been more than two feet from the hole, so it was really a shot I felt ok with, though the result was not too great.  However, I was left with a bunker shot, downhill, that was literally about five or six yards, with the green sloping away.  It was one of the toughest bunker shots I have ever played.


I don't really think the course fooled me, I think I was dumb and didn't take a little walk to the green like I should have.  However, if I had played the course before I would have known about that bunker.  And, I think that knowing the close proximity to the green of a bunker makes the shot really interesting.  The rest of the round the feature was used several times to pack pins (there simply one front pin for the tournament!) and each time I had a short pitch or wedge to those greens.  Out of the four, I went +2, all from inside 95 yards.  The first time, as mentioned, I playd into the bunker.  The other three I was dead scared and while I managed two on the green once I left the ball short in a bunker trying to run it up!


Personally, the fact that I had never experienced something like that, with bunkers so close to the green that they made normally simple wedge shots tough may be the reason I am so in awe of the feature.  It was simply the best way to defend par on a short golf course I have seen in a long time.  It seemed so simple yet effective.

What are other courses that use this feature so greatly?

[D_Malley]

you do not need a bunker or a water hazard.  as above pics show.  almost every green on this course falls way off if you go over.  you will learn quickly when stuck between clubs on a back pin, go with the shorter one and just be happy with a putt from the center of green to the back hole location.

[Jerry Kluger]

My home course has many small greens and one in particular has a similar bunker over the back plus a severe downslope making the bunker far more welcome than going long and missing the bunker.  I think it is important that the bunker allow for a level lie and a possible recovery.  Anyway, the hole at my home course is a short par 4, downhill to a low point and then slightly up to the green which slopes severely from back to front and right to left with a bunker left, as well as the bunker long. I have hit more good tee shots but bad scores on that hole than any other.



 

[Phil Benedict]

I agree with Sean that architects like Ross really penalized a player for being long to a green, although generally not with bunkers in back of the green.  The most common defense is a back-to-front sloping green.  This is sometimes accompanied by a steep fall off in back of the green.  I think back pins are the most treacherous in classic architecture because to be long is to be in jail on many classic courses.

[Ed_Baker]

Interesting thread Jordan.

Anytime an architectural feature causes an accomplished player to be less aggressive I think the architect has done well. The expert player has to execute almost perfectly time and again to hit it close, another case also of how f&f enhances the architecture. If the greens were soft when you played it would be just another throw the darts golf course. I like behind the green bunkers, or steep drop offs, or water , 15 at Augusta for example.

Tiger mentioned that being above the pin at Congressional with poa greens was extremely problematic because to make anything from above the pin the putt had to have speed on it to hold the line and a miss would just run away to three putt territory. As Patrick stated in another thread Congressional does have a lot of slope but not as much undulation as one might expect. It seems that the great courses consistently have these features yet are still playable for the less acomplished player.

[Matt_Cohn]

Learn how to spin it!

Don't spin it. If your shot releases a little, you can land it in the middle of the green.

But the more you spin it, the closer to the back edge (and the trouble) you have to fly the ball. You'd have to land your shot practically on the back fringe just to get it close. If you miss your target by 3 feet, you're finished.. No thanks.

But Jordan, you knew that already!

[John Mayhugh]

Interesting discussion.  I play quite a bit at a club with very small greens and trouble long has a huge influence on how aggressive I can be on several of the holes.  When I play safe, a minor mishit will usually mean I come up short of the green.  But my distance control isn't so good that I can play more aggressively than to the middle of the green (again, keeping in mind these are small greens).

But I think I would prefer a bunker to a steep fall away.  And either of those are far preferable to OB or a hazard.

Jordan's observation is a good one.  Trouble behind the green is a real good defense when you have short holes with small greens.

[Brian_Ewen]

I play a lot of old courses where there are bunkers at the back of the green , and most that I can think of are blind , which seems to be totally unfashionable because you have Pro's stating that they need to see everything in front of them .

[Mike Wagner]

Jordan,

Great thread.  I played Skagit numerous times growing up and it's one of those courses that needs this startegy to compensate for lack of real estate.  Definitely requires the better player and longer hitter to think quite a bit more about where to position the ball on the green.  

As far as Shawn R's comment - I'd like to take him to Bandon and play for a lot of $$.  Another golf wanna be that probably attacks every pin and doesn't understand how to play the game.

[D_Malley]

my course has a lot of steep falloffs behind the greens, (which i think is a much harder recovery than a bunker) Alot of the holes are short par 4's.  Knowledge of pin placement many times will dictate the play off the tee.

[Jordan Wall]

One thing to note is the bunkers behind the greens were not large.

Usually, they were perhaps ten yards wide and five yards front to back.

I liked (well, from a GCA standpoint) the claustorphobic feeling the bunker gave me when I was in it.

It was small, but once I was in the bunker I knew I screwed up.  It made me think twice before hitting other wedge shots.