A Question for Supers or Anybody Who Might Know

[Sean_A]

In an effort to embrace the dreaded disease of bunkeritis I have selected this photo.  I don't like many bunkers for many reasons, but for the moment I will focus on how they are often presented.  In this pic, the fairway carefully swings around or or in some way cozies up to a bit of rough which then surrounds the bunker.  The right bunker looks very much hung out there.  The strip of rough cutting the bunkering off from the green is also detestable.  I dislike the look immensely and especially don't like the idea of rough partly negating an expensive hazard - IE the rough helps to stop balls from entering the hazard.  My question is how much extra work and expense is it to bring the fairway to the outside of the bunkering?



Ciao

[Tony_Muldoon]

Sean personally I agree with your views but is it over generalising to suggest the design here comes from the opposite end of the spectrum from the classic small and deep gathering bunker, hard by the green, more typical of Link’s golf?  

Today it’s an aerial game.  Hence the Bunkers are larger and more plentiful and the idea that balls will run on a fairway, or fall off a green into them, is barely relevant.  The market proves there are many who appreciate that kind of golf and like this look.

It’s as different as Point to Point and The Flat and it’s a case of “Bunkers for Courses”.

How many supers believe it’s being maintained like that just to save money?

[Jon Wiggett]

Tony,

while I agree with you it is much more an arial game today it has to be said that the over watering of the golf courses plus many holes being made unplayable any other way have had a large hand in this sorry state of affairs.

Sean,

supers often argue in favour of such strips because they reduce ware on the mowing units, make it easier to maintain a closed sward and of course reduces the ware on the edges of the bunkers. These are all valid arguements but I don't believe that they outway the added interest that mowing at fairway height brings in many cases.

[John Gosselin]

The first thing I would do to save money would be to eliminate all the flower beds on the golf course, unless of course this is a resort course. In that case I would eliminate half of them.

If the turf around the bunkers were mowed lower would the membership be okay with it being brown most of the time?

[Jon Wiggett]

John,

would the turf be brown most of the time? In my experience only when the weather was dry and hot. What is more important how a course plays or how it looks?

[Ray Richard]

Assuming the bunker surround grade would remain the same, and plenty of suitable topsoil was in place, and the irrigation impacts would be done by the club, I would spec. it out as follows.

1. Remove existing sod and transport to on site dumping area.Limits to be marked out by Owner.
2. Fine grade topsoil, soil amendments by Owner.
3. Install bentgrass sod, post plant care by Owner.

I would say its not a big deal, costs in the Northeast should be $1.25-1.75 per square foot.

[Michael_Stachowicz]

There is an added cost to the additional fairway acreage for fertilizer, chemicals, irrigation, and mowing.  There is the chance that while fairway running into the bunkers will play as intended, the turf may not look as good as rough height turf.  It is also a look that may not go well with a parkland design.

I agree with Ray, the best thing is to strip the sod and start again.  There are some courses with mongrel mixes of grass that have enough bent in their rough that they could start lowering the height, overseed, and heave the desired result within a couple of years.

[Jim Franklin]

Isn't this a par 3? Why would anyone play left or right of the bunkers? The hole is fine as is.