Bunkers in the rough

[JESII]

Sean,

Good post.

[Peter Pallotta]

"...I love a hole with one fairway bunker (in the fairway) and one greenside bunker...but I am a realist..."

JES - why does being a realist preclude having true fairway bunkers and limited greenside bunkering?

A real question, not a rhetorical one. 

Thanks
Peter

[JESII]

I was looking at the golf course landscape of today and being realistic about migrating to the idea of bunkers being actually in the fairway.

I think it's great, in theory, for courses built today and into the future, but how do we change the courses of today to get there...not inexpensively...that's all I was driving at.

[Dean Stokes]

Very few bunkers were designed to be in the rough during the Golden Age or the Modern Age.  That's several generations of architects who passed on the idea.

But a quick look at Whistling Straits and other newer courses and it's clear you've entered a different design universe.

Perhaps I am missing some deep metaphysical architectural issues here, but to my lights bunkers in the rough are a mistake at the level of strategy, playability and aesthetics. Which only leaves room for one other possible justification - gimmickry.

Bob

Brilliant. Fluff is another good word for them.

[Joe Hancock]

Fluff? This isn't Whistling Straits, though......








The purpose here is to challenge the golfer to fly the right side bunkers to the hidden fairway area behind them. The terrain is too severe to mow at fairway heights surrounding these bunkers, but the strategy is there none the less.

Joe

[Dean Stokes]

Joe I think this hole looks good and the bunkers do serve a purpose. They could have grown the rough deep or used gorse and heather for the same effect.
I think we are talking more about the bunkers seen on many newer golf courses that are built today that are simply there for looks. That is what I mean by 'fluff'. They serve no purpose on the golf course and will doubtfully ever be played out of.

[Joe Hancock]

Thanks, Dean.

I just wanted to make sure that there was a visual illustrating that all bunkers in the rough are not fluff.

 

Joe

[TEPaul]

Ted Kramer:

How would you feel about a course with bunkers but no rough at all?

I hestitate to say it but that's apparently one of the things Behr and Mackenzie et al were looking at in the late 1920s.

Talk about radical!  Good radical, 

[Sean_A]

Fluff? This isn't Whistling Straits, though......








The purpose here is to challenge the golfer to fly the right side bunkers to the hidden fairway area behind them. The terrain is too severe to mow at fairway heights surrounding these bunkers, but the strategy is there none the less.

Joe

Joe

This is exactly what I was referring to earlier.  There is no need for those bunkers on the bank.  The challenge of carrying the bank is present regardless of the bunkering and I would argue the strategy is not enhanced by the bunkering.  They may be purty, but they are fluff.  How many fluff bunkers are worth building/maintaining?  Three were slapped in right there!

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags: