[Mike McGuire]

Not sure where the landing area is but missing right looks like death anyway. Why block the bunker views with vegetation? Could seeing the bunkers in the distance suck you into hitting down the right - or is it just to far?

[Sean_A]

Joe, thanks for posting.  I too have wanted to see pix of HV for some time.

Zowie, this site looks more severe than Pasa, or at least it seems more severe in how some of the land was used.  Given the incredible elevation changes, green side drop offs, angled greens and what I am told are f&f conditions, do folks think all that bunkering necessary?  The green sites on the all three 9s look to be very good, but I am really struggling with the bunkering on A and B, much of it doesn't seem to make any sense to me.  I really would like someone to talk me through the following holes and explain how bunkers add to them.

A5 - the front right bunker


A7 - short left bunker


B1 - short right bunkers


B2 - left fairway bunker


B2 - front right bunker.  This one is particularly annoying because its such a great green site.


B4 - both wide bunkers.


B8 - short left bunker


B9 - all three of the right fairway bunkers.  Looking at the other pix of this hole I can't believe with such a hard climb and plateau green that the archie would think 8 bunkers would make this hole better.


I would also like to know why the C course seems to have a completely different philosophy with its bunkering scheme.

Ciao

[Kyle Harris]

Sean Sean Sean,

Better add Huntingdon Valley to your "next dozen."

A-5:

There's a tongue of green behind it and you can actually put a pin to the right of the bunker. That should answer your question.

A-7:

This bunker was added a year or so ago. I wasn't initially too keen on the placement but it does prevent balls from bounding into the hazard which makes going for the green in two all that more appealing. I think it encourages a more aggressive play that isn't necessarily smart. It adds uncertainty to the second shot that was already fraught with uncertainty.

B-1:

From the fairway, these are really the only bunkers that enter into the golfers' mind from a strategic point of view. Back right hole locations are guarded by these bunkers and it's easy to aim a little more left than one should (making for a more difficult putt, or even yanking into the other bunkers) because of them.

B-2:

The bunker suckers people into trying to cut the corner when they really should be playing to the outside of the dogleg. I once saw one of the best shots of my life in a the PA Am here in 2005. I think it was Chet Walsh who managed to hit a shot out of this bunker to a back left hole location while keeping into under the tree branches - he stuck it to within 4 feet. Keep in mind this bunker is about 140 yards out from the green.

As for the greenside bunkers, I'd keep all of them. The front right one makes the line taken off the tee a bit more acute for front right hole locations. Since the back left is already difficult enough to hit, no bunkers guard there, however, the front right is a bit more inviting from the fairway without the bunkering. Since the golfer has a wedge in hand typically - these bunkers are necessary to provide the requisite shot urgency.

B-4

You are managing to pick the most pivotal bunkers on the golf course. Believe it or not, that pin is near the middle of the green distance-wise. The pond forms an oblique line from the tee and that bunker serves to keep people bailing out left honest.

Similar idea with the wide left bunker, it forces the golfer to be a bit more aware of club selection off the tee since he knows the pond goes deeper into the green and missing long is usually safe.

B-8

I've thought of what the hole would play like without this bunker and then I realized that the green was designed to accept running shots into the hole that used the contour to feed the ball to back hole locations. Flirting with this bunker is really the only acceptable way to get to the back left and the bunker gathers shots that aren't precisely hit, but are hit with the right intention. Half-stroke penalty for a half-credit shot.

B-9

At one point, this hillside probably had 5-9 bunkers cut into it. From the very back of the back tee, the carry to the top bunker is 240 yards. This is very much a bite off as much as you can chew tee shot and the bunkers help make that decision all the more difficult. These bunkers are too be challenged.

The C-course is routed over the most severe portion of the property, and as such, excessive bunkering is not needed to draw attention to the features and problems presented there. It is also the most difficult 9 holes of golf in Philadelphia, IMO.

[Mike_Cirba]

It appears to me that any number of the bunkers in question are there as "saving" bunkers, which prevent balls from cascading far, far away down steep slopes.   I think that's a perfectly legitimate reason given the vagaries and severity of some of the natural features.

[Mike_Cirba]

I would agree, however, that bunkers protecting balls from going into adjacent water hazards are just sort of silly.

I have the same problem with the 2 "restored" bunkers to the left of #5 at Merion, which are just....just....not very good.

[Sean_A]

Sean Sean Sean,

Better add Huntingdon Valley to your "next dozen."

A-5:

There's a tongue of green behind it and you can actually put a pin to the right of the bunker. That should answer your question.

A-7:

This bunker was added a year or so ago. I wasn't initially too keen on the placement but it does prevent balls from bounding into the hazard which makes going for the green in two all that more appealing. I think it encourages a more aggressive play that isn't necessarily smart. It adds uncertainty to the second shot that was already fraught with uncertainty.

B-1:

From the fairway, these are really the only bunkers that enter into the golfers' mind from a strategic point of view. Back right hole locations are guarded by these bunkers and it's easy to aim a little more left than one should (making for a more difficult putt, or even yanking into the other bunkers) because of them.

B-2:

The bunker suckers people into trying to cut the corner when they really should be playing to the outside of the dogleg. I once saw one of the best shots of my life in a the PA Am here in 2005. I think it was Chet Walsh who managed to hit a shot out of this bunker to a back left hole location while keeping into under the tree branches - he stuck it to within 4 feet. Keep in mind this bunker is about 140 yards out from the green.

As for the greenside bunkers, I'd keep all of them. The front right one makes the line taken off the tee a bit more acute for front right hole locations. Since the back left is already difficult enough to hit, no bunkers guard there, however, the front right is a bit more inviting from the fairway without the bunkering. Since the golfer has a wedge in hand typically - these bunkers are necessary to provide the requisite shot urgency.

B-4

You are managing to pick the most pivotal bunkers on the golf course. Believe it or not, that pin is near the middle of the green distance-wise. The pond forms an oblique line from the tee and that bunker serves to keep people bailing out left honest.

Similar idea with the wide left bunker, it forces the golfer to be a bit more aware of club selection off the tee since he knows the pond goes deeper into the green and missing long is usually safe.

B-8

I've thought of what the hole would play like without this bunker and then I realized that the green was designed to accept running shots into the hole that used the contour to feed the ball to back hole locations. Flirting with this bunker is really the only acceptable way to get to the back left and the bunker gathers shots that aren't precisely hit, but are hit with the right intention. Half-stroke penalty for a half-credit shot.

B-9

At one point, this hillside probably had 5-9 bunkers cut into it. From the very back of the back tee, the carry to the top bunker is 240 yards. This is very much a bite off as much as you can chew tee shot and the bunkers help make that decision all the more difficult. These bunkers are too be challenged.

The C-course is routed over the most severe portion of the property, and as such, excessive bunkering is not needed to draw attention to the features and problems presented there. It is also the most difficult 9 holes of golf in Philadelphia, IMO.

Cheers Kyle.  In truth, I would really like to see the course as I think it looks grand.  My issues with the bunkering, as nearly always, are minor compared with lay of the land, its use and green sites.  

A5

There is water that should be utilized for anybody who fails to reach a back hole location and there is a bunker in the rear.  I understand what you are saying, but I disagree as to that bunker's effectiveness.  In fact, I would argue its a life saver.  No, I think its best to use what nature provided in full.

A7

I can buy your PoV, but in general, I dislike saving bunkers from natural hazards - which the front left green side bunker is.  With this in mind, I would suggest that if the bunker is to encourage bold play, it should be bigger  or perhaps connected to the greenside bunker which would mean that it wouldn't start so far back.

B1

Again, doesn't the shit at the bottom of the hill protect the back pin placement?  Is this is a case of short grass as a hazard?  The use of this type of bunker is overdone.  There are already seven cases in the previous nine holes which employ the strategy you outline.  I don't think the very best courses can be so scripted.  

B2

I agree with PoV, if the trees are taken out.  There is no need for both trees and a bunker on that corner.  

There is water guarding the front right of the green.  Why stick a bunker there as an added guard?  I say use the natural hazard ro better effect if need be.

B4

I can accept your PoV, but if they must be there, they should look far better.  At the moment, they detract considerably from what should be an aesthetically appealing hole.

B8

Again, there is a natural hazard which should be better utilized.  I don't understand not using these streams to their full potential - especially as the greens are often angled as if this is what should be.  I say create shoprt grass on that bank and let gravity golf take its course.  

B9

Again, one or the other.  There is no need for trees and bunkers.  Plus the scale of these bunkers is well off.  They look most odd.


Perhaps I am much more willing than most to play courses which allow the lay of the land to do their thing because it is obvious you and are not agreeing on basic concepts concerning bunker placement.  That isn't to say either is right or wrong, just that its a radically different approach.

Ciao

 
 

 

[Kyle Harris]

I would agree, however, that bunkers protecting balls from going into adjacent water hazards are just sort of silly.

I have the same problem with the 2 "restored" bunkers to the left of #5 at Merion, which are just....just....not very good.

Mike,

Not when it presents a half-stroke penalty for a half-credit shot. The bunkers on 7 and 17 both do this. The hazard is still very much in play, these bunkers just add a little bit of false comfort.

[Mike_Cirba]

Sean,

Next time you're in the states I'm bringing you to Cobb's Creek for some gravity golf. 

[Sean_A]

I would agree, however, that bunkers protecting balls from going into adjacent water hazards are just sort of silly.

I have the same problem with the 2 "restored" bunkers to the left of #5 at Merion, which are just....just....not very good.

Mike,

Not when it presents a half-stroke penalty for a half-credit shot. The bunkers on 7 and 17 both do this. The hazard is still very much in play, these bunkers just add a little bit of false comfort.

Kyle

Why does the archie always need to present false comfort on water risk/reward holes?  It seems like if this was the idea at HV it was used too often at the expense of the flip of the coin.  I don't get to see water used strategically very often and it breaks my heart to see it wasted with the idea of not wanting to punish a failed greed golfer with a double bogey.  Why do we have to coddle the greedy with a helping aid for a bogey or better?

In regards to A7, why can't some of the crap below left be cleared out so a decent recovery is possible?  I bet just a lot of bad shots head down that way anyhow - regardless of intentions of going for in two.

As regards B8, why is this severe land treated differently from that on the C course?

Ciao

[Steve Lang]

  Some larger perspective..

[Kyle Harris]

Sean,

To be fair, you are basing your opinions off of 2 dimensional pictures and not 3 dimensional presence. A lot of the bunkers which appear to prevent a shot rolling down a hillside would not. For example, the hillside on 10 is covered in 3-4 inch rough in season. No ball will roll down it. Same goes for the one on A-5. The creek is still in play for the back right hole location, this just isn't apparent from the photo or the tee. What the bunker does is add a bit more urgency to an otherwise benign shot.

A lot of the bunkering is a response to Flynn's rather clever technique of bringing the creek into play with certain hole locations (back left on 11) and taking it away on others (middle of the green on 5).

Furthermore, you assessment that the course bunker is scripted is based on the vantage point of the photographer, and not the playability of the hole. While yes, the bunkers appear to placed in a manner that is redundant, consider this:

A-5:

150-190 yard hole. Green is around 30 yards deep with kicker slope on the left. The bunker forces the golfer to fly a precise iron into the right hole location, or use the slope of the green to feed the ball to the location.

A-7:

You're 280 out looking at a thin sliver of flat fairway short of the green, anything short of 200 yards will leave a baseball swing lie into the green. You can take the typical safe play of the 200 yard shot at the right fairway bunkers or you can hit it 250 onto the flat. You're standing on a hook lie. Trust me, this bunker ADDS to the temptation because it is now possible to not just bound into the water hazard. In this case, taking water out of the equation adds to the decision making.

B-1:

WIDE fairway off the tee, however, the green side bunker makes playing out to the left far more appealing. From the right side, back and back right hole locations are blind and perched over a wall of sand. Miss short and you're guaranteed a bunker shot out of a 10 foot deep trap. Take out the bunker and you're looking at a relatively easy chip shot up the hill.

[Kyle Harris]

Sean,

Here's 7 from the tee - maybe this will help give you a sense of place.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

To be fair, you are basing your opinions off of 2 dimensional pictures and not 3 dimensional presence. A lot of the bunkers which appear to prevent a shot rolling down a hillside would not. For example, the hillside on 10 is covered in 3-4 inch rough in season. No ball will roll down it. Same goes for the one on A-5. The creek is still in play for the back right hole location, this just isn't apparent from the photo or the tee. What the bunker does is add a bit more urgency to an otherwise benign shot.

A lot of the bunkering is a response to Flynn's rather clever technique of bringing the creek into play with certain hole locations (back left on 11) and taking it away on others (middle of the green on 5).

Furthermore, you assessment that the course bunker is scripted is based on the vantage point of the photographer, and not the playability of the hole. While yes, the bunkers appear to placed in a manner that is redundant, consider this:

A-5:

150-190 yard hole. Green is around 30 yards deep with kicker slope on the left. The bunker forces the golfer to fly a precise iron into the right hole location, or use the slope of the green to feed the ball to the location.

A-7:

You're 280 out looking at a thin sliver of flat fairway short of the green, anything short of 200 yards will leave a baseball swing lie into the green. You can take the typical safe play of the 200 yard shot at the right fairway bunkers or you can hit it 250 onto the flat. You're standing on a hook lie. Trust me, this bunker ADDS to the temptation because it is now possible to not just bound into the water hazard. In this case, taking water out of the equation adds to the decision making.

B-1:

WIDE fairway off the tee, however, the green side bunker makes playing out to the left far more appealing. From the right side, back and back right hole locations are blind and perched over a wall of sand. Miss short and you're guaranteed a bunker shot out of a 10 foot deep trap. Take out the bunker and you're looking at a relatively easy chip shot up the hill.

Kyle

I assume that many of the banks won't allow for balls to kick all the way down, but why can't some of the banks be cut down?  I spose in a way this part and parcel of wide golf philosophy where as creating rough and allowing other crap such as trees to block out recoveries is part and parcel of championship golf philosophy in the US.  

I can accept that I am only looking at pix, but it can't be denied that bunkers are being used to cut off natural hazards and gravity golf.  Again, this isn't right or wrong, just a style of golf.  

I find your use of the word "trap" in relation to B1 interesting.  I would argue the angle of the green with water below is the trap.  There really is no need to create what I can only assume one thinks of as a better trap - especially if the water is fully used in conjunction with short grass.

Ciao  

[Kyle Harris]

Also, from the back of 11 green.

[Kyle Harris]

Sean,

To be fair, you are basing your opinions off of 2 dimensional pictures and not 3 dimensional presence. A lot of the bunkers which appear to prevent a shot rolling down a hillside would not. For example, the hillside on 10 is covered in 3-4 inch rough in season. No ball will roll down it. Same goes for the one on A-5. The creek is still in play for the back right hole location, this just isn't apparent from the photo or the tee. What the bunker does is add a bit more urgency to an otherwise benign shot.

A lot of the bunkering is a response to Flynn's rather clever technique of bringing the creek into play with certain hole locations (back left on 11) and taking it away on others (middle of the green on 5).

Furthermore, you assessment that the course bunker is scripted is based on the vantage point of the photographer, and not the playability of the hole. While yes, the bunkers appear to placed in a manner that is redundant, consider this:

A-5:

150-190 yard hole. Green is around 30 yards deep with kicker slope on the left. The bunker forces the golfer to fly a precise iron into the right hole location, or use the slope of the green to feed the ball to the location.

A-7:

You're 280 out looking at a thin sliver of flat fairway short of the green, anything short of 200 yards will leave a baseball swing lie into the green. You can take the typical safe play of the 200 yard shot at the right fairway bunkers or you can hit it 250 onto the flat. You're standing on a hook lie. Trust me, this bunker ADDS to the temptation because it is now possible to not just bound into the water hazard. In this case, taking water out of the equation adds to the decision making.

B-1:

WIDE fairway off the tee, however, the green side bunker makes playing out to the left far more appealing. From the right side, back and back right hole locations are blind and perched over a wall of sand. Miss short and you're guaranteed a bunker shot out of a 10 foot deep trap. Take out the bunker and you're looking at a relatively easy chip shot up the hill.

Kyle

I assume that many of the banks won't allow for balls to kick all the way down, but why can't some of the banks be cut down?  I spose in a way this part and parcel of wide golf philosophy where as creating rough and allowing other crap such as trees to block out recoveries is part and parcel of championship golf philosophy in the US.  

I can accept that I am only looking at pix, but it can't be denied that bunkers are being used to cut off natural hazards and gravity golf.  Again, this isn't right or wrong, just a style of golf.  

I find your use of the word "trap" in relation to B1 interesting.  I would argue the angle of the green with water below is the trap.  There really is no need to create what I can only assume one thinks of as a better trap - especially if the water is fully used in conjunction with short grass.

Ciao  

Actually, Sean - it can be denied. Look at the aerials some time. There is also no water below the 10th green, at least within 100 or so yards. As for the 5th, there is almost 10 yards of rough between the bunker and the creek at that point, and it's flat rough. You'd have to underclub by at least two clubs to find the creek at that point and the slope wouldn't bring the ball into it.

Consider this angle:

[Kyle Harris]

Here's 10 from the fairway:

[Ian Andrew]

I’m enjoying a couple of my favourite courses are up for discussion this week.

Huntingdon Valley is the best example of pressure golf that I know. You stand on many tees and have to hit a cut or fade just to hold the cant of the fairway and stay on the short grass. This includes some real tough reverse cant holes where – like the 16th – the fairway goes left but the grade falls right. There is another tough one on the C nine as well.

Where Flynn was devilish is there are a number of holes where you face a fade lie, but the green slope suggests a draw approach. This may be the toughest test left for good players. The fun part is he leaves you many of these shots throughout the round. The other interesting thing that Flynn had done at Huntingdon is mixed downhill and uphill approaches to further toughen the mix. If you’re not confident about how to adjust a ball for all these lies, you are going to begin to yank the ball everywhere.

Throw-in the sharp receiving bowls in the front of greens like the 8th – which favour the low trajectory guy like me – and watch many a good approach retreat right off the front. The place is an awesome test and yet well below 7,000 yards.

If there is one place that I would fly to watch an exhibition match – it would be Huntingdon Valley. It’s no wonder that they dominate Philadelphia most years.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

To be fair, you are basing your opinions off of 2 dimensional pictures and not 3 dimensional presence. A lot of the bunkers which appear to prevent a shot rolling down a hillside would not. For example, the hillside on 10 is covered in 3-4 inch rough in season. No ball will roll down it. Same goes for the one on A-5. The creek is still in play for the back right hole location, this just isn't apparent from the photo or the tee. What the bunker does is add a bit more urgency to an otherwise benign shot.

A lot of the bunkering is a response to Flynn's rather clever technique of bringing the creek into play with certain hole locations (back left on 11) and taking it away on others (middle of the green on 5).

Furthermore, you assessment that the course bunker is scripted is based on the vantage point of the photographer, and not the playability of the hole. While yes, the bunkers appear to placed in a manner that is redundant, consider this:

A-5:

150-190 yard hole. Green is around 30 yards deep with kicker slope on the left. The bunker forces the golfer to fly a precise iron into the right hole location, or use the slope of the green to feed the ball to the location.

A-7:

You're 280 out looking at a thin sliver of flat fairway short of the green, anything short of 200 yards will leave a baseball swing lie into the green. You can take the typical safe play of the 200 yard shot at the right fairway bunkers or you can hit it 250 onto the flat. You're standing on a hook lie. Trust me, this bunker ADDS to the temptation because it is now possible to not just bound into the water hazard. In this case, taking water out of the equation adds to the decision making.

B-1:

WIDE fairway off the tee, however, the green side bunker makes playing out to the left far more appealing. From the right side, back and back right hole locations are blind and perched over a wall of sand. Miss short and you're guaranteed a bunker shot out of a 10 foot deep trap. Take out the bunker and you're looking at a relatively easy chip shot up the hill.

Kyle

I assume that many of the banks won't allow for balls to kick all the way down, but why can't some of the banks be cut down?  I spose in a way this part and parcel of wide golf philosophy where as creating rough and allowing other crap such as trees to block out recoveries is part and parcel of championship golf philosophy in the US.  

I can accept that I am only looking at pix, but it can't be denied that bunkers are being used to cut off natural hazards and gravity golf.  Again, this isn't right or wrong, just a style of golf.  

I find your use of the word "trap" in relation to B1 interesting.  I would argue the angle of the green with water below is the trap.  There really is no need to create what I can only assume one thinks of as a better trap - especially if the water is fully used in conjunction with short grass.

Ciao  

Actually, Sean - it can be denied. Look at the aerials some time. There is also no water below the 10th green, at least within 100 or so yards. As for the 5th, there is almost 10 yards of rough between the bunker and the creek at that point, and it's flat rough. You'd have to underclub by at least two clubs to find the creek at that point and the slope wouldn't bring the ball into it.

Consider this angle:

Kyle you could be right, but it sure looks like if a ball were to karoom off that bank nose that there ain't much to stop it if the grass were short.  It could even be a case of the closer the miss the more dangerous the water becomes - I am fine with that because I don't believe in graded penalties for misses as I do in rub of the green. In any case, if the water isn't in play except for a bad shot, I say make the water in play.  I realize this is a bit expensive, but I have to question the intent of an archie that wouldn't make that water in play.    

As regards to A7, yes, I think I have seen pix before which show there is a flatish lie near the new bunker.  Plus, the green look to be quite small so getting closer (even if one isn't going for it in two) looks advantageous. 

The bottom line for me is that bunkers are generally a visual eyesore and should be used when natural features/additional shaping aren't getting the job done.  In this way, a more balanced golf course is created, which is why I prefer the look of the C course to the other two.  Of course, in practice, I may prefer the other two nines.  What is for certain is that I haven't seen anything at HV which would put me off wanting to see the course, its only that I have a different bent as to what my ideal courses are like. 

Ciao 

[Kyle Harris]

Sean,

Take a close look at the back right side of the green on A-5. To this hole location, the bunker is a short hazard, and anything missing right will carom into the creek. I've missed short enough to be before the bunker, and the ball just stayed there. The creek just isn't close enough to the green at that point.

Here's a link to the aerial:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.127593,-75.107775&spn=0.001216,0.002843&t=h&z=19

Bring the creek closer to the green? Well, Huntingdon Valley already has one green that can be completely submerged in a flood (17), not sure that it needs another.

Am I reading you right when you say that bunkers are below shaping in terms of ideal architecture?

[Matt OBrien]

Sean,
Were you listing the bunkers that I rake the most or the bunkers that you feel should be removed? I know you were saying to have them removed but I would have to strongly disagree. After looping many rounds there I will tell you that the bunkers you listed are the most popular bunkers on the course. Starting with the bunker on A5. That bunker is crucial in saving the back right third of the green. For people who dont know the course all to well they think they have to carry that bunker and hold the green so they dont go in the back bunker. In reality the play here is to use the slope and throw it back left and let it take the slope. That bunker also changes the contour of the green on the right side. The new bunker on A7 is not really in play but visually makes the approach intimidating as it gets very narrow. I did not see many players in that bunker but I know that it changes players minds when they are deciding thier second shot. From these pictures it is very hard for you to understand the severity of the bunkers on 10 (B1). If you are saying to take those bunkers out and let the balls bound into the woods then you will change your mind when you see it. I would rather my ball go into the woods because those bunkers are almost death. Due to the uphill approach,many players under club themselves to a back pin and end up in the bunkers every time. I never thought about this until now but when you make the turn at HV the lies change. for a right handed player you now are faced with all down hill lies. Players do not take that into effect and fade the ball into the bunkers. If you loop 5 times a week I will rake one of those 2 bunkers at least 4 times. I have seen many tournaments lost in those bunkers. The bunkers on 11 are perfect as well. The fairway bunkers on 11 are placed about 230 yards off the tee. The avg golfer only drives a ball 230-240 so this puts these bunkers into play. The bunker on the left is VERY important now that the tree has fallen. Without the tree there and without a bunker you can miss short left and there is no penalty. The green side bunker plays as a semi-kicker and will effect and ball that lands on right side of the green. If the branch that overhangs this bunker was cut down this bunker would be in play a lot more but it still plays a roll even if you are not in it. The left bunker on 13 is the most popular bunker on the course. I have looped many rounds where all 4 players were in that bunker. Players get intimidated by water and figure they will bail out left and end up in the bunker. I dont know what kind of bunker player you are but if you are in that bunker and the pin is up front I can guarantee you will end up in the pond. I will somewhat agree with you on the bunker on 17 but again it is popular. It does protect the player from going in the hazard but with no bunker there that green would be a semi redan.
All in all I think the bunkering at huntingdon valley is perfect. There are only 1 or 2 bunkers have no purpose at all but I feel that every course will have them. I think that is you played the course and saw them in person you would have a better understanding.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Take a close look at the back right side of the green on A-5. To this hole location, the bunker is a short hazard, and anything missing right will carom into the creek. I've missed short enough to be before the bunker, and the ball just stayed there. The creek just isn't close enough to the green at that point.

Here's a link to the aerial:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.127593,-75.107775&spn=0.001216,0.002843&t=h&z=19

Bring the creek closer to the green? Well, Huntingdon Valley already has one green that can be completely submerged in a flood (17), not sure that it needs another.

Am I reading you right when you say that bunkers are below shaping in terms of ideal architecture?

Kyle

I can buy that bunker provides a different hazard for the back right pin than missing  a few more yards right.  I certainly would rather see the the water come all the way into play for missing short or right on that side of the green because as I mentioned earlier, its a shame not use natural features to their fullest as they provide the more variety in design.  

So far as making the water in play, no, I am not suggesting anything but perhaps grading that slope a bit more viciously so balls will kick down.  Of course, this makes it more difficult to cut the grass!  

Without a doubt a will take shaping over bunker work if by shaping we are including greens and all sorts of funny stuff that could be created in the absence of natural features.  I will give you an example of what I think is excellent bunker work and a great balance of man made features which for the most part flow wonderfully with the terrain - Lederach.  Every single bunker on that course adds something important to the design.  None can be considered as anything less than critical to the strategy of the hole, yet none are obtrusive visually.  I don't recall how many bunkers are on the course, but I think they seem much more numerous because of how they were utilized.  Can you say all the bunkers are needed at HV in the way they are at Lederach?  In fact, can you say all the bunkers at HV are needed without any comparison to Lederach - though it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.  If so, I will tip my hat to you and freely admit they were are on completely levels of understanding where these things are concerned.


Matt

There is no question that I would better understand the course if I played it once or 100 times.  I am arguing more from the perspective of balance in design and especially taking advantage of any terrific natural hazard as creeks present.  Bunkers are too often used as a crutch to create interest and from what I can see, HV doesn't need that added crutch.  It looks awfully interesting and challenging without the bunkers I mentioned. 

Ciao

[Matt OBrien]

Sean,
I think the bunkers at huntingdon valley play 2 roles in some cases. They could act as a crutch in some cases but they also affect the greens and thats what makes them as good as they are. If they were just used as a crutch I would agree with you but due to the fact that they change the contour of the greens you cant touch them.

[Kyle Harris]

Sean,
I think the bunkers at huntingdon valley play 2 roles in some cases. They could act as a crutch in some cases but they also affect the greens and thats what makes them as good as they are. If they were just used as a crutch I would agree with you but due to the fact that they change the contour of the greens you cant touch them.

The left side of the 12th green seems to think otherwise, Matt.

[Sean_A]

Sean,
I think the bunkers at huntingdon valley play 2 roles in some cases. They could act as a crutch in some cases but they also affect the greens and thats what makes them as good as they are. If they were just used as a crutch I would agree with you but due to the fact that they change the contour of the greens you cant touch them.

Matt

I am not sure what you mean, but any greenside shoulders created by bunkers could be created with shaping.  Now, I will grant you that there is a fundamental difference between bunkers and banks and sometimes it is prudent for the archie to give a guy a break with a saving bunker rather than having balls drop 75 feet below greens/fairways too often, but I tend to think of this situation as mainly in the mountains or desert.  I think the blind recovery shot up a steep bank is vastly undervalued by golfers.

Ciao

Ciao

[TEPaul]

Ian:

Regarding your post #41, I'm glad to see you pick up on the interest and excitement of the canted fairways on that course. I know no other course around here that has that to that extent.

I've never played the C nine but I have the A and B a ton of times and now that I think back on all the years playing there I believe every single round I ever played there was in tournaments.

When those fairways are firm and fast and bouncing and rolling there's no other course I know like it.

The supreme irony is that up until maybe a decade ago most all the tournament players just hated it. They complained about not being able to control quality shots   , they complained about getting so few level lies etc!

My how times have changed!!

I don't really know what changed the general opinion but somehow HVGC seems to be almost solely responsible for it as a few other courses began to follow its F&F lead and now many more are too.

You mentioned #16 which is probably the most dramatic but so are a bunch of others in trying to figure out the sideways bounce and rollout. #1 to a large extent, #2 a little, #6 bigtime, #7 pretty much and particularly on the second shot layup bigtime, #8 quite a lot, #9 straight down and for long hitters they have to be careful not to go too far, #15 on both the drive and second, #16 you really do almost need to try to hook it against the slope.

That kind of thing is just a ball to try to figure out and execute via your imagination of the ball casting around on topography.

And then there are some of the approaches such as #6 where in F&F conditions you really should not try to carry the ball to the green surface. Same somewhat on #15.

HVGC has always had some of the best tournament players in the district going all the way back to the beginning and the word on the street was always that they were the best shotmakers in the district because they played off so few level lies.

And why have I played so many tournaments there over the years? The answer is with the long-going tournament mentality at that club they have been more generous with their course for tournaments than any other around here and that too goes way, way back in their history.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()