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