Kenny, Thanks for trying. At least there's one who is interested.
Please don't read any tone into my response, there is none.
I was specifically referring to the fairway bunker. Not the trees. But since you mentioned them, the trees on the left basically remove any normal golfer's notion of going left. I suspect when the hole was built those trees were not there and the openness was massive. The benefits of openness are several but the one I'm partial to is the theory that a good golfer has serious doubts or uncertainty as to where to go, without the definition created by trees and narrow fairways. Think ANGC original principles here.
I will have to point out the error of referring to this hole as a risk reward hole. There's really no such thing, technically. There are risk reward shots, not holes.
But, the issue with the Marzolf version of the Thomas bunker is how it flows against the natural flow of that property. Thomas originally built the course without one feature that was built in this manner. The newer scalloped edges to the cross bunker on #10 also has elements that are built up against the flow.
I'm not representing myself as an expert on the subject,(or Riviera) I'm relaying what I remember reading back when this site was more focused on GCA and these issues came up. Also, the day I met Ben Crenshaw he went out of his way to explain to me how, and what, Thomas had done at Riviera.
Hopefully, someone with better recollection, and understanding, will correct any mis-statements I've made in this post.
As an aside, the green on this hole is not an original either. It is completely out of character with the rest of the greens and is another thing Thomas would never have built here.
I'll reiterate that these few examples of mistakes take very little away from the golf course because there is so much still right about the golf course.