Tom D
Bunkers are just one item with the architect/designers arsenal of option called hazards. In the good old day, the quality of the course was described by having many hazards.
I am actually not after penal or strategic golf as it appears to me being played or used today. What I suppose I am stumbling for is the word like deterrent. I feel that deterrents are far more useful and constructive, although some may say that we already have that within the term strategic, yet IMHO I feel if we have It is not been fully used let alone perhaps understood.
The most penal option for a designer to include is a large pond/lake either around or part around a Green. That it feels is totally penal and in my way of thinking contributes very little to the round for the average player. It’s a killer, its stops the game in its track if the ball drops in the water. It may make the hole look spectacular, but for what all the players are about, i.e. playing golf is a NO, No. The interruption not just to the poor player but his playing partners and potential hold up for those following is unacceptable. Yet what is a hole with an island Green or in part surrounded by water but perhaps a cop out by the designer to use his ability and imagination to design a hole with actual landing surfaces with all sorts of hazards. Therefore, I am not keen on this type of hole or this type of water hazard. A small stream is a calculated risk for the average golfer, an island Green really just a gives an outside chance.
I would like to see options, not just a limited approach to the pin. To take a risk, perhaps just follow the longer but safer route, or seek an alternative route that requires skill with shorter precision shots to the hole. Variation is the spice of life is it not.
As to the means to attracting the golfer to the options then I believe that is the job of the hazards. As for the bunker, it’s a useful trap and can cost a single stroke is wrong, more if not full upon your game, but at least you don’t loose the ball in 3 feet of water. As mentioned before shallow bunkers are not my idea of hazards, certainly, if the ball can bounce straight out. Nevertheless, these bunkers seem to appear quite regular on posted photos. Nor are they small in circumference but large and shallow. What sort of a deterrent is that?
I suppose it’s down to what the client wants, but hitting the ball a long distance leaves much to be desired and the final resting place can be down to the Gods. However persuading the golfer that skill and steady progress is the more effective strategy, does not seem to play much in Tee shots, or am I missing the point.
Penal has its part to play but deterrents are more useful if the players understand that they can be indeed penal. The option that the best shot is from the bunkers needs to be eradicated, you are in the bunker because you tried but were not good enough on the day so are paying the price. If water hazards with their inherent destruction to the golfers round are acceptable, then I see little against my above options or am I being naive Tom
After all what is the main requirement of a client, surely to see golfers playing repeat rounds on a very regular basic on their course. Perhaps I am also suggesting more emphasis on design and less on complicated construction methods (building large shallow bunkers/pond/lakes).
Just my opinion and nothing to do with the past, just hopefully golfing options for all.
Melvyn