There is Hope! Fairway Bunkers in the....Fairway?

[Bill_McBride]

The USGA has published a hole by hole story of the set up planned for Pebble Beach.

http://www.usopen.com/en_US/news/articles/2010-05-20/201005201274374493011.html

 Here's a very exciting quote from Hole 1:

"One of the new wrinkles, as opposed to the last Open here in 2000, is the USGA’s request that the fairways be taken to the bunkers, with no ribbon of rough between. If overly aggressive players miss their landing zone spot, the ball is more likely to roll into a bunker instead of getting held up by tall, wispy grass."

Wow!  This has been my pet peeve for years, and was personified by the 18th hole at Bethpage Black in the last two Opens there.



I will be watching eagerly!  Any chance we'll see this?

[Chip Gaskins]

Bill

I totally agree.  I hate when fairway bunkers are 20 yards into the rough.  I think it is a pretty big shift for the USGA to come out and say what their new thoughts are on this subject, certainly when they seem to fly in the face of everything the past decade or so of US Opens have been like.

My favorite bunker like this is Chicago Golf # 12

[JESII]

The bunker on #1 seems preferable to 5 inch rough immediately next to it...are there a few bunkers out there that will be a worse position to play from than if the ball were in rough?

Are there pictures?

[John Moore II]

I can understand a small, second cut of rough, you know, shorter rough, between a bunker and the fairway to prevent slightly mishit shots from rolling into the bunker. But for the rough to be full length, that makes the bunker somewhat pointless. Lets see what the players think about this idea. Didn't they do the same thing at Southern Hills for the PGA a few years ago? Have the fairways back like halfway into the bunker?

[Bill_McBride]

I can understand a small, second cut of rough, you know, shorter rough, between a bunker and the fairway to prevent slightly mishit shots from rolling into the bunker. But for the rough to be full length, that makes the bunker somewhat pointless. Lets see what the players think about this idea. Didn't they do the same thing at Southern Hills for the PGA a few years ago? Have the fairways back like halfway into the bunker?

Why would you want anything to prevent a ball hit toward a bunker from rolling into it, "slightly mishit" or not?

There you go thinking like a golf pro again! 

[Matt_Cohn]

6


6


6


8


14

[Steve Kline]

Great photos Matt. On the first photo of 6 it looks like everything between the bunkers and the ocean is fairway. Is that right?

The USGA might be turning a corner here. I just visited my dad in Pinehurst. The fairways are #2 are at least twice as wide as they were for the last two US Opens. I find it hard to believe that they would redo that course with it really being ready for play in 2011 and then have the US Open just a few years later and cut the fairways back in half again. You have to think those changes had the USGA's blessing. Now if the USGA just makes sure the courses have lots of brown on them and instructs the announcers to talk that up maybe we can start to get the average Joe to appreciate real golf.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I can understand a small, second cut of rough, you know, shorter rough, between a bunker and the fairway to prevent slightly mishit shots from rolling into the bunker.

WHY ?

Why defeat the intended gathering nature of the bunker ?

This is how bunker surrounds should be maintained.


But for the rough to be full length, that makes the bunker somewhat pointless.

?

Lets see what the players think about this idea.
Didn't they do the same thing at Southern Hills for the PGA a few years ago?
Have the fairways back like halfway into the bunker?

The problem starts when clubs narrow their fairways for competitions.

The problem gets exacerbated when the clubs then MOVE the bunkers in to match the new rough lines.

It's a terrible progression or regression.

It's a shame that clubs aren't more in tune with elasticity vis a vis width.

[Jobst von Steinsdorff]

The problem starts when clubs narrow their fairways for competitions.

The problem gets exacerbated when the clubs then MOVE the bunkers in to match the new rough lines.

I don't see why narrowing fairways should necessarily have so much impact on the fairway bunkering. In most cases it should be possible to leave the fairway right next to the bunker on its side and cut off the desired width of fairway only on the other side. While this may cut off the safe route, you don't necessarily want such a route provided in major competitions.

This should work for almost all strategically relevant bunkers, while penal and directional bunkers can have rough between them and the fairway as they are not really in play for expert players anyway.

I can understand a small, second cut of rough, you know, shorter rough, between a bunker and the fairway to prevent slightly mishit shots from rolling into the bunker.

Well, the thought that a slightly mishit shot deserves milder punishment, is what you expect from penal designs. However mishits from tour pros usually are only slight ones, so the bunker is effectively out of play for them. I believe it's much more interesting to increase the "Risk-Reward-Ratio" for flirting with the bunker by having shots roll into the bunker also when they land clear but close.

On the other hand I understand stripes of rough/first cut on the setup for everyday play, as hitting huge fairway bunkers can have a detrimental effect on pace of play (Murphy's law will take care that there are either too few rakes in the first place or all rakes are in one corner of the bunker, sometimes huge detours, especially for cart riders when they have to walk from the cartpath ...).

[Patrick_Mucci]

JVS,

Both Oakmont and Baltusrol narrowed their fairways and brought bunkers in to match, eliminating the possibility of widtht elasticity.

[Jobst von Steinsdorff]

Patrick,

Both Oakmont and Baltusrol narrowed their fairways and brought bunkers in to match, eliminating the possibility of widtht elasticity.

I am not familiar with these changes, but was there an architectural reason to keep the fairway centered and move the bunkers instead? Or did they just want to keep it symmetrical?

[Sean_A]

The problem starts when clubs narrow their fairways for competitions.

The problem gets exacerbated when the clubs then MOVE the bunkers in to match the new rough lines.

I don't see why narrowing fairways should necessarily have so much impact on the fairway bunkering. In most cases it should be possible to leave the fairway right next to the bunker on its side and cut off the desired width of fairway only on the other side. While this may cut off the safe route, you don't necessarily want such a route provided in major competitions.

This should work for almost all strategically relevant bunkers, while penal and directional bunkers can have rough between them and the fairway as they are not really in play for expert players anyway.

I can understand a small, second cut of rough, you know, shorter rough, between a bunker and the fairway to prevent slightly mishit shots from rolling into the bunker.

Well, the thought that a slightly mishit shot deserves milder punishment, is what you expect from penal designs. However mishits from tour pros usually are only slight ones, so the bunker is effectively out of play for them. I believe it's much more interesting to increase the "Risk-Reward-Ratio" for flirting with the bunker by having shots roll into the bunker also when they land clear but close.

On the other hand I understand stripes of rough/first cut on the setup for everyday play, as hitting huge fairway bunkers can have a detrimental effect on pace of play (Murphy's law will take care that there are either too few rakes in the first place or all rakes are in one corner of the bunker, sometimes huge detours, especially for cart riders when they have to walk from the cartpath ...).

I would think the more fairway that immediately surrounds a bunker, the more potential for maximum strategy that bunker has.  Hence the reason centre-line bunkers create the most options (essentially four) for players.  That is unless folks are in favour of burying optimal angles of approach in rough - usually a sign of a course being too narrow and/or poor bunker placement. 

Ciao