[MCirba]

I'm suggesting they are never raked, thus the early v. late argument loses it's luster.

[John Kavanaugh]

I'm suggesting they are never raked, thus the early v. late argument lose it's luster.

At what point does this lead to lost balls and slowing the game down. Don't forget injuries unless the other players in the group vacate the green as cruise missile coons are launched head high across the green.

[John Kavanaugh]

If you can find a club with any money I have an emulsion that you mix with sand that all but eliminates foot prints and is still playable. Between asphalt liners bunker liners and emulsified sand mix I may never need to build a road again.

[Jim Sherma]

It's been said before here, but I think it is important to emphasize the importance of the type of sand used.


Beach sand like on a lot of link courses tends to fall back in on itself. You could end up on an uneven lie but unlikely to be in a sharp edge from the side of a shoe.


On the other extreme, very firm and gritty sand like you see in waste areas and some less maintained muni type courses will leave some footprints but is usually easier to smooth out with your foot/club. Also the firmness means that you can dig into it with some consistency and that the bounce will engage. This means that even with a less than good lie there is a shot that can usually be played if you know how to play in this type of sand.


The type of sand used at many country clubs in the northeast causes real problems with less maintenance in my opinion. It does not fall back in on itself thereby leaving sharper edged footprints while the softness of the surface makes it difficult to go down and get the shot out given less than a good lie. It is in these types of situations where it really is a hit and hope. If you go steeper the club may or may not dig deep with the bounce not engaging.


I grew up on public courses and don't expect or even strive for perfection in bunker maintenance (although it is nice to see it done well). However, there should be some expectation that the shot can be playable if you have reasonable skills. The hit and hope shot where the outcome is less based on skill is not anything that golfers should seek out or accept.

[A.G._Crockett]

Whatever you think about the question of rakes and bunkers, stop using water and OB and the rough and the fairway as tortured analogies to make a point.  None of those are especially pertinent to bunkers. 


I also understand the concepts of hazards and randomness.  I don't expect a good lie in a bunker, and I don't expect to have the same condition in a bunker as another player in that same bunker; I think we ALL accept those ideas and realities.  And we all understand, I think, the randomness of finding our ball in a divot hole in the middle of the fairway, or having our ball go to the bottom of the rough while a fellow competitor's ball sits up beautifully a few feet away.

But the idea that somehow golf is a better, purer game if conditions are allowed to deteriorate thru the day, much less the tournament, is unique.  A water hazard doesn't grow during the round.  OB doesn't become closer during the round.  Yes, there are marginally more divots in the fairway, but SOME players are doing the right thing and filling those, and the grass is growing if only a little. 


I play most of my golf on a Fazio course with a crazy number of bunkers, most of which have extremely steep faces AND fingers of turf mounds that extend into the bunker so that two balls a few feet apart face radically different shots.  I get ALL of that, and I tell guests and first time players at the course that a really good strategy is to just play the course without getting into a bunker.  And I don't blame Fazio when I'm in the left fairway bunker on 18 with absolutely no option but pitching out; I blame ME for the double cross tee shot that put me there.

But none of that has anything to do with the fat guys in carts who played before me and were too drunk by 18 to care anymore about smoothing the 25' of footprints that they made going in and out of the bunker; the divot from their actual shot is the least of the problems.

I'm in a HUGE minority on this particular Grumpy Old Men thread, so I'll stop.  But one final note concerning the Tour, which a lot of you guys LOVE to bash.  Do you really want a guy like Patrick Reed to be at a competitive advantage late in the round on Sunday because he and his brother-in-law caddy don't have to rake the bunkers?  Do you put it past a guy like that to walk a quarter mile or so in the bunker before and after his shot and then do a Mexican Hat Dance around his ball before he hits?  C'mon, man...

[Jason Thurman]

I think the most important thing to emphasize in this conversation is that the average club golfer, influenced by the Tour and his own desire for good scores and the golf industrial complex, is not even a little bit on board with a permanent move to unmaintained bunkers.


You guys can boast about playing in sheep shit all you want on this forum. And my perspective here is definitely based in Midwestern America, so maybe golfers in the UK think sheep shit makes a great playing surface. But if you show up at my US club's 19th hole and start arguing that bunker maintenance should be eliminated, you're getting laughed out of the open air pavilion.


Y'all are out here speccing sand for a purpose that's a figment of your imagination.


Once again, I find myself nodding in resounding agreement with Lou. I've never understood the guys who think we shouldn't try to leave the course as-or-better-than we found it for others.

[Mark Fedeli]

Whatever you think about the question of rakes and bunkers, stop using water and OB and the rough and the fairway as tortured analogies to make a point.  None of those are especially pertinent to bunkers. 


I also understand the concepts of hazards and randomness.  I don't expect a good lie in a bunker, and I don't expect to have the same condition in a bunker as another player in that same bunker; I think we ALL accept those ideas and realities.  And we all understand, I think, the randomness of finding our ball in a divot hole in the middle of the fairway, or having our ball go to the bottom of the rough while a fellow competitor's ball sits up beautifully a few feet away.

But the idea that somehow golf is a better, purer game if conditions are allowed to deteriorate thru the day, much less the tournament, is unique.  A water hazard doesn't grow during the round.  OB doesn't become closer during the round.  Yes, there are marginally more divots in the fairway, but SOME players are doing the right thing and filling those, and the grass is growing if only a little. 


I play most of my golf on a Fazio course with a crazy number of bunkers, most of which have extremely steep faces AND fingers of turf mounds that extend into the bunker so that two balls a few feet apart face radically different shots.  I get ALL of that, and I tell guests and first time players at the course that a really good strategy is to just play the course without getting into a bunker.  And I don't blame Fazio when I'm in the left fairway bunker on 18 with absolutely no option but pitching out; I blame ME for the double cross tee shot that put me there.

But none of that has anything to do with the fat guys in carts who played before me and were too drunk by 18 to care anymore about smoothing the 25' of footprints that they made going in and out of the bunker; the divot from their actual shot is the least of the problems.

I'm in a HUGE minority on this particular Grumpy Old Men thread, so I'll stop.  But one final note concerning the Tour, which a lot of you guys LOVE to bash.  Do you really want a guy like Patrick Reed to be at a competitive advantage late in the round on Sunday because he and his brother-in-law caddy don't have to rake the bunkers?  Do you put it past a guy like that to walk a quarter mile or so in the bunker before and after his shot and then do a Mexican Hat Dance around his ball before he hits?  C'mon, man...

It’s a shame that so many aspects of the game need to cater to drunk guys in carts, stroke play, and professionals.

[Rob Marshall]

Who said you should be a perfect lie in a bunker? The fun of playing a bunker shot is the different lies you get. A foot print shouldn't be one of the lies.


"It's f****** easy to practice shots from footprints. Stop bitching. You are not entitled to a line, stance, or to advance the ball any distance. Get in the practice bunker and work. I'm not giving you strokes for your laziness."

Kyle,
I practice almost every night. I've been working on my bunker play pretty hard since our bunkers were recently renovated and the sand is nothing like the old "dirt" we used to have. Please give me the fundamentals  of hitting a shot from a 3 or 4 inch footprint and I'll go to work...... I certainly don't want to bitch when it's so f****** easy.

[MCirba]

In case my point isn't clear, I am not arguing against each individual taking responsibility for leaving the course better than they found it, or failing to smooth footprints with their foot or a club.  To fail to do so is inconsistent with the sportsmanship aspects of the game, and being a good golf citizen.

[Kyle Harris]

Mike,


Bunkers require some degree of rake maintenance for the sake of preservation. Once, twice a week, tops.

If you were to read our surveys at Streamsong, we likely have the most least-kempt bunkers on the planet and I've yet, in almost ten years, to draw a lie in one that actually influenced the outcome of my round or match.

[MCirba]

Kyle,


Understood.  I'm all for whatever is necessary to preserve a golf course and its features and I'm admittedly a novice when it comes to those particulars.


On a recent trip south I played early and watched teams of workers meticulously sandpro-ing each long waste bunker/area that stretched sometimes for hundreds of yards and hand tending to each smaller individual bunker.  I'm not sure I see the value or the sustainability of this economic model if that is our collective expectation.

[John Kavanaugh]

I hated a few things at Pinehurst #2. The starter telling us before we hit that breakfast balls are appropriate, caddies riding in carts because they are too old to carry, caddies using a wrist watch gps, but most of all playing all sand as waste areas. Until you watch a guy take practice swings inside a green side bunker you haven't experienced stupefied rage. This is exactly where we are headed and it's not a surprise.

[Niall C]

Whatever you think about the question of rakes and bunkers, stop using water and OB and the rough and the fairway as tortured analogies to make a point.  None of those are especially pertinent to bunkers.  right, you don't want us to use analogies on water, rough and OB to make a point. Got that.


I also understand the concepts of hazards and randomness.  I don't expect a good lie in a bunker, and I don't expect to have the same condition in a bunker as another player in that same bunker; I think we ALL accept those ideas and realities. But Sergio and Patrick won't, is that not what you said ? And we all understand, I think, the randomness of finding our ball in a divot hole in the middle of the fairway, or having our ball go to the bottom of the rough while a fellow competitor's ball sits up beautifully a few feet away.

But the idea that somehow golf is a better, purer game if conditions are allowed to deteriorate thru the day, much less the tournament, is unique. I don't believe anyone on this thread is saying that. The comments seem to me to address the spurious notion that you seem to be supporting that you can't have a level playing field (as opposed to a perfectly level and raked bunker) for competitors without using rakes unless you allow a free drop. A water hazard doesn't grow during the round. and neither do bunkers  OB doesn't become closer during the round. ditto bunkers Yes, there are marginally more divots in the fairway, but SOME players are doing the right thing and filling those, and the grass is growing if only a little. and if players simply used the sole of their foot or the back of the clubhead to smooth out the sand in a bunker, would that not also be the right thing ? Or alternatively do as Mike suggests and have no smoothing of sand at all so that the players start with messy bunkers and finish with messy bunkers. I have to say that isn't my favoured approach as I believe in courtesy towards other players, however that doesn't equate to trying to eliminate luck which is what you seem to be driving at.


Anyway, I thought we weren't meant to be using analogies on rough, bunkers water etc. ?


I play most of my golf on a Fazio course with a crazy number of bunkers, most of which have extremely steep faces AND fingers of turf mounds that extend into the bunker so that two balls a few feet apart face radically different shots.  I get ALL of that, and I tell guests and first time players at the course that a really good strategy is to just play the course without getting into a bunker. And I don't blame Fazio when I'm in the left fairway bunker on 18 with absolutely no option but pitching out; I blame ME for the double cross tee shot that put me there.

But none of that has anything to do with the fat guys in who played before me and were too drunk by 18 to care anymore about smoothing the 25' of footprints that they made going in and out of the bunker; the divot from their actual shot is the least of the problems. And presumably these fat drunk guys will rake the bunkers perfectly is only they had the right equipment ? 

I'm in a HUGE minority on this particular Grumpy Old Men thread, so I'll stop.  But one final note concerning the Tour, which a lot of you guys LOVE to bash.  Do you really want a guy like Patrick Reed to be at a competitive advantage late in the round on Sunday because he and his brother-in-law caddy don't have to rake the bunkers?  Do you put it past a guy like that to walk a quarter mile or so in the bunker before and after his shot and then do a Mexican Hat Dance around his ball before he hits?  C'mon, man... I'm not one to bash the tour as you suggest for the simple reason that I don't watch it. I am however against the idea that somehow we should design courses purely for these guys. Likewise I'm against changing the rules for the same reason.

[Tom_Doak]

But one final note concerning the Tour, which a lot of you guys LOVE to bash.  Do you really want a guy like Patrick Reed to be at a competitive advantage late in the round on Sunday because he and his brother-in-law caddy don't have to rake the bunkers?  Do you put it past a guy like that to walk a quarter mile or so in the bunker before and after his shot and then do a Mexican Hat Dance around his ball before he hits?  C'mon, man...

I feel like this scenario would give the rest of the players on Tour license to kneecap Patrick Reed once and for all, so, another reason in favor of not raking bunkers. 

[Tom_Doak]

If you can find a club with any money I have an emulsion that you mix with sand that all but eliminates foot prints and is still playable. Between asphalt liners bunker liners and emulsified sand mix I may never need to build a road again.

If this is really a thing, email me with the details.  I would be happy to try it out somewhere, and I'm sure I can find a club that would be the guinea pig.

[Tom_Doak]

One of the impediments for new people coming to the game is how difficult it is.  With the average handicap just south of 18, do we really want to make golf harder?

Lou, I feel certain that if bunkers were less well tended, you would be among the first to adapt and give them their due.  No way it would cost you two shots a round, except maybe at places like Winged Foot with greens pinched by bunkers on every hole.


Aren't you usually in favor of keeping the game difficult and not pandering to weaker players?  Why the concern trolling here?  It's the same with John Kavanaugh, the tune suddenly changes when a change is proposed that would require a change to your own approach.


I do understand that this discussion is purely hypothetical.  We didn't put bunkers out at Barnbougle when it opened and that experiment lasted maybe a month -- and only because it took that long to get rakes to Tasmania once the complaints started!


I have watched clubs where I consult spend ridiculous amounts of money putting perfect sand in the bunkers to make them play easier and "reduce maintenance costs" [while they spend 5-10x as much on bunker maintenance now as they did 20 years ago].  Luckily it helps to keep my employees well fed and hopefully able to send their kids to college, but it would be nice if we were making those courses more interesting, instead.

[John Kavanaugh]

If you can find a club with any money I have an emulsion that you mix with sand that all but eliminates foot prints and is still playable. Between asphalt liners bunker liners and emulsified sand mix I may never need to build a road again.

If this is really a thing, email me with the details.  I would be happy to try it out somewhere, and I'm sure I can find a club that would be the guinea pig.

Tom,


So I'm on the phone with my R&D department and I see that you have thrown me in the same bucket as Lou. You go low, I'll go high and answer the above anyway.


I'm sure you have seen various dust control products that stabilize sand. Water being the most common. A nice tight wet compacted sand would make for nice bunkers. Our product is called a PEP. It is unfortunately both black and stinks. This works in a construction environment and is often used as a prime to later be covered by a permanent structure. So it would be a poor use in this exact state. I do however think that it would be relatively simple to replace fuel oil and asphalt with more desirable agents to get the texture you desire. Something like an emulsion of coconut oil, corn syrup and water seems like it would work. And you could lick your balls when you were done.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Some of those white sands get so firm that most balls find themselves right at the low spot of the bunker anyway.  Yes, you pay over $100 per ton for it, but I doubt it really needs to be raked every day, other than about 20 s.f.  Wonder how that figures in?


It also occurs it could be a local rule, or one of the second waves of the USGA relaxed rules.  If you don't think muni players do it now anyway, I think you may be wrong.  But on a course by course decision local rule, a muni could implement it, private club not.  A course that wants to become more difficult and overcome lack of harder hazards might forbid it, etc. 


Courses used to be quite a bit more variable by region, and now seem standardized.  This might bring back some uniqueness?

[Kalen Braley]

While I'm inclined to take Mike's position, of just let em be..

As a practical matter they will slow down play and for the average double digit capper, attempting to hit a ball out of a foot print is an exercise in futility.  I ran into this twice at Chambers Bay when some of the bunkers were deemed "waste areas" and left unmaintained. Both occurrences resulted in a picked up ball.

In a time when golf bodies are trying to speed up play, probably a bad idea...

[Mark Fedeli]

While I'm inclined to take Mike's position, of just let em be..

As a practical matter they will slow down play and for the average double digit capper, attempting to hit a ball out of a foot print is an exercise in futility.  I ran into this twice at Chambers Bay when some of the bunkers were deemed "waste areas" and left unmaintained. Both occurrences resulted in a picked up ball.

In a time when golf bodies are trying to speed up play, probably a bad idea...

Will we see it any more often than we see the same double digit capper take 4 swipes in a well-maintained bunker before just picking up or throwing the ball out?


Maybe, conversely, extra-difficult bunkers will encourage those players to forget about carding a complete score on the hole and utilize their ESC scores more often. Or maybe the inclusion of more randomness, in a feature as ubiquitous as bunkers, will lead toward future generations of players not expecting perfect conditions as much, playing match play more often, becoming more accepting of bad luck, and gaining a bit more enlightenment about the game.

[John Kavanaugh]

I've played 52 year now and I'm still waiting to meet those golfers who don't play match play. When there are bets on the outcome of each hole it is match play.

[Bernie Bell]

So raking bunkers is "unenlightened" now?  It's so hard for me to keep up.  Did Shivas say that?  I never could make it to the end of Golf in the Kingdom.

[John Kavanaugh]

A digital watch to time your round is all that is woke that you can't pluck from nature with your own two hands.

[Mark Mammel]

While I'm inclined to take Mike's position, of just let em be..

As a practical matter they will slow down play and for the average double digit capper, attempting to hit a ball out of a foot print is an exercise in futility.  I ran into this twice at Chambers Bay when some of the bunkers were deemed "waste areas" and left unmaintained. Both occurrences resulted in a picked up ball.

In a time when golf bodies are trying to speed up play, probably a bad idea...

Hey, we are not all scratch players on this site. Some of us are now accepting that trying to tread water may not even be feasible! I have a good friend, single-digit, who will get out of the bunker even if it takes 2 (almost never 3!) shots. I agree that 'in the pocket" makes sense when the task seems overwhelming.

For those who do take more than one shot in a bunker, there are some ways tpo describe the effort: 2 shots is a Hitler, 3 shots a Stoogie, 4 or more unfortunate.

[Mark Fedeli]

So raking bunkers is "unenlightened" now?  It's so hard for me to keep up.  Did Shivas say that?  I never could make it to the end of Golf in the Kingdom.

Don’t know. Never read it. But I’m certainly not going to apologize for thinking that a large portion of the average golf playing public could use some enlightenment when it comes to not expecting perfection and being more open to randomness. It can only have positive effects for the future of the game.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()