Rear bunkers

[Jeff_Brauer]

First, kudos to Tommy for a good, philosophical design topic.   


Not that anyone cares, but here are a few thoughts.


As to the unplayability of a downhill bunker shot, most of the PGA Tour Pros I know have commented on their difficulty, especially when the green also slopes away from you, as would be typical with a bunker elevated about a green that falls from back to front.  You may say, "who cares" because they are mostly concerned that a shot that they have the skill to play close to the pin may run away beyond their control.  In their opinion, it goes a bit beyond rub of the green to an intentionally punishing design feature.  And, they wonder if they have trouble getting it close, how would the average player fare?  They side with Adam.  


As to Tommy's more recent comment, creating an uncomfortable shot for the vast majority of golfers rarely makes sense.  As mentioned golf courses are in the entertainment biz.  Also, most golfers love it when their opponents have uncomfortable and difficult shots, but bitch when it happens to them!  (Sort of like the difference between recession (when you friends lose their job) and depression, when you lose your job.


This has been a debate as long as I have been in the biz (1977)  Ross was said to not use backing bunkers, although that may have been proven largely false.  Mac used them for framing and artistic composition and they often work well in that regard.  Somehow, when you have control of the golfers view (rare in other forms of architecture and landscape architecture) and the green is the ultimate target and (usually) the end of the view, back bunkers have at least a limited place.  Given that only 8% of missed shots go back right, and 12% go back left, you cannot call them "high value" hazards compared to frontal and lateral bunkers.  IMHO, a few per course where really necessary visually are enough.


As to their hazard, second level thinking would say, yes, protecting a back pin is sometimes a good thing.  But in theory, if you have a mix of "Sunday Pins" they should be spread around like a tic tac toe board, and there should probably be only 2-4 back Sunday pins.  And, George Thomas figured a long miss was a better shot than one that comes up short and deserving of a fw lie in many cases.  Or, if you want to entice a golfer to play aggressively, leaving some wiggle room back tends to do that.  Or, if you believe in a bail out area for most shots, including aggressive ones to back pins, they should probably be pretty rare on those tucked corners of greens that also have a huge front bunker and only 50-60 foot of target depth. 


I can kind of see back bunkers where they guard the shot from the "wrong" angle much more than from the "right" side of the fw.  When coming in over a frontal bunker from the wrong side, one typical good player strategy is to aim long and play more spin.  A bunker back there, on top of a greater green slope right in front of it both allows and challenges that shot, if they happen to overcook it and play long.  Or, with a bit lesser slope on the green facing that direction to make the shot itself a bit harder, (in addition to less green depth from that direction, tending to bring it in play more.)


As to "rear bunkers becoming the next gca trend"  I think they were and now they are not, nor do I foresee it in any near term scenario. Just my experience, doing several bunker reduction plans.  I have not been able to "keep" any back bunker I deem visually necessary.  If they don't see play, most supers and pros say take them out.


Lastly, I think which architect uses them seems to influence this site's opinion of them.  I recall C and C being praised for keeping the Maxwell bunker several yards behind 12 at Prairie Dunes.  They reinstalled the fw cut behind the green to keep running shots running, potentially into the bunker.  I would actually like to see the stats on how many players get in that bunker, 9.5 yards behind the greens back edge (I checked) even with the back center of the green kicking shots that way.


I have built a few bunkers several yards behind a green, usually on an uphill approach shot where I did want a bunker to help mark the green location.


Short version, while there are no hard and fast rules that should prevent them, of course, I agree with those who say it seems like for a variety of reasons, they just shouldn't be overly relied in a design.

[Ira Fishman]

Yes, all things in moderation, but rear bunkers can add a bit of variety and risk. Ross did use them on PH2, Mid Pines, and Pine Needles if my memory serves. And in some other cases, he put them on the back side of a green that is angled so technically not "rear" but serve a similar function.


Ira

[Ira Fishman]

Rear bunkers are something I really associate with Dr MacKenzie. Colt, for example, almost never used them. I agree with Dai that they're mostly eye candy, though in certain cases they can be 'saving' bunkers and they do sometimes protect a back pin effectively. Rees Jones has an interesting theory, related to pin locations rather than bunkers, that the back pin is nowadays generally the hardest to access for top golfers, because of the amount of spin they impart.

I have played only two Colt courses--St.George's Hill and Swinley--and both have rear bunkers.


Ira

[Ira Fishman]

Am I the only person that has found every rear bunker possible as a result of thin and skulled shots? It is a great topic. The courses at Bandon and Streamsong all have rear bunkers and many of them add real value.


Ira

[Kalen Braley]

Given that most weekend players' miss is coming up short, I think its refreshing to implement something that will affect better players more often than the average hacks...

[Sean_A]

Adam, Sean,

No doubt it is harder to design meaningful rear bunkers. But they neither have to be above the level of the green nor blind if there is enough scale / space to the backing hill / mound along with the right gradient to bring the sand flash up high enough. Definitely brings a few more variables in to the equation with construction though. They end up being quite big.

I think they can play their part in strategy also, particularly on a shallow green with a front left, back right combo (or vice versa).

Occasionally they can really add to aesthetics.

Still, all those things needing to come together (along with tendency for most golfers to rarely go long) usually means they are best used sparingly. Best applied in firm conditions for sure.

I don't mind rear bunkers. All I am saying is most of the time the cool looking high visual impact rear bunkers don't require much of a recovery shot. In which case, it's a lot of money to spend when grass will do. I would rather go the different route of rear bunkers with a proper face even if they have little visual impact. Everybody knows sand is there, just as is the with many blind bunkers. A lot of trepidation can be caused by unseen elements. Folks act as though the challenge must be seen to be believed.

Ciao

[JMEvensky]

Thanks for that JB--it was interesting inside baseball info.

[Wade Whitehead]

I played Ballyhack yesterday and when I got to 8 looked at the rear bunker. It doesn't come into play very often but when the pin is in the back it does. Land it too far on the green and it will one hop into the bunker.

One reason the back bunker on #8 works so well is that the approach plays between 5 and 8 yards shorter than the expected yardage.

Players who don't recognize this can hit a solid shot that flies straight into it.

WW

[Niall C]

I'm in the camp of thinking that they don't quite look right but of course that is probably because of the way I've been conditioned. Mind you nothing wrong with occasionally having to do a delicate downhill pitch but that could just as easy be done from grass.


With regards the Cavendish photo Duncan posted, I can't say the perched bunkers at the back do anything for me. I suspect it is an existing landform and indeed looks like it might be the back end of a rail track ? I do like Simon's idea for the back of the 4th at NB if only to help save time looking for lost balls.


At the end of the day I wouldn't say definitely don't build them but just think they are hard to pull off well.


Niall

[Tommy Williamsen]

I forget the hole but one of the players at Detroit GC flew it into a rear bunker on Sunday. It was an easier shot that if he had been in long grass.

[Tom_Doak]

Personal experience informs me that Pacific Dunes hole 8, rear left bunker, quite blind and severly penal given the slope of the green back to the bunker.
When the pin is left, IMHO the only "smart" approach  shot is 15 yards short of the green leaving a putt from off the green.

That bunker was actually built around a small tree at the back right of it, so that on opening day, you had to hit your bunker shot under the limbs to a back right hole location!  The tree blew over in a windstorm its first winter, and though the crew tried to prop it back up for me, it wouldn't stay.


That front hole location is indeed a killer; I've thought of it as similar to a left-to-right version of the Road Hole green.  But then the right half of the green is a big old catcher's mitt!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Both par threes (12&16) at Muirfield Village have rear bunkers. The first time I played there the last place (other than the water) I wanted be on 12 was the bunker. It made me grit my teeth and trust that I had enough club. It is one of the defining features of the hole.


Spieth made an impressive up and down from the rear bunker on 17 in the first round.

[Bradley Anderson]

I had the pleasure of walking Cypress Point in February and I noted that the rear bunker behind 15 was shallow, curvilinear and steeply banked, while the bunkers in the front of the green were larger and flatter with the same number of curves but lengthened between the lobes.

I spent several minutes marveling at these bunkers. I sensed that the whole point in how these were designed was to engender the feeling, from the tee, that the green is deep and its a shot you can make because there is plenty of room. The small bunker in the rear is key in how the whole visual sets up.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I had the pleasure of walking Cypress Point in February and I noted that the rear bunker behind 15 was shallow, curvilinear and steeply banked, while the bunkers in the front of the green were larger and flatter with the same number of curves but lengthened between the lobes.

I spent several minutes marveling at these bunkers. I sensed that the whole point in how these were designed was to engender the feeling, from the tee, that the green is deep and its a shot you can make because there is plenty of room. The small bunker in the rear is key in how the whole visual sets up.

16 also has a rear bunker. It is a good aiming point and keeps balls from the 17th tee.

[Pete_Pittock]

Stanley Thompson built a good set of them at Banff Springs.
It looks like the majority of holes at Pasatiempo have them.
There was a vicious one on the par 3 6th of The Home Course in WA, but I just checked the aerials and it is gone.
The bathtub behind Sagebrush 14.
Pacific Dunes 16 could be the poster child.


At Muirfield Village I think a pro would rather be in a bunker behind #12 green, rather than in the rough.

[Michael Wolf]

Hirono has some of the most ferocious rear bunkers I've seen. One that really stood out was behind their par 5 15th hole. I remember thinking while I was playing that it made a smart deterrent for anyone thinking of just trying to bomb a 3w on their second shot.

For similar reasons, I like the ones behind both of the short P4's at Oakmont, 2&17. I'm nowhere near long enough to try driving either hole. But if I was, it would be the rear bunkers that would give me pause, not the front ones.

Michael 

[Tal Oz]

I had the pleasure of walking Cypress Point in February and I noted that the rear bunker behind 15 was shallow, curvilinear and steeply banked, while the bunkers in the front of the green were larger and flatter with the same number of curves but lengthened between the lobes.

I spent several minutes marveling at these bunkers. I sensed that the whole point in how these were designed was to engender the feeling, from the tee, that the green is deep and its a shot you can make because there is plenty of room. The small bunker in the rear is key in how the whole visual sets up.

Bradley, earlier in the thread I had brought up the rear bunkers on 13 as a different kind of aesthetic thing than what you're describing on 15. The bunkering at Cypress has been discussed many times before, but the astute observation of the long (and deep) front bunkers combined with the shape of 15 green and the framing of the rear bunkers sets off the contrast. Mackenzie also did that on 3, but with a less flash faced rear bunker.

My one loop around Cypress last year I opted to hybrid putt out of that rear bunker on 15 to a back pin since there was a near zero chance I could stop a ball within 20' of that pin. Hit it to a foot and the shallow lip of that bunker made the shot possible no doubt.

https://imgur.com/a/blYvVMV

[Michael Felton]

A couple of these spring to mind. For aesthetics, the 17th at BPB is an interesting one. The bunkers in front and behind create the impression of just one big bunker with no green in the middle.


Then there is this one at Sands Point GC on Long Island: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sands+Point+Golf+Club/@40.8552112,-73.6992643,129m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c28ee0741c4441:0x89396e1c15662c9b!8m2!3d40.8533054!4d-73.7065672 It's on a longish par 5. The green has a tier at the back and the approach is downhill. The back bunker really makes you second guess the approach shot and it's hard to get it back on that tier with a short shot.


A similar one on another par 5: https://www.google.com/maps/place/North+Hills+Country+Club/@40.7730411,-73.6858861,91m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c28843d04daa17:0x99b8f699162207bb!8m2!3d40.775969!4d-73.6814901. This approach is uphill and again it's hard to get the ball to the back third of the green.


I think that they can be a great way to get in the head of someone with a shortish shot to a smallish back area of the green and it's especially effective when the approach shot isn't flat and you have that doubt in your mind about what the slope will do to your distances.

[Bradley Anderson]

I had the pleasure of walking Cypress Point in February and I noted that the rear bunker behind 15 was shallow, curvilinear and steeply banked, while the bunkers in the front of the green were larger and flatter with the same number of curves but lengthened between the lobes.

I spent several minutes marveling at these bunkers. I sensed that the whole point in how these were designed was to engender the feeling, from the tee, that the green is deep and its a shot you can make because there is plenty of room. The small bunker in the rear is key in how the whole visual sets up.

Bradley, earlier in the thread I had brought up the rear bunkers on 13 as a different kind of aesthetic thing than what you're describing on 15. The bunkering at Cypress has been discussed many times before, but the astute observation of the long (and deep) front bunkers combined with the shape of 15 green and the framing of the rear bunkers sets off the contrast. Mackenzie also did that on 3, but with a less flash faced rear bunker.

My one loop around Cypress last year I opted to hybrid putt out of that rear bunker on 15 to a back pin since there was a near zero chance I could stop a ball within 20' of that pin. Hit it to a foot and the shallow lip of that bunker made the shot possible no doubt.

https://imgur.com/a/blYvVMV

Tal, The rear bunkering on 13 ties in so nicely with the backdrop of the ocean. I took a lot of pictures of those bunkers. From the left side of the green you are looking at what has to be one of the most glorious spots in all of golf.

[mike_malone]

Flynn strikes again. When greens are set at an angle “ back “ bunkers become side bunkers with much strategy. When  they are offset from the front bunkers it’s even better.