Wayno, the ground is of almost no consequence, it's the backhoe that determines the floor of the bunker, not the base grade
Oh, but it does when there is a lot of rock. Much of the bunkering at Cascades is shallow. It is because of the amount of rock under the thin layer of soil. In this case, and others around the country on similarly difficult ground, dynamite determines the floor more so than a backhoe.
Nothing is more predictable than a bunker floor that rises toward the green.
It presents a much easier extraction, with the possible exception of a very long bunker shot from a steep face.
You only focus on the upslope towards the green. What about an undulating floor offering a variety of stances and lies, including sideslopes and downslopes? The types of lies you get in more dynamic bunker topography, especially those that go with the slopes rather than are carved out of with their flat bunkers, look a lot better and offer many more varieties of stance and recovery testing. You cannot deny this as much as you like to focus on the one simpler shot.
Flynn's bunkers behind greens (which often sloped back to front) were purposefully shallow, but the floors were not laser level flat. These sorts of bunkers do not allow an upslope to make it easier to recover to the green. Concomitantly, they did not have the unfair downslope on the back side of the bunkers hindering recoveries for the bold player.
One must context your response above in terms of the frequency that one finds themselves in a bunker.
I rarely hit into 18 bunkers in a given round.
I rarely hit into 9 bunkers in a given round
I rarely hit into 6 bunkers in a given round.
On some rounds I may not be in any bunkers, or, in just a few.
So how would you achieve variety in bunker lie and stance if the golfer rarely visits them ?
And, how can you context your statement, with a modicum of credibility when few if any of bunker extractions are replicated in terms of the bunker configuration, bunker depth, green surrounds, putting surface and distance to the hole ?
This makes absolutely no sense. By the way, if you are rarely in bunkers, they rarely come into play and they are poorly placed and obsolete due to improvements in clubs and balls. You must be playing too many Macdonald and Raynor courses.
You're saying that you would have flashed bunkers at Westhampton ?
Not necessarily. I wouldn't have laser leveled flat bunker floors. I'd have some undulations and a lot less geometric look. It is a seaside site and I wouldn't use a t-square and ruler to lay out my bunker edges. Those unnatural shapes clash a lot. By the way, sand flashed high on raised bunkers have a look that resembles breaking waves on the ocean. In that regard, it is very harmonious with the surroundings.
Let me guess, is that what Flynn did ?
I don't know. I was telling Rich what I like. Stop using the Flynnophile BS as a source of my opinions and a deflection of considering Raynor and Banks. Let them stand on their own and quit using Flynn as a crutch to defend their work.