[Bryan Izatt]

This bunker struck me as being odd, but then it was designed by Coore and Crenshaw at Sugarloaf Mountain, so it's probably just me that's odd.  The bunker is on the 8th hole a 165 yard downhill par 3 with a Redan-like green that runs away from the tee, but has a bit of a lip at the back to stop slow rollers.



Now, I thinned the ball a bit, but not badly, and not surprisingly given the front to back cant of the green, the ball ran off the back edge and down a three or four foot embankment.  As I crossed the green to reach the ball I was surprised to find a pit bunker built into the embankment as if they were tring to protect the green from a shot coming from the back.  Now,  I missed the bunker, but was left with a delicate pitch from scruffy ground over the bunker.  Is it not penalty enough to have the ball run through the green and down the embankment without having to contend with a hidden bunker there too.

[Bill_McBride]

Bryan, an "unfair" bunker?

[Bryan Izatt]

Bill,

"Unfair" didn't pop into my mind when I discovered it.  Odd was the word.  Location and style seemed odd given the hole.  Overly punitive also came to mind.  Is that the same as unfair?  If we considered the hole a downhill Redan, I guess it's no more "unfair" than putting a rock wall behind the green.  Quirky maybe.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bryan,

Basically, you have laid out the argument for "What you see is what you get courses" and most in the "outside world" would agree with you.  Most in the gca.com inner circle might not!

[JSPayne]

The most difficult, penal bunker on my course is exactly like this one....the fairway is somewhat humpback, so your second shot is downhill to the green, though the green is tilted back to front, unlike the example here, but the bunker is still completley hidden from view in the fairway. However, the bunker serves a dual purpose to penalize someone attacking a back pin placement and going long and to stop balls from bounding down the slope behind the green into a road about 50 yards behind the green.

Luckily I've never been in that bunker, but I think it makes back pin positions, which are normally easier for most golfers to attack, more nerve-wracking on this particular green, as everyone is scared that if they catch it just a little better than they expected, the result could be disasterous.

[Bryan Izatt]

Jeff,

I'm not a big fan of what you see is what you get courses.  Some blindness and surprises are good.  And, in fact, Sugarloaf Mountain has a lot of blind shots and uphill holes that many might consider unfair, but I was good with those.  I suppose on this one it is the double penalty for going long.  Either the embankment or the bunker would have been fine.  Both seems like overkill, bu then all's fair in love, war, and golf. 

[Tom_Doak]

If the next time you played the hole, and the flag was on the left, would you think about aiming more to the right because of the bunker behind the left side?  If so, then it's a fine bunker.  If not, then it's probably unnecessary, but that is not the same as unfair.

I really don't understand your application of the "double penalty" clause.  By that standard, there would be no deep bunkers anywhere, because the embankment would always be enough.

[Ed Oden]

The redan at Yeamans has a bunker behind the green:



After one round it is obvious that you just don't go there. 

Tom Doak, is the Yeamans bunker in part to keep balls that go long from going in the water near the 7th tee?

Ed

[Sean_A]

I am completely lost as to what this thread is about.  Is it just about rear/hidden bunkers being unreasonable?  If so, I don't see the problem.  There are plenty of holes with rear bunkers in sight.  Is this somehow better?  I spose if you are a strict MacHead yes, visible bunkers are better, but Mac wasn't the Alpha and Omega of golf design. 

Ciao

[Jimmy Muratt]

Now that you have been in that spot and realized how tough if it is to play from, don't you think that will pop into your mind the next time that you step on the tee? 

That is why the best courses truly get better and reveal themselves with multiple plays.  The first go around is often a stroll in the park as "ignorance is bliss".  Shots are much easier to hit when you don't know the potential trouble that exists. 

[TEPaul]

"Overly punitive also came to mind.  Is that the same as unfair?"


Bryan:

I don't know what you have in mind when you say "overly punitive" but puntive doesn't mean the same thing to me as unfair unless there is something about architecture where it seems there is very little way NOT to get penalized.

Also, sort of "thinning" a tee shot on a redan type hole generally doesn't work out very well in any case! 

[cary lichtenstein]

Seems like this is a "Saver Bunker" and actually makes the hole easier

[Adam Clayman]

I like to call these blind rear bunkers "How do you do" bunkers.

Ax and Proc placed one on the rear of the 14th at Wild Horse. It was all Dick Daley could do to not tell me about it before we played the hole. Of course I found it, and have subsequently found it, But only because I missed played the shot.

Pete Dye also has used them (only much smaller in size) and I chuckle every time. He's one funny dude.

[Bryan Izatt]

Fair comments all. 

After serious reconsideration, I'll only say I guess I was miffed at thinning the shot; surprised by finding the hidden bunker; and, defeated by the delicate chip back over the bunker and the embankment.   

There's no reason a shot too long shouldn't be "penalized" any less than a shot too short or left or right.  The bunker per se was no more severe than any of the other bunkers.  And, deep bunkers with an embankment are not a double penalty.  And it is only blind once.  And, it would effect how I would play the hole a second time.

So, I can only say that the surprise must have clouded my judgement.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()