[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

I don't think anyone of us is "technically" wrong.  It just seems to me that the USGA needs to think about how the whole issue of natural sand, etc., is handled.

I'll give you a silly example.  Hurdzan and Fry built a course in NJ called Sand Barrens.  It's sort of a PV-ish theme, with man made sand pits (with native sandy subsoil) framing many holes like gutters on a bowling alley.

Many of those "gutters" (played as "waste areas") extend for hundreds of yard and then magically become "bunkers" when they get within a certain proximity of the green.  Yet, you are in the exact same sandy area, only your proximity to the target should determine the rule??!    

I've just developed my own rule for sandy areas.  When in doubt, don't ground the club.  It avoids all the mess.  

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

I follow your rule also, exactly.  There was NO DOUBT I could ground the club in that area to the right of 13 at PD.

But you're right also, situations like that you describe at Sand Barrens are silly.

I just think that's THEIR problem, not the rule's... Read the rule exactly, tell me how better it could be written.  I really do think it's fine just as it is, and serves the purpose intended.

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

I guess what I call into question is the definition of a bunker as having to be "man made".  

This thread seems to have proven that natural bunkers exists...so, are they not "bunkers" under the rules of golf?

I can tell you that if I was in either of those natural pits I posted above in the first picture, I wouldn't think of them as a "waste area".  No, I would treat them as natural hazards.

[THuckaby2]

I guess this is where we differ.  I follow the rules, which state what they do.  Yes, if it's in any doubt, I don't ground the club, and assume what I'm in IS a bunker.  But those pics - at least from what I can see sitting here - don't look like "bunkers" as defined, at all... to me anyway.  Thus if it was gonna help me, I might ground the club.  At least the thought would be there, anyway.

Now should the rule be changed?  Perhaps.  Maybe eliminated "man-made" and leave "prepared."  I just think the good outweighs the bad in the current rule though, as without the rule, HUGE areas of Pacific Dunes, Sand Hills, many other courses with large sandy areas would require a player to do things, and potentially be penalized, where it really isn't necessary....

TH

[Tommy_Naccarato]

And my final contribution to this thread.

[Tim_Weiman]

Tom Huckaby:

You and I simply see things differently. I believe GCA is best served by threads that stay focused. In this case, it was pretty obvious that a discussion about rules was not the point of the thread.

Just as people can ignore threads that aren't of interest, posters should also have the courtesy to start new threads rather than diluting an existing one.

Focus is an important ingredient to interesting discussion.

[THuckaby2]

Tim:

Yes, I guess we do see this differently.  I much prefer discussion that branches out beyond what the originator intends to a multitude of very specific threads, and find the discussion works better this way.

To each his own.  

TH

ps - I'll be playing golf tomorrow with Ran, and may ask him his opinion on this.  Then again, I may just concentrate on having fun at a great course.  In any case his take would be interesting, and likely the most valid one.

[Forrest Richardson]

Mike wrote,

"Have I not read somewhere that many of the bunkers on links courses evolved in preferred playing locations as better golfers played from those spots and exposed the underlying sand to the elements?  Perhaps the ultimate men-made bunkers.  Someone, please post the text if you are familiar with it."

My writing on the subject: "...The hazards were the hollows created by animals combined with the naturally occurring hills of sand held together with tufts of grass at the top and sides. Presumably, the first bunkers were created by animals, who knew that, as the modern-day adage says, a bunker is a relatively good place to be should lightning catch you by surprise. Bunker, by the way, is Scottish for “wooden storage chest” ..."

I have heard the notion that worn areas were eventually left to expand, and that these became bunkers. Surely this was the exception, however it also is certain that it has been the case at some courses, especially those on sandy, linksland soils where worn areas will easily drain water and settle and become pits.

At Dooks in Ireland I recently noted at the 17th hole two former sand bunkers which were continual problems so the club allowed them to fill in with turf and then eventually expanded the green to include these two nicely placed depressions — now mere 2-foot low areas actually within the putting surface. How delightful they were.

[Dennis_Harwood]

Are you telling me that if you were in either of the bunkers in the first picture, you would ground your club?

Because, the USGA has said that a bunker must be "man made"??

I don't understand.  

I didn't intend to start a firestorm--

But I do need to respond one more time--

The definition of a "bunker", which is type of hazard along with a water hazard, is not the creation of the USGA(So why even mention the USAG)-- Its those darn Scots  associated with the Royal and Ancient who came up with that definition over 150 years ago--

And they used that definition to define an area which "from which the soil or turf had been removed"--whether by Tom Morris or a sheep-- And the first of those areas were where sheep had dug away the turf on the side of turf covered mounds to create shelter from the winds(if you drive though Scotland today will see what appears to be beautiful bunkering in grass covered fields, until you look closer and see that those are "shelters" built by sheep--they still do it today--)

And why was this important to the Scots?  Because there was different relief granted from a hazard than through the green, and you had to play your way out of a hazard, but could take unplayable from the natural dunes--

And despite what you call them, those areas in every desert course I have set up for competition plays those sand areas as through the green, and not bunkers, and Cypress and Maidstone play those sand dunes as through the green and not bunkers, and St Andrews play the sandy areas adjoining the fairways as through the Green, and the sandy areas in the coastal Carolinia courses and at Pinehurst are played as through the green and not bunkers--

And all those pictures that Tommy posted, if you look at the historical notes and the old cards of the courses, do not play those areas as bunkers--the bunkers on those courses were the areas surrounded by sod and were designated as hazards--the natural sandy areas were not--

And its not only that you can't ground your club in a bunker, nor remove sticks coving your ball, you can not take unplayable out of a bunker(except S&D) and must play your way out--

[THuckaby2]

Well said, Dennis.  THAT is why the rules are very important in this discussion.

I continue to fail to see what is so bad about interjecting this very key point, in a discussion centering on what bunkers really are....which is what this is...

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Dennis;

Thanks for your explanation...sometimes it's not even sheep that cause natural bunkers but just wind and/or water flow beating on an exposed area.  

Now, humor me for a second...

Take a look at Tommy's last posted photo of Friar's Head just above.  Would you play that entire thing as "through the green", or do you see any "bunkers" there?

Thanks, again!

[THuckaby2]

Mike:

I'm a rules peon compared to Dennis, but I'd say damn near all of that is "through the green"... or ought to be, whether they call it such or not.  The only part that might be called "bunker" under the rules is the back left, from what I can tell in the picture.  That looks "prepared" and maintained.  The part hiding on the right might be also, but one can't tell, the bushes are in the way.

We'll see what Dennis says...

That being said, it looks like one fantastic golf hole.  

If I plug one in the stuff anywhere other than back left, however, I'd like to think I can extricate it under the unplayable lie rule - which I could if it's through the green, can't if it's bunker.

That seems fair, doesn't it?

TH

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Huck, it must be about time to go to the airport.

[THuckaby2]

 

Oh yeah, it sure is... just got a massive project done, during which my forays over to here were used for sanity.  But we got it done a few hours ago, so now I am free....

Plane leaves at 4:40pm my time.  I'm outta here pretty soon.

TIGERS TIGERS TIGERS TIGERS

TH

[Dennis_Harwood]

Mike:

 but I'd say damn near all of that is "through the green"... or ought to be, whether they call it such or not.  The only part that might be called "bunker" under the rules is the back left, from what I can tell in the picture.  That looks "prepared" and maintained.  The part hiding on the right might be also, but one can't tell, the bushes are in the way.

We'll see what Dennis says...

That being said, it looks like one fantastic golf hole.  


TH

Agree 100%-- And it is a fantastic golf hole, even though most of it is through the green and is not a "bunker".

[Mike_Cirba]

Agree 100%-- And it is a fantastic golf hole, even though most of it is through the green and is not a "bunker".

Dennis/Tom - Where would you guys "draw the line"?  

Would it be imaginary, or need to be "staked" for tournament play?

Does anyone know the local rules at Friar's Head governing such areas?

God...I sound like Patrick Mucci!  

p.s. I also don't know how one grounds their club in sand without improving their lie, unless the sand is rock hard.  Thus, my own preference for never grounding the club in such areas.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Mike,

If you play Golf the right way, you play it as it lies, and its a bunker. What those others guys are hammerin' about, I don't know!

[Gene Greco]

Mike:

    When Sand Hills first opened for play there were NO RAKES in ANY of the natural bunkers. The idea being to preserve what nature had provided. One would simply hit their recovery shot and smooth foot prints with their feet.

Rakes first appeared in 1999 in the greenside bunkers only. Last week I noticed that rakes were placed in many of the giant blowouts.

All this raking has 'refined' the floors of these bunkers to a degree.

However, in some cases,  its an almost laughable exercise as it seemingly takes about half an hour to climb down into, rake and then climb out of some of these monsters.

[Gene Greco]

Mike:

   BTW, great thread.

[Forrest Richardson]

After reading the last few posts it is quite amusing that I have just opened the literature from a company selling "below grade" rake housings and cute little plastic rakes that "disappear" into the ground. How fitting that I toss it in the circular bin as we speak.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Forrest,
I wish you would have waited to let me do that on my next visit to the Mountain House.

[Forrest Richardson]

We sold the Mountain House to some gentlemen from "GCA.com" — ever heard of them?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Gene,

It would seem that "natural" bunkers become un-natural when a golfer trods through them, digs in their feet, and excavates large quantities of sand in attempting to extracate their ball on one or more occassions, and then trods back out of the bunker.

This un-natural disruption of a natural bunker necesitates remedial action to return the bunker to its natural state.
Enter the rake.  It's all very natural.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()