News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #50 on: June 06, 2020, 07:40:02 AM »
Is the Cabot Cliffs example really a PN? I thought the main point of a PN is the 4 options. This example is really penal in nature rather than strategic.
This.  It looks to me as if the strategic intent of the PN has been completely abandoned.  This looks like a bunker complex built entirely for eye-candy.  So I'm with you, Sean, not a PN at all.  And I'd question whether it's good design.  Also, what's with all the cabbage around it?  It appears as if, if you are stupid enough to hit a shot that might go in it, the sand is almost the only place you'll have any sort of shot. 


Probably the first picture of Cabot I have seen that doesn't make me want to play there.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #51 on: June 06, 2020, 08:41:29 AM »
Is the Cabot Cliffs example really a PN? I thought the main point of a PN is the 4 options. This example is really penal in nature rather than strategic.
This.  It looks to me as if the strategic intent of the PN has been completely abandoned.  This looks like a bunker complex built entirely for eye-candy.  So I'm with you, Sean, not a PN at all.  And I'd question whether it's good design.  Also, what's with all the cabbage around it?  It appears as if, if you are stupid enough to hit a shot that might go in it, the sand is almost the only place you'll have any sort of shot. 

Probably the first picture of Cabot I have seen that doesn't make me want to play there.

Mark

I have no issue with the design. Penal architecture is as valid as strategic architecture. I have an issue with the label of the feature. It seems more based on appearance than function. To be fair, the architect may never have referred to the feature as a PN.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #52 on: June 06, 2020, 09:27:10 AM »
Is the Cabot Cliffs example really a PN? I thought the main point of a PN is the 4 options. This example is really penal in nature rather than strategic.
This.  It looks to me as if the strategic intent of the PN has been completely abandoned.  This looks like a bunker complex built entirely for eye-candy.  So I'm with you, Sean, not a PN at all.  And I'd question whether it's good design.  Also, what's with all the cabbage around it?  It appears as if, if you are stupid enough to hit a shot that might go in it, the sand is almost the only place you'll have any sort of shot. 

Probably the first picture of Cabot I have seen that doesn't make me want to play there.

Mark

I have no issue with the design. Penal architecture is as valid as strategic architecture. I have an issue with the label of the feature. It seems more based on appearance than function. To be fair, the architect may never have referred to the feature as a PN.

Ciao


To be honest, the name is more about form than function for me. I don’t call every centreline bunker a PN... nor does every PN have be strategically centreline.


Maybe it’s just me but it has to look like a nose to be called a nose.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2020, 12:15:40 PM »
I think the overhead shot gives a better picture of what it is. A hazard wraps all the way in front of it.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Cabot+Links+Golf+Resort/@46.2481544,-61.2918996,583a,35y,270h/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!3m7!1s0x4b5d8897b3cb0655:0x48e360879296b73b!5m2!4m1!1i2!8m2!3d46.2365266!4d-61.3022359

Looks like you either take it on with your drive to go for the green, or if you layup it can come into play on a poor approach shot..

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #54 on: June 07, 2020, 04:04:42 AM »
Is the Cabot Cliffs example really a PN? I thought the main point of a PN is the 4 options. This example is really penal in nature rather than strategic.
This.  It looks to me as if the strategic intent of the PN has been completely abandoned.  This looks like a bunker complex built entirely for eye-candy.  So I'm with you, Sean, not a PN at all.  And I'd question whether it's good design.  Also, what's with all the cabbage around it?  It appears as if, if you are stupid enough to hit a shot that might go in it, the sand is almost the only place you'll have any sort of shot. 

Probably the first picture of Cabot I have seen that doesn't make me want to play there.

Mark

I have no issue with the design. Penal architecture is as valid as strategic architecture. I have an issue with the label of the feature. It seems more based on appearance than function. To be fair, the architect may never have referred to the feature as a PN.

Ciao


To be honest, the name is more about form than function for me. I don’t call every centreline bunker a PN... nor does every PN have be strategically centreline.

Maybe it’s just me but it has to look like a nose to be called a nose.

Its about both for me. Though I admit the function, as with any bunker, is more important. Given the importance of TOC's (RIP) and Woking's examples of PN as a pillar of strategic design I think a PN carries added gravitas as function over form.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #55 on: June 07, 2020, 04:18:42 AM »
Sean, I agree the function of a good centreline bunker comes first... I’m just arguing why we are calling centreline bunkers PNs?


I’ve never known any PN other than 16 at TOC or ones that have been deliberately built with a bridge and a couple of nostrils.


No one ever called 4 at Woking a PN? It was merely inspired by the strategy of 16 at TOC.


Perhaps I’m being pedantic but if that’s what we’re talking about, why not name the thread “small, centreline bunkers”




Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #56 on: June 07, 2020, 04:22:50 AM »
Ally,


I'm not calling 4 at Woking a PN.  I just noted that we appeared to have a thread entirely about form, rather than function.  Which appears to suggest that eye candy matters to many on this board more than others.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #57 on: June 07, 2020, 04:30:17 AM »
Sean, I agree the function of a good centreline bunker comes first... I’m just arguing why we are calling centreline bunkers PNs?

I’ve never known any PN other than 16 at TOC or ones that have been deliberately built with a bridge and a couple of nostrils.

No one ever called 4 at Woking a PN? It was merely inspired by the strategy of 16 at TOC.

Perhaps I’m being pedantic but if that’s what we’re talking about, why not name the thread “small, centreline bunkers”

I always thought of Woking's as a PN from a side view  8) It's a sneaky PN which plays like TOC.

There is also a PN (as you would call it) at Sacred 9, but interestingly it plays fairly evenly between fairways...and can't be seen off the tee from either direction.

Ciao
« Last Edit: June 07, 2020, 04:34:32 AM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2020, 02:36:40 PM »
I've been on a bit of a nostalgia tour in recent months and today I played a course call Pine Hills Country Club near where I grew up for the first time in probably close to forty years.   in the iteration I recall, there were no sand bunkers and conditioning was sketchy, the design of the course done by the original owner.   


Around the turn of the century he sold the course and the brothers who own it now put a lot of work and money into it, as well as upgraded architecture including some fairly decent bunkering.   Imagine my surprise today to find this PN on the inside corner of the  dogleg of the par four 7th hole.   



"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Principal's Nose
« Reply #59 on: June 07, 2020, 10:49:32 PM »
On another thread we were discussing Brandon Johnson, one of the architects currently working with Arnold Palmer Design. Brandon did a masterful complete redesign of Wexford Plantation on Hilton Head Island, incorporating a great number of old school features... including a Principal's Nose bunker complex:


 
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back