new fairway bunker on 18 at Pebble

[bob m]

Just wondering if anyone has played Pebble recently and if so what they thought about the new Fairway bunker on the right side of 18.  The Callaway is going on right now and the players seem to welcome the change along with the new tree.  I am trying to find a photo for those of you who have not seen it.  The bunker though is positioned near the two target pines on the right side that you look at off the tee.

[ChipOat]

Who designed and built this bunker?  How long has it been under discussion and who was involved?  Come in Left Coast experts.

Please post a picture of the new bunker if you can.  I'm interested in how it impacts the strategic requirements of the hole (which are excellent) and, especially, if it makes the Stupid Trees in the fairway even more stupid.  Also, I'm sure Tommy N. would be interested in the aesthetics of the bunker its own self.

Of course, the hole would be much improved if the Stupid Trees were gone and the green were re-angled.

But that's another thread we've already done.

[redanman]

But have the Stupid Trees (Proper noun) died yet?

This is a double dog-leg hole-kinda (See other thread), fortunately without trees blocking the inside of the dog-leg (Yet).  One CAN gain a positive outcome to the risk reward type thingey by playing down the left side.  Don't forget that THIS is the finest finishing hole in golf.

[A_Clay_Man]

Here we go again. Stupid trees? I have been under the impression that the greenside tree was the one that Chipoat has the problem with? Perhaps they should make it back into a par 4 so those trees don't bother him? Or, if any of the corporate few who's co.'s are willing to spend the extra money will just have to flirt with the pond and stay left off the tee. I suppose the eisenhower tree is stupid too? and the Linder on 16 at BWR-river, that's stupid too?

Now I can see how over growth over the years has ruined some playing angles on many an older course but I just don't see how any of these trees quailify for that. So why are they stupid? Out of the thousands of balls I've seen played there I think I can remember one that was stymied by a fairway tree. Was that you chip?

[redanman]

Adam

Trees occasionally in the middle of a fairway are interesting.  The ones off the tee at 18 PBG(Not)L are cute-a penalty for bailing too far right, but stubby little pines make them less interesting.  

Some better examples are #1 Mayacoo Lakes and #16 Belfair East, unusual and clever use of trees, although the one hole at ?Swinley Forest? with 3 trees that I have seen on TV and in pictures is borderline.  Tall mostly trunk trees are cute this way, conifers are silly.

But only as an occasional novelty.

[Surrey Kid]

Those are at the Burma Road Course, Wentworth, no. 12.

[Robert Kimball]

Another interesting example is the 7th hole at Nicklaus's Melrose Course on Daufuskie Island in HH Island.  The risk of hitting left brings in a better/shorter angle to the green.  Stay right and you will have a longer shot (and maybe still have tree trouble).  Good risk/reward, IMHO. . .

http://www.daufuskieresort.com/golf/melrose07.asp

[redanman]

BTW

Does this new bunker prevent sliced balls from going OB?  My guess is yes, and I don't necessarily disagree with that at PBGnotL

[A_Clay_Man]

Because of lengthening restrictions those two fairway trees are rarely in play. The bunker and OB right suffice to make one re-think that option. Those trees are perfect aiming points and how often do you end up exactly where you aim?

It sounds as though the new bunkers are exactly where a timid soul would play for, approx. 180 off the tee. Now, this is a par 5 and in order to have a wedge in your hand for your 3rd one needs to attack this tee shot. Bring in some elements like wind and your most likeky to have to aim either over the water or very near to it, just to stay close to those trees. Thier spindley nature makes them even less penal and even if one is within a yard of the tree it is possible to get into good position for the third. The addition of the bunkers is starting to sound like a dumbing down of the hole. I wonder who consulted? Could it be...should I say...UFF Da I'll think I'll wait for facts for a change.

On a side note, I have lamented every tree that has fallen or been pruned out of existence on the site that is PB. Most were never in play but were either wonderful landmarks and reference points or esthetic. The tree seems to be a re-ocurring theme throughout the course. Starting on one you are made to think about them and avoiding them is crucial. On two, I love the tree right side before the baranka/cross bunker. It has stood me well every time I go for the green in two as an aiming point. On three the trees on the left are not as hard to carry as they probably once were but are still paramount in ones mind over the tee shot. Holes 4-10 only have two significant trees. The beautiful oak on five and maybe one of rear pines for targeting and the lone tree on six, behind the green, is a perfect example of how the trees are used at pebble as aiming devices. The dead Oaks on 11 are good lines for reference points and the trees on 16 frame that approach magnificantly. Now, your on 18 and if I read you correctly these trees are somehow stupid. I don't see that, ever. I see it as the sort of subliminal message the course is sending me and without them on 18 you'd be ignoring or missing a visual motiff that has been there all day long.

[A_Clay_Man]

Above:
The tree on two s/b left side, not right.

my bad

[Mike Benham]

Here is a photo dated August 29th and I do not know if this is the new bunker set-up or not.

It definetly looks like the "Redanman" trees have been thinned out.

The primary purpose of those bunkers are to prevent shots in those directions going O.B. in the millionaires front yard.  Therefore, by definition, the bunkers are penal but stroke-saving.

http://www1.californiacoastline.org/cgi-bin/image.cgi?image=1163&mode=sequential&flags=0

[Scott_Burroughs]

Here's the pic Mike linked to above of the new fairway bunker
on 18, including the "stupid trees".  I certainly don't like the
look of the bunker.  Why does it have to have those ugly
tongues?  How about 2 or 3 smaller bunkers, with no rough
leading up to the edges?

Ahhh! There's a sea serpent in the water!!!  

[redanman]

Thatsa' some bunker.  I won't comment on its shape or aesthetics.  

[Keith Williams]

I may be very wrong, but I don't think the bunker shown above is new.  I just checked an aerial photo on Terraserver from 1998 and that fairway bunker is present in it; and while I don't have a copy in front of me, I am almost positive that the old illustration of the course from "The World Atlas of Golf" shows the fairway bunker on 18.

Keith.

[Mike Benham]

Keith,

You could very well be correct.  The date of the photo I posted is August 29th.  If they were to do work on it I assume it would be after the end of the summer during their slow time (ha ha).

Mike

[JWL>]

The bunker to the right of the fairway on 18 is not new at all, but it has been there for quite some time.
The changes in the bunkering on that hole before the 2000 Open are as follows:
A new sea wall was constructed down the left side.  The bunker along the seawall was expanded into the fairw at the 100 yd mark from the green, to create more of a layup strategy.  That same bunker was extended into the left front of the green.
The  greenside right front bunker's lead-in was lowered to maximize visibility into the bunker.
The seawall at the green was constructd more into the ocean, therefore the existing green was not as close to the edge as before the construction.  Thus, 800 sq. ft. was added to the green on the left side to create a pin placement over the new front left bunker.
A new rear left bunker was added to catch long left shots from rolling into the ocean.
A slight grass swale is now on the left side of the green and slightly contains a ball rolling off the left side.

There were many other changes made in drainage etc. and suggestions made in case the greenside tree finally dies, which it did.

Just curious how many GCA's were aware that the 18th green had been enlarged.  Very little has been written about that and the other changes that  were made on the course.

[A_Clay_Man]

JWL- You seem to have some pretty good info. You state above that the changes were made prior to the open in 2000. DO you know exactly when they were made? As I recall a majority of the work was done prior to Lone Cypress' purchase.

[JWL>]

clay man

The construction work discussed at PB happened in July/Aug 1997.

[ChipOat]

So is there, or is there not, anything new (last 6 months) at Pebble #18 regarding a fairway bunker?

Or is it just the same old thing on that hole?  Same great routing; same superb strategic choices, same Stupid Trees with underachiever green complex.

[A_Clay_Man]

JWL- Thanx, As I understand the realities, the Japanese co. that owned PB is responsible for many of the improvements especially as it relates to the long-term erosion problems. DOMO.

Chip- My info tells me there are/is (a) new bunker(s) on 18. From what I gather they or it is to the left of the existing bunker and I would assume short of it. AND, you keep holding on to your belief that those trees are stupid and I will continue to disagree.

[bob m]

there is a NEW bunker on the hole i apologize my digi cam is messed up I am trying to get a picture.  My friend built it about 6 weeks ago I will get photos

[A_Clay_Man]

I finally have confirmation that the new bunkers are past the existing one's by aprox. 50 yds. Closer to the green than I previously thought. I think that would be somewhere in the area of Tiger's drive in 97'. Remember the famous 3 wood from 296. It sucked. Second that is.

Now, It is clear that they have been added for the big boys. I don't know how close to the fairway they are. As I recall the rough over there needed respect because of the danger left on your next.

Also, Save your money until after the AT&T. Supposedly they have an alternate green on 18 and won't re-open the real deal til afters.

[Mark_Fine]

That bunker in the picture was there last summer and several years before by my recollection.  Those grass tongues fortunately don't look nearly as bad from ground level (one of the problems of evaluating courses from pictures and my plug to Tom Paul for actually visiting the courses in person).  And those trees are considered stupid by some because they are perceived as unfair.  Frankly I am not hung up on fairness as some people are.  They add one more dimension to the tee shot.  In reality as Adam states, they rarely come into play but in the golfer's mind that is not the case.  They add complexity and further interest to an already exhilarating tee shot!  

Just my opinion.
Mark

[Dan Grossman]

So - if the bunker is 50yds past the bunker that is in the picture, doesn't that put it right into play?  

I have only played PB #18 once, but when I did, I nailed those trees on the fly from the tee and came backwards.  I would think that a bunker to the right of the trees would be in the tee shot landing area and thus put a greater reward on hitting the ball to the left of the trees.

[A_Clay_Man]

Dan- No they would not be in play unless they are in the fairway. The likelyhood is that they are in the right rough ahead and to the right of the two trees. But I've been wrong befroe on this thread so we have to wait to see if Bob H has learned anything from Evan on digi cameras.