A comment on another thread (and seeing a few famous greens at Augusta this weekend) concerning Dr Mac's surrounding bunkers and acting as visual deception got me to thinking about surrounding bunkers in general.
I often don't care for the look, but I can see where visual deception could come into play. However, when can surrounding bunkers be hailed as visually deceptive and when can the be labelled as framing bunkers? Below are a few pics from Spyglass. Framing or visually deceptive? I don't think they are done anywhere near as good as the Dr Mac bunkers (or even the version we have today). Is the aesthetic aspect one of the criteria which help with differentiating?
Another example from Old Town.
An example from Whistling Straits.
I could be wrong, but I get the impression that Dr Mac was somewhat unusual in his use of rear bunkering so frequently. I could also be wrong in that I don't think this technique is used all that often today. We see a lot of it here because Tom D used this style of bunkering on some of his dunesy properties. Is there a substantive difference in how these bunkers are used today than by Dr Mac in the old days? I would be really interested in people's thoughts on the subject.
Seeking out further pix of bunkering which I didn't consider framing, but rather an offering to the golfer to aim away from the back bunker if he doesn't believe he can control the distance. Of course, this works best when the incorrect angle of approach leaves the pin between the golfer and the back bunker. A few examples from Merion.
Ciao