MV's Inside Dogleg Bunkers at the 18th

[Gary Slatter]

Some of you folks don't understand what I posted originally -- it's not the placement of the bunker(s) -- but how they look and how they mesh when viewed -- the aerial shows it quite clearly to me. It just looks like someone said -- OK, we will prevent players from doing something -- just create circular discs and keep on adding to them to the point of excessive overkill and eye revulsion.

Would it be Jack's reaction to the "ball", it really is ugly how far it's flying?   He'll have ugly bunkers all the way to the green soon.
He mentioned it several times on air "it's not the ball" meaning of course that something has to be done with custom balls used on the Tour.  I've mentioned a few times how the Old Course will have no defence this year, unless the R&A test balls on the first tee.

[Matt_Ward]

Gary:

All well and good -- but how many pros previously cut the corner and how many birides resulted in their style of play?

What usually happens is an over-reaction -- just like Hootie, Jack hears or see one or two players do something and then presumes THAT ALL are doing likewise.

Far from it -- the original 18 at MV worked perfectly well beyond the hideous plastic surgery carried out by Jack after the fact.

[JESII]

Matt,

There's got to be some way to make this a conversation...Surely you recognize that the guys on Tour hit the ball 40 or 50 yards further in the air than when the course was built in 1974...maybe not 50 yards further than Jack, but as a whole, it's a different game from the tee. If left untouched, the key feature in the drive - the creek left of the fairway - would not be a factor and the majority of guys would hit it right over the bunkers. Maybe they don't look great from the air, but to suggest the original version would be fine is just wrong...

[Peter Pallotta]

Geez, Jimmy - you really know how to kill a conversation, don't you...

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

I always love when people extrapolate one or two guys and then whammo -- everyone is then driving th eball 40-50 yards more and that such a hole is a pushover. Really.

Check out the scoring stats for the life of #18. For all the guys who do what you suggest the rest have opted for the more predictable and safer course of action.

I never said having no bunkers would not work -- re-read what I wrote -- I simply said the bunkers that Jack eventually did include are hideous and were simply plopped down in a haphazard fashion.

Jim, you and a few others -- take the Hootie approach -- you see a guy land a drive in an area that few actually get to and then presume everyone else is doing it. That mindset destroyed the former 11th at ANGC and even the 15th there too.

A better bunker pattern would have worked much better and still permitted those who want to dare the hole to try.

My example of the 15th at Westchester CC is a great case in point.

[JR Potts]

Different courses are built to be different things.  MV is built to host the Memorial....a tour event.

I hit the golf ball a long long way....and the young kids now all bomb it by me.  Even the medium hitters almost hit it by me.

It's a different game out there.  I haven't played MV but I think from a strategic standpoint in PGA Events, they work.  I also think that they look like crap but then again, I'm not planning on flying over the course on a handglider before playing it and while assessing it because afterall, I'm scared of heights.

[PThomas]

re 16, Jack will be changing per a recent item on Geoff S's site

[JESII]

Matt,

If you want to disappoint yourself go to Google Earth and take a few measurements. Not sure when the image is from but it shows the entire second half of the bunker complex under construction...the yardages to various spots from the back tee(s), new and old are alarmingly short in this day and age...keep in mind, the shot is, if anything, slightly downhill.

[Greg Tallman]

Perhaps a small lake up on there would do the trick. Would not be the first such lake above the desired playing surface on a well respected (outside of this site) golf course in the Columbus area.

[Matt_Ward]

As a general comment -- when a designer provides for a dog-leg does he not also provide for a risk taking element that encourages the bold play? If all dog-legs were designed to provide only for a particular location to be gained then the very nature of the hole itself would be quite limiting from an option perspective.

Take MV's 18th -- so what if a player or two or even a few more actually cut the corner? If the execution was done well why should they not gain such an advantage. The issue boils down to whether the shot required for such a gain is truly above and beyond the norm. For Jack to have added the array of hideous bunkers (they need to be altered to look more appealing and also from strategic sense be angled beyond the cookie-cutter flavor).

The problem is that when a designer -- in this case JN -- sees a few players do something that is beyond the norm there is a tendency to "correct" the problem by eliminating any other shot option so that the only way to play the hole is through all players arriving at the same location from the tee. I like designs that encourage the bold play but only reward it with a high degree of well-played execution.

The 15th hole at Westchester CC was always fun to watch when the Buick Classic was played for these reasons.

[JESII]

So was the original version designed to have the corner cut by the top few?

[JESII]

Also, are the bunkers aesthetics really a strategic flaw?

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

Only Jack knows the answer to the first question you raised. I have no problem with someone who attempts such a play. Unfortunately, sometimes the people who either design a hole/course or the membership itself gets all worked up when someone does exactly that and derives a benefit from such a herculean effort.

The other element -- wrong choice of words by me -- I don't mind a bunker concept -- but don't make it so obvous and unflattering as the ones there are now. The "look" dimension can be better done while at the same time providing a strategic dynamic that doesn't cut-off those who may still wish to make the big play at the tee.

[JESII]

I asked at the beginning of this if it would help to eliminate the first several bunkers so a really conservative player could go there and avoid everything...this would also reduce the eyesore of so many bunkers in the hillside...any thoughts on that?

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

I agree -- eliminating the single individual bunkers to a more manageable number and having them located in a manner that can prevent the so-so play from being rewarded is a good thing -- but not in such a way that the big bold play from the tee has zero chance in succeeding. Once that happens the nature of the bold play is a moot point.

[Matthew Petersen]

Does anyone have photos of what it looks like now? Google's staellite image still shows the bunker complex under construction.

I'm also curious as to what it looks like from the ground. I've played many a hole that looked bizaree from an overhead shot but looked fine on the ground.