[Matt_Ward]

I knew going into this year's Memorial event that Jack had made changes to a few holes.

The new fairway bunker complex on #18 is simply hideous looking stuff. I know it was put there to thrwart people from playing a little loose with the driver off the tee and simply cut-off the dog-leg. I can understand the intentions to do something about it but the cluster of several different bunkers is at best uninspiring from a visual perspective and simply overkill and poorly thoughtout out at worst.

I wonder if others noticed the bunkers because what Jack did was simply to force players to hit irons to the same landing area for a shot into the flag.

[Bill_McBride]

"Jeezus!!" I yelled to my wife, "Get a look at those goofy looking bunkers down the right side!"  

She takes a look and says, "Those are really pretty, but aren't there a lot of them?"

So Matt, I had the same reaction as you, but the masses of golf fans think those bunkers are cool!

I'm still trying to figure out why Freddy hit an iron there after Ernie Els hit it so far left and brought the left side bunker so much into play.  Why not hit driver, his only hope was birdie when Ernie bogied?  Of course he didn't know Ernie was going to stiff another one! But it seems that an iron off the tee really took birdie out as an option.

Great final match play round between those two!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt, Shivas and Bill,

Have any of you seen those bunkers in person, from the tee or fairway ?

Or are you solely basing your analysis on the aerial view from the blimp ?

[rgkeller]

"But it seems that an iron off the tee really took birdie out as an option."

Not for Els.

[rgkeller]

It appears to me that at "golfer level" the bunkers are hardly visible from the fairway or from the tee.

[Bill_McBride]

Patrick, I suspect you'd have had to be in Dublin OH within the past few months to see all those bunkers.  I've never seen the place in person, but I can certainly form an opinion of a gargantuan complex of overkill fairway bunkers from an aerial view, can't I?  

[Brian Phillips]

Pat,

With the sort of Devils Advocate style you play, you risk stopping people giving opinions on any course that they haven't seen or only seen on tv.

I haven't seen nearly all the courses on this site but I still study them from books, or on the tv, do you want everyone to stop giving opinions, just because they haven't seen them?

The bunker site is crap and overdone, and what did it achieve...not a damn thing.  The current best player in the world hit an iron off the tee on the final hole of a 72 hole tournament and still stiffed it to birdie range.  

Is that the brilliance of Els or the fact it just isn't a very good finishing hole?

What is the point of the new bunker complex?

Brian.

...my opinions based yet again on what I saw on tv....but if that is not interesting enough, then all of us on this side of the pond can quit this site.

[Michael Dugger]

Pat,

With the sort of Devils Advocate style you play, you risk stopping people giving opinions on any course that they haven't seen or only seen on tv.


...my opinions based yet again on what I saw on tv....but if that is not interesting enough, then all of us on this side of the pond can quit this site.

Well said, totally agree.  Been beating that horse for about two years now.  Most just stop answering his questions.  Many don't post at all because it's just an invitation to get sniped.  Personally, I get enough of that elsewhere in life.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Brian, please do not let Pat bother you. That was one of his canned questions that would make you wonder why he has not been run down by a welcome wagon by now. He is reportedly a great guy if you were to meet him, but I have not seen him in person, from the tee or the fairway. Therefore I am not in a position by his criteria to make an observation.

[Brian Phillips]

Guys,

Don't get me wrong, I class Pat as a good friend even though I have never met him.  We have talked a lot in e-mails and letters, so don't worry about him scaring me off! I know he likes to helps to think but sometimes he 'Kicks the Arse out of It'

I just think that everyone from someone like myself who is lucky enough to design and build golf courses at such a young age (35) to the baker down the street who loves Fazio courses should be allowed to give an opinion about the appearance of a course from the tv.

It is just an opinon and as long people understand it is from the tv or from pictures in a magazine then the opinion will not be taken out of context.

So, IMHO the bunkering on the 18th is crap, overdone and unneccesary...


Cheers,

Brian

[George Pazin]

I thought that the look of bunkers didn't matter....

[Matt_Ward]

Pat:

I was at Muirfield Village last year when workers were preparing that area for the cluster of junk that eventually came into being.

They actually look worse from TV.

Shivas is quite correct --- this is the Ohio version of BB's 18th hole. Simply awlful stuff and what it does is simply take driver out of the player's hands and play an iron. Wow! How exciting!

George P:

Here's a case in which how the bunkers look and play is simply atrocious. You would think there would have been some  imaginative way created to make the player think of going with the big stick. Jack's desire to "toughen" the hole is simply amateurish 101 design in this case.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brian,

With the sort of Devils Advocate style you play, you risk stopping people giving opinions on any course that they haven't seen or only seen on tv.

Is that a bad thing ?[/color]

MDugger,

I'll try to explain this to you in simple terms.

Most don't answer because they don't have the supporting or reinforcing facts and/or logic to back up their position.
Sometimes a position that is irrational, irresponsible or just plain reckless.
If they did, they'd answer the questions with candor and intellectual honesty.

When one makes an evaluation of an architectural feature that they've never seen, or have only seen in limited modes and/or dimensions what type of credibility can be attached to that position ?

It's akin to the three (3) blind men who are asked to examine and describe an elephant.

One takes the tusk in his hands and declares that the animal is like a mollusk, hard shelled.

The other examines the ear and declares that the animal is plant like, like a huge leaf.

The third examines the trunk and declares that the animal is serpentine in nature.

Seperately, all three have no clue.
Collectively, even after lengthy discussions about their findings, all three still have no clue.

It is only when all of the substantive facts are in that an intelligent anaylsis and discussion can be achieved.

You may be one of those who prefers to discuss issues absent the facts or logic, but I'd prefer not to waste my time in that futile pursuit.

The same analogy applies to individuals who haven't personally examined an architectural feature.  Without all of the substantive facts they can't possible put forth a credible analysis.  So why waste everyone's time ?

Looking at an aerial from limited, select angles from a blimp hardly provides ample evidence to intelligently analyze a bunker complex as the player sees, confronts and plays it.

I think you still have a hard time coming to grips with being reprimanded for your posting of pictures of dunes on the ocean and representing those pictures and those dunes as indicative of the Sandpines site, which was miles away and inland.

Intellectual honesty remains a critical component in evaluating architectural features and having credible discussions.[/color]

[Michael Dugger]

Pat,

Well said, but you still don't get the point.  This is not a court of law.  We ought to be able to freely throw around opinions about such and such without being browbeaten by you.  

I have a friend who is an aquaphile.  He has four aquariums with African Cichlids.  On the wall behind his tank is a map of Africa showing the regions from where each of his species come from.  Lake Malawi, Lake Tanganica, etc....

He keeps a log of each fish in each tank, what date he purchased them, how much they cost, the date he returned them and the amount he was rewarded in exchange.  He's learned the Latin names for each of them and I am disgusted to admit, due to his influence, that I know the difference between a pseudotropheis Moori and pseudotropheis Bimba or something like that.

I, personally, have a little fishtank.  I like my fish and it is relaxing to look at my tank.....that is until my buddy comes over and starts grilling me about my sub-strait.  It is a fun thing to maintain and enhance the tank, that is until he starts questioning why I do not keep a log.  I don't care if my biological is all messed up and a couple of $2 guppies buy the farm.  I don't have time to care about whether or not the plants I have selected are consistent with the natural habitat of my fish.

Some things are just simpler for some of us.  

"Ugly bunkers" is a pretty simple statement.  We don't need to delve into whether or not you determined them ugly from the TV or the ground.  

You, apparently, feel that we do need to establish the difference.  Why?  It will not change how Brian feels about the look of those bunkers?  

We all appreciate your attention to detail, but sometimes it's overkill.  That's all I'm saying.
       

   

[Dan Grossman]

I think the JN had to add the bunkers to the hole to keep the design intent of the hole due to the technology arms race.  That being said, I thought the bunkers turned out poorly.  

But, why are we bashing JN for attempting to keep the design of his hole intact?  Shouldn't we be (again) mad at the USGA for not reigning in the golf ball?

When I played this course 10 years ago, this was far and away the toughest driving hole on the course.  If you play a draw off the tee, the pond / creek on the left side of the fairway is clearly an issue, as is dumping it the bunkers on the right.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

MDugger,

I understand your point of view.

But, how relevant is the look of the bunkers from 3,000 feet, to the golfer ?  The person actually playing the golf course ?

I could show you aerials of bunkers at NGLA that you'd declare as UGLY.  But, playing the golf course and seeing, confronting and playing them would leave you with a completely different view, one based on sound, first hand information and experience.

But, golfers, unless they combine bungee jumping, don't play golf from 3,000 feet, they play golf on the ground, a ground that is integrated with architectural features placed within or on that surface.

If there was one thing I learned from Scott Burrough's AOTD it was that bunker shapes as viewed from aerials don't provide ample representation of the architectural feature that's on the ground, and that an evaluation based solely on an aerial doesn't provide enough substantive information to allow the viewer to make a thorough, intelligent analysis of that feature as it relates to the look and play of the golf course.

Matt Ward's title to the thread and the text of his opening remarks called for a thorough evaluation of the bunker complex.  But, his position was based on incredibly limited access by which to examine that bunker complex.

Had he qualified his title by adding "from the air" I wouldn't have posed my question.

But, he called for an in depth analysis of the bunker complex, and I thought that any evaluation, based solely on some aerial views from a blimp would be incomplete at best and disengenuous and highly inaccurate at worst.

You will notice, in Alex's post on Hidden Creek, that he qualified his title so that those viewing his thread would have a better understanding of his viewpoint, which I think was the right thing to do.

You may view my question and position as nit picking, but, I'd rather attempt to clarify and qualify the issue rather then let it go down the path of reckless abandon.

But, that's just my opinion.

[SJ_McCarthy]

Matt, Shivas and Bill,

Have any of you seen those bunkers in person, from the tee or fairway ?

Or are you solely basing your analysis on the aerial view from the blimp ?

Pat,

I have seen (and played) thoose bunkers within the last 45 days.  They LOOK horrible, are way too deep and quite frankly look like an "afterthought".  Have you seen them in person ?

[ed_getka]

SJ,
  Is it possible for a bunker to be TOO deep? They are hazards after all, and their point is to extract a penalty. I haven't seen these bunkers on TV or in person, and I will take your word for it that they weren't done well, but even without seeing them, I sincerely doubt they are too deep.
   BTW, how deep are they?

Patrick brings up a good point about an aerial view of bunkers not being indicative of how they actually look at ground level and affect the golfer trying to avoid them. However, I think one could still conclude from an aerial if the bunkering takes up too much space and forces the golfers to hit irons off the tee, that it was poorly thought out.

[T_MacWood]

Patience, if you don't like the bunkers, just wait, they will be different next year. I remember watching the telecast last year, they were commenting on Daily and others making the hole a drive and pitch...and Nicklaus said quite plainly that will not be the case next year.

 A portion of the bunker complex at the corner of the dogleg has always been blind...the hole bends around a hillock. You would have to be a complete moron not to appreciate the corner is trouble. The new bunkers are extremely deep, I doubt its possible to reach the green from them...but golf ain't fair. Risk and reward. That being said they are totally out of character with the rest of the golf course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

SJ McCarthy,

I have seen (and played) thoose bunkers within the last 45 days.  They LOOK horrible, are way too deep and quite frankly look like an "afterthought".  

Have you seen them in person ?

NO, but then again I never offered an opinion on them.

If you're familiar with my posts I don't offer opinions on courses or features I haven't experienced personally.
In other words, I disqualify myself, through silence, as a credible source.

How deep are the bunkers top to bottom, and how deep are they relative to the adjacent fairway ?  Are the floors below fairway grade ?

Weren't there bunkers at that location previously ?

What specifically makes them look like an "afterthought " ?

Fred Couples had a horribly awkward lie and came within inches of hitting the green.   I would imagine that a good lie in the floor of the bunker wouldn't have troubled him much.

How far are they from the green, from the back of the bunker closest to the tee to the front of the bunker closest to the green ?[/color]

[John Nixon]

Fred Couples had a horribly awkward lie and came within inches of hitting the green.  

Exactly. Take a yard and a half off of Ernie's shot and add it to Freddie's and you have the potential for a completely different outcome. The bunkering, however deep it is, is apparently no threat to the top notch player.

I agree that from the air the new bunkers look awkward, but from the one view I saw at ground level they didn't bother me at all. However, talking about PGA tour style bunkers as impediments to scoring seems to be a waste of good air.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm not quite sure why Muirfield Village takes so many hits.  It may not be a world beater but it is in my top fifty.  For the averagae player the landing areas are wide enough so that even poor drives can land there.  The further you drive the more exacting the course is.  The green complexes have good bunkering and interesting greens.  If I havae one complaint it is the rough.  The times I have played it it just was too penal.  As for the bunkers on 18 I don't find them particularly pleasing to the eye but it does make one think off the tee.  The strategy is "Wat can I hit to get as far as I can and land in the fairway.  Should I work the ball left to right, should I hit and iron,  should I hit it to the left of the fairway and and chance the creek and not get the bests angle to the green.  I have played there maybe six times.  I justs hate the houses especially on the first few holes and the holes starting with 15 on in.

[T_MacWood]

BillV
I don't believe a pond at the corner would be physically possible based on the topography. If they succeeded it would probably become the most artificial (and criticized) hazard in golf.

Aren't most of the golden age designs in the US parts of housing developments?

[Patrick_Mucci]

John Nixon & Tommy Williamsen,

I wonder what the members think of the bunkers ?

The PGA Tour pros only play the course one week a year,
the members play it year round.

I'd be curious to hear from some of them with respect to their views on these bunkers.

[SJ_McCarthy]

SJ McCarthy,

I have seen (and played) thoose bunkers within the last 45 days.  They LOOK horrible, are way too deep and quite frankly look like an "afterthought".  

Have you seen them in person ?

NO, but then again I never offered an opinion on them.

You may not have offered your opinion, however you were mighty quick to tell the original poster that in essence, HIS opinion of them can not be substantiated because he has not viewed them in person.

If you're familiar with my posts I don't offer opinions on courses or features I haven't experienced personally.
In other words, I disqualify myself, through silence, as a credible source.

No snipe here Pat, but silence was one thing on this issue you did not show.  The fact that you think someones "opinion" was wrong, because they did not see it in person is akin to saying "if you have not seen "insert model name here" in person, you can't say she's beuatiful.  It is all in the eye of the beholder / poster.  Regardless of where (blimp, crane or hand held camera, TV) it was viewed from.

How deep are the bunkers top to bottom, and how deep are they relative to the adjacent fairway ?  Are the floors below fairway grade ?

Specifically?  I have no idea, tape measure and transit were not part of the tools I carried those three days.  As for their relative position to the fairway, some bottoms are below, some are above and I am guessing some are even with the fairway.  Keep in mind that the entire right side of this hole (including right of center fairway) is higher than the rest of the hole.

Weren't there bunkers at that location previously ?

Yes, and why ask that as you already know the answer?

What specifically makes them look like an "afterthought " ?

Firstly, the fact that the sand is a different color and consistency than the others.  Secondly, the facing and mounding around the new ones is obviously not in keeping with the others.  Thirdly, as we were playing over a 3 day period, the newest (and deepest) bunker was being re-done because good old Jack thought it needed to be deeper.

Fred Couples had a horribly awkward lie and came within inches of hitting the green.   I would imagine that a good lie in the floor of the bunker wouldn't have troubled him much.

The same could be said of almost any (note I said almost any) bunker.  Yes Fred almost stuck it, Freds a pro, the majority of golfers are NOT.

How far are they from the green, from the back of the bunker closest to the tee to the front of the bunker closest to the green ?

You are joking right? Again, next time I make a trip to Dublin, I will bring my transit in order to answer your questions.  The bottom line is this thread was started by a person whoi diliked the look of those bunkers.  That is his opinion, nothing ANY of us says here makes him right or wrong.  We are all still allowed to post opinions no?

[/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()