[Andy Hughes]

For those traps that are actually in the fairway, why is the grass immediately surrounding them often higher than the fairway cut?
For example:

(Jeff Brauer's Quarry course, #13)

Another example is the picture on this site of the second hole at Hidden Creek.


This is not a criticism, but a question.  If the intent is for the bunker to collect balls, won't the longer grass prevent that from happening?
Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

[Shaun Carney]

I've wondered that same thing Andy.

Aslo, what a great looking hole/picture

[SPDB]

I believe it is a matter of maintenance. If greenkeeping crews had to fly mow those bunker surrounds, it would take them forever to complete the course.

I'm more concerned about the fairway traps that have seemingly migrated to the rough, as fairway lines narrow.

[Mark_Fine]

Guys,
For one, a bunker without any long grass around it would not look very natural.  The best ones, are those with grasses around but still allow balls to roll into them - the longer grasses are on the sides and back, not in the front.  You will notice that is quite obvious at the one at Hidden Creek.

A pet peeve of mine are fairway bunkers in the rough - bunkers that are meant to be in the fairway but are surrounded by long grass.  
Mark

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Andy I agree with you.  At least on the fairway side I am placing fairway cut bentgrass right up to the bunker edge.  May not look natural, but this isn't about a beauty contest, this is about strategy.

[texsport]

Since I've actually been in the rough above Jeff Brauer's 13th hole fairway bunker, I'm somewhat qualified to respond.

The rough is worse than being in the bunker!

I posted my experiences concerning this bunker previously, in a post about what I call it--Paul Bunyan's A Hole Bunker. I made a smooth 6 from the rough just left of the bunker.

From the tee, I thought I was in the bunker, but, unfortunately was in the rough left. On my 2nd shot I successfully hacked my ball into the sand. My 3rd shot barely got out and my 4th reached the green from where I 2 putted for a double.

For the unsuspecting, the bunker appears small and not of much concern from the tee. For those who have felt it's sting, however, it becomes the main consideration from the tee when playing to the left, elevated fairway. If the wind is left to right---I never lay up left.

This is a very severe hazard! The correct play is sideways if you get in it!

The severity of the thing makes this 323 yard hole an even greater hole than is obvious from the photo.

 That photo, by the way, is not taken from the back tees, but from in front of the ladies tee box. From the back tee, you can only see a small portion of the left fairway, since it's hidden behind a huge hill. You actually play over part of the hill to hit the blind left fairway.

 So, to play aggressively to the left fairway,  you have to miss the fairway bunker on the right, but have to guess how far left you dare hit it to still hit the blind fairway.

In summary, the severity of the bunker and it's rough makes you weigh all your options every time you play the hole--(1) attempt to drive the green, (2) play to the left for a better, downhill view of the green, (3) play safely to the right fairway but probably eliminating any reasonable chance for birdie.

On this short par 4, it's a great design!

[Andy Hughes]

I believe it is a matter of maintenance. If greenkeeping crews had to fly mow those bunker surrounds, it would take them forever to complete the course.

SPDB, there is some logic to that. But then I was wondering why that wouldn't apply to all the courses I saw in Scotland that didn't have the dreaded 'ring of rough'.  Also, as the true fairway trap seems to be such a rare creature, most courses if they have them at all wouldn't have to deal with many, so would it be that big a maintenance issue? I wonder if any of the supers here could comment?

For one, a bunker without any long grass around it would not look very natural.  The best ones, are those with grasses around but still allow balls to roll into them - the longer grasses are on the sides and back, not in the front.  You will notice that is quite obvious at the one at Hidden Creek.

Mark, I believe you are quite right, that the grass is shorter on the fairway side of the Hidden Creek photo, though it appears fairly uniform on the Quarry bunker.
But I am not sure I agree about the naturalness angle. Granted, that topic is subjective, but I never looked at bunkers in Scotland that didn't have the encircling rough ring and thought they looked unnatural. Though again, that is more a matter of taste.

May not look natural, but this isn't about a beauty contest, this is about strategy.

Kelly, I am not convinced it will look any more unnatural than having the ring of rough, and it will presumably play more like you want it to.  Any chance you have pictures of the finished product?

Ah. Missed redanman's post. Yes. I agree it appears to happen here in America, and not elsewhere as much.  Does that imply it is just an American preference, along Mark F's 'looks natural' line of reasoning?

[Bill_McBride]

There was a discussion about this not too long ago, and the photo of the most egregious culprit was of #18 at Bethpage Black in the US Open set up.  The FAIRWAY bunkers were at least 10 yards into the ROUGH on each side of the fairway!

I got after our superintendent about this because we had a 5 to 10' band of rough between the fairway and the fairway bunkers and balls were hanging up in that rough rather than running on into the bunkers as designed.  I took him into the office, logged onto GCA and showed him photos of what this condition looks like and what it could look like!  He got the picture right away.  Another great benefit of GCA!  

I don't have any problem at all with the photo of the Hidden Creek bunker with the little surrounding band of native grass.  A ball with any zip at all will roll through that into the bunker.  The strategy of the bunker is not sacrificed to a new fairway cut, which is so often done to save some money.

[Dan Kelly]

The rough is worse than being in the bunker!

Which is part of why I don't like that rough -- as I said in the alternate-fairwarys thread, which sparked this thread.

That bunker ought to collect balls.

------------

As for the question of naturalness: Neither of those bunkers at the top of this thread looks any more *natural* than (obligatory comparison of golf course to well-known woman, directly ahead) Pamela Anderson!

No offense intended, of course. I don't expect bunkers to look natural, unless they *are* natural.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Andy,

Part of it is a maintainance issue, part of it is a philosophical issue.

Fairway or gang mowers try to avoid steep embankments, it's a dangerous situation.  Other times, clubs feel that a buffer should exist between a fairway and bunker, in the name of fairness or as a last resort before a more dire penalty is incured.

The second picture has long grass for aesthetic reasons rather then maintainance or buffer reasons.

I'm against placing buffers of rough in front of hazards, be they water or  bunker.

I think the feature or configuration is mostly found on American golf courses, and in principal, I object to it, I like fairways that feed into bunkers.

[SPDB]

I believe it is a matter of maintenance. If greenkeeping crews had to fly mow those bunker surrounds, it would take them forever to complete the course.

SPDB, there is some logic to that. But then I was wondering why that wouldn't apply to all the courses I saw in Scotland that didn't have the dreaded 'ring of rough'.  Also, as the true fairway trap seems to be such a rare creature, most courses if they have them at all wouldn't have to deal with many, so would it be that big a maintenance issue? I wonder if any of the supers here could comment?

Andy - There is a dramatic difference in turf quality, mowing frequency that makes the comparison one of apples to oranges.

[texsport]

The slopes around the Quarry bunker are too steep for regular mowing but they are not present just for asthetics.

The high bank on the greenward side of the bunker is what makes it an effective hazard--it's almost impossible to hit the ball onto the green if you get in it--you have lost a shot! In fact, when deciding how to play your next shot, you have another decision to make--(1) try to hit the green,(2) blast out left to the elevated fairway, (3) blast right and forward to the safer right fairway. A great, strategically designed hazard and hole!


I think it's a situation where the high lip of the bunker is the desired design feature and the rough just followed out of necessity. The ball can't feed into that bunker from the green side because there's a 20 foot drop straight down to more rough beyond the bunker lip.

[Don_Mahaffey]

IMO,  close cut turf right up to the edge of a bunker is less maintenance if the bunker was designed for this type of cut. Modern lightweight fwy units have plenty of over hang on the outer units to clip right to the edge of the bunker..if… and this is a big if...the bunker shape was designed with this type of maintenance in mind. If you just decide to cut it tight right up to the edge of your bunkers, you will collapse the edges, create mower tire wear patterns, or have a lot of fly mowing if the bunker is not constructed properly.

Although the stacked sod bunkers in the UK are a work of art in my mind, they are hardly natural looking, at least I've never seen a stacked sod bunker with a razor sharp edge in the wild. Personally, nothing looks more unnatural to me then some hairy bunker surrounded by close cut emerald green fwy turf. I like the hairy look as the bunkers transition into native on the perimeter of the course, not in the center of a golf hole.  

[Joel_Stewart]

I have found that the skill of the superintendent has alot to due with the entire issue of rough and bunkers.

[Dennis_Harwood]

I'll give you a great reason, and one that I have been able to observe when working high level amatuer events--

Many courses (Pebble among them) that are hosting both everyday play and top flight events have found that by mowing the front half of the fairway bunkers in the line of play to a light rough level but permitting the back half of the bunker grow very long rough, and including the area just beyond the bunker being also left very long. they get the best of both worlds.

With light rough in front players of all levels will find their shots rolling into the sand if they don't clear the sand-- given the condition of bunkers these days escape from the US fairway bunkers with a lofted club, if smoothed. is something an average or even high handicap golfer can achieve- (the Britsh links courses pot bunkers is another matter)--

For the skilled amatuer, shots from fairway bunkers are not much more difficult than the fairway for long irons or even fairway woods-- however the "hazard" impact is greater if long rough is facing any shot that rolls to the end of the bunker--AND THE REAL PLUS is the player who just fails to clear the bunker or does not clear the complex(which now includes the long rough) pays the proper penalty--

For the skilled amatuer a lie in that long rough bordering the end of the bunker makes for a very difficult recovery and usually extracts the one stroke such hazards should extract--

I personally love the set up and the element it brings to the game punishing the good player for a slight mistake, but not disrupting the average golfer very often,

[TEPaul]

We've been struggling with this question at my course for about two years. The committee wants the incoming sides of bunkering (and other hazards) to be kept low cut (no surrounding rough cut rings, at least on the incoming sides) to make the hazards play more strategic and effective.

Our super has all kinds of reasons why this can't or shouldn't be---eg, another layer of costly maintenance in mowing and keeping those incoming sides low all the time---how to transition the cut to the higher cut on the out-going side---the fact that if rolling equipment is taken in too close to the bunkers and hazards on the incoming sides it'll get into scalping (due to uneven ground) as well as the fact that equipment too heavy could actually crush some of the bunker construction.

I did a study a couple of years ago and it seems most all American bunkering has always had those rough cut rings all the way around them. On some of the older courses in the old days it seemed to be lower than it generally is today but it was always there.

This is a big departure from most all the bunkers in linksland style courses that have very low cut grass right up to them and in many cases right around them. That might have something to do with the fact that generally the grass probably just doesn't grow over there at the rate it does over here. Why? Probably because over there they don't fertilize and irrigate the hell out of it like we do over here!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Andy,

John Kendall pretty well covers the bunker at the Quarry.

TePaul,

My superintendent friends tell me that any machine maintenance right on the edge of a bunker typicall destroys the edge.  The best practice is to get close - and on the low flat side you can get closer - and finiish it out with a flymow or weedwhacker.  I don't think its possible to smoothly weed whack at fairway height.  Top side damage is caused by the mowers rigid frame trying to negotiate a wavy slope, tires digging in, blades negotiating the same slopes, etc.  Compared to other areas, where mowers can change direction, having the ability to mow around the bunker either clockwise or counter clockwise also takes its toll on turf - mowing higher, and less often helps out the turf.

While all things are possible, since few clubs are clamoring for more players to get in the bunker, it probably isn't a high priority at most places.

[Andy Hughes]

In terms of natural or unnatural, I found this picture of Pacific Dunes on this site:


Would it look more or less natural with the 'ring of 'rough'? I think the fully encircling beard would detract.

That might have something to do with the fact that generally the grass probably just doesn't grow over there at the rate it does over here. Why? Probably because over there they don't fertilize and irrigate the hell out of it like we do over here!

Tom, I think SPDB was saying something similar. Perhaps it is a bit apples and oranges to some extent, though I can't help but think if it is a maintenance nightmare, it would be so there as well.

Dennis, interesting.

Pat,
Yes, I can certainly see how the longer grass on the far side adds asthetically to the look. I can even see how some would find that look more appealing.
"Other times, clubs feel that a buffer should exist between a fairway and bunker, in the name of fairness or as a last resort before a more dire penalty is incured."
I understand that is not your view personally, but I would disagree with such clubs.  

[TEPaul]

"TePaul,
My superintendent friends tell me that any machine maintenance right on the edge of a bunker typicall destroys the edge."

Jeff:

That's precisely what I'm saying and precisely what my own superintendent is saying. To have it be otherwise that portion of the bunker where the grass would need to be kept extremely short if mowed by a mechanized riding mower would have to be specifically constructed to handle that weight day in and day out or it's liable to completely damage it.

This is precisely the type of thing my super says it's fine for committees and such to ask for things but when they do they have to understand ALL the ramifications of what they're asking for!!

He says he can do it but what is he going to say when he tells them in two years they have to reconstruct those portions of bunkers that've collapsed or whatever?

[Andy Hughes]

That's precisely what I'm saying and precisely what my own superintendent is saying.

Tom, does your course have a number of real, live, actual fairway bunkers that are actually IN the fairway?

[ForkaB]

The fact is that many courses in Britain, links and otherwise, do manage to build and maintain (cheaply) sharp edges bunkers.  I'm not exactly sure why although I suspect that soils, climate and drainage (giving you slightly moist but firm turf, and grasses that do not grow fast) do make a difference.  I'll be up in Dornoch for 10 days starting next weekend and I'll try to remember to ask some of the greenkeeprs there what they do.  I think they use strimmers rather than flymos for the occasional barbering.

Disclosure--I hate any sort of facial hair on bunkers.  Even those Hidden Creek ones have the "70's Disco" look, at least to me.

PS--I particularly hate (along with Mark Fine, Dan Kelly, et. al.) fairway bunkers which seem to have migrated to the rough.  Sadly, I think what others have said here is true--i.e. this abomination is member driven, woith the goal of making the course look harder (narrowing/shaping of fairways) but play easier (unless you fly into a bunker you ain't getting there).  More sadly, I have seen this phenomenon at some of "our" most favorite courses, including some that have been recently restored.  Yes, the owners of a course can do what they want, but why do they have to be so stupid?

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

  With many thanks to Wayne Morrison we have copies of W. Flynn plans for our course dating to the 20's and 30's. Those plans clearly show the fairway lines running up to and bisecting the fairway bunkers. This to me means the fairway cut should be as close as possible to the bunkers. Flynn must have had a clear vision of what he was representing with this plan.

  Now come forward to the present. The bunkers where rebuilt in the mid 90's. The modern architects plans clearly show the fairway line well away and around the bunkers. Is it possible that this is a architecture issue more than maintenance issue? On modern courses for sure. It is also possible that different architects do things different ways.

[Doug Siebert]

I think surrounding the fairway traps with thick rough is a good thing, because it tends to help worse players (by letting them avoid the traps they fear so much and play from the long grass they are used to) while providing better players the challenge they rarely receive from fairway bunkers in the US otherwise, thus making fairway bunkers a hazard more worthy of avoidance from a strategic perspective.

[Jeff_Brauer]

 With many thanks to Wayne Morrison we have copies of W. Flynn plans for our course dating to the 20's and 30's. Those plans clearly show the fairway lines running up to and bisecting the fairway bunkers. This to me means the fairway cut should be as close as possible to the bunkers. Flynn must have had a clear vision of what he was representing with this plan.

I wouldn't be so sure.  I have one draftsman who insists on drafting a break on the fairwayline when approaching a bunker, whether we intend it that way or not. And, despite numerous attempts to break him of that drawing habit, he doesn't budge! If Flynn had similar employee problems, then we don't know what he really wanted.

I think most GCA types view the drawing as a general representation, not true reality that they achieve in the field later.....

[Chris Perry]

I think it has to do with lie and stance, and making the bunkers more of a hazard than they would be without.

Perfect example is this pic I took at Bandon:



Those are some funky stances gentlemen and neither of us hit the green from there even though it is only 140 yards in!!

It's also strangly odd how a drive hitting that wall stays put in that mess, but if you are actually IN the sand and happen to hit that wall of grass trying to get out, it wil promptly send your ball flying back at your feet.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()