[Dan Herrmann]

Just wondering how much influence the Rules have when designing a course?  Things like OB, water hazards, potential for lost balls, and the like.

Are things like places to drop after entering a water hazard a factor?   Even things like the amount of carry from a non-tips type tee?

Are bail-out areas considered?  For extremely difficult bunkers (like PV's 10th DA bunker), do you provide an alternate means of escape?

Lastly, are you any more an expert on the rules than most other folks that play the game?  

Thanks!

[Forrest Richardson]

We take them into account, yes. But, on a recent job I did give the professional staff a hurdle to overcome. They wound up avoiding a local rule and let alone the odd circumstance.

[TEPaul]

"For extremely difficult bunkers (like PV's 10th DA bunker), do you provide an alternate means of escape?"

For extremely difficult hazards like PV's DA the Rules of Golf themselves provide an alternate means of escape. It's called "Stroke and Distance".  

[Neal_Meagher]

I'm glad you started this thread as this is something that I'm pondering at this very moment.

Let's examine the recent (say last 12 years or so) creation of "naturalistic" golf courses with their rough-hewn edges that seamlessly meld with the native scrub, grasses, etc.  And let's say that you have found that the native scrub or even dune sand is way too fine to be easily playable for most players.  This could lead an owner to prefer the importation of non-site sand to create a more typical and playable bunker sand.

So, the question is, how does one reconcile this difference?  One easy answer would be to totally segregate the two, having the native scrub/sands as lateral or crossing waste bunkers apart from the obviously constructed traditional-style bunkers filled with penetrometer-approved bunker sand.

But this doesn't allow for that wild seamless visual effect.  All of which gets to the rules of golf.........finally.

Is it possible to create an arbitrary line in the sand, so to speak, that indicates to the player that if they are on one side of it they can ground the club and that if they are on the other side they can't.  This also brings up the issue of how to have two disparate sands side-by-side, if that is even possible.

So to answer your question, in this case, yes, the rules are informing some very real design decisions.  And if anybody has ever seen a device employed within a large sandy area to delineate different zones of play, I'd like to hear about it.

[Forrest Richardson]

I think the USGA's definition of a bunker is...well, bunk. Play it as it lies. Who cares if one grounds the club. Use the  K  I  S  S   method.

Always works.

[Bill_McBride]

I usually determine the difference between a "waste" bunker and a regular bunker by looking to see if there is a rake.  No rake, it's a waste bunker.  Or maybe just poor maintenance!

[Troy Alderson]

The rules of golf have ruined golf (to a point).  All laws/rules start simple and escalate into too many.  The rules of golf have turned bunkers into what they are today, smooth, clean edged, perfect.

Let's make all bunkers "waste" bunkers, K.I.S.S like Forrest stated.  If all bunkers are considered waste bunkers, the cost to maintain the bunkers is practically nothing.  Just the occasional mechanical raking once per week.

Troy

[Craig Sweet]

Troy...did the "rules" of golf do that to bunkers, or is it the unrealistic expectations of golfers?  Golfers expect "fairness"...for example, a shot running toward the green can bounce into a bunker instead of on the green...or a shot can carry one foot short and drop into the bunker...feeling slighted and screwed, they now expect a perfect lie in the bunker....the bunker they feel they unfairly wound up in...

I agree with you...they are hazards and should be maintained as such....

[Troy Alderson]

Craig,

I know, the rules did not really make bunkers what they are today, but the rules maintain the bunkers they are today.  I applaud Jack for what he did at the Memorial, great step forward.

I still like the idea of making all bunkers waste bunkers.

Troy

[Tom_Doak]

Neal:

Years ago when the Tour was using English Turn for the New Orleans event, they made artificial distinctions between "bunkers" and "waste areas" by painting lines in the sand in spots.  Which was pretty silly.

That "seamless" look does create some Rules issues but personally I take it as a badge of honor that they can't tell where to draw their line.  We've managed to achieve it at Lost Dunes and Pacific Dunes.  I don't know how they have decided to handle possible questions at Pacific for the Curtis Cup -- it's a small enough field that the match referee can make the call if the players can't agree themselves -- but there is always the option of calling everything "through the green", as Forrest suggests.

As to the original question, yes, I think we all consider the rules in everything we do.  If you've got water in play, you should consider where the legal drop options would be and try to leave one that a high-handicapper can deal with -- I hate seeing holes where there is a drop area that's clearly a free gift contrary to the Rules.

[Jim_Kennedy]

An added benefit of playing all sand as 'through the green' is that a player could, in many cases, drop just outside a 'bunker' with only a one stroke penalty.
I think it would encourage bravery in some, make it more enjoyable for others and eventually help to lessen the demand for 'perfect' bunker conditons.

[Forrest Richardson]

Just recently a golf committee member quized us intently on where we planned to "put the designated drop areas" on two water holes at Mountain Shadows here in Arizona (remodel). I replied that we intended the holes to be "played under the rules of golf...without any designated areas to drop."

This was met with opposition...my feeling is that (often) committees look for ways to inject local rules, conditions or complexity. At these two holes it really thwarts the design to reduce the options to one specific area in the event of a shot played into the hazard. But, we relented, figuring it was their course and they can do as they please.

[paul cowley]

I also try to design to keep things simple....but as others suggest, its not always that easy....bunkers being a good example.

In my world I would play it down thru the green in any situation ....no marking of hazards, as a ball lost or unplayable [including those that are OB], costs a stroke at the point of infraction and then play resumes from there ....no provisionals or plugged lies or casual water...if you can't play it or you lose it, its a stroke and then you move on....no lift clean and place...if your ball is damaged and you want to replace it, that will cost a stroke. Bunker and grass maintenance can occur as the course deems fit because you play the course as you find it at the time......basically few rules.

...and not likely to happen soon...but I will continue to work in that direction when designing by building bunkers that defy demarcation or not designing holes whose strategies rely on a fairway cut.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Rules come up infrequently in design, since we figure there is a way to play the hole, as noted above.  The biggest questions come when you introduce hard surfaces like retaining walls, or rocks in bunkers.  Then someone usually asks how that might be played.

[TEPaul]

Guys:

In the R&A/USGA Rules of Golf there is no such thing as a waste bunker.

Some clubs may designate some areas of their course as "waste bunker" and maybe even the PGA Tour designates some areas as "waste bunker" but nevertheless there is no such thing in the Rules of Golf. I actually called the USGA Rules Department within the last year and asked them if they were thinking or recognizing the idea of a "waste bunker" anytime soon and was told no they were not despite the fact there seem to be a good number of them around and designated that way on scorecards and such.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom:  Understood.  Anything we are calling a waste bunker is just played as "through the green", right?

[TEPaul]

TomD:

Right.

Most of the problem of the "waste bunker" ("waste area") in golf today isn't just that the R&A/USGA doesn't recognize such a thing, but that to most golfers what many golfers and some clubs call a "waste bunker" or a "waste area" on their courses and on their scorecards look so much like what most people think a bunker (hazard) is. But of course they aren't that. As much as they may look like a bunker and as much as they may even be maintained like a bunker they are "through the green."  

I can be very confusing sometimes to tell the difference between a bunker and a waste bunker or waste area and consequently very hard to know the difference with them between a hazard and "through the green".

Obviously it gets very confusing to know whether or not you can ground your club. Not just that but as we saw with the Cink situation it can get pretty confusing as to whether or not you improved your lie or the area of your intended swing.

[Willie_Dow]

Wasn't Harbor Town the first course to claim waste bunkers?

Was Tom with Pete Dye when he worked with Jack on that lay out ?

Anyway, I contended it was a great move, and enjoyment followed the play of the course under the new ruling.

[Dan Herrmann]

How does Pine Valley categorize all their sand?  As hazards, or 'through the green', or is it a mixture of both?

[Doug Ralston]

% of 'muni players' that even pay attention to the 'rules of golf'; rather than make their own?

You could obviously never have OB mean taking the 'walk of shame' at a busy muni. Commonly, they simply make a 'guess' at the exit point, and drop with penalty stroke. Very occasionally you will see a 'provisional'; but if they play like me, they know a 'provisional is reasonable likely to mean two lost balls to search. Pragmatism rules. Most of these groups simply agree to their own rules, often while in play. Please do not feel offended.

So if you design a 'muni'; please do worry about us ......  

Doug

[Forrest Richardson]

Harbour Town's story was that Dye helped contain a big leak from a sewer line break during buidling of the 16th hole. He mobilized dozers to build a berm to contain the waste. Later Dye smothed the area into a hazard...creating the first "waste area."

I define the terms differently. A "waste area" not being a hazard, but a "waste bunker" being one...

waste area
Usually a flat bottomed area with occasional vegetation or tall grasses the surface of which is sand or smoothed soil; resembles a huge bunker, but not defined as a hazard

waste bunker
Same as “waste area”, but defined as a hazard

[JohnV]

"For extremely difficult bunkers (like PV's 10th DA bunker), do you provide an alternate means of escape?"

For extremely difficult hazards like PV's DA the Rules of Golf themselves provide an alternate means of escape. It's called "Stroke and Distance".  

Until you've tried to get out once.  Then you're screwed.

[JohnV]

The problem at Harbor Town was that they didn't put sand in the "waste areas", but crushed shells instead.  Since a shell is a loose impediment Cink could move it, which he couldn't have done if it was sand even if it wasn't a "bunker" under the PGA Tour Rules.  

Starting this year, there is a decision (33-8/40) that allows the Committee to declare that such items have the same status as sand.

At the US Mid-Am at Sea Island we successfully dealt with the issue of sand that was a bunker and sand that wasn't by using the definition of a bunker: "a hazard consisting of a prepared are of ground"  So, if it wasn't maintained (ie raked), it was through the green, whereas if it was it was a bunker.  No problems that I heard about during the week.

[JohnV]

The biggest problem I see with designs today and the rules is that the carries over water hazards are so long that some players can't make it and nowhere is given for them to play the hole so the club ends up putting a ball drop on the green side of a water hazard.

Areas such as Jeff mentioned are usually dealt with pretty easily and most tours and associations have them on their hard cards as integral parts of the course.

[TEPaul]

"Wasn't Harbor Town the first course to claim waste bunkers?"

Willie:

I believe the first waste bunker or waste area was at Crooked Stick, not Harbour Town.

Last year during one of these discussions about bunkers and waste bunkers, I called up Pete and Alice and got Alice. I asked her about the first waste bunker and I believe she said it was at Crooked Stick and it was that example Forrest gave about some septic waste area or whatever they didn't know what to do with during construction, and so a so-called "waste area" or "waste bunker" was the solution.

When it comes to golf the entire subject of "bunkers" and the Rules of Golf is a subject which has never been dealt with completely satisfactorily, in my opinion.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()