Some time ago I posted a thread about making bunkers function as they were intended to by either making them deeper, where soil & drainage permited, and/or by creating above ground berms at their faces.
That would aptly describe the bunkers at Oakmont.
Deep, with high bermed faces.
Faces that present an abrupt and distinctive impediment to advancing the ball.
It doesn't matter how skilled one is with a utility club or their irons, advancing the ball a meaningful distance from the mid-point of the bunker forward is difficult, if not impossible.
Is this the way fairway bunkers should function ?
They are definitely a half a stroke to a full stroke penalty, and may be more than a full stroke penalty for the foolish or brazen.
I liked them.
They sent a clear message to the golfers eye and brain.
Avoid me at all costs.
What I also liked about them was their use on short holes, and, from the members back tees, Oakmont has 6 short holes, # 2, # 5, # 7, # 11, # 14 and # 17.
Even from the Open tees, # 2, # 5, # 11, # 14 and # 17 are short, and some might throw # 3 in as well.
The fairway bunkers in conjunction with the parallel fairway ditches/hazards present an interesting look, one that's unique and intimidating.
It's my contention, that the fairway bunker configuration at Oakmont will be adopted by other clubs. That bunkers will be made deeper, where possible, and that fronting berms will be added or heightened for effect.
Interestingly enough, I found an uncanny resemblance between the fairway bunkers at Oakmont and some of the really old fairway bunkers at GCGC.
Could it be, that Oakmont's attempts to return to their penal architectural roots will inspire other golf clubs to construct their bunkers to function as intended, ie, more penal ?