TEPaul,

Could you define "formulaic" architecture ?

I hear the term used, but, I'm not so sure that the term is being used in a consistent context.

Perhaps you could clear up my confusion by defining it, or if you can't define it, please don't tell me that you know it when you see it.

TEPaul,

I don't think that you can attribute "formulaic" to a thought process that noone is privy to.

But, I did notice bunker after bunker at RSG that is unrecoverable from, causing at least a one stroke penalty.

I've also noticed a "formulaic" design or construction of most of their bunkers.  They all seem to have artificial brick sod faces.
This would seem highly "formulaic" by your standards.

Is it you opinion that RSG's bunkers are extemely formulaic, thus rendering the golf course inferior ?

TEPaul,

It's all about how close to those faces your ball ends up

You've clearly described something formulaic,
something highly predictable, not random.

The closer you are to the face, the more penal the shot.
The further you are from the face, the easier the shot.
That's one of the most consistent, formulaic situations you could describe.

And, all of the brick sod bunker faces look the same, and are built the same way.   That's formulaic.

God forbid something formulaic gets acknowledged as acceptable, if not excellent architecture.

You're in DENIAL.
You need Dr. Katz.
Dr Katz has two new assistants who specialize in DENIAL.
Dr Fazrees and Dr Vinny Boombatz.
Dr. Fazrees uses hypnosis.
Dr. Vinny Boombatz uses a .38 special.
Dr. Fazrees's treatments consist of 14 visits.
Dr Vinny Boombatz's treatments consist of one short visit.
Dr. Fazrees allows you to pay on an installment method
Dr Vinny Boombatz gets the money up front
Dr. Fazrees schedules appointments at his office
Dr. Vinny Boombatz makes unannounced house calls.
Dr Fazrees has a fixed practice
Dr Vinny Boombatz hires out as a consultant.

Oh, and if you select Dr. Vinny Boombatz, please leave
Coorshaw at home that day and make sure he's fed before your appointment.

TEPaul,

I prefer the bunkers at RSG versus most of the bunkers I encounter here.

But, I don't think it's so much the bounce of the ball as it is the feeding of the ball into those bunkers.

Their configurations are so similar, especially their faces, that even you would have to admit that they are formulaic in design and construction.

The reason that they don't yell, "get in the bunker" is because those bunkers are far more penal then those they encounter each week on the PGA Tour, but that's not evidence that they are not formulaic.

Bjorn's unfortunate experience with a black hole bunker is a perfect example of what I've been talking about.

The bunker is fed balls by its surroundings, including the green.

Several greens at NGLA feed the ball into the nearby bunkers.

This feature places a greater emphasis on risk/reward and prudent play.  And, depending upon the internal configuration of the bunker, can make a player defensive and unsure of the shot at hand.

All too often buffers of rough protect the golfer from having their ball fed into a nearby bunker.  I'd like to see this buffer of rough eliminated.

Is this feature deemed to be too punitive by most clubs ?

Will there be a movement to eliminate the buffer ?

Why aren't more courses built with this feature ?

TEPaul,

I wonder how much of a culprit mechanized maintainance is ?

Hand mowing could create and maintain this feature.

I doubt that triplexes and other mechanized equipment would venture anywhere near the feature.

Pat said:

"TEPaul,
I wonder how much of a culprit mechanized maintainance is?
Hand mowing could create and maintain this feature.
I doubt that triplexes and other mechanized equipment would venture anywhere near the feature."

Pat:

You've got some significant questions there! Mechanized maintenance probably does have a lot to do with the mindset about not doing this kind of thing. Probably more than most are aware of.

I feel this way because this kind of thing is something we very much want our crew to do--a ton of members want to see it happen--eg very close mowing on bunker surrounds--at least on the side the ball is incoming! But the super doesn't really want to do it or would prefer not to. He has some valid reasons too.

We use mechanized mowing of one kind or another on these rough buffers surrounding our bunkering (and some other features). If we were to try to mow it to the very short height you're talking about it would create all kinds of problems with mechanized mowing. There'd be all kinds of scalping etc as the mowers got in too close to the bunker edges that has all manner of intricate little topography. The only way to avoid this would be to go to some other kind of smaller more manual type of close mowing.

Even if the bigger mechanized machinery could get in close on bunker surrounds one needs to be very careful not to take too much weight too near the edges of bunker surrounds particularly over the top edges of bunkering. The obvious reason is the weight of the machinery alone can be disasterous to the architecture of bunkers basically crushing the construction of it.

But clearly this kind of thing is done really short and close in Europe and Australia etc. So, however they do it obviously we could too.

But with that in mind it occurs to me what may be the primary reason it's so much easier to do it over there than it is in America.

That'd be the funny adage about golf course agronomy over there compared to here. They say that supers in America are into the best way to "grow" grass while in Europe and Australia etc the supers are into the best way to "stop the grass from growing".

Just think about that for a second and it may go a long way to explaining why and how they can maintain their bunker surrounds so much lower than we do.

But there's no doubt it could be done over here. It'd just take studying what the best and most efficient process would be. That probably would take a good deal more man-hours though, particularly as our grass probably grows a lot faster. The subject of what kind of grass to use on the surrounds to maintain lower and more slow growing obviously needs to be looked into too!

There is an added concern about close mowing, at least on the side of the bunkering where the ball is incoming. On our course I doubt we'd want to do close mowing on the outgoing side of the bunkering. The reason for this has a lot to do with the "Ross" bunker surround look. So if we close mowed on the incoming side and not on the outgoing side how would that look in the overall? How exactly would you transition from one side of bunkering to the other both maintenance-wise and with the look of it? That could be more man-hours and more complexity even if it could be made to look OK!

But there's no question at all that this type of thing really does make bunkers and hazard features play SOOO much more functional and effective as hazard features. One only had to see that shot Woods hit to the 11th at RSG the other day. His ball was about 3 paces to the left of the pin and well onto the green. It hit the green, slowly turned left, slowly rolled off the green and AROUND the front of  a bunker and entered the bunker on its OUTSIDE edge!! Now that was really something!

It left Woods's apparently really good approach that hit well within the green in a bunker situation with a restricted back swing and about a 25 yd bunker shot. This is something most club members would not put up with. Of course, being Tiger Woods he sunk the damn thing for a birdie!

 

I turned on the radio this morning, and the first sentence I heard -- in a dialogue about Royal St. George's -- included the phrase "those ridiculous bunkers they have."

I think this, alas, is pretty much the standard American view: It's fun to watch the professionals play into and out of "those ridiculous bunkers" -- but it's not fun for us to play out of them.

Too bad.

Pat

In my previous post I did tell you how they maintain the surrounds of those "black hole"/gathering bunkers over here in the UK--with mechanized equipment, as far as I can tell.  I'll be up in Dornoch in a couple of weeks and find out for sure, if you want me to.  My guess is that the firmness of the true links turf allows for this where it would not be feasible on the mushier US ground--even at those places in the US that call themselves "links"............

Pat

Riding.