News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Steve Wilson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #25 on: February 12, 2003, 07:27:27 PM »
There might be some foot dragging by earlier, but presumably the player would have to hit into the bunker, not knowing its condition, in order to commit such an action.  And there is always the knowledge that what goes round comes round.  On the whole, I don't think being deliberately untidy would be that much of an issue among the pros.

And wasn't it C. B. himself who expressed the wish that a herd of elephants be driver through the bunkers prior to the start of a tournament?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Some days you play golf, some days you find things.

I'm not really registered, but I couldn't find a symbol for certifiable.

"Every good drive by a high handicapper will be punished..."  Garland Bailey at the BUDA in sharing with me what the better player should always remember.

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2003, 02:08:28 AM »
Biarittz, Steve, thankyou for your thoughts
I agree with both of you, why not indeed!
My thoughts exactly...  they are hazards regardless of what the rules say about being prepared or not

J.J.S.E
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Tom Doak

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2003, 06:44:15 AM »
Hey, I understand the sentiment here ... I'm just telling you why no one will go along with it.

At Pacific Dunes we did two things to the bunkers to make them tougher.  First, we used the native sand and soil, so the bunkers aren't consistent throughout the course.  Some of them which get a lot of play and raking are very soft and shifty; others are drifty; and in others the sand is blown right down to a hard-packed base.

Second, the insides of the bunkers are heavily contoured, so you often have to play off an uneven stance.  This is the main reason I rejected the Pete Dye / C.B. Macdonald style of flat-bottomed bunkers ... there's simply less variety to them.

Those are things we could get away with.  However, the question of raking the bunkers at Pacific Dunes has been difficult to address.  Some of the sand areas are just natural dunes and blowouts, while others have edges that are hard to define.  Where do the bunkers end so you are allowed to ground your club?  I hate to think what the USGA will conclude when they set up the golf course for the Curtis Cup and the Mid-Amateur.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #28 on: February 13, 2003, 07:07:57 AM »
Tom, thank you for the reply.

I'm not so sure that it's not possible.. - but I do understand your point and the general consensus today amongst golfers and there bunker needs.

Heck, I've had the rack in my hand following professionals and had every sort of accusation hurled at me...

Consistency... Interesting! I agree different consistencies would mix up the shot a little.  Would the professionals moan about that though? - I think they would wouldn't they?

You say, some which get a lot of play?  I agree, there must be away of making the bunkers around the green different in appearance and preperation for variety because they have different amounts of usage?

Again, I like the idea of contouring the insides of the bunker is a fascinating conundrum.  I would accept the challenge with open hands, and I think the professional would also, good solution!

The last point on where the hazard ends, is what I'm leading to - where are bunkers actually bunkers?  Where do we define the 'Hazard'? if there is a wasteland of sorts?  Seminole number 2, right greenside bunker is not defined on the lower lip.

Regards.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #29 on: February 13, 2003, 07:34:27 AM »
I believe I remember seeing one of the Bobby Jones instructional films in which Jones stepped on balls in the bunker and then hit shot after shot stiff.  The bunker was very, very rough by today's standards.  This is one of the true dividing lines between the pros and the rest of us.  They will play well out of even unraked bunkers, while we will get worse (and slower) at something we're already bad at.  Net result, nothing good.

Two years ago at the PGA Championship at Atlanta Athletic Club (won by Toms) I sat behind the first green and watched every group come through on Sunday.  EVERY golfer who missed the first fairway put the ball in a front left bunker with a back left pin (except several who missed long, presumably from flyers in the rough).  They elected this rather than chip from heavy bermuda rough.  Has ANY "average" player EVER made that choice?  Doubtful!

As mentioned earlier in the thread, the pros play a different game, and this change wouldn't fix that.  Bunkers are a hazard for 99% of the golf world, albeit one we MIGHT recover from, and therein is some of the essential addictiveness of the game.  Stop raking, and that changes for the worse.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2003, 08:08:53 AM »
AG Crockett, thank you for your points.

Thats what I'm trying to do, Im trying to aim this idea at that 1 % and nobody else  -  certainly not the other 99 %.  

If the professionals can handle it like you've suggested, it must be a certain percentage tougher than a perfectly raked hazard. (hazard - such a bad description of a bunker) so the effect of wanting to hit at that particular bunker in order to get a better scorecard and line to the pin would be vastly reduced, in my opinion, if there is indeed an element of the unknown. (breath)

Toms solution of contouring is an interesting one? any others to make bunkers tougher, so called Hazards?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

JohnV

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #31 on: February 13, 2003, 10:47:07 AM »
The PGA Tour keeps track of "scrambling" and Sand Save numbers.  The scrambling is any time a player saves par after missing the green so it includes Sand Saves.  The Sand Save number is any time a player gets it up and down from a greenside bunker regardless of if it is for par or not.  Therefore the numbers are not quite comparable.  But, in general, it appears that players score better from the rough than bunkers.  Here are some numbers

Scrambling:
1st 69.7% Tiger Woods
median 59.6% 5 Players
202 47.1% Bo Van Pelt

Sand Saves
1st 64.9% Jose Maria Olazabel
median 50.5% 3 Players
202 29.7% Chris Smith.

Given that they score the same from sand whether it is for par or triple bogey, and the ones for par are included in the scrambling stats, it would appear that they do a bit better from rough than sand.  Of course, the scrambling number also includes the times they are just off the edge in the fringe or fairway.

The biggest issue I have with the way they maintain bunkers on tour is that they rake them towards the hole every day.  This means the player never have a cross grain shot to a hole.
I think they should rake them either parallel to the fairway or perpendicular to it and let the players deal with the various shots that requires.

As for Pacific Dunes and the USGA, I would guess that some areas that have rakes might have them removed and just become "through the green."  If not, they might ask that they only be raked out to a certain point then them become more natural.

We had problems at some of the less well maintained courses that the Futures Tour used with the edges of bunkers and I remember trying to put down paint to define the edge.  What a pain in the butt.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2003, 11:08:57 AM »
JohnV
Thanks for that info.  That makes me rethink my previous post somewhat.  

Obviously, there is a difference between the rough at a major championship and anywhere else in golf, and the preference for rough or bunker would also depend on hole placement on a particular green.

I guess the factor that cannot really be isolated would be a pro's decision as to "where to miss."  From your experience, could the difference in the statistics be accounted for by players "shortsiding" themselves in a bunker due to tournament pin locations?  In other words, the shortsiding would be the factor of difficulty, rather than either the bunker or rough, but with the presence of bunkers dictating the pin position and thereby where the shortsiding would be most likely to occur.  Does that make any sense at all?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

JohnV

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #33 on: February 13, 2003, 11:34:54 AM »
A.G.  I supposed that short siding would be a factor in this.  Certainly a bunker that has a slope on the green that runs away and a close hole location would be a problem.  I would also assume that a fair amount of the scrambling stats are due to easier shots from fairways or fringe and if these were taken out, the percentage would change dramatically.

Tom Doak,  I just went through the pictures of Pacific Dunes on this site and from them and my memory, the bunkers on the right of 13 along with the big monster on 18 are the only ones I can think of that would present a major problem with definition.  What others have I forgotten?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

DanBelden

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #34 on: February 13, 2003, 12:17:54 PM »
 Just add more sand like they have been doing at the US Open for the past couple of years.  If there is chance your ball is going to plug, it is a reason to avoid the hazard.  Also more sand makes it a little harder to control distance.  You have to hit it harder, especially if you have less bounce on your SW and LW.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Art_Schaupeter

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #35 on: February 13, 2003, 03:09:21 PM »
There is a wonderful essay that addresses this topic specifically in the 1993 version of "Hazards" (by Aleck Bauer, originally published in 1913).  The essay is titled, "To Rake or not to rake bunkers?  It is written by Philip A. Truett, who was the Captain of Walton Heath Golf Club at the time.  I thought I might retype the whole essay, but it is a bit too long.  Suffice to say, for those of us who believe bunkers are lacking in their ability to create true risk/reward scenarios in today's game, Mr. Truett made many solid points.

I think that Tom Doak is onto something when he mentions the internal contouring and the different sand characteristics from hole to hole or bunker to bunker.  Taking the predictability out of every bunker shot would start to create that creeping doubt in the players mind as to whether it is worth the risk of challenging it.  I also like Biarritz's comment of a deeper bunker.  (In fact, I have a preliminary design for a par five that would include a deep pit fronting the green.  I was thinking "only" 10-15 feet so I might need to reconsider.  Two fairway options around either side would create some real value for the players that want to go for it.  Almost exactly as you described.)

Beyond that though, I think the problem with the bunkers is that there are too many on most courses.  Flanking every landing area and every green with bunkers on both sides pretty much forces the architect to tone down the hazardous nature, otherwise the golf course becomes a playability nightmare.  I think that there has been a trend to create more visually appealing courses at the expense of solid strategic courses.  More bunkering might lead to magazine covers, but it hurts the overall balance of strategy and playability.

If a golf course's merit is in its ability to challenge the finest players while still being playable to the average player, then less bunkering but more penal bunkering might be the answer.  I would take Tom Doak's suggestions regarding sand variety and internal contouring and throw in Biarritz's comment about deeper bunkers as well.   If you take this step though, then you have to be sparing with your use of the bunker.  Each one should have a solid strategic purpose, and the golfer who doesn't want to risk challenging it should have an optional line of play and plenty of room to play away from or around it.

I rarely bunker both sides of a landing area or a green.  There is usually that option of playing away from the hazard, though at the risk of giving up a good angle to a pin, or dealing with a contour that funnels a ball the wrong way, a longer more difficult putt, etc.  The small things that cost you a partial stroke here and there.  

This subtle stuff that makes the game fun and challenging doesn't necessarily show up on TV, a magazine cover or in the glossy brochure though, and as a result it can be a real challenge convincing your client of the merits.  

In order for the architect to properly incorporate these "hazardous" bunkers, they will need something that most clients don't want to give up...width.  You need width to create the options and the risk/reward strategies and the room that will balance out the difficulty presented by these stronger bunkers.  It is like pulling teeth to try and get some width and some room from the developers.  As a result, things get modified and softened.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #36 on: February 13, 2003, 04:00:43 PM »
Art, great post.

I agree there is no real room in architecture, - except occasionally for variety - to flank both sides of green and fairway on a regular basis with monotonous (spelling?) bunkers.

Solid point about the glossy magazine courses...

So to summarise. ;D

Biarittz mentioned deeper bunkers
Tom mentioned the idea(s) of more internal contouring and different consistencies of soils being used across the course.
Dan Belden mentioned more sand.
John V made a good point about bunkers always being raked
towards the pin and never across.


I think we are getting nearer my original question of Bunkers being hazards!  Are there any more, I've missed?  I apoogise otherwise..

Keep them coming -

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #37 on: February 13, 2003, 05:03:14 PM »
Anyone ever seen a two level bunker?  People here like "greens within a green", why not "bunkers with a bunker"?  Imagine a large bunker that is somewhat deep but not a terribly challenging recovery, with a deep bunker within that from which recovery directly to the green itself is impossible.  You may play backwards or you may play into the main bunker and then play to the green from there.

It'd at least be interesting to see how the pros would handle such a thing (and how much they'd whine about it)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #38 on: February 13, 2003, 05:20:37 PM »
Doug
thank you for supporting the thread(s)....

a bunker within a bunker??? ponder,hmm, ponder?


Could it work, Would it work? How would it really work? How would it look?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Ville Nurmi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #39 on: February 14, 2003, 10:04:43 AM »
I have been thinking about a device which would rake the bunker, but not make the sand even. Then it would be harder for players to get out of the bunkers, but it would still be uniform conditions to everybody.

I think that would solve both problems with rules and professionals.

Ville
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

guest

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #40 on: February 14, 2003, 10:06:25 AM »
JJSE,

Regarding flanking both sides of greens with bunkers, what do you think of Winged Foot?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #41 on: February 14, 2003, 03:01:46 PM »
I just returned from playing the Pine Barrens course at World Woods in Brooksville, Fla.. One of the nicest concepts they have is as JohnV mentioned in an earlier post, all areas of sand are considered through the green, even at greenside.
I've never been to PD but the hazards (photos of) would seem to lend themselves to this approach.

One extra benefit to this: one guy in my group plugged a ball deeply under a lip and he needed a drop. He was about to take relief in the "bunker" when I mentioned to him that this sandy area greenside wasn't a hazard and therefore he could take his drop outside of it. He was relieved as he wasn't a very accomplished bunker player.
I believe that if we treated all sand areas this way we would see more nasty hazards being built as a player would be able to drop outside the more nasty ones without having to trek back to the tee.  


One aside: They have experienced four times more frost delays at WW than their average and by extension causing the superintendent much grief with maintenance.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

TEPaul

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #42 on: February 14, 2003, 04:55:05 PM »
Jim Kennedy:

You know you have a helluva point there about bunkers or sandy areas being considered just "through the green". I've wondered about that for years and have just sort of assumed that the fact of and concept of the bunker is so old in golf--the one real odd vestige and holdover in all of golf from the original linksland--that the playability of it in a rules context has just become firmly imbedded within the Rules of Golf (can't touch the sand, can only use stroke and distance for penalty relief etc).

But other than just age old tradition is there really any other reason to handle sandy areas or even bunkers they way they do?

In other words if the Rules of Golf would just consider handling bunkers a bit differently than they have forever maybe they could be maintained in a more rugged fashion which of course might allow it's strategic function to return to golf more.

There's a lot in golf or certainly in the eyes of the regulatory bodies that's sort of a "it's that way because that's the way it is" mentality, but in the case of bunkering and the rules it might be just a case of "it's that way because nobody can remember when it wasn't".

But after all that's happened to weaken the function of bunkering in modern times maybe now's the time to consider that the rules should treat bunkers differently.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #43 on: February 14, 2003, 05:31:48 PM »
TEPaul,
The rules of golf almost force a player to try and recover from the sand as the stroke and distance penalty is too severe, unlike the relief options for all other hazards. If the rules for all hazards were the same a club could choose to play its sandy areas as through the green or as hazards or a combination of the two.
Weren't sandy areas much more common than water hazards at golf's beginnings? Perhaps this led ruling bodies to believe that players must learn to hit from the sand, not drop out of it, I don't know, but I think this has led, along with stroke play, to the notion that bunkers must be fair.
Personally I like the through the green option everywhere as we could throw away the rakes and just mush the sand out with our feet. Supers would need to upkeep the bunkers but it would not be nearly the chore it now is.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2003, 07:51:10 AM »
Jim, TEPaul, again thank you both for your interesting insights.

I've been taking a back seat and reading with interest how this thread has unfolded.

I think for the first time in the 44replys I've heard two posts from you guys and Toms earlier one, which have accepted that bunkers were bunkers once before and people just got on and played the shot - no complaints, THEY HIT IT THERE!

Jim, I agree bunkers were never meant to be fair, and the rule should be introduced TEPaul.

It's good to hear some thoughts that agree.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Dr. C.B. MacRoss

Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #45 on: February 15, 2003, 07:54:52 AM »
Mush the sand out with our feet? Why would we do that if we are no longer in the business of raking? What amount of "mushing" would become the standard? Why wouldn't I simply dig in good and deep and let the next guy's ball fall where it may? If my concern is for "mushing" the sand for the next guy, well, maybe I'll spend a lot of time in there trying to get it "mushed" just so. Well, in that case just give me the bloody rake.


There is a reason that bunkers are raked. They are the one area of a golf course that other golfers can really foul up in the course of normal wear and tear, forgetting the rare problem of divots in landing areas. The rules of golf are absolutely correct to treat the bunkers as prepared surfaces. For a website that clamors for wide fairways and no rough, the idea of making someone hit from behind the neighbor kid's sand castle is odd. Do we always have to treat the game of golf here as being played by unthinking, pampered individuals who "don't get it" and are trying to "get away with something"? Just a question. Now everyone have a great day.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #46 on: February 15, 2003, 08:14:04 AM »
Dr, thank you for replying.

In your opinion they are absolutely right.

My original question was why do we rake bunkers for the professional, when they are purposely (on occasions) trying to get the ball into certain bunkers in order to benefit there scorecards because they know they will get a better lie?

You must have heard them on the tele, going get in the bunker, get in the bunker?  isn't this a little odd in your opinion?

How do we stop them from aiming at bunkers to get better lines to the tough pins on par 5's?

My suggestion, make them think a little about the consequences...

I never wanted this to spill over into the amateur club members course set up!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #47 on: February 15, 2003, 08:20:53 AM »
Guest, thank you.

Regarding Winged Foot - I was there on a study tour in August and I got to walk both courses with the superintendent.

YES, there is a lot of sand, and YES they flank a lot of the 36 holes which make up that incredible piece of property.

But, it fits...
on this occasion....

I'd love to show you my pictures and video camera where I make this point.

(How do we get pics onto the posts??)

I'm not a lover of flanking fairways, but you have highlighted a good example, so good point made.

#1 is typical of an approach at Winged Foot

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #48 on: February 15, 2003, 08:35:30 AM »
Dr. Whatever your name is.
The rules don't require maintenance of any kind be performed by a player. If you don't have the necessary manners to think about the player who follows you than no rule could make you do so, that's for sure.

If you find yourself in a bunker and behind the neighbor kid's sand castle, don't touch it before you hit.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

James Edwards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Bunkers are Hazards!......   arent they???
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2003, 09:09:47 AM »
Jim,
And you are right, it is all about manners and courtesy and the old bastions (spelling?) of the game.  

Sorry to keep on about this, but I am passionate about this point..  It's only for me a question of stopping the professional making routine birdie 4, routine birdie 4, I don't care where it goes round the green, it won't challenge me, routine birdie 4 etc.etc.

Lets get back to strategy and the power of the architect to design hazards which test... the best... (nice eh?)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
@EDI__ADI

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back