Did Sarazen change the course of architecture ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Have the sand wedge and Lob wedge had an impact on golf course architecture ?

Have they reduced or eliminated the intended effect of greenside bunkering ?

How would architecture benefit if only the pitching wedge existed ?

Would the need for accuracy be viewed differently ?

Would bunkers be designed differently ?

[A_Clay_Man]

Yes, but not only the sarazen wedge. I still wonder what the first housing complex course was and if it pre-dated 1954's Shadow Mountain in Palm springs?

[Dan King]

Patrick_Mucci writes:
Have the sand wedge and Lob wedge had an impact on golf course architecture?

It seems like a strange connection. Equipment made the game easier, so then bunkers were made easier. Most people would think that the bunkers would be made tougher to compensate for the equipment improvement.

Maybe that's the answer to equipment that makes it easier to hit the ball a long ways. Make the courses shorter.

I don't think it was a direct equation, but just sand and lob wedges went into the whole idea that golf should be a fair game. It was part of the whole idea that good shots must be rewarded and bad shots punished. Why should someone who just barely misses the green be in worse shape than someone who missed by 40 yards?

Dan King

"The idea for the sand iron came when I was taking flying lessons while I was living in Florida. I used to pal around with Howard Hughes, we played a lot of golf together. Hughes was a good golfer, by the way, about a three handicapper. Anyway, when I took off in the plane I pulled the stick back and the tail went down and the nose of the plane went up. Something flashed in my mind, that my niblick should be lowered in the back."
 --Gene Sarazan

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Frank Nobilo is on record saying he thinks the L-wedge has created one of the most significant changes in play at the highest level.

As to the sand wedge and L-wedge influencing architecture and maybe being responsible for making it easier--I'm sort of with what Dan King said--"Do they relate or equate?"

Seems like the general drift in almost all things to do with golf is to make it easier but with architecture it seems to follow its own odd track making some things much easier and other things harder. I'd say probably very few really think about it in any overall sense.

[card and pencil]

"Why should someone who barely misses the green be in worse shape than someone who misses by 40 yards?"

YEAH!! I need to know the same thing. My score depends on it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Card and Pencil,

They're not in worse shape, they're in better shape.

I'd rather be in a bunker with a twenty foot L/S Wedge than forty yards from the green having to carry that bunker to get to the pin.

Dan King,

What I meant is that bunkers and especially angles of attack have seen the diminishment of their importance with the advent of highly lofted clubs.

In the past, an angle of attack to a green might never have been comtemplated due to the severity of the next shot, let alone a missed next shot.
Sand and Lob wedges have almost made that concern and the prudent decision, irrelevant.

The approach to the first green at NGLA and GCGC has become more benign from any angle off the tee, with their introduction and I would guess the same at # 10 at Riviera.

Without a Sand or Lob wedge, I would almost always take the riskier, more heroic route off the tee, giving me a clear advantage with the angle of attack with my approach shot into # 1 at NGLA and GCGC.  Now, I can take the safer Tee shot, and easily overcome the architecture facing my approach with my Sand/Lob Wedge.  

The CLUBS have obsoleted the architecture like aerial warfare did the Maginot line. (forget about flanking)

You're correct, architecture did not counter with more penal bunker design and more penal bunkers.  Perhaps that has to do with the Great Depression in the 1930's, WWII in the 1940's and fairness in the 1950's and beyond.

What were once feared architectural features, hazards and bunkers, have lost a good deal of their architectural significance, strategic and playability wise, due to the use of high loft Sand and Lob wedges.

Perhaps that's why no new NGLA's, PV"s, GCGC's and similar courses with penal features and obvious dual route's of play architecture have been or are being designed in numbers.

[A_Clay_Man]

Once again yes .If Rustic, pac dunes and Friars head are anything like Wild Horse, then the sand wedge or lob wedge will not automatically give you any advantage at all. I know thats not true at the standardized multi-million dollar venue but these newer firmer faster courses negate(actually equate more) the influence of Mr. Sarazen's tool. Besides what was more natural than using clubs with more loft unless you wanna talk about the final frontier of negative loft.

[Patrick_Mucci]

A Clayman,

I can't speak to courses I've never seen or played, but,
trust me, the Sand/Lob wedge gives you an advantage at
Friar's Head.

TEPaul,

For fun, the next time we play NGLA & GCGC let's do it without our sand & lob wedges.  I know it will alter my play significantly.

[Tim Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

My guess is that it depends on the quality of the golfer. Even with the sand wedge, probably 75-80% of the people who play still fear bunkers and find it difficult to get out of them.

That's part of the problem with technology. It is probably good for the vast majority of people who play the game casually. The problem comes with the 1-2% most skilled.

Placing limits on the use of technology in competitions would make the professional game far more interesting, e.g., limiting the loft of wedges and/or requiring persimmon drivers.

It would also reduce the concern over courses becoming "obsolete".

Hopefully, the very concept of courses being "obsolete", will become "obsolete". Simpson wrote long ago that the magic in the game comes from the BALANCE of player ability, equipment technology and the layout of the course. Allowing one factor, (technology), to get out of hand and then saying the other factor (courses) needs to catch up, makes very little sense.

Consumers need to take back the game.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,

For fun, the next time we play NGLA & GCGC let's do it without our sand & lob wedges.  I know it will alter my play significantly."

Pat;

I know even if I practiced out of sand and such for a week solid I could not perform even 1/4 as well without my L wedge!

[Dan King]

Patrick_Mucci writes:
For fun, the next time we play NGLA & GCGC let's do it without our sand & lob wedges.  I know it will alter my play significantly.

Back in the days when I used to play golf with clubs, balls and tees, I had gotten down to a regular set being 6-7 clubs. There was no room in my bag for sand or lob wedges.

I've never been a very good sand player, but still without a sand wedge, I did play the game differently. I had to do a better job of planning my way down a hole, so that I wouldn't get stuck somewhere that would have benefited from a club I didn't have. I got much better at avoiding greenside sand hazards. Sometimes I'd lay up, other times I'd make sure I hit plenty of club to clear them.

I'd encourage everyone to try this for more than just a round or two. Try it for a few months. I think you'll see a significant change in your course management. Who knows, eventually you might get to the exalted point I'm at, where you need no clubs to play the game.

Dan King

"The golfer has more enemies than any other athlete. He has 14 clubs in his bag, all of them different; 18 holes to play, all of them different every week; and all around him are sand, trees, grass, water, wind, and 143 other players. In addition, the game is 50 percent mental, so his biggest enemy is himself."
 --Dan Jenkins

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul & Dan King,

I wasn't thinking about bunker play, rather approach play off of the fairways and rough to the green, and the need to reposition my drives, or second shot on par 5's.

The absence of those clubs would clearly exert additional pressure on the rest of my game to AVOID bunkers at all costs, recognizing that exiting from them will be far more difficult, as will recovery from the rough and fairways near the greens, especially with tucked pins, and firm fast conditions.

The thought of coming in to the first green at GCGC downwind without a Sand/Lob wedge is not appealing unless I can hit my drive over the right side bunkers, leaving me an unobstructed shot into the green.
# 4,  lay up on 2nd
# 7,  lay back to 100-120
# 9,  lay back to 120-140
# 13 ?, possibly lay back
# 14 iron or 3-wood off tee
# 17 go for it or lay further back

# 1 at NGLA would force me to lay up off the tee or gamble more boldly down the left side.
# 2, either gamble boldly or lay up.
# 5 keep right on my second shot
# 7 Learn & implement innovative shots or hit it in two
# 9 either lay back on the 2nd or practice bump and run
# 14 lay back
# 17 ?, probably lay back
# 18 ?, probably cause me to lay further back or go for it
        might cause me to 3-wood or 2-iron off tee.

The bunkers would force me to rethink the play of each hole and create a more defensive mentality relative to strategy.

[Dan King]

I wasn't thinking about bunker play, rather approach play off of the fairways and rough to the green, and the need to reposition my drives, or second shot on par 5's.

As hard as it may seem to believe, I think we are agreeing with each other. I was hoping to make that exact point in the post just above yours. I noticed a significant change in how I planned my way around holes when I got down to 6-7 clubs. All sand hazards became real hazards, that needed to be avoided to prevent the dreaded other. Better to lay up, with the possible loss of a single shot, than to flirt with the hazard and lose multiple shots.

But originally you asked about the affect of the sand wedge on architecture. I said I didn't think it had a direct affect, but more with the general prevalent attitude toward golf being a fair game.

Dan King

"Ah, but don't say you agree with me. When people agree with me I always feel that I must be wrong."
 --Oscar Wilde

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan King,

I think you're right, architecture didn't respond with defensive counter measures.  There was no drift toward more penal bunkers or more fortified greens, although that would have seemed like the natural cause and effect cycle.

I suspect that the timing of its origin, 1932, and the world events thereafter may have prevented the counter measures
from being designed and built.

I also wonder, with the timing of the Depression and the recovery, and the demise of the architects from the Golden Age, had the Sand Wedge been invented/employed earlier, say in 1920, would the architectural response have been more vigorous and penal with respect to bunkers.

Is it also possible that the next wave of architects had less of a connection to penal designs, and that golf was in its beginings of appealing to a broader base ?

[A_Clay_Man]

Pat- I think you over estimate the sw and lw's effectiveness.  Have you no interest in trying to create the shot with any tool at hand?

 I have too found myself without the correct club, but in the interest of pace and the knowledge that the margin of diffence is minimal.
 In other words haven't you ever tried to hit a soft explosion with a nine or pitching wedge? It's not that difficult to figure out how to adjust the clubface and your length of swing.

I remember one day hitting flop shots about ten yards, off concrete with an old seven iron, true.

[John L. Low]

Pat wrote,

"The bunkers would force me to rethink the play of each hole and create a more defensive mentality relative to strategy."

I agree. That's good advice for the average golfer whether he/she is carrying three clubs or 23 clubs. Play within yourself and stay out of as much trouble as you can.

[Doug Siebert]

I was going to say the same thing A_Clay_Man did, it isn't difficult at all to play explosion shots from greenside bunkers using a pitching wedge.  The sand wedge helps for deep, soft sand, but as you are often down in that sand and need to dig kind of deep, even that's not a problem.  Some will object that the higher loft of the sand wedge is a benefit, but in Sarazen's time, the typical loft for a pitching wedge was 52 to 54 degrees!  Years of reducing the loft so players find their new set of irons hits longer has created the need for the SW (and now sometimes gap wedge) to fill in the gap left by the fact that a modern 8 iron is equal in loft to a 6 or even 5 iron from the 60 years ago when irons first acquired numbers.

One question though, perhaps someone here can answer...  When Sarazen invented the sand wedge, did he also invent the swing we all use for the explosion shot?  Perhaps he invented that shot with his wedge (niblick? whatever it was called then) and then found that a simple modification soldered onto the sole made that shot easier?  Or was it in general use by many players before he came along, and he just made it easier?

If you want to point the finger at what made the average greenside bunker much easier for the better player, I'd look on the back of your golf cart instead of in your bag.  Looking at pictures of bunkers from 100 years ago makes me think that the rake has been far more important!  Don't blame Gene for that.

[Neal_Meagher]

Mr. Clayman brings up a good point about how the sand wedge did change golf but, possibly more important to golf as we now know it, so did real estate golf.

According to the architectural study of the Palm Springs area
"Palm Springs Weekend", the first 18-hole course in the valley was built on the grounds of the Thunderbird Ranch, a horse ranch in Rancho Mirage with ranch homes interspersed with riding trails that was converted to a golf course in 1951.

Thus, the Thunderbird Country Club pioneered the concept of golf course as real estate development.  Why even Lucy and Desi had one of the original houses there.

Also predating 1954 was the 1953 opening of the Tamarisk Country Club and its attendent community.  Can anyone really disagree that real estate golf has served to help grow the game?  We may scowl at some of the attempts over the years, but it would be a different game today if not for these house-selling incubators of the sport.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug Siebert,

It's not a thread about blame.  
Only potential cause and effect, and Newton's third principle.

Perfect maintainance practices combined with a new generation of Lob wedges have taken the strategic teeth out of bunkers.

It's rare when you come across a severe or highly penal bunker on most of the golf courses designed in the last 50 years.  Greg Norman's original fairway bunker on
# 17 at The Medalist would be an example of an exception.

It's also rare when a pin can't be attacked from 100 yards in.
Something that wouldn't be dreamed of before the Sand and Lob Wedges found their way into everyones golf bag.

These clubs have reduced the significance of prefered angles of attack, and strategy.

My dad and TEPaul's dad played their early lives without the Sand Wedge, and I'm told that a wristier, outside-in motion was used in and out of the sand.

The Sand & Lob wedge have caused many golfers to favor a more offensive, or attacking style, rather than a defensive style where bunkers are viewed as less penal, and are more easily avoided, aerially.

Being able to take a bigger swing, hitting down on the ball forcefully, imparting significant rpm's to the ball, and achieving high or low trajectories has rendered many a bunker obsolete, and therefore affected the strategy, the play of the hole, and the perception of the architecture.

Like Rodney Dangerfield's putter in Caddieshack.

[TEPaul]

I don't think anybody's blaming Gene Sarazen exactly. He was definitely looking for an edge when he unveiled his SW! But is it easier to play many kinds of sand shots with an L or very lofted wedge today? It certainly is! Is it easier to play delicate little shots around the greens with those lofted wedges? It certainly is.

Some ask Pat why he doesn't just try to play the same shots with a pitching wedge by opening it up more or whatever. If anyone is seriously competing in any context today asking them to do things like that isn't particularly reasonable and wouldn't last long.

Ever hear the remark if you don't have the equipment that's out there today that's gonna work best for you somebody who has it will beat you? Well it's true.

But for those who just go play golf only to have a good time and aren't into any kind of competition it really shouldn't matter. It wouldn't matter to me either if that's all I was doing!

[ForkaB]

Pat

As one of my "friends" on this site often reminds me, I am "older than dirt," so it should not be a surprise to me that the refererence to your and Tom P's dad's bunker play (outside in, wristy) describes me!

An honest evaluation of my bunker play would be 9-10 on the Doak scale for shots of extreme difficulty (downhill/sidehill lies, fried eggs, shots that require one to flop the ball just onto the top of the bunker edge and no more, etc.).  However, when presented with bunker shots of the "vanilla" variety, I'm probably no better than a 3.

My question:  Have I missed out on some sort of modern technique that has been developed over the past 50 years for those simple sort of shots?  Any help or advice would be greatefully appreciated.

And, the answer to your question is, YES! although as you and Tom P have said, it is far less to do with bunker play than with all the other 100 yard in shots.  I bought my first lob wedge in 1985 for the sole purpose of having a club that could allow me to hit a helicopter shot off of the tightest of lies to elevated fast and firm greens at my "home" course.  I was not, am not nor ever will be good enough (as are Adam C and Seve B) to play that shot with a 7-iron................

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rich Goodale,

My observations with respect to the tour players execution of their bunker shots is as follows.

They usually take their hands back no further than waist high.
There is no jerkiness to their transition, no hurry to get to the ball, but there is a gentle acceleration to the ball.  And the toe never passes the heel (unless there's a desire to have the ball run).  The extent of their follow through reflects the type of shot that they're trying to hit.

Practice builds a comfort zone for not having to hit the ball hard.  I think the shorter, smooth swing also provides for greater accuracy in striking the intended point in the sand.

I've tried to mimick their method and it has improved my bunker play, give it a try, but have someone watch you, because what you think may be a short swing may actually be a full or shoulder high swing.

Good Luck.

[TEPaul]

A good little wrinkle that's always worked for me in wet and/or hard packed sand particularly with a very lofted wedge is to try to stop the clubhead right at the ball--gets a lot of spin  too.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I saw George Burns hole out a bunker shot off a difficult lie and riim out with the next one.  When I asked him how he did it, he described your method of stopping the clubhead at impact.  But, that shot takes practice, lots of it.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Not really. Try it--It's not that hard to try to stop you're hands at the ball. You're right Burns sure did use that shot a lot. I've never really tried it, though, in normal sand conditions--that might be tricky. But it does work very well in hard packed and wet sand. With really wet sand you have to really try to stop your hands and on that shot it helps too to try to hit it about 1/2-3/4 as hard as a normal bunker shot. No trying to skip the club off the wet sand either--just open that blade a little and hit right down into the sand and stop the club! The biggest problem in wet or hard packed sand with most people using a normal bunker swing seems to be hitting the ball too far. The reasons are pretty obvious.