Bunkers you can putt out of?

[Brian Joines]

Playing the par 3 14th at Tobacco Road this weekend, my Dad and I both hit into the bunker behind the green. There was virtually no lip on the bunker and we were both able to putt out of it, to within 4 ft. of the hole.

My question is, are their any other green side bunkers that you can easily putt out of?

Also, doesn't this essentially defeat the purpose of the hazard?



In this picture, there appears to be a lip but believe me, it's not there.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sounds like the perfect Huckaby bunker....

[Doug Siebert]

Whether it defeats the purpose of the hazard depends on what that purpose is, doesn't it?  I'm all for more challenging bunkers, I think most (in the US at least) are too easy for good bunker players.  But just like there are hard holes and easy holes, there should be hard bunkers and easy bunkers.  That bunker was just the equivalent of the wide open 320 yard par 4.

[John_Cullum]

I think most (in the US at least) are too easy for good bunker players.  

I disagree. PGA Tour players, the best 150 golfers on the planet, only get up and down about 60% of the time from greenside bunkers. That's from perfectly maintained firm bunkers.

A 4 handicap player is in the top 1% of golfers, and probably gets up and down less than 40% of the time.

[rjsimper]

There are plenty of bunkers that you can putt out of, but just like any other bunker, that does not mean it's a cinch to pull off.

In a college tournament at Taconic (Mass.) I was in the left bunker on the 9th hole with a downhill lie to a front left pin - literally an impossible shot for anyone short of Eldrick to get close (because anything blast-oriented would come out low and hot...the sand was fluffy)

I putted it, it hopped over the lip, trickled through the rough, and tumbled to about 6 feet, and I made the putt.

Still, it did not defeat the purpose of the hazard because A- I still had to make a 6 footer to save par, B- I really had to think about it....it was not the immediately evident play, and I watched others in a similar position blast with varying levels of failure over the years, and C- It was still incredibly risky, especially not having ever practiced the shot in that location - catch it a little fat, leave it in.  Dont hit it hard enough, it catches in the rough...or maybe sticks on the lip.

Should it always be an option?  No...but if it is an option, It's fine by me.

[CHrisB]

Brian,
The 17th at Bayside in Nebraska is a par-3 with a bunker in the middle of the green. What I especially like about that bunker is that the lower edge of it has no lip, so not only can you try to putt out of it to a lower pin, but you can actually try to putt through the bunker if you hit your shot on the top level. Of course, you can use the slope to try to putt around it too.

Going the other way, you can't putt through it because the top side has a lip, but you can try to pitch over it, and there are slopes to the right and behind the green that you can use as a backstop.

I think this hole improves upon the concept of the 6th at Riviera, because the bunker presents more options.

[Doug Siebert]

John Cullum,

Its irrelevant what their sand save percentage is without reference to their up and down percentage overall.  If you look at the stats for 2005, the best sand save percentage was 63.0%, and the best up and down percentage was 64.5%, pretty much a dead heat!  The sand save percentage drops more as you go down the list, but even the 100th place sand save is 48.7% and the 100th place up and down is 57.7%.  And remember, those up and down percentages INCLUDE all sand saves and include all putts from the fringe (and pros get a lot of those hitting into fast greens!)

Can a bunker really be a hazard if people yell "get in the bunker!" and mean it?  You hear the pros do it all the time, and if you played with me you'd hear me yelling it too on most courses.  I figure that like the pros, I've got about the same chance of saving par from the bunker as I do from greenside rough.  The key difference between the two is that I think I have a much larger chance of making double from the rough (e.g., if I'm trying to make par and end up leaving it in the rough) than I do of making double from the bunker, if its the kind of rough that can give you some ugly lies and but the bunkers are the nice firm PGA Tour type that won't give you buried lies.  Still sound like a hazard to you?

When I'm in Scotland or Ireland believe me I'm not rooting for my ball to go in the bunker, I'd rather have it in the knee high grass around the greens because if my ball gets in the wrong place in one of those little pot bunkers its a guaranteed I'll need two to get on because the first won't even be in the direction of the green!  Now THAT'S a hazard!

[John_Cullum]

Doug

I don't buy that.It just doesn't happen that way in every day play. A 12 handicapper is going to take fewer strokes on average from through the green areas than he will from bunkers. I am not saying that bunkers are always worse than other misses; if you really hit off line, the bunker might be a lesser evil than the woods or high grass. But that doesn't mean its not a hazard. Your numbers prove its likely going to cost  you at least a stroke if you wind up in a bunker. Now thats a hazard.

[Jim Nugent]

John Cullum,

Its irrelevant what their sand save percentage is without reference to their up and down percentage overall.  If you look at the stats for 2005, the best sand save percentage was 63.0%, and the best up and down percentage was 64.5%, pretty much a dead heat!  The sand save percentage drops more as you go down the list, but even the 100th place sand save is 48.7% and the 100th place up and down is 57.7%.  And remember, those up and down percentages INCLUDE all sand saves and include all putts from the fringe (and pros get a lot of those hitting into fast greens!)

Can a bunker really be a hazard if people yell "get in the bunker!" and mean it?  You hear the pros do it all the time, and if you played with me you'd hear me yelling it too on most courses.  I figure that like the pros, I've got about the same chance of saving par from the bunker as I do from greenside rough.  The key difference between the two is that I think I have a much larger chance of making double from the rough (e.g., if I'm trying to make par and end up leaving it in the rough) than I do of making double from the bunker, if its the kind of rough that can give you some ugly lies and but the bunkers are the nice firm PGA Tour type that won't give you buried lies.  Still sound like a hazard to you?

When I'm in Scotland or Ireland believe me I'm not rooting for my ball to go in the bunker, I'd rather have it in the knee high grass around the greens because if my ball gets in the wrong place in one of those little pot bunkers its a guaranteed I'll need two to get on because the first won't even be in the direction of the green!  Now THAT'S a hazard!

I think you are not looking at quite the right stat.  PGATOUR.com also has a stat titled "Scrambling from rough".  They define it as "the percent of time that a player misses the green in regulation, but still makes par or better when the birdie stroke is taken from the Rough."  You can find this by looking up any individual player and then opening up his stats.  Click on "Scrambling from the rough" and you will the year's numbers for the entire tour.  

Last year, the average (median) rough save was 53.6%.  Average (median) sand save was 48.7%.  

IMO the conclusion is that sand and rough both penalize pro's.  Get in a sand trap, and on average tour players will not get up and down.  They do a little better out of the rough, and they do better still if they are neither in the rough or the sand.  Sand costs them nearly a stroke, compared to hitting the green.  

When the pro's yell "get in the trap", sometimes it makes sense.  But on average it does not.  

On the original question: I putted out of the trap at the right front of the 4th green on the Blue Monster.  (I think it was the 4th -- the long par 3 over a pond.)  This was just after a rainstorm, and the sand was solid.  There was no rough or lip to hold the ball back.  As I remember, got it to around 15 feet.  

[rjsimper]

I dont think that every time someone says "get in the bunker!" when a shot is sailing on them, that it's because the bunker is always the BETTER place to be...I think its sometimes more a function of that being the safer bet to hope for.

If a ball is going short-side to an area with some nasty rough and a bunker, the bunker is much better than the worst place it could end up if it doesnt go in the bunker (maybe nestled down right on the edge of the bunker with no stance) but the ball could also end up sitting up with a nice uphill lie prime for a little flop shot.

Thing is, the bunker is much less of a crapshoot as the ball is in the air.

I ask for the bunker sometimes, not because I think I have a better chance always getting up and down out of the bunker versus the rough (hardly the case) but because I know that the worst case scenario if the ball does NOT end up in the bunker is likely much worse than the "usual-case" scenario should the ball find the sand.

[Jason Topp]

I personally think that puttable bunkers are a great option I would like to see more of.  For the poor player - it is an opportunity to pretty much guarantee he gets it in the hole in 3 shots.  For the good player, he will hit a normal bunker shot in an effort to get up and down and will not putt because of the uncertainty associated with putting through a bunker.  

I do not think deep greenside bunkers are much of a penalty for the good player unless they are extremely severe or the sand is deep enough to create buried lies under the lip.  Because most people hate that type of bunker, I say, make them puttable.