[JMorgan]

Would you or would you not remove these rocks if you had designed this course?

If you were restoring or redesigning the hole, would you remove them by any means, whether burial or otherwise?

Why or why not?



Ed.: the person who designed the course is NLE.

[jeffwarne]

I'd bury them and put a ragged edge bunker around them with some wispy fescue --not!!

I'd leave them-nice to see something different-
great hazard, possible recovery,possible freakish outcome


Actually, I'd need to know the length of the hole(from all 6 tees) to make sure such a hazard is acceptable at that length and green size

[John_Cullum]

Assuming these are to the right of the green, I would leave them. I like the way they look. I might take out what looks like a little one up close to the collar because they're going to tear up an expensive piece of equipment on that one

[JMorgan]

I'd bury them and put a ragged edge bunker around them with some wispy fescue --not!!

I'd leave them-nice to see something different-
great hazard, possible recovery,possible freakish outcome


Actually, I'd need to know the length of the hole(from all 6 tees) to make sure such a hazard is acceptable at that length and green size

Jeff, par 3, 126-152 yards, ladies to championship tees.  

[RJ_Daley]

I abhor any rocks of that size anywhere near a green in it's surrounds.  I'd go with burial, and lacy bunker, or mounds if they can't be removed.  The potential of ruining clubs to make a recovery, with the only alternative of an unplayable lie, that close to a green is not a good prospect, to me.

I know, folks say if it was water, it wouldn't be recoverable, and would need a penalty drop just as an unplaybable near the rock hazard.  But, I just have this personal abhorance to rocks, brick walls, etc., within the greens surrounds.

A hole at Greywalls has this sort of rock outcropping to the right approach to more than 1/2 the pinnable areas of that green, and I hate it too...  

[JMorgan]

I abhor any rocks of that size anywhere near a green in it's surrounds.  I'd go with burial, and lacy bunker, or mounds if they can't be removed.  The potential of ruining clubs to make a recovery, with the only alternative of an unplayable lie, that close to a green is not a good prospect, to me.

I know, folks say if it was water, it wouldn't be recoverable, and would need a penalty drop just as an unplaybable near the rock hazard.  But, I just have this personal abhorance to rocks, brick walls, etc., within the greens surrounds.

A hole at Greywalls has this sort of rock outcropping to the right approach to more than 1/2 the pinnable areas of that green, and I hate it too...  

Dick, I would prepare yourself for a question from someone about your feelings on the Road Hole, North Berwick #13, or the Minimalist Manifesto.  

[TEPaul]

JMorgan:

I would not remove them---definitely not---with the single exception of the last one nearest the green on the left in that photo. That one might be a little excessive and dangerous simply because of its configuration and position, particularly if the ball got right behind it. The rest I wouldn't touch.

[JMorgan]

JMorgan:

I would not remove them---definitely not---with the single exception of the last one nearest the green on the left in that photo. That one might be a little excessive and dangerous simply because of its configuration and position, particularly if the ball got right behind it. The rest I wouldn't touch.

Tom, do you think MacKenzie, Ross, or Flynn would have blown them to smithereens and buried what was left over?

[Dave McCollum]

I agree with TEP.  Leave them.  The photo seems to be shot with a normal lens rather than wide angle.  Therefore the rocks are not that close to the green on a short one shotter.  (A super wide shot would make the green look farther away, while a telephoto shot would "foreshorten" the perspective, compress the distance, and make the green look much closer.)

[wsmorrison]

I love them!  They look great and add a geat deal of interest to a short hole.

Flynn has been known to leave rocks in place.  While he wasn't afraid to use dynamite (lots of it at Cascades), he used it sparingly at times.  I cannot recall which par 4 it was at Eagles Mere, but there was a huge rock outcropping sticking out of the ground in the middle of a fairway.  It was fairly flat shale and it added a great deal of interest because the ball could bound in different directions depending upon the angle of play and the unevenness of the rock.  

My guess, as I have no idea, is that he would've liked the natural setting of the hole and would leave those rocks undisturbed especially as they are on the periphery of the line of play.  

[George Pazin]

I think I'm with Dick - I'd either bury them or get rid of them. To me, the bizarre and sometimes dangerous bounces from big rocks are just too much. I can accept greenside water easier than greenside rocks.

[JMorgan]

Thanks for the Flynn perspective, Wayne.  I think MacKenzie would have buried them.  I don't know what Ross would have done.  Maybe someone will opine.

George, what if those rocks were a.) trees or b.) another sand bunker?  How would you feel?  

[J_ Crisham]

Given the modest length of the hole -leave them .  O)nly a truly awful shot will end here. There should be some penalty for missing a short shot. In addition to being unique.

[Brian_Ewen]

Thanks for the Flynn perspective, Wayne.  I think MacKenzie would have buried them.  I don't know what Ross would have done.  Maybe someone will opine.

Its well documented that MacKenzie while building Hazlehead GC , buried a lot of granite boulders , which he said he prefered to do .

And of course after he left , the local council dynamited them , much to his amusement .

[Dean Paolucci]

It appears like there are rocks within a few feet of the green before and on the mound to the right.  I suggest that that is a saftey hazard.  I have gone on record in previous posts advocating buried stone walls and debris mounds as very much in context.  It does not appear like the hole is in a setting like Mauna Lani with volcanic rock all over the place lining the ample width fairways.  I would bury them.

[Don Hyslop]

 I would bury only the smaller one that is closest to the green. It appears to be relatively close to the green and a shot that is just a few feet off line that hits that rock would be penalized far beyond fairness. The others seem far enough away that they would not come into play unless a player was way off line.

[jeffwarne]

Don,
Would it be Ok if a ball buried under the lip in the same area?

Or stuck in one of those beautiful patches of heather so prevalent in Sean Arble's outstanding pictures of Sunningdale New (or the not so beautiful lush fescue surrounding the bunkers in the recent pictures of the Dukes' course?)

 Or were lost in a pond or stream equally close to the green?

Can you define fair please?

I might,however, bury the one closest to the green if it presented an inconvenience/hazard for a maintenance crew (as John C. stated)

I think the very point of hazards is that they SHOULD BE close to the line of play or the green in that the player has to CONSIDER them and execute/plan accordingly.

If they're located in an area that "would not come into play"
or would only punish an "awful shot' that a player had never even considered, I really wouldn't care what they did with them as their appeal would be merely aesthetic and I would do whatever was easiest/attractive to maintain.

[TEPaul]

"Tom, do you think MacKenzie, Ross, or Flynn would have blown them to smithereens and buried what was left over?"

J:

Probably. I've never seen much evidence of rocks like that that close to play on their courses. They say that some of the traditional Ross mounds (that were often in sort of random places not necessarily that close to play) were basically the turfing over of rocks and debris.

On the other hand, Perry Maxwell redesigned a couple of holes at my Ross course and on one of them he did leave some rock outcroppings clearly sticking out of the faces of some bunkers around one of those greens. It's a very neat natural look in my opinion.

I did a routing around here and on at least one really natural landform green site that was basically the rolling top of a hill there were a bunch of rocks as close to the green as the ones in that photo but on my site they were all basically flat on the ground. But if a ball landed on any of them, and they surely would have, it definitely would've created a super high bounce.  

Now that I'm on the subject of that routing I should mention that the green site of the next hole---a fairly short par 4 would've been built right on top of a pretty big underground cattle shelter. I had every intention of leaving the entrance of it open below the green so if a golfer happened to get his ball in there he'd probably have to just take out his putter and putt it back out the entrance.

And the next hole was going to have a pretty big and complex short par 3 green bordered all along the left of the green by a big stone drop-down wall.

So obviously I'm into rocks and stones and underground cattle shelters and stuff on a golf course.  

Oh yeah, on the next hole which would've been close to 600 yard downhill par 5 there's a pretty little springhouse that definitely would've been hittable by a pushed drive right.

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

Flynn left the rocky outcroppings in the bunker short and left of the 17th at Philadelphia Country Club.  It looks great there.

That shale outcropping at Eagles Mere could have easily been blown away since the rock is just compressed sandstone and pretty brittle.  I think it works great in that context.

The rocks in the posted photo are clearly in situ and would seem to exist elsewhere on the course.  Over time, the luck of the bounces will probably even itself out.  If a golfer cannot accept an unlucky outcome without excess complaint, he/she hasn't thought things through very carefully.

[Mike_Young]

I would take a D8 and move the damn rocks out of play.....and they would have too if they had had the equipment or the money to do it another way...  JMO

[Scott Witter]

I guess I don't follow how so many of you can make a firm statement about the impact on play of the boulders and then therefore what to do with them without knowing the hole...perhaps though you are all better guessers than I   and know the hole from this one photo?

IMO, they don't look as close as you think and, if you look carefully, there seems to be a larger rock outcrop on the other side of the green that is even closer to the putting surface than the boulders.  What should be done with this...blast?  That is probably out of the question, or as Mike Y. states, they probably would have moved them if they had the $ or equipment.

If they were REALLY in play, then they would have been moved, covered with soil, or the green site moved during planning/const. to avoid them altogether.  If they are not in play, and they honestly don't appear to be, then I would let the grass grow up around them and anyone hitting their ball into them would not have an option to play out...just another natural hazard that unfortunately doesn't allow for recovery.

[TEPaul]

Scott:

That's a good point. I have no idea where the angle of approach is to this green but it sort of feels like it might be about 90 degrees to the left and between those bunkers. If that's so those rocks wouldn't be of much consequence.

But the question is---would any architect in history have the guts to design a hole with an angle of approach directly over those rocks?

I bet not. Of course I would but that's probably why I'm not an architect.  


MikeY:

So you'd take a D8 and move those rocks would you? Well then you are a blantant enemy of Mother Nature. Let me ask you something. Do you think you'd be completely safe in a D8 if I was out there shooting at you with a high-powered BB gun?

[Mike_Young]

MikeY:

So you'd take a D8 and move those rocks would you? Well then you are a blantant enemy of Mother Nature. Let me ask you something. Do you think you'd be completely safe in a D8 if I was out there shooting at you with a high-powered BB gun?

YES

[Tony Ristola]

In the words of J.J. from the TV series Good Times... Dyn-o-mite!
Not really, it just popped into me head... but...

I'm with RJ and George.

I'm a rock hater too, having witnessed way too many in play in Scandinavia.

Strange, I don't mind rock walls. I liked The Pit at Berwick.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Depends if the rocks have always been there, then I would leave them, if added, then yes remove, as not natural.

To those who want natural formations removed, then I would say golf is all about the challenge, they are just another obstacle.  

I have in my time hit a few large rocks and nearly hospitalised one or two of my friends. Windermere in 1979 springs to mind, but the error was mine, not the rocks.

Have faith, it can moves mountains, regrettably not the large boulder at Windermere.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()