What architectural features have been removed or are no longer

[Patrick_Mucci]

constructed due to their being deemed, "Unfair" ?

[Kalen Braley]

Cops, Large waste areas in the middle of the fairway like 7 at PV, teeny deep bunkers on same course.

[John Moore II]

Blind shots are getting more rare (at least I think they are, could be wrong) because many golfers think they are unfair. And on a public course (private courses are different since golfers play the same course every day) I think a blind shot can present a safety issue (I have seen Tom Doak agree with that safety statement).

I do not see 'false front' bunkers very often either, meaning bunkers that are center of the green and line of play, but about 40 yards short of the green.

Centerline fairway bunkers seem to have gone away as well.

[JMorgan]

.

[Robert Emmons]

cross bunkers, top shot bunkers, blind shots, one set of tee's

[Jon Wiggett]

Unfortunately not cart paths

There seems to be a distinct lack of cross bunker these days. Square greens are also rare as are the little banks that used to used around three sides of the green.

[Rich Goodale]

Shortness.

[Lester George]

Dragons Teeth

Trench Bunkers

Lester

[Rich Goodale]

Agree with the first two, but eliminating Lester?  Seems a bit harsh......

[Lester George]

Richard,

My wife may not think so.

LG

[Mark_F]

Severe contours on small greens.

Greens that slope away from a bunker guarding its flank.

Uphill second shots to an away sloping green.

Crowned fairways, or crowns in fairway landing areas.

A deep hollow beyond slightly rising ground tieing in with the green, a'la 4 Dornoch or 6 Old Course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Could it be said that the removal of the features mentioned has reduced the dramatic interest & challenge that was presented to the golfer, thus making the game less appealing for the majority of golfers ?

Have the few that found a/the feature/s unfair, ruined it for the majority of golfers ?

[Shane Wright]

Although it has not been completely removed, the art of the short par 3 is rarer today. 

Examples: 

I think #7 at RCD is one of the best I have seen....about 140, can't see the bottom of the flag, great bunkers, and if you miss on one side of the green, the ball will roll all the way off. 

#14 Ballybunion -

#14 Pacific Dunes - Tom did a great job with this hole (actually reminds me of #14 at BB).  Tough bunkers, crowned green visual from the tee.  Completely different hole with different wind directions. 

I personally like to see 1 strategic short par 3 on courses.  I know many have implemented, but most courses are lacking probably due to chasing a certain total ydg.

[Philippe Binette]

Cross bunkers

Except a few architects (Doak, C&C...) greens running away severely (2% overall)

Tees within 10 yards of the edge of the previous green which create great intimacy

[John Moore II]

Could it be said that the removal of the features mentioned has reduced the dramatic interest & challenge that was presented to the golfer, thus making the game less appealing for the majority of golfers ?

Likely not. I would say that the removal of these features would make the game less interesting for those of us who appreciate good architecture, but for the guys cartballing with a 12 pack of High Life in the back of the cart, I doubt they really understand most of the architctural features (at least not the ones that make the course more difficult, especially after the 6th or 7th beer). I think easier golf courses can make the game more appealing to the masses who are simply there to have fun and beat the ball around. They are challenged enough by their own limited ability and do not need centerline bunkers, blind shots, etc. to make the game more challenging.

Have the few that found a/the feature/s unfair, ruined it for the majority of golfers ?

Well, this goes back to my answer above. If we think that the majority of golfers want blind shots, etc, then I suppose, yes it has 'ruined' it for golfers. I don't think it has ruined the game for the majority. Has it made courses less interesting for those of us that write here, probably. Its kind of like me looking at Abstract Art or something. I just see a canvas with paint spattered about, but someone more tasteful of the arts see's something beautiful. Golf Courses are much the same way. We all see the same thing, just some of us, see things with a more refined eye.

[Thomas MacWood]

I suspect the mounds at the old 12th at GCGC were removed because they were thought to be unfair. Mackenzie's crazy greens at Sitwell Park; Engineers had some greens softened early on too. The old 17th at LA-North, short par-3 over a barranca, was redesigned, again the green was considered too severe. Simpson's redesigned Sunningdale-New only lasted a few years, the same with Strong's Ponte Vedra Club. And speeking of Ponte Vedra Pete Dye's Players Club got a major facelift early on as well.

[Ian Andrew]

out of bounds as a strategic hazard

Whether its safety or the unwillingness to accept it - out of bounds hard up against a fairway's edge is not a common practice anymore.

[Michael Moore]

Football-shaped island greens flanked by jaws-shaped island bunkers.

I will never get to experience the thrill of hitting from a jaws-shaped island bunker and, with the ball hanging pregnantly in the air, waiting to see if it lands in the water short of the football-shaped island green, on the green, in the water on the far side of the green, in the other jaws-shaped bunker, or in the water beyond that.

Indeed, a whining minority has effaced this sort of green complex entirely from the golfscape, and yes, ruined golf architecture in the process.

[Thomas MacWood]

Blindness is another feature that has been removed over the years, especially the infamous blind par-3s

Maiden (Sandwich)
Haides (Sandwich)
Sandy Parlour (Deal)
Cader (Aberdovey)
Mujabi (Burnham & Berrow)

The Dowie at Hoylake (NLE) is an example of OB as a strategic hazard.

[JMEvensky]

out of bounds as a strategic hazard

Whether its safety or the unwillingness to accept it - out of bounds hard up against a fairway's edge is not a common practice anymore.

My course was designed in 1971.The original plan for #12 was a long 4 par with OB just left of the entire length of the hole.Between design and build,the hole was moved ~40 yards right and trees planted between the fairway and OB.

Over the last few weeks,I've shown/described the original plan to ~25 guys.Almost to a man they say it would have been unfair and/or too hard.

[TEPaul]

One architectural feature that has been removed from new course construction today and is no longer (other than on some of the really old courses) is this remarkably close proximity of things like next tees to the preceding green or even greens to the basic lines of tee shots.

The reason things like that don't exist anymore in golf architecture coming on stream and for many decades is obviously they can't due to the realities of liability.

For those who've never played Myopia I guarantee you'd be pretty shocked to see where the 4th tee is in relation to the really long par 3 (253 yard) 3rd.

And if that doesn't get your attention bigtime just wait until you first step on that 4th tee and look where the 7th green is!!!

I played about five rounds there last July and in three of those rounds when I was on or near the 7th green there was a ball on it from the 4th tee. I guarantee you there is no green in the entire world that gets as many balls on it from another tee than that 7th green at Myopia.

Is it scary and unsettling? A little bit, but you get used to it and to me it takes on some real charm actually because I know one can never see a golf course done today with something like that.

[Sean_A]

Centreline bunkers haven't been so much removed as not used enough previous years.

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

I suspect the mounds at the old 12th at GCGC were removed because they were thought to be unfair.

Tom MacWood,

It turns out that the concept of "unfair" had nothing to do with their removal.

It was a combination of the inability of the person in charge to grow grass, excess watering, mixed with a dab of innocent vandalism.

Those mounds formed an attractice nuisance for the young, local bicycle riders.

They used to use them as ramps to jump their bicycles.

This damaged the mounds and the green and surrounds.

In addition, the green was being overwatered, so you can imagine the mess.

Add in the difficulty of growing grass and it, along with the timing of RTJ's popularity, conspired to bring about the elimination of the mounds and the entire green complex.

What's frustrating is that the current version has been left unchallenged, save for a few members, over the last 40 or so years.

On a golf course that's so special, so rooted in architectural history, it's hard to believe that this eyesore has remained, untouched over the years, and that the club doesn't have its restoration high on their priority list.

I'm also surprised that Tom Doak, the club's consulting architect, hasn't taken a more pro-active stance with respect to restoration of this hole.

Newton's First Law of Motion seems to have been confirmed.

[JMorgan]

I suspect the mounds at the old 12th at GCGC were removed because they were thought to be unfair.

Tom MacWood,

It turns out that the concept of "unfair" had nothing to do with their removal.

It was a combination of the inability of the person in charge to grow grass, excess watering, mixed with a dab of innocent vandalism.

Those mounds formed an attractice nuisance for the young, local bicycle riders.

They used to use them as ramps to jump their bicycles.

This damaged the mounds and the green and surrounds.

In addition, the green was being overwatered, so you can imagine the mess.

Add in the difficulty of growing grass and it, along with the timing of RTJ's popularity, conspired to bring about the elimination of the mounds and the entire green complex.

What's frustrating is that the current version has been left unchallenged, save for a few members, over the last 40 or so years.

On a golf course that's so special, so rooted in architectural history, it's hard to believe that this eyesore has remained, untouched over the years, and that the club doesn't have its restoration high on their priority list.

I'm also surprised that Tom Doak, the club's consulting architect, hasn't taken a more pro-active stance with respect to restoration of this hole.

Newton's First Law of Motion seems to have been confirmed.

Pat,

Many times I contemplated starting a thread on this topic but thought it presumptuous on my part so thanks for the above.  I do hope the members eventually move it up on their priority list. 

[Kalen Braley]

- square greens
- Big massive mounds surrounding the greens