Why don't architects introduce

[Patrick_Mucci]

more centerline bunkers to their design ?

These features are all but extinct.

The only modern ones I've seen in person are those at Wild Horse and Hidden Creek.
At Hidden Creek it was a late addition, part of the fine tuning process.

Have we become a golfing nation of wimps and wussies, afraid of the toll that these features will take on our game ?

Is their absence a concession to "fairness" and dumbing down the challenge ?

I'd like to know, from architects, why there's not at least one centerline hazard in each one of their courses ?

[Mike Nuzzo]

There's at least one centerline hazard on each one of my courses.

[Mike_Young]

Pat,
I do try to use at least one....
Answer this for me....would you agree that in years past with the balata ball and wooden drivers that most good players would block out one side of a fairway and work the ball back to the fairway  BUT as equipment changed and balls became straighter and the good players started playing to one side of a fairway and not one edge thus emphasizing bunkers within a fairway much more than "edge" bunkers.....  Several older pros have told me this was the case....they don't like straight balls...because it's too easy for them to bend either way....

[Tim Bert]

Patrick - you should get out and see some of the modern gems. I agree the feature isn't used on enough courses but many of my favorites make use of them on more than one hole.  

Pacific Dunes - 2, 3, 12, 15
Kingsley - 1, 8, 17
Ballyneal - 8, 13
Bandon Trails - 3, 4, 6

[Jaeger Kovich]

Its hard to fit bunkers on the centerline when your fairways are only 25 yards wide!

I hate the monotony of bunkers on both sides of greens and fairways, I dont know how we (America) evolved into this over the years, but golf is way more fun you aren't kicking field goals all day!

Do crossing hazards count? There I've seen 2 new versions of Hell Bunker on modern courses that opened within the last year... Old Mac and Dormie Club.

[Art_Schaupeter]

I love centerline bunkers!  Five solo designs, all with centerline bunkers on at least one hole, 20 holes total.  The high is eight holes on one course and five on another.  Additionally there is at least one hole with a centerline hazard on it on each course.  Variety and options are what makes golf interesting.  You need to have the width to do it effectively obviously, and I am sure that many projects do not afford the architect the room to utilize this feature.

[Adam Clayman]

I'd rather not see them when done poorly. Out of scale is worse than the concept. IMO. Patrick. I think you more attempting this these days but that depends on how much heavy lifting you do.

[Sean_A]

I think true centreline hazards require wider fairways than some archies want or are allowed to be committed to.  Some archies don't like centreline fairways and believe (falsely imo) that they are not effective.  Helping to drive this notion is that a lot of golfers don't undertand centreline bunkers.  Golfers also want what they see on tv and many archies aren't bold enough to turn away from tv design.  There are a lot reasons, but to be honest, I think many are archie driven. 

Ciao

[Andy Troeger]

Patrick,
I can think of lots of centerline bunkers...you just aren't getting to the right courses. You also forget the ones at Warren on #1 and 7, unless you haven't played it since they were put in. Some examples are better than others, but its not for lack of them.

Kingsley and Ballyneal already mentioned
Fazio's Gozzer Ranch #8, 12, 16
Nicklaus' Idaho Club #8, Dove Mountain #4, 8, 9, 15, 18 on the Saguaro/Tortolita combo,  Concession #12
Pete Dye's Promontory Course in Utah #10, 14
Doak's Rock Creek #3
Engh's Creek Club #14 and #18, plus a couple others that are borderline. Plus Lakota #8, Pradera #16, and I'm sure a few others.
C & C's Cuscowilla #14
Kavanaugh's Vista Verde has them all over
Schmidt/Curley's Southern Dunes has a couple examples
Spann's Black Mesa #13, plus a few other holes that are borderline

[JNC Lyon]

I think the appalling lack of centerline hazards in modern courses can be chalked up to the customer, not the designer.  My sense is that many architects are willing to put in centerline hazards if they are allowed.  However, many golfers see centerline hazards as "unfair," believing that a bunker in the middle of the fairway represents a penalty for a perfect shot.  Of course, as any architect worth his salt would agree, no golf shot hit into a bunker can be considered perfect.  It was Donald Ross who said that "no bunker is misplaced, and it is the job of the player to avoid it."

The fairness issue seems to be the problem, as you say Patrick.  Golf isn't fair, just like life is not fair.  Golfers should be made to think on each hole, and the best way to get golfers to think is the strategic placement of hazards.  Centerline hazards are inherently strategic, and, as long as there is enough short grass on either side, centerline bunkers provide a brilliant challenge.

Yet for all of the problems with "fairness," there are several modern courses that utilize centerline hazards.  Long Shadow has several, particularly on the appealing par five finisher.  Renaissance in Scotland (a Doak design, so no surprise) had great centerline bunkers on 16 and 18.  A new nine-holer, Champion Hills in Rochester, NY uses centerline hazards to perfection on 4, 7, and 9.  Two other lesser 18-hole layouts, Mill Creek in Rochester and Windswept Dunes, just North of Destin, FL, use centerline bunkers several times. 

I don't play a ton of modern courses, almost as a rule, but I've still seen many that have no issue with using centerline hazards.  Maybe you should just look more carefully!

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

I agree with others that I've seen quite a number of them in modern design.   

You need to get out more. 

Interestingly, Donald Ross didn't do many, did he?

[Bill_McBride]

Patrick,
I can think of lots of centerline bunkers...you just aren't getting to the right courses. You also forget the ones at Warren on #1 and 7, unless you haven't played it since they were put in. Some examples are better than others, but its not for lack of them.

Kingsley and Ballyneal already mentioned
Fazio's Gozzer Ranch #8, 12, 16
Nicklaus' Idaho Club #8, Dove Mountain #4, 8, 9, 15, 18 on the Saguaro/Tortolita combo,  Concession #12
Pete Dye's Promontory Course in Utah #10, 14
Doak's Rock Creek #3
Engh's Creek Club #14 and #18, plus a couple others that are borderline. Plus Lakota #8, Pradera #16, and I'm sure a few others.
C & C's Cuscowilla #14
Kavanaugh's Vista Verde has them all over
Schmidt/Curley's Southern Dunes has a couple examples
Spann's Black Mesa #13, plus a few other holes that are borderline

Talking Stick North #4 and 5, and a centerline hazard on #12.
Cuscowilla #5!!
Friars Head #5!!
Austin Golf Club #9

C&C like those centerline hazards!

[JNC Lyon]

Patrick,

I agree with others that I've seen quite a number of them in modern design.   

You need to get out more. 

Interestingly, Donald Ross didn't do many, did he?

Mike,

I was thinking about that as I wrote in my Donald Ross quote--Ross did not use centerline hazards as much other Golden Age architects.  However, I think if you looked at some of his original plans for courses, he constructed centerline bunkers that have since been removed.  We have no centerline bunkers on either course at Oak Hill, but two cross bunkers that stood in the Sixth Fairway of the West Course were built and later removed.  He also used them at CC of Rochester and Teugega, to name two.

Even if Ross wasn't the most prolific user of centerline hazards, his bunkers are always prominent and strategic rather than penal.

[Mike Cirba]

John,

Indeed, most of Ross's centerline bunkers were in the form of foreshortened, "top-shot" bunkers, many of which have been lost to time.

Interestingly, I have a picture of an 81 year old woman I played with on New Year's Day trying to escape one of them that Ron Prichard restored on the 18th hole at Wilmington (NC) Muni.   

I don't know what Ron (or Ross) was thinking punishing such a nice, little old lady.  She had smacked a beauty right down the middle from the tee.   

[JNC Lyon]

Mike,

That's a great photo!  Wilmington is a course I'd like to see sometime, and this picture gives me all the more reason to try and see it.  Hopefully, this nice old lady got to enjoy the thrill of driving over some of those 'topped-shot' bunkers.

You should see Country Club of Rochester.  Gil Hanse restored a few of the topped-shot bunkers, but he also did a great and historically accurate restoration of several centerline bunkers.  Some of these create challenge of the tee, some defend second shots on long par fours and par fives, and others simply fit well into the land.  A glance at old aerials shows that Ross built all of these bunkers in his three separate trips to the club.  I wish other clubs were as faithful about restoring the old Ross bunkers as they have been at CCR.

[Mike Cirba]

John,

I'll be up in your neck of the woods this coming year.   I'll certainly give you a shout.

Here's my sweetie extricating herself from another "fairway" bunker at Wilmington, which is very much worth a visit.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Looks like #6. Fun hole, real sleeper.

Wilmington was having some real problems with their greens (some were mostly dead) a couple of winters ago. How'd they look?

[Bill_McBride]

John,

Indeed, most of Ross's centerline bunkers were in the form of foreshortened, "top-shot" bunkers, many of which have been lost to time.

Interestingly, I have a picture of an 81 year old woman I played with on New Year's Day trying to escape one of them that Ron Prichard restored on the 18th hole at Wilmington (NC) Muni.   

I don't know what Ron (or Ross) was thinking punishing such a nice, little old lady.  She had smacked a beauty right down the middle from the tee.   

That old lady looks pretty good for 81!

[Mike Cirba]

Bill,

You should have seen her husband!   

We should all be so lucky.

[Ronald Montesano]

JNC...I don't know that I'd call Mill Creek a "lesser" layout.  I find that it has much of everything that all the finest, new courses have.  In fact, the 14th hole reminded me so much of a hole at Pac Dunes that I had to blink and imagine the two, superimposed over each other.  I think that Mill Creek is a top-notch course and is well worth a trip out of anyone's way.  It is listed as a Raymond Hearn design, but it is principally a Paul Albanese track.  He did the rennovation at Holiday Valley, southwest NY.

[JNC Lyon]

JNC...I don't know that I'd call Mill Creek a "lesser" layout.  I find that it has much of everything that all the finest, new courses have.  In fact, the 14th hole reminded me so much of a hole at Pac Dunes that I had to blink and imagine the two, superimposed over each other.  I think that Mill Creek is a top-notch course and is well worth a trip out of anyone's way.  It is listed as a Raymond Hearn design, but it is principally a Paul Albanese track.  He did the rennovation at Holiday Valley, southwest NY.

Ron,

I like several holes at Mill Creek.  The 14th is a really phenomenal long par four, with good split-fairway options.  I also enjoyed holes like 5 thru 8, 13, 15, and 16.  7 is a solid long par four with a great centerline bunker.

However, Mill Creek is less than the sum of its parts.  I think the course is very disjointed from start to finish.  The routing is forced, with several taxing walks from green to tee.  Additionally, the holes that ascend and descend the drumlin are very weak.  1 is okay but not great, 9 is very bland, with artificial water hazards marring the landscape, and 10, 11, and 18 are all downright bad.  I enjoy a lot of the course, but it does not hang together as well as it should.  I'd take Mill Creek over a Fazio, Rees, or Art Hills course any day.  However, I think a more talented architect could have produced a better routing with holes just as interesting as the ones there today.

[Chris Cupit]

JNC_Lyon,

I think you are absolutely correct in that many designers and many architect "buffs" like those on this site really love and "get" the concept of centerline bunkers but that centerline bunkers are almost universally despised by today's golfer.

I spend all day around golfers (the 99.8% who are "normal" ) and the notion of having a bunker "in the middle of the fairway" absolutely drives them nuts.  It is not a perspective unique to any type of golfer either--my scratch buddies despise those centerline hazards as much or more than others--again, they feel like if they bust a drive 290 down the "middle" they should have a perfect shot.

Also, and I think Pat and Mike or others touched on this, the relative "straightness" of the modern ball has made the art of shot making far less relavent.  I am not sure how much shotmaking was really a part of the game in the "good 'ole days" to begin with but to play well today you would be an idiot to try and shape shots when there is little need to do so.

The modern game is a fundamentally different game than what was played 30 years ago--that horse left the barn and is never coming back.

As summed up by Dr. Rotella who has spent a lifetime watching how the world's elite shoot low scores, here are the "secrets":

1.  Get the ball in play with ANY club that keeps you in play.  Tour players do not hit balls out of play--no crazy, wild shots.
2.  Iron play is over rated--no one (even Ben Hogan) makes birdies with 5 irons.
3.  From 130 and in, you must literally be thinking of making EVERYTHING.  Your short game is EVERYTHING.

While Doc would not emphasize bombing it off the tee, since birdies are made with wedge play and putting it makes sense that the more wedges you in your hand, the more birdies.  Not BOMB and GOUGE but pretty close.

Sorry for the tangent but players (customers) hate center line hazards, they don't appreciate the strategy or fairness and they pay the bills.  I think designers and nut cases like us (and me) love them but we are far out numbered.

Lastly,  I can tell you that even more than the severity of some greens the worst "argument/fight" any of Mike Riley's (my architect and the architect of numerous Atlanta courses) buddies and fellow members ever had with him or me was over his use of center bunkers!!!     

[Mike_Clayton]

We used them at Royal Queensland at 3,6,11,16 and 18 - and If I heard 'I hit a perfect shot and it went intoi the bunker' once I heard it a thousand times. As Chris says golfers often hate them because their definition of a perfect shot is one hit well that goes straight -  rather than a shot that perfectly sets up what is to follow.

At the 18th at RQ a member complained about the small bunker in the middle of the fairway, 250 off the tee.
There is 30 yards of fairway right of it and 25 left of it.
He agreed that 30 yards was a reasonable width - so I suggested that if we grew all the left fairway as rough the bunker would no longer be in the middle but in the left rough - and therefore it would be ok.
To his credit he immediately saw the folly of his argument and said 'I have never thought of it like that!'

[JNC Lyon]

JNC_Lyon,

I think you are absolutely correct in that many designers and many architect "buffs" like those on this site really love and "get" the concept of centerline bunkers but that centerline bunkers are almost universally despised by today's golfer.

I spend all day around golfers (the 99.8% who are "normal" ) and the notion of having a bunker "in the middle of the fairway" absolutely drives them nuts.  It is not a perspective unique to any type of golfer either--my scratch buddies despise those centerline hazards as much or more than others--again, they feel like if they bust a drive 290 down the "middle" they should have a perfect shot.

Also, and I think Pat and Mike or others touched on this, the relative "straightness" of the modern ball has made the art of shot making far less relavent.  I am not sure how much shotmaking was really a part of the game in the "good 'ole days" to begin with but to play well today you would be an idiot to try and shape shots when there is little need to do so.

The modern game is a fundamentally different game than what was played 30 years ago--that horse left the barn and is never coming back.

As summed up by Dr. Rotella who has spent a lifetime watching how the world's elite shoot low scores, here are the "secrets":

1.  Get the ball in play with ANY club that keeps you in play.  Tour players do not hit balls out of play--no crazy, wild shots.
2.  Iron play is over rated--no one (even Ben Hogan) makes birdies with 5 irons.
3.  From 130 and in, you must literally be thinking of making EVERYTHING.  Your short game is EVERYTHING.

While Doc would not emphasize bombing it off the tee, since birdies are made with wedge play and putting it makes sense that the more wedges you in your hand, the more birdies.  Not BOMB and GOUGE but pretty close.

Sorry for the tangent but players (customers) hate center line hazards, they don't appreciate the strategy or fairness and they pay the bills.  I think designers and nut cases like us (and me) love them but we are far out numbered.

Lastly,  I can tell you that even more than the severity of some greens the worst "argument/fight" any of Mike Riley's (my architect and the architect of numerous Atlanta courses) buddies and fellow members ever had with him or me was over his use of center bunkers!!!     

Chris,

Do you think that if architects employed more centerline hazards and other hazards that forced players to think, the "secrets" to scoring well would change?  Is the avoidance of centerline bunkers a problem with perception or a problem with reality?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Centerline bunkers, this is my design....

Design, meet centeline bunkers.

There, I did it.

Seriously, like Mike Nuzzo and others, I put at least one CL hazard in.  Its certainly a viable idea that makes for variety, even if, as pointed out, it really creates a two fw hole, even if not mowed that way, and each side of the hazard needs at least 20-25 yards of fw.  Yes, available land and the problems of making each route desireable in some way figure in.

Why not more?  To be honest, the problem is that they challenge only one particular distance, whereas longer angled hazards can be arranged to work more or less the same for more players.