Great catch posting the bunker on the 3rd at Woking.
The hole is a model for less can be more. An interesting and challenging mid-length par 4 with a single greenside bunker.
Bob
Bob,
I look at that photo and I see a bunker that works perfectly for all pin placements on that hole, and even if the green were enlarged to accomodate large amounts of play at say a public course, it would still work incedibly well.
I see holes with 4,5,6 (0r 2 really big ones) bunkers green side over and over again.
In today's day and age at the big budget courses not only are there way too many acres of maintained sand, but they're all hand raked!
Such an incredible waste of resources, man hours, and ....strategy
I'd just like to see 60-70 % less bunkers and the ones that were left would be worthy of your attention.
As a good bunker player, they never enter my mind as far as strategy and even if they did I don't know how I'd play around them at many places as they're there to simply collect a poor shot.
Jeff, do you propose that all classics remove 60-70% of their bunkers? I think Mr. Ross knew what he was doing. If cost is a factor, then clubs should just not maintain them. Never remove. Every bunker has its place whether strategic or aesthetic. And, as a golf professional, properly placed fairway bunkers always get my attention.
Pete,
That's a good question.
No I'm not proposing that classic courses remove 60-70 % of their bunkering.
Reason, because they'd just have to spend more money again in a couple decades on the restoration....
Seriously though, I didn't mean for that to be a criticism of the hole, rather, I just found it ironic that I was glorifying a hole with a clever use of one bunker and you post one with 9.
!924 was a period quite similar to 1995-2005 where a lot of courses were built in boom times and maintenance budgets skyrocketed because they could(or more accurately because they thought they could)
A lot of bunkers were removed in the 30's and 40's and I'm sure a bunch will be now.
I'm not sure that's what should happen, but no doubt it will happen.
Certainly if you only have one cleverly placed bunker on a hole, it has better chance of surviiving removal than being one of nine.
A course that bunkers are used sparingly, yet memorably, will stand a much better chance of weathing a lean time.
As Tom Doak stated,of course you can (and in my opinion should) maintain them less, but once you've gone to less, but have 100 bunkers, you're still going to be spending a lot more time on them than the course with 25 (if they've gone to less)
I do believe that a hole that has good strategy with 1-2 bunkers is more appealing, but I'm certainly not opposed to bunkering.
It does seem to be eye candy for many and it certainly isn't a natural hazard in many locales. (hard to believe anyone would brag about where they imported their sand from, but I digress)