Bunkers: Visible or Hidden?

[JNC Lyon]

This is a debate that is ongoing for me.  Many courses, particularly those in the British Isles, contain bunkers that are hidden from view without indicators that also dictate the strategy of the hole.  As architecture progressed, many architects sought to make bunkers more visible.  Willie Park, Jr. did this at Huntercombe, where his bunkers, sand and grass alike, have big faces that dominate visually.  It seems many architects, particularly Donald Ross and William Flynn, sought to make bunkers more visible and dramatic, both for aesthetic and strategic purposes.

Which is the better tactic to use?  Should bunkers be visible so that players can plot out strategy and tactics from the tee?  Or, should bunkers be hidden to create mystery, charm, and strategy that can only be learned through multiple plays?

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think they should be visible.  Not only for reasons Ross wrote about, but with the cost of sand these days, if I make an owner pay for it, I think he wants it visible!

The only blind bunkers I might do are ones that save a player from bounding away over the green to worse conditions.

[Eric Smith]

Remember MacKenzie's lamenting in The Spirit of St. Andrews that Hell would be more effective in striking fear in the golfer if it were to be seen.

[Kalen Braley]

I don't see why they can't be both.

I think its cool when you have a big gnarly bunker, and then hit a great shot to clear it, only to find out there was another one right behind it that was hidden from view.   

[Ross Tuddenham]

They are only hidden once, why shy away from a great strategic position for a bunker just for the sake of the first time player?

What if you have say three small bunkers near each other where one is hidden, do you think that is ok?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Even though Mackenzie didn't think blindness was a good idea he loved TOC, hidden features and all.

What's the difference in hiding the surface of a green, done quite frequently, and hiding the location of a bunker, rarely done? The perimeter of the green might 'show up' better than a hidden bunker(especially one located at the back of the green), but prior knowledge (and the ability to recall that knowledge) is important for success in both instances.

I believe that a certain amount of blindness adds to the interaction between the player and the course over time.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I can tell you that blind bunkers would tee off anyone playing for score.

I recall playing Aronimink with Jim Lipe and he (and his boss, JN) were non plussed at the number of fw bunkers that were visible, but the inside portion of the bunker happened to be blind.  As Jim tried to carry a corner only to find out the corner wasn't where it was presented, he was was not pleased.  It seems to be logical and predominant POV.  I mean, if you have the talent to carry a bunker, who wouldn't want full information before trying the shot?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jeff,
If they were perplexed by the sheer number it wouldn't take much more, like the blind end of a bunker, to upset them.
Must have been their first time on the course, I'd bet it wouldn't happen the second time around.  

I understand the POV, especially if it was only going to be one go-round at a resort,/hi-end public, or exclusive private, but no one would go out unprepared as to the locations/distances of the hazards for a competitive round.

Plus, nowadays it's easy to check out, or measure, a course online before you play it.

[Jud_T]

Jeff,

Guess they should have ponied up for an A caddy...    Personally I like the feature.  Both have their place IMHO...

[Mike Nuzzo]

I'm going to be sick....
Forcing every bunker to be visible will lead to a worse golf course.
Same with making the entire green visible

JNC
Would you rather have fairness of competition or mystery & charm

[Kalen Braley]

I'm going to be sick....
Forcing every bunker to be visible will lead to a worse golf course.
Same with making the entire green visible

JNC
Would you rather have fairness of competition or mystery & charm

A triple amen to this.

I thought this site was supposed to be the antithesis to "everything is right in front of you"

[Sean_A]

I am definitely of the opinion that both blind and visible bunkers, greens and fairways should exist whenever possible.  I have a strong aversion to archies going out of their way to avaoid blind shots if it means extra walking more than a few times per round.  I am also very partial to bunkers which are sort of visible, they hint at being there, but sand isn't visible.  This is one of the best things about gathering pots.

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm with Jim Kennedy and surprisingly, Kalen on this.

Why do bunkers have to be visible ?

Must the golfer be entitled to every conceivable bit of information known about the course.
Yardages, widths of greens and DZ's, location and dimension of every hazard.

I prefer a mixture where common sense was inherent in the architect's design

How many bunkers behind a green are visible ?

On most older courses, especially "Golden Age" courses, practically none.

As to hidden bunkers in the DZ, an architect should be able to present enough of a tactical, visual signal to alert the golfer to the potential for a bunker's/hazard's existance.

Inherent in a design with hidden bunkers in the DZ, would be that width would seem to be a prerequisite to their introduction.

[JNC Lyon]

I'm going to be sick....
Forcing every bunker to be visible will lead to a worse golf course.
Same with making the entire green visible

JNC
Would you rather have fairness of competition or mystery & charm

Mike,

I love mystery and charm, don't get me wrong.  Fairness and competition are not the only thing that visible bunkers bring to the table.  If placed correctly, they will dictate strategy more effectively.  When players can see bunkers, they will have to deal with them immediately as a mental challenge.  When bunkers are hidden, these golfers may be more likely to bash away without care.

I'm trying to be impartial between the two types right now.  Hell, that's why asked the question: I haven't really made up my mind yet.

[Sean_A]

I'm going to be sick....
Forcing every bunker to be visible will lead to a worse golf course.
Same with making the entire green visible

JNC
Would you rather have fairness of competition or mystery & charm

Mike,

I love mystery and charm, don't get me wrong.  Fairness and competition are not the only thing that visible bunkers bring to the table.  If placed correctly, they will dictate strategy more effectively.  When players can see bunkers, they will have to deal with them immediately as a mental challenge.  When bunkers are hidden, these golfers may be more likely to bash away without care.

I'm trying to be impartial between the two types right now.  Hell, that's why asked the question: I haven't really made up my mind yet.

JNC

I don't think visibility (after one play) dictates strategy better, fewer numbers of bunkers do.  If I see a ton of bunkers out there I swing away without care.  If I know a ton of bunkers are out there (read TOC), I swing away without fear.  Blind or not, if one or two bunkers are on my radar I give them much more respect because I think they are readily avoidable. 

Ciao

[Wade Whitehead]

Fool me once, shame on the bunker.  Fool me twice, shame on the player.

WW

[Jeff_Brauer]

I do understand the theory of excitment correlating to length of time that you don't know your result, so a carry bunker with a blind carry bunker right behind it would prolong the mystery and thus extend the excitement as well as anything, providing there are no forecaddies.

Sean, I had the discussion about fewer deeper bunkers being better for strategy than many shallow ones the other day with a client.  Having played my first round of golf at a very deep bunkered Medinah, I started my career thinking that a few deep bunkers (kinda sounds like the Marine Corps) would be a great design theory.  In that case, I surmise that seeing them, so you could experience the full agony of hitting the one thing you should have missed would probably work.

Overall, I agree that the trend to more and shallower bunkers was just for eye candy, and certainly bunker left, bunker right don't contribute much to strategies, even if they look good.  Dick Nugent used to talk in terms of the "Master Bunker" (i.e., a deep one) balanced by secondary bunkers.  In other words, you had to know which of many was the one that really influenced the shot and could get you in trouble.

[Michael Goldstein]

I'm going to be sick....
Forcing every bunker to be visible will lead to a worse golf course.
Same with making the entire green visible

JNC
Would you rather have fairness of competition or mystery & charm

This last sentence is one of the best things I've read on GCA

[Sean_A]

I am confused by the "fairness of competition or mystery and charm" question as I don't believe the golf course has anything to do with a fair competition.  Do we ever think its unfair ballparks are different or that the reaction of boards in hockey is unfair competition?  Somehow I think people equate fair with championship courses and that mystery and charm cannot be part of that. 

Jeff

I think you understand my thoughts on bunkering.  It hasn't changed in many years, but I do recognize there are exceptional courses which can get away with more sand than others.   Often times for me this means how sand is visually used in terms of blocking views of the target VS opening up views of the target.  I am especially impressed when bunkers like this suggest an easier bailout shot aiming away from the target.  Unfortunately, not many courses do this well. 

Ciao