Riviera's 6th.

[Tony Ristola]

This is one design element I'd have though someone would have pulled off to perfection, improved on the 6th at Riviera. It seems to have been eliminated from all architect's design palette.

It can't be done anywhere; to me it seems an improvement on the concept could be done on a large green set into the slope of a hill, or bowl. That way the bunker would seem to be, could be plausible, would fit visually, and the slope(s) of the green could be created strong enough to allow the ball to be worked to a hole location around the bunker.

For example, I could see the back of the green being built up the slope of a hill to an elevation of 5ft, allowing golfers to putt to the back and having the ball trickle back down to the hole.

I also understand why some simply dislike the concept, but that might be a reason to use it!

[Adam Clayman]

It seems to have been eliminated from all architect's design palette.

Tony, I know of at least two designs that use the concept. Neither course was around in 1998. So, eliminated, is incorrect.

[Tony Ristola]

It seems to have been eliminated from all architect's design palette.

Tony, I know of at least two designs that use the concept. Neither course was around in 1998. So, eliminated, is incorrect.

Stand corrected... how about ... almost eliminated
Were they any good?

[Adam Clayman]

One is very good, the other had to be improved, because the bunker was much too deep and big. Also, on the latter, there really is no creative way to get around, mostly due to the HOC of the surrounding rough. I will look for a picture.


Here's one;



I'm trying to convince the super to get rid of almost all the rough around the bunker, but, he's not motivated.