I believe a course that should be played from a particular set of tees is generally a poorly designed course. A good course design is enjoyable from shorter or longer than one ordinarily plays.
I want to say that I genuinely agree with you here, which is why I added the caveat that:
I'm certainly not someone who thinks that "bunkers should be at x and y distances only,"
I would still say that given the nature of strategy in two-shot and three-shot holes, combine with hard limit on driving distances for individuals, I think it's a hard argument to make that every two or three shot hole should have strategic interest from every distance off every tee. I just think that's asking too much.
If i were to evaluate the merits of some templates, we could argue over which were more distance neutral, vs which were distance dependent. I'd argue that discrete hazards (like cross bunkers) are distance dependent, where as continuous hazards (like OB) are less so.
I'd say a
double plateau template will generally be distance dependent. We need a proverbial principal's nose
somewhere, but it will generally be ideal if the principals nose is in play, but only carry-able in ideal conditions. We can obviously argue the details there.
I'd say that a
C&C template based on #2 at Talking Stick would be less distance dependent. Given the nature of the away-and-back of this hole, I think pretty much anyone could play it from pretty much any tee, but longer hitters are going to start playing it like a par 3 if they are playing the front tees, and it's unreasonable to say that's part of C&C's intention.
Some holes, however, I think are absolutely based on player distance, and lack much interest whatsoever when played from the too short of a distance. The template that immediately comes to mind is the Biarritz. Playing even a mid-iron into a hole like this is pretty much a cakewalk, and may be fine, but seems like a bit of a waste of time to me. That said, folks are perfectly free to disagree with me, or just argue that it's to the template's detriment (and I think that can be a persuasive argument).
---
Beyond these template examples, I think there is something to be said for the non-linearity of drives and approach shots on most golf holes, and I've been planning on writing something on some mathematical curves that allow the exact challenge on drives and approaches for folks who play different length shots from there respective tees. However, while I think the math is really interesting, I think that, as golf holes, they would be too ugly that nobody would want to build them.
Suffices to say, I suspect that many architects are building bunkers that they intend to be
generally in play from each tee. If they are, then I think a token feature on the first hole would be a helpful way to get folks on the the optimal tee.