[Patrick_Mucci]

Dunlop White,

The grasses you depicted were rather benign.
I was referencing thick grass and underbrush islands, not the hairplug types.

Hopefully, someone will be able to post a picture of just such an island.

[John L. Low]

Pat,

Just open the course review of the Sand Hills. The first picture should do.

[Patrick_Mucci]

John Low,

Thanks,

In viewing the first picture, it's not what I had in mind.
While I haven't played it, the grass in the bunker didn't look like you would suffer a lost ball or unplayable lie, and that the ball could be advanced.

I had in mind, distinct islands in the bunker containing more penal grass, growth and underbrush.

[RJ_Daley]

JLLow, those pics of Sand Hills are very illustrative.  I would say look at the second page of the SH feature and study the nature of the grasses on the edge and within the bunkers at the 17th and beyond to the islands of grasses in the left side bunkers of the 18th.  As knarly and severe as those grasses look, they actually can be played from in most instances.  That is because of the sandy-dry soil, unfertilized-un irrigated nature of the native grassed in those locations.  Most of the Sand Hills native is sparse enough that one can actualy extract a ball from it without taking an unplayable.  There are isolated places where it gets too lush due to wind migrating the irrigation and lighting up the undergrowth of blues to an undesirable extent.  But, they apparently got the heads set pretty well to prevent that at SH and for the most part WH.  

Dunlop, if the mix Mr Spence uses received too much fertility and irrigation, I think it would be the same problem as any other, too much blue undergrowth, becomes unplayable.  Just my untrained opinion...

[Tom Doak]

I personally think there should be more nasty grasses planted around bunkers -- greenside as well as fairway.  This would put the penalty back into bunkers and make players fear them, even though the penalty would only happen randomly some of the time.  (Over the long haul, those things even out, but too many golfers nowadays want their score to exactly mirror how they played.)

However, I have never done this on any of my courses unless the plant material was already there.  I know how much bitching would take place if I do it, and the owners would probably relent!

[ChipOat]

Pat:

Without wishing to split hairs, are you referring to Scotch Broom or dune/"elephant" grass?

The difference is meaningful because:

1) Scotch Broom lives around the edges of bunkers and, while hitting into it can mean an Unplayable Lie, it rarely results in a lost ball.  One of the significant moments in the 1981 U.S. Open at Merion was when David Graham recovered from the stuff on the 14th hole of the 3rd round.  There are those who still believe he incurred a penalty as he moved around taking his stance.

2) Elephant grass is typically planted in clumps towards the middle of bunkers and hitting into it often results in a lost ball.

The downside of Scotch Broom never bothered me much but, with all respect to Dr. M, losing a ball that happened to come down in a clump of dune grass has always annoyed me.

One of my pet peeves in golf is grass that's so deep it slows up play and often results in a lost ball.  While that usually applies to rough, I'm not fond of it in bunkers, either.

[ForkaB]

I personally think that having to add grass to a bunker, inside outside, upside down or sidieways, is a cop out.  Take a look at the bunkers TOC, or TPC or Muirfield or Dornoch, etc. ad nearly infinitum.  They don't need no stinking moustaches!  Other than vanity or incompetence, why do "modern" architects choose to paint those moustaches on their creations?  Is it perhaps because they realize, deep in their hearts, that they are not capable of painting a Mona Lisa?

[brad miller]

Prairie Dunes has many bunkers with random "yucca" in and around them, many are also backed by native grasses. If you find a yucca, you are "stucka" Some examples can be seen in the course profile, but these pic's were taken in mid-April, things will get even tougher later in the year. Paineful but, "rub of the green"

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brad Miller,

I wasn't referencing anything on the exterior of a bunker.

I was referencing greenside bunkers with islands of heavy grass/growth/underbrush.

Chipoat,

I hope the above answers your question.

Rich Goodale,

I tend to agree that the grasses inside bunkers tend to be what this group has traditionally opposed..... eye candy.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick;

Two points:

Many of the yucca plants at Prairie Dunes are within the confines of the bunkers themselves, including "islands" within the bunker, a Maxwell favorite.

Second, how can you call them "eye candy" when you've already quite effectively made the case that they are dangerously penal in terms of playability?

I also think Grampa makes a sound aesthetic assessment in his comparison of the bunker plantings at Merion pre and post Fazio.  The old stuff just seemed to grow at random, and looked as much a part of the bunkering as the sand.  The new stuff...looks like rows of hair plugs on a bald pate.  

From a playbility standpoint overall, I say, bring em on.  While I think that plantings that cause lost balls is a bit of overkill, I do enjoy the inconsistentcy and variations that a reasonable amount of bunker "growth" can achieve.  If it gets in your head, which I believe it does, then I say the strategic objective is already achieved.

[brad_miller]

Pat, please take a look at my post again, and or read MC's.

[ForkaB]

Mike

Wouldn't little wooden windmills or clown faces or (to be natural) boulders in the middle of bunkers also be "dangerously penal in terms of playability?"

PS--I personally think that the picture of the bunker which Dunlop White has posted, chronicles a disaster, but everybody to his or her own opinion...............

[TEPaul]

Pat:

What Chip Oat said about David Graham on #14 Merion is a very interesting example of a real hazard and potential super penal situation WITHIN a bunker--and it should be remembered it was in the US Open.

Someone should find and post a photo of that on here. Someone should even ask the USGA if they would put up with something like that today, and if they say they wouldn't, they should ask them why not if they did 21 years ago.

And if you think #14 was tough, you should have seen the two fairway bunkers right on #10--two bunkers that were definitely not hard to get into off the tee. That bunker(s) were virtual jungles (on the inside). I never saw anything anywhere like them and they were that way for years!

[Mike_Cirba]

Rich;

Yes, and burying a '73 Buick Century wheels-deep in a bunker might offer a few problems, as well.  

However, I think the distinction between native grasses and a clown's head or wooden windmill is pretty self-explanatory.  Nice attempt with the "natural" boulders, and I've seen them used, but I think you'd agree that despite the obvious physical danger, grass...even thick grass, provides a more traditionally playable surface for golf than rock does.

Would either you or Patrick consider either of the following either "ornamental", "eye candy", or non-integrated into surrounding natural growth?

[John L. Low]

Pat, Regarding playability, how is the horrible grass that eats Pro-V's for lunch more unplayable than a greenside pond?    Let's assume for the sake of discussion a hole that is exactly the same except that the harzard is either a bunker with grass as you describe or a water feature in which you are dead in the water.

I am just trying to get back to your original post in which you kind of took aesthetics out of the equation.

RJ, I can imagine that the native grass at the Sand Hills is whispy enough (?) to play out of. But those photos look like you could find yourself between a grass and a hard spot fairly easily.    Do you happen to know if those grasses were planted or if they carved the bunkers around them?

[ChipOat]

Mike:

The clumps of grass in the first picture look like a ball hit into them can be found.

The clump in the second picture looks like that which annoys me - your ball is probably a "goner".

Incidentally, there's some Scotch Broom on the left side of that 2nd pix.

BTW, where were they taken?

[Mike_Cirba]

Here's another two;

[TEPaul]

I've seen internal vegetation more penal than those two photos at a few holes at Fazio's Galloway National! Don't go to some of the Irish courses, including Port Rush or Royal County Down if you can't deal with the kind of stuff in those photos.

But that's vegetation! There're a few bunkers at RCD that are architecturally as penal as the vegetation in those two photos. There're a couple at RCD where you could get out of a rainstorm by getting under the face of the bunker!

[Mike_Cirba]

Chipoat;

For the time being, I'd like to keep the courses and architects involved out of it to ensure a "non-biased" discussion.  

I'll update you offline.  

[ForkaB]

Mike

I just don't see any of those pictures as being at all "natural". except perhaps for #3.  But, then again, bunkers aren't natural on most sites, so it's hard to really integrate them into the surroundings.  Maybe that's what the archies are trying to do when they chunk native plants at them?.  I still think that a properly built minimalist bunker can provide much more strategic interest and challenge than a big one that is full of all sorts of flotsam and jetsam, but that's just my preference and opinion.

[Mike_Cirba]

Rich;

I understand and respect your opinion and tastes.  That being said, would you remove the island of turf from the right hand bunker on 18 at Muirfield?  

[John L. Low]

Mike,

Even though I don't think it looks natural to left that "sage" plant in the fourth photo (the bluish green one foreground sitting by itself with the sand uniformly raked up to its base), if I did find my ball there, it would only mean that I myself had been un"wise" in hitting my shot.  

[Mike_Cirba]

John L. Low;

Very good point!  

If bunkers are going to provide any strategic value, which they clearly should and historically have to a much greater degree than in modern times, then there has to be the possibility of serious consequences for all levels of players.  

Of course, I probably wouldn't mind quicksand, boiling oil, and venomous snakes, so I might be a bit biased.  

[ForkaB]

Mike

The turf in the middle of the right bunker on the 18th at Muirfield is quaint, and works OK in that situation, but the bunker could be equally good without it, with a little tweaking.  It is good that the island is actual turf, and not some mutant growth which arose from randomly spreading seed from a Burpee's catalogue, as a couple of the pictrues you posted seem to be........

[Mike_Cirba]

Rich;

How would you "tweak" the right hand bunker on 18th at Muirfield to keep it's current challenge and unpredictability after you removed the turf island?  

Also, I'm really curious to know which plants on what pictures above you believe are "mutant growth which arose from randomly spreading seed from a Burpee's catalogue, as a couple of the pictrues you posted seem to be........ "

Please elaborate?  Thanks!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()