[mike_malone]

 Building on Jerry Kluger’s bunker topic I would like to advocate for what I see and study of Flynn’s ideas for problems on a course.


  As I said about bunkers he is more interested in providing a problem or mode of play for most rather than a hazard for a few.


He specifically did not like crossing creeks. He said they affect some rather than all. Many of my favorite water hazards of his have a diagonal which affects the decision of many instead of few.


Using the side of a ridge rather than going straight up and down the hill creates challenge for all.


Finally at the green he usually angles the green with an opening and then uses bunkers for a challenge to all.


We argue at Rolling Green about a bunker short and right on our 7th hole which was added about a decade ago.
I say it reduces the randomness that Flynn designed into the hole because the land there slopes and turns in such a way that the rolling ball could go anywhere. Now the bunker affects some and sits exactly where one should hit the ball.


I find parallel hazards like trees, bunkers, or water to be particularly annoying as they affect the badly hit shot which wasn’t part of the players strategy.


I say Flynn asks you to take on his hazards not to avoid them.

[Tom_Doak]

Mike:


I agree with most of your points.  And yet, one could argue that today's bunkers on American courses have almost no penalty value for the best players, so the reality is there are no bunkers which are truly a problem for every class of player.

[Jay Mickle]

Tom,
If you were designing a course for the best players, what would it look like?

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,
If you were designing a course for the best players, what would it look like?

We will find out next year!   

[Ed Brzezowski]

Mayday I think you need to go into a better description of your 7th hole. I would believe the ( offending?) bunker was added to place more value of the second shot by those unfamiliar with the ground game.

Placing the ball far right on the second shot allows the better player to use the topography and  have a good chance of putting for an eagle. Which is what Mr. Flynn would have enjoyed. Worst case a nice chip shot to a cool green.

[mike_malone]

Ed,
 Your description of 7 is spot on.

[John Kavanaugh]

Sounds like you would love high rough. I know I do.

[Thomas Dai]

Not sure your going to get random sand bunkers, assuming a modern raked sand bunker is actually a ‘hazard’ in playing terms, on an inland course unless it’s on sand. Grassy humps and hollows and rocky outcrops maybe, and streams and ponds and marsh etc but not sand bunkers.
Atb

[Mark_Fine]

Mike,
I'm not quite sure that Flynn placed his bunkers "randomly"?  As you know, he often didn't even add all the bunkers that he might have drawn on his plans until after the course had been played for sometime.  He wanted to observe play before placing them.


I think Ross might have done more random bunkering but they were still strategically thought out.  He recognized different turf conditions and weather conditions would make the hazards play differently.  One other thing that many often forget is that bunkers that are seemingly out of play for some players might not be when those same players have to hit a recovery shot.  A bunker for example that is well short of a green might just seem like a penal hazard for the weaker player.  That might be true but that same bunker might also be in play for a good golfer who hits a poor tee shot and now has to manufacture some kind of recovery shot that brings that bunker into play. 


I think variety is more important than randomness. 


Mark 

[Sean_A]

Since I don't really believe archies place bunkers willy nilly (ie randomly), I have come to think of randomness in terms of conditions reducing or increasing the impact of bunkers.  Even if bunkers are very well placed, I suspect 50% effectiveness rate is damn good and thats a good thing. Imagine with the number of bunkers archies use if nearly all of them effected nearly all players...very boring outcome for sure.  There can also be bunkers which seem like they are placed strangely, but become effective after a poor drive...especially semi-cross bunkers (leave an unappealing gap for rabbits) where now the issue of can the carry be made comes into play.  These days, bunkers like this can be placed at distances where very good players need to take them into account for their tee shots...thus increasing their effectiveness. 

Mayday, I don't mind bunkers cutting off the ground game approach off of a slope so long as there is some room to pull off the shot if one is in good position. 

Ciao 

[Peter Pallotta]

I wanted to see what Sean said.
My thoughts about bunkers got even closer to his ever since Tom mentioned the other day that the 8th at Crystal Downs has no bunkers (and that no one ever notices/mentions it -- me included).
So striking what was achieved there without a bunker -- and maybe precisely because there was no bunker planned/used.
Peter 

[Sean_A]

I wanted to see what Sean said.
My thoughts about bunkers got even closer to his ever since Tom mentioned the other day that the 8th at Crystal Downs has no bunkers (and that no one ever notices/mentions it -- me included).
So striking what was achieved there without a bunker -- and maybe precisely because there was no bunker planned/used.
Peter

Pietro

I often find myself frustrated by the use of bunkers and wondering how, especially on non-sandy sites, their use has become so predominate.  I will nearly always be more impressed by interesting land features, natural or man-made, if they are front and centre....which on hilly sites can sometimes mean to the sides 

The latest crazy sand I saw was at Westward Ho!  The bunkers on the 6th hole are crazy on a such an amazing landscape.  Plus, the scale of the bunkers makes no sense.   

Ciao

[mike_malone]

Sounds like you would love high rough. I know I do.

Rough certainly meets the rule but I prefer randomness there as well.  Just being thick throughout where you lose balls isn’t good. Links courses seem to get it.

[mike_malone]

 Indeed bunkers aren’t very random so I like to see few. I’m suggesting that Flynn’s principle for fairway bunkers  was to use them less frequently and as modes of play primarily.

[mike_malone]

 When a bunker provides a mode of play it can affect most players. The typical bunker that sits parallel to play is the one that doesn’t affect the mind. When you must decide which way to go a bunker affects most. Other than 10 at Lehigh I don’t know of Flynn centerline bunkers. Those clearly provide a mode of play.


When I say “I don’t know “ here I don’t mean there aren’t any but just I can’t bring any to mind.

[Tom_Doak]

I wanted to see what Sean said.
My thoughts about bunkers got even closer to his ever since Tom mentioned the other day that the 8th at Crystal Downs has no bunkers (and that no one ever notices/mentions it -- me included).
So striking what was achieved there without a bunker -- and maybe precisely because there was no bunker planned/used.
Peter

The eighth at Crystal Downs has no FAIRWAY bunkers.  It does have the two at the green.  I actually wound up in the right-hand bunker there last week, for the first time in several years.


It's funny because several wags criticize the other par-5, the 16th, as having no strategy because it doesn't have any fairway bunkers.   

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes, I should've specified: the thread seemed to be more about fairway bunkers, and so I was thinking in those terms. I know those green-side bunkers -- I couldn't get my mind off them from the fairway and so pulled my little 3rd shot wedge so far left it was left of *everything*... bunker and rough and tall grass etc.
What a splendidly conceived Par 5

[Bill Brightly]

Mayday, I've never played Rolling Green so I can't comment on the 7th hole bunker. But I'm curious, is there significant discussion about removing the bunker and restoring Flynn's intent?


I have to imagine that the low handicaps would oppose this.

[JESII]

I believe there was some debate when they put it in that it was restoring a Flynn bunker...not positive, but I recall some debate in here.


FWIW, the bunker matches approach bunkers on #5 at Merion and #’s 2 & 6 at Huntingdon Valley. All sit into the terrain one would want to use to run a ball off the slope and onto the green.

[JESII]

Additionally, there are several ways to avoid the bunker but they don’t include blasting a drive down the center of the fairway and expecting to blast a 3 wood that will run on from 40 yards short right of the green...

[Mark_Fine]

The 8th at Crystal Downs has one of the coolest rumpled fairways in all of golf.  I love it. 


Mike,
There is nothing wrong with a fairway bunker that is parallel to the line of play.  Maybe it is there because the closer you get to it the better line into certain hole locations.  As I have said here a thousand times, less can be more and over use of almost any particular design feature is not good.  I love centerline hazards but a repetitive sequence of holes with them would get old fast. 


One other point to add about "parallel" that you don't like is that what is "parallel" to some players might be a carry bunker for others.  Think about a dogleg hole with a "parallel" fairway bunker on the corner.  Some golfers play up to and/or or close to it, while others try to carry it.  Again, this design feature can be over used just like any other. 

[Ed Brzezowski]

Mayday, I've never played Rolling Green so I can't comment on the 7th hole bunker. But I'm curious, is there significant discussion about removing the bunker and restoring Flynn's intent?


I have to imagine that the low handicaps would oppose this.

[Ed Brzezowski]

Mayday, I've never played Rolling Green so I can't comment on the 7th hole bunker. But I'm curious, is there significant discussion about removing the bunker and restoring Flynn's intent?


I have to imagine that the low handicaps would oppose this.

I would think low handicaps would embrace the removal. Twenty and up guys cannot reach the bunker, they are usually well short of it. It's the single digit guys I think it messes with on the second shot. If you send a nice drive out there you now have a slight gamble on the second. If well struck a bit right of the green you are usually around the bunker, get a good bounce and you are rewarded. Bad bounce and you have a sand shot to a bit of a runaway green, not a very difficult shot but not easy either. Plus it just looks out of place to me. Mr. Flynn seems to give you a few ways to make a good shot. I agree with Mayday, I would go back the way it was before the change. Give a single digit player a chance before he gets to eight and nine which are difficult holes. Mayday make it great again.

ed

[JESII]

In fact, I would argue that the short right bunker is better, and more appropriate than the left greenside bunker...

[mike_malone]

I believe there was some debate when they put it in that it was restoring a Flynn bunker...not positive, but I recall some debate in here.


FWIW, the bunker matches approach bunkers on #5 at Merion and #’s 2 & 6 at Huntingdon Valley. All sit into the terrain one would want to use to run a ball off the slope and onto the green.

Absolutely not Flynn.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()