Sand bunker placement RANT

[JEFF4i]

Hmmm ...I do apologize but reallly I was talkin to the other guy... And I m not in anyway aggressive unless I see a reachable par 5. Cheers

:biglol:

Well, all I meant to say was that pretty much anything you post is up to scrutiny by anyone, given the nature of the beast.

That hasn't worked out so well for me.

 

[PureStroke]

:biglol:

Well, all I meant to say was that pretty much anything you post is up to scrutiny by anyone, given the nature of the beast.

That hasn't worked out so well for me.

But you are right though . Someone might take me or it the wrong way. But I always liked livin on the edge if you know what I mean ... I ll tone it down just a wheee bit . Only because you called me on it 4i

 

[JEFF4i]

But you are right though . Someone might take me or it the wrong way. But I always liked livin on the edge if you know what I mean ... I ll tone it down just a wheee bit . Only because you called me on it 4i

Enlightend self interest.

Someone as intelligent as yourself, and strong in this game(not being sarcastic, but sincere), has a lot to offer here on this board. Just thought I'd toss in my .02 and try to help.

 

[zaphod]

Enlightend self interest.

Someone as intelligent as yourself, and strong in this game(not being sarcastic, but sincere), has a lot to offer here on this board. Just thought I'd toss in my .02 and try to help.

Whoa---Absolutely no offense taken here. When in a discussion, I enjoy alternate options. Complete agreement is BORING.

Anyway the bunker are where they are. Just wondering about what others thought of this design.

Wi-Golfer presented a accurate description there-of.

I brought the topic up as I have NEVER seen placement of this style hazard before. Water, false fronts, ravines, quarries etc but not a bunker. Just unusual.

As for my placement of hazards on MY COURSE I truly would incorporate some unusual design surprises. However they would challenge the better golfer and not hinder an already challenged high handicapper. Whoa, Does that mean I like Obama's tax plan better than McCain's?? Tax the rich to provide for the poor??? Just a thought.rop: opps is that politics?

 

[Eracer]

Hmmm... Please dont take this the wrong way but......I wasnt talkin to you bro. So I dont think you need to know what I meant. Anyways its cool that your a bit nosyImeancurious ...lol

Simple question........bro.

 

[Eracer]

I brought the topic up as I have NEVER seen placement of this style hazard before. Water, false fronts, ravines, quarries etc but not a bunker. Just unusual.

Interesting that the bunkers you and Wi-G describe are unusual in your experience, but quite common here in Florida. Many, many greens have bunkers with high back faces disguising the front of the green. There are lots of bunkers placed in such a way that you can't see the bottom half of the flag from the fairway.

 

[Fourputt]

I don't see it as being much different from playing to an elevated green where you can't see any of the putting surface. I've played plenty of courses that use this design feature to make one's approach shot more difficult to judge on some holes. One that I played last week has a hole where the green is so far above the player that they have to use a 10 foot long flagstick or you wouldn't even be able to see the flag from most of the fairway. The player has no clue what the green looks like until he gets within about 10 yards of it.

Over the last year, my laser rangefinder has saved me a number of strokes in such situations. If I have a course marker that shows the distance to the center, and I have the laser sighting to the flag, I can judge pretty accurately how much green I have to play with and whether I should favor being slightly long or slightly short.

 

[Wi-Golfer]

Interesting that the bunkers you and Wi-G describe are unusual in your experience, but quite common here in Florida. Many, many greens have bunkers with high back faces disguising the front of the green. There are lots of bunkers placed in such a way that you can't see the bottom half of the flag from the fairway.

I have played somewhere around 40 different courses here in Wisconsin & this is the 1st one I have seen with such bunker placements. They did't really bother me as I said before I thought they were cool looking. Plus mosy of my approach shots were off to the side of them so they never came into play for me. Zaphod probably had 5-6 shots that those bunkers were directly in his way, never went into one but due to not knowing what was on the other side, several shots ran off the backside of the green.

 

[zaphod]

Interesting that the bunkers you and Wi-G describe are unusual in your experience, but quite common here in Florida. Many, many greens have bunkers with high back faces disguising the front of the green. There are lots of bunkers placed in such a way that you can't see the bottom half of the flag from the fairway.

Sorry I was not clear. The bunker placement is unusual for me not the style.

 

[zaphod]

I don't see it as being much different from playing to an elevated green where you can't see any of the putting surface. I've played plenty of courses that use this design feature to make one's approach shot more difficult to judge on some holes. One that I played last week has a hole where the green is so far above the player that they have to use a 10 foot long flagstick or you wouldn't even be able to see the flag from most of the fairway. The player has no clue what the green looks like until he gets within about 10 yards of it.

Over the last year, my laser rangefinder has saved me a number of strokes in such situations. If I have a course marker that shows the distance to the center, and I have the laser sighting to the flag, I can judge pretty accurately how much green I have to play with and whether I should favor being slightly long or slightly short.

Again I agree they provided a visual blockade which is normal. The issue is they penalize the poorer golfers and not so much the above average golfer. With correct yardage and knowledge of the layout of the green they pose minimal problems. Only reason they gave me trouble was I did not want to delay our play to drive all the way up to survey the shot. We were playing for fun and I nonchalanted it. Either way they slow game play by making the golfer travel extra distance or we must wait for a high handicapper deal with their nastiness. Imprudent course design.

 

[Eracer]

Again I agree they provided a visual blockade which is normal. The issue is they penalize the poorer golfers and not so much the above average golfer. With correct yardage and knowledge of the layout of the green they pose minimal problems. Only reason they gave me trouble was I did not want to delay our play to drive all the way up to survey the shot. We were playing for fun and I nonchalanted it. Either way they slow game play by making the golfer travel extra distance or we must wait for a high handicapper deal with their nastiness. Imprudent course design.

Impudent bastard course designers. Kill 'em all!

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

These were generally on par 5s or short par 4s.

Were the par 4's at a possible drivable distance. This actually all seems to make sense to me in that it is basically giving you a risk reward on making you think twice about driving a par 4, or going for a par 5 in two. A pot bunker and the greens running that way would present me with a big enough hazard incentive to reconsider going for a Par 5 in two or trying to get within chipping distance on a par 4 as opposed to laying up to a wedge distance that would allow me to still stay on the green. Not that I personally hit the ball far enough to have the option of reaching a par 5 in two. The only drivable par 4, or reachable par 5 for the average golfer on our home course are set up in such a way that if you intend to do such, a normal teeshot may more likely end with a penalty, and is usually the case with most of the golfers about 1/2 the time. After years of being greedy, I now just play a 7w off the tee and find myself putting for birdie the majority of the time. 2 of the easiest holes on the course, that likely end up with the most penalties much of the time for the normal golfer.

 

[Wi-Golfer]

Only 2 of the par 4's might be considered "drivable", but you had better be able to nail & 306 yd drive on one of them & 325 from the other, & that's from the middle tees. from the back tees they are both over 350 yds.

 

[zaphod]

Were the par 4's at a possible drivable distance. This actually all seems to make sense to me in that it is basically giving you a risk reward on making you think twice about driving a par 4, or going for a par 5 in two. A pot bunker and the greens running that way would present me with a big enough hazard incentive to reconsider going for a Par 5 in two or trying to get within chipping distance on a par 4 as opposed to laying up to a wedge distance that would allow me to still stay on the green. Not that I personally hit the ball far enough to have the option of reaching a par 5 in two. The only drivable par 4, or reachable par 5 for the average golfer on our home course are set up in such a way that if you intend to do such, a normal teeshot may more likely end with a penalty, and is usually the case with most of the golfers about 1/2 the time. After years of being greedy, I now just play a 7w off the tee and find myself putting for birdie the majority of the time. 2 of the easiest holes on the course, that likely end up with the most penalties much of the time for the normal golfer.

Nope unless you were Boo Weekly on steroids. They were designed to be in play