Advertisement
Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
trickymicky69

Greens with bunkers in the middle of them are ridiculous, please comment

76 posts in this topic

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Riviera has a famous one which was replicated at Tour 18 just north of the DFW metroplex. Pin placement the day I played it was just in front of the bunker (elevated green). I hit my most purely struck iron off the tee going right for the pin (couldn't see what happened due to elevated green. Get to green and I see the trickle marks going into the front of the bunker). Now I'm left with a short sided bunker shot to a green that slopes back to front. Out of bunker, then two putt. I was not happy. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/image/id/248352/width/640/height/480][IMG]http://thesandtrap.com/image/id/248352/width/640/height/480[/IMG][/URL] Groundskeepers must hate these also--if your ball is on the wrong side of the bunker (relative to pin), you have to pitch or flop off the dance floor. Not many amateurs can perform that shot without taking a divot out of the green.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by trickymicky69

Sh1t design imo

If you're going to type shit just type shit.

I don't think a bunker being in the middle of the green makes something shit, btw. Don't hit it on the wrong side. There are some greens with lobes on which you can't make putts, or some holes cut below tiers where you have no chance of making the putt if you're above the tier. No different - you have a medium length par putt.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by iacas

If you're going to type shit just type shit.

I don't think a bunker being in the middle of the green makes something shit, btw. Don't hit it on the wrong side. There are some greens with lobes on which you can't make putts, or some holes cut below tiers where you have no chance of making the putt if you're above the tier. No different - you have a medium length par putt.

After playing Doonbeg in Ireland I have had experience very similar to uttexas above.

A beautiful shot went straight in the bunker, so for me they are SHIT

They have the whole "through the green" area, so why in the hell would they want to ruin a nice green?

I agree its my fault for finding it but I think it cheapens a great design and makes it look gimmicky.

For a high handicapper, how do you aim for the middle of the green if its been bastardised with a massive crater?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the course is hosting a tour event, they shouldn't put the pin directly in front or directly behind the bunker. The PGA tour average accuracy from 150 yards is about 30 feet. 30 feet=10 yards with fancy math. 10 yards long if the pin is in front of the bunker = sand 10 yards short if the pin is behind the bunker=sand. Too punishing for the recreational player. Placing the pin to the left or right of the green bunker, no problem with that.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with it, they are rare, unique, and kinda cool.  And I look at it this way:  Instead of seeing it as a bunker in the middle of the green, see it as 4 different smaller greens for one hole (front, back, left, right) that just happened to be connected.

As far as the chipping off the green part, I always assumed that courses with these type of holes would have a local rule requiring (or at least encouraging) you to move your ball to the nearest fringe or something to chip, rather than having everybody tear up the green every day.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I gotta say I see that as kind of gimmicky. I don't see it as being the same as tiered/sloped greens, to me that's just a normal part of golf. If I hit a shot to the middle of the green, I shouldn't have to bring my sand wedge.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

In terms of playing the hole there's no difference if the bunker is a front greenside bunker or in the middle of the green; you'd still aim to carry it to the back section. The only difference is that in front of the bunker is 'green' rather than fairway/fringe/rough.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like hazards between you and the hole when putting stick to putt-putt. Almost every shot should have an appropriate risk reward element. Forcing you to chip when on the green, you can putt through fringe, doesn't pass this test, especially when the trap is in the middle of the green.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by uttexas

Riviera has a famous one which was replicated at Tour 18 just north of the DFW metroplex. Pin placement the day I played it was just in front of the bunker (elevated green). I hit my most purely struck iron off the tee going right for the pin (couldn't see what happened due to elevated green. Get to green and I see the trickle marks going into the front of the bunker). Now I'm left with a short sided bunker shot to a green that slopes back to front. Out of bunker, then two putt. I was not happy.

You hit a tee shot in the bunker.

It would be like hitting a "perfect" drive that bounces into a water hazard.

Not that great a shot.

You played the sucker shot and paid the price. Whwere is the problem in that?

Annoying, but your fault. Sometimes there are trees in the middle of the fairway. A shot down the middle is not a good shot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by jetsknicks1

I gotta say I see that as kind of gimmicky. I don't see it as being the same as tiered/sloped greens, to me that's just a normal part of golf. If I hit a shot to the middle of the green, I shouldn't have to bring my sand wedge.

what he said......

otherwise we should have bunkers like putting greens and you can use your putter in them

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by allin

If you like hazards between you and the hole when putting stick to putt-putt. Almost every shot should have an appropriate risk reward element. Forcing you to chip when on the green, you can putt through fringe, doesn't pass this test, especially when the trap is in the middle of the green.

Every shot should have an appropriate risk-reward? Sure - but the penalty for failing in this case to hit the ball to the proper section of the green is that you can't hole your next shot, and you'll have a medium-length putt for par.

The bunker at Riviera isn't exactly taking up a ton of space:

Riviera_Sixth.jpg

You still basically have two greens (either front/back or left/right, depending on how you want to look at it). What if you looked at it this way given the flag position above: I missed the green well to the right but was still putting. Woo! Only if you "miss the green" (the "left" one) long AND right are you "punished" - and why shouldn't you be?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by jetsknicks1  If I hit a shot to the middle of the green, I shouldn't have to bring my sand wedge.

A shot into a bunker is not a shot to the middle of the green.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A shot into a bunker is not a shot to the middle of the green.

Exactly. Just treat the half of the green that doesn't have the pin like it's part of the fringe. If you really want to aim at the middle of the green, completely eliminate the half without fit pin form your mind, and hit to the middle of the half of the green with the pin. And if the pin is in front of the bunker, don't even think about the part of green behind it. If you hit into the bunker, you flew the green.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by trickymicky69

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

If you're going to type shit just type shit.

I don't think a bunker being in the middle of the green makes something shit, btw. Don't hit it on the wrong side. There are some greens with lobes on which you can't make putts, or some holes cut below tiers where you have no chance of making the putt if you're above the tier. No different - you have a medium length par putt.

After playing Doonbeg in Ireland I have had experience very similar to uttexas above.

A beautiful shot went straight in the bunker, so for me they are SHIT

They have the whole "through the green" area, so why in the hell would they want to ruin a nice green?

I agree its my fault for finding it but I think it cheapens a great design and makes it look gimmicky.

For a high handicapper, how do you aim for the middle of the green if its been bastardised with a massive crater?

You don't aim for the middle of the green unless your sand play is better than your putting. Aim left or right, or take too much or less club to isolate the other parts of the green. Otherwise just live with the possibility of landing there if you play a shot into it. For a high handicapper, you shouldn't be mad because 90% of the time aiming straight at it will result in a safe landing. It's not the bunker's nor the designer's fault you aimed straight at something and hit it. If you want someone to blame, check the grips on your clubs; the pair of hands on them are attached to him.

It's an interesting place to put a bunker; it really changes the way the hole plays. It sounds no different than complaining about a bunker down the right off the tee that you always hit into; it's your problem if you end up in it and if a bunker isn't in the way then it's not doing its job. Bunkers are supposed to get in the way. They shouldn't just penalize bad shots, they should protect the green or target areas.

Does it make a difference if it's a par 5 you hit a 3 wood into vs a par 4 you hit 7 iron? The par 5 would make the bunker a good play; reach in 2, get up and down for birdie and guarantee stopping the ball in the middle. It's a shallow and small bunker so I doubt it'd be a hard shot. Otherwise you could lay up and hit a pitch right at the pin, still a possible birdie. On a par 4, it's a bit more penalizing but still depends on what club you hit and the pin position.

You shouldn't be mad because every hole isn't a birdie chance; you're not good enough to make more than a couple birdies at best anyway. There should be some holes that are but they're usually the most boring.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Groundskeepers must hate these also


I have found that greenskeepers dislike bunkers in general. Our greenskeeper is always bellowing about the cost of maintenance.
That said I love the design feature. it is something different, unique and makes the hole play entirely different each day you play it. I don't think every course needs one but once in a while is a nice change up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Maybe I'm a bit of a course design postmodernist, but a bunker in the middle of a green sounds interesting, not "ridiculous". More to the point, I can't think of a course design decision that would seem "ridiculous". The course is supposed to challenge you - if you want generic course design then stay on the driving range and practice green.

Now if we are talking about shit course design from the standpoint of maintenance.... that's another story.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see what the big deal is.  If you hit your shot where you intend to, the bunker shouldnt be an issue.  All it does is penalize you for hitting to the wrong side of the green.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Thanks for your questions Swede. Regarding data for irons, if I understand what you are asking, the driver data can't really be correlated. Each iron would have it's own ideal launch conditions (launch angle, spin rate, ball speed) which would be based off of the player's swing speed.  The ball is designed to perform differently with longer clubs than shorter clubs, but if you can get dialed in with your driver, you'll be pretty close with the rest of the set also. The driver/shaft combo certainly affects the trajectory as well, and sometimes guys are playing the wrong ball and the wrong driver.  But what I see more often is a player who goes through the fitting process when purchasing a driver and irons, then they play whatever ball happens to be on sale.  It would be like using a different driver every time they played!  When trying to optimize trajectory, the ball is a good place to start.  Why buy a new driver when moving to a different ball can make the difference?  Sometimes the ball will help some, but to get where a player needs to be a different shaft or driver might be needed also. A lot of guys will go through a ball fitting whenever they get a new driver, which is not a bad idea.  Usually, if your previous driver fit properly and the new one fits properly, the ball will work just fine.  I usually suggest going through a ball fitting at least every-other-season just to make sure.  Sometimes our swings evolve...maybe your swing has improved or swing speed has increased, or it could be the other way, but it's good to make sure your stuff is correct.
    • To be clear, I have never talked about "the Titleist fitting." I don't know what they do to fit players. I'm simply talking about their recommendation to start at the green and work backward, but ultimately to consider all the shots you play in a round of golf, not just ones with the driver. I'm not talking about "here's two balls, try them out." I'm talking about the idea of "here are 30 kinds of golf ball. I eliminated a few because they felt horrible off my putter. I eliminated a few more for poor performance around the green. I eliminated some more for poor spin or flight with my irons. Of the six that I had left, these two performed well with my driver, so one of them is a good fit. If they have a super official "ball fitting" process, I wasn't talking about that, nor was I talking about a "here is a Pro V1 and a Pro V1x… hit some shots and pick one." So… I wish you hadn't devoted that much attention to the "Titleist method" in your post when that's not at all what I was asking. My point was… I'm skeptical that the Bridgestone method (only hitting a few balls, not doing much to account for consistent tee heights, ball position, players getting "warmed up" during the process, etc., only using the driver and disregarding the rest of the shots) is a great method, either.
    • 1. Golf is elitist. So far from true but I still get way too many people who chuckle at my interest in golf- as if I should be embarrassed that I enjoy such a snobby pastime.  2. Just swing your swing- and stop obsessing about getting a "pretty" swing. Sorry, but that's not sound advice - when I get rid of the key elements that are holding me back, yes, sure- then I'll make the most of what I've got. I'll swing that swing. Until then, not a chance, now that I have learned about the fundamentals . There's work to be done to make my future golf far more enjoyable and competitive.   3. Lessons are expensive. Nope- look hard enough and you can find quality swing guidance at a reasonable price.  I agree with lotsa others above but these resonate for me at my level of play right and interactions with people now. 
    • Let me address the things you mentioned and clarify a little bit, because I think there is some misconceptions on some of the aspects. There is perception that the Titleist fitting covers everything and the Bridgestone only addresses the driver.  One of the biggest issues I have with the Titleist method is it's not a real golf ball fitting.  They give you a Pro V1 2-ball pack and a Pro V1x 2-ball pack and basically tell you to hit some shots and see which one you like best. So regardless of swing speed, handicap, launch numbers or anything else, they are saying you can pick this ball or that ball.  The other models in Titleist's line are not included and competitor models are not included.  I know for a fact that there are many players who don't fit into either of those models, but Titleist doesn't offer other options or comparisons.  They claim the Pro V1 and Pro V1x have the best distance, best short game spin, best flight characteristics, softest feel and great durability.  I hate to tell everyone, but there is no such thing as a perfect golf ball.  The laws of physics and aerodynamics apply to Titleist just like everyone else.  A ball that is designed for high spin will not be as long as a lower spinning model and will tend to curve more, and a ball designed for distance will not have the same type of performance on approach shots and around the green. Titleist also doesn't offer any data that shows how those models stack-up for players, or how they perform compared to their ideal numbers.  Sure, people love the spin that they get around the green, but do they need that much spin?  Is all that spin hurting them in other areas?  High spin actually gets a lot of players in trouble and costs them more strokes than it saves them.  Similar to the Titleist method that has players go through the process on their own, after a Bridgestone tech works with a player and their driver and shows them the data, a 2-ball pack is given to the player to continue their testing on the course with irons and short game.  As far as the number of shots on the launch monitor is concerned, you are correct...typically 3 or 4 shots with each ball is recorded.  It's not a lot, but it's 6-8 more shots over a launch monitor than a Titleist fitting. Obviously it would be great to do more, but a fitting could easily stretch to an hour per player, so a typical 4-5 hour event we could only help a handful of players.  A normal fitting takes about 15 min, so that is 16-20 players per event.  At that number, the cost of each fitting was right around $40/player.  If an hour was spent with each player, it would cost almost $200/player which isn't cost effective. On the launch angle issue, what I said was there are many things that can affect the launch, including the ball.  I didn't say 2* wasn't possible and I didn't say in the example I posted that only 1/2* could be attributed to the ball.  Honestly, I can't say how much of that 2* is related to moving to a different model...even if other variables like tee height, ball position were removed, the difference in loft will vary from player-to-player due to different swing speeds, swing paths, angle of attack etc which is unique to everyone.  Plus depending on what model is used first and which model is recommended could have a smaller or larger affect than other combinations.  You could probably make the same case for every category if you wanted though, right?  You could say how much of the difference in spin was caused by the ball change and how much was the result of some other variable?  Spin is more important than the launch angle, so even if the l.a. stayed the same, the drop in spin would have made a nice difference by itself.  But we know the player was launching the ball too low with too much spin, a lower spinning/higher launching ball was recommended and the results were a more efficient trajectory and an increase in performance. I believe the key is to be able to show a player in black and white what their launch conditions are with their current ball and how it compares to their ideal numbers.  If you can't show a player the areas that need improvement, then how can you confidently recommend the best ball for them?  The truth is, most people are playing the wrong ball, so it's not that hard to make an improvement, and honestly there are probably a handful of different makes/models that would be better.    
    • 1-5. Putting matters most. Uh huh. What are the chances I gain 2 strokes because I (or just about any golfer) 4 putted? It's happened. Rarely. What are the chances I (or just about any golfer) hit an errant tee shot and blow 2 strokes? 40% every tee shot for me. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dragondrake
      Dragondrake
      (57 years old)
    2. Mistabigevil
      Mistabigevil
      (36 years old)
    3. Taylor56
      Taylor56
      (61 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon