Article on Eliminating Rakes for Bunkers

[boogielicious]

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/why-we-should-do-away-with-bunker-rakes

It would certainly make the tours more interesting.

Quote

From David Owen:

Complaints about “unfair” bunkers are especially contrary to the spirit of golf: aren’t hazards supposed to be hazardous? On TV, the standard greenside-bunker shot is about as thrilling to watch as a two-foot putt. You know the guy is going to spin it close, and he knows he’s going to spin it close -- otherwise, he wouldn’t have yelled “Get in the bunker!” when his ball was in the air. Sand’s function in a tour event is often just to make the surrounding grass seem troublesome.

There’s a simple remedy: follow the example of Pine Valley, the legendary New Jersey golf club, which for decades has been listed at or near the top of nearly every ranking of the best courses in the world. Pine Valley has many, many bunkers -- some small, some large, some soft, some hard some coffin-shaped, some bottomless, some seemingly miles across -- but no rakes. The club’s maintenance regularly smooths everything out, but, if your ball ends up in a footprint (or behind a rock or under a cactus), that’s your tough luck, and you deal with it. As you should.

Rake-free bunkers would make televised golf a lot more interesting to watch. They would even be good for choppers like you and me. Pristine, consistent bunkers are expensive to build and maintain. Why not let a course’s sandy areas take care of themselves, and spend the savings on something more obviously beneficial, like cutting back overgrown trees? Most golfers, who can’t hit sand shots anyway, wouldn’t notice a difference. (That guy I mentioned earlier skulls balls from well-conditioned bunkers, too.) Everyone else either would learn an arsenal of useful new shots or would get better at doing what bunkers are supposed to make golfers want to do: stay out of them in the first place.

 

[newtogolf]

My first reaction was that the author must not be a golfer, because I can't imagine why any golfer would want to hit out of a footprint or other imperfection of the sand.  

As I thought more about it, it makes some sense.  When we land in the rough, we're not guaranteed a clean lie to hit from, same goes for hard pan and other non-fairway areas where our ball can end up.  

Most bunker shots, especially for pro golfers are preferable to shots out of rough around the green (except for deep pot bunkers).  If bunkers are placed around the course to protect the course and green, ensuring those areas are well maintained and in pristine condition seems to be contrary to their purpose.  

On the other side, sand traps usually surround the perimeter of a green so does a slightly offline shot warrant having to play a ball out of a footprint.  

I'd like to see some pro courses adopt this policy and see how it impacts play.  It could make it more interesting to watch.  

[dennyjones]

 Ha!   My local course has several people that don't rake the bunkers and if you end up in the bunker, it is usually in a footprint!  

Edited November 27, 2016 by dennyjones

[iacas]

Better yet… just replace a lot of sand bunkers with rough. They're easier for golfers to play out of, and hate playing out of the rough simultaneously. Grass is much easier and cheaper to maintain as well (compared to a bunker).

[shanksalot]

 The problem with not raking the bunkers is the first players out get the best playing conditions.Those who go out in the afternoon get the worst conditions. The biggest problem I have with bunkers is when they are so deep it is hard to get into the bunker to hit the shot and then it is very difficult to get back out of them. Those us who are in our Golden Years and have bad knees, hips and backs find it very hard to navigate this type of bunker and it seems most of the new courses bring built are like this on many courses. 

[Missouri Swede]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Better yet… just replace a lot of sand bunkers with rough. They're easier for golfers to play out of, and hate playing out of the rough simultaneously. Grass is much easier and cheaper to maintain as well (compared to a bunker).

Check.

Check. (trimmed the tree, too)

Check.

And check.  (Wipes hands on pants, tosses rakes and shovels into cart.)

1 hour ago, shanksalot said:

 The problem with not raking the bunkers is the first players out get the best playing conditions.Those who go out in the afternoon get the worst conditions.

Not if they don't get raked at all. (Okay, maybe the evening wind will smooth it out a little.)

[phillyk]

You could basically just deem all sand traps waste areas instead.  There are a lot of pro courses that have lots of waste bunkers instead of real bunkers.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, phillyk said:

You could basically just deem all sand traps waste areas instead.  There are a lot of pro courses that have lots of waste bunkers instead of real bunkers.

But they're actually waste areas. Like acres and acres.

[jamo]

I would not be a fan of what the article in the OP suggests. Also, rake-free bunkers would certainly not "make televised golf a lot more interesting to watch." It just wouldn't. No one gets jazzed about bunkers when watching golf, and no one's going to. 

If a course wanted to mix it up with some grass bunkers and waste areas, sure, I'd be into that for the variety. But not as a general rule. 

(Well, not so much actual waste areas, but more like scraggly hardpan.)

1 hour ago, phillyk said:

You could basically just deem all sand traps waste areas instead.  There are a lot of pro courses that have lots of waste bunkers instead of real bunkers.

Dustin Johnson is nodding furiously at this!

[Hacker James]

I may have mentioned the make over of a local course that resembles a link type of course now. They have vast waste areas, complete with cacti, succulents, sand e.t.c. in front of the tee boxes that you need to clear, but are not penalized if you hit out of them. Actually makes the holes more interesting. (Boulder Oaks, North San Diego County)

[14ledo81]

I would be one of those it wouldn't bother.  Like mentioned, I can skull it from any type of bunker...

[bkuehn1952]

When playing off season, many courses remove the rakes and stop maintaining the bunkers.  Many of us take time to scuff out our footprints and impact mark.  If everyone did it, no rakes is no big deal.

i would be okay with eliminating rakes as long as the course only smoothed out the surfaces once a month or so.  The first groups out should not benefit from perfect conditions. If they leave deep foot prints, maybe they will have to hit from them a few days later.

[RussUK]

18 hours ago, iacas said:

Better yet… just replace a lot of sand bunkers with rough. They're easier for golfers to play out of, and hate playing out of the rough simultaneously. Grass is much easier and cheaper to maintain as well (compared to a bunker).

A number of course's in my local area have done this with some of their  bunkers (mainly fairway). The reasons are two-fold. "Grass bunkers" are, as you said, cheaper to maintain and they are are also a lot more flood resistant. In the last few years some courses have had sand washed away by either flood water or very heavy and prolonged rain.

Bunker liners are available that apparently help prevent this but even this isnt that cost effective for small clubs.

[Valleygolfer]

They could do this for tournaments. I know the fuss about different rules between ams and pros but this is can be course choice or pga choice. Sand penalizes the amateur more than it does a pro any day and since it is a part of history and design of golf courses, elimination isn't necessarily an option. What is the option is to take the easy bunker shot away. I would be okay with this.

[woodzie264]

19 hours ago, newtogolf said:

As I thought more about it, it makes some sense.  When we land in the rough, we're not guaranteed a clean lie to hit from, same goes for hard pan and other non-fairway areas where our ball can end up.  

Most bunker shots, especially for pro golfers are preferable to shots out of rough around the green (except for deep pot bunkers).  If bunkers are placed around the course to protect the course and green, ensuring those areas are well maintained and in pristine condition seems to be contrary to their purpose.  

Redundantly, I agree with what many here have said in that the bunkers are intended to penalize the golfer and, in the spirit of their purpose, I have long held the notion that they should go unraked. 

[mcanadiens]

The pros can do whatever they want. As for me, if the course has bunkers, I want rakes.

That said, I'd be perfectly happy with a lot fewer bunkers, particularly on my City of Dayton courses, since they can't maintain them. At Kittyhawk, the men's association has a local rule for rake and place. You try to scratch up the dirt enough that it approximates sand, put the ball in it's original position and then play it out.

[CarlSpackler]

10 minutes ago, mcanadiens said:

The pros can do whatever they want. As for me, if the course has bunkers, I want rakes.

That said, I'd be perfectly happy with a lot fewer bunkers, particularly on my City of Dayton courses, since they can't maintain them. At Kittyhawk, the men's association has a local rule for rake and place. You try to scratch up the dirt enough that it approximates sand, put the ball in it's original position and then play it out.

And most of the rakes at KH have been run over by carts or mowers. 

I think most muni courses should start doing away with bunkers. If they are well maintained, I would rather hit out of one of those than deep rough, so it's often less penalizing.

[natureboy]

Inside of about 13 yards sand is still more penal than rough on pros (and even more so for amateurs). Being short-sided in a bunker matters.

For pros there is a sweet spot from about 14 to 32 yards where sand is slightly easier (fewer expected shots) than the typical rough they face at Shotlink tournaments by about a tenth of a shot. Both are still significantly worse than being in the fairway by ~ .2 to .25 expected shots.

A bunker fronting the green on a long par-5 'going for it' shot is more likely ideal than a bunker right next to the pin.