Article on Eliminating Rakes for Bunkers

[DaveP043]

20 hours ago, iacas said:

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

I played at Tobacco Road last week, where there are indeed acres and acres of waste areas.  They've chosen to define all sand as waste area.  Their local rule allows a player to rake and place his ball in a sand area in order to have a "fair" lie.  I don't imagine for a second that this kind of rule could work in a professional tournament, and I doubt that this local rule would be accepted by knowledgeable  rules officials, but it makes sense at Tobacco Road.  

[Rulesman]

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

 I doubt that this local rule would be accepted by knowledgeable  rules officials,

Nor by the handicap rating authority.

[DaveP043]

6 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

Nor by the handicap rating authority.

I hadn't thought of that, but of course that's correct.  Yet obviously it has been rated.  I wonder whether the rating committee saw the description of the "local rule" and chose to ignore it.  Its not easy to miss, its on the placard in the golf carts (buggies), on the website, and I'm pretty sure was on the back of the scorecard.

[RickK]

Not all bunkers (sand traps) are created equally.  Playing out of someone's footprint in a bunker where maybe the sand is an inch or so deep is one thing.  But, playing out of a bunker that has sand that is 4 or 5 inches deep and you are in someone's footprint(s) who made absolutely no attempt to smooth it out on exit...well that is totally different.  

[phillyk]

8 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I hadn't thought of that, but of course that's correct.  Yet obviously it has been rated.  I wonder whether the rating committee saw the description of the "local rule" and chose to ignore it.  Its not easy to miss, its on the placard in the golf carts (buggies), on the website, and I'm pretty sure was on the back of the scorecard.

A local rule can be a local rule but still not be "legal" by the USGA.  I'm not sure if this is one of those, but if it is then that would explain why the rating committee would ignore it.

[Rulesman]

The rating team would rate as if it didn't exist but would lean on the club to put it right.

Ultimately they could resort to cancelling their licence but don't know if they ever have.

[Buckeyebowman]

On 11/27/2016 at 0:29 PM, 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).

Good point. Many years ago I took my Uncle to a local course that was just lovely! Terrific layout, great turf, hardwoods and water, and greens that were quick, but true, and just a joy to putt on. There were also mounds and depressions suggesting bunkers near the greens and along some fairways. But, there was no sand.

I've been corrected here before that there are no such things as "grass bunkers", but that sure is what they looked like! I asked my Uncle about that, and he gave the same reply you did. He said it looked like they might have thought about putting sand in them, but that sand bunkers were expensive to build and maintain. I thought that it would make the course a lot tougher, which I liked. He told me that if they made the course too difficult, they might lose some play.

BTW, my Uncle was a PGA "country club" pro before WWII, and shot 73 from the tips on a par 72 course in his late 40's! Sure was a lesson for me!

5 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I played at Tobacco Road last week, where there are indeed acres and acres of waste areas.  They've chosen to define all sand as waste area.  Their local rule allows a player to rake and place his ball in a sand area in order to have a "fair" lie.  I don't imagine for a second that this kind of rule could work in a professional tournament, and I doubt that this local rule would be accepted by knowledgeable  rules officials, but it makes sense at Tobacco Road.  

Lift, rake, and place? Mehhhhh! I'm guessing Tobacco Road is a resort course, and they may have gone to this in order to try to speed play.

[Fourputt]

23 hours ago, bkuehn1952 said:

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.

This is how it should be.  Just kick out the deepest craters as you leave the bunker, but let them be the hazards that they are supposed to be.  I have no problem at all with the article's proposal.

Over the years, my home course has replaced a couple of bunkers with grass depressions which, in my opinion, are harder to play from than sand.  They leave the rough about 4" deep in those areas, and playing from them is as unpredictable as playing from a buried lie in a bunker.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I hadn't thought of that, but of course that's correct.  Yet obviously it has been rated.  I wonder whether the rating committee saw the description of the "local rule" and chose to ignore it.  Its not easy to miss, its on the placard in the golf carts (buggies), on the website, and I'm pretty sure was on the back of the scorecard.

The course rating committee would disregard that, just as we disregard trees or tall grass marked as lateral hazards, or other things that violate the Rules of Golf. We then inform the club of the violations and in some cases refuse to issue a rating until the course makes the appropriate changes.

[jsgolfer]

I would not be a fan of not raking most bunkers.  Waste bunkers are another thing.  Bunker shots may be nothing for a tour pro, but the majority of golfers I play with, are not that good out of bunkers, even the ones that are raked.  So golf is tough enough as it is, no need to make it more difficult than it already is.  Not sure I would want to get rid of all bunkers either, but if a course does to minimize costs, then all the more power to them.  Thick rough around the green is also no picnic.

[newtogolf]

6 minutes ago, jsgolfer said:

I would not be a fan of not raking most bunkers.  Waste bunkers are another thing.  Bunker shots may be nothing for a tour pro, but the majority of golfers I play with, are not that good out of bunkers, even the ones that are raked.  So golf is tough enough as it is, no need to make it more difficult than it already is.  Not sure I would want to get rid of all bunkers either, but if a course does to minimize costs, then all the more power to them.  Thick rough around the green is also no picnic.

If bunkers are intended to be penal then the question becomes how penal?  Should we eliminate pot bunkers because they are harder to get out of, what's the maximum depth of bunker should be?  People have trouble getting out of the woods and thick rough too.  

I'm not disagreeing with you but course setup is part of what makes every course unique and fun or in some cases not so fun to play.  The relative difficulty of getting out of bunkers might be interpreted differently based on the level of golfer a course wants to attract.  

[jsgolfer]

43 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

If bunkers are intended to be penal then the question becomes how penal?  Should we eliminate pot bunkers because they are harder to get out of, what's the maximum depth of bunker should be?  People have trouble getting out of the woods and thick rough too.  

I'm not disagreeing with you but course setup is part of what makes every course unique and fun or in some cases not so fun to play.  The relative difficulty of getting out of bunkers might be interpreted differently based on the level of golfer a course wants to attract.  

Bunkers, imo, are already penal for the majority of golfers, no need to make them more so.  Same for being in the trees, pot bunkers and rough.  But if we aren't going to rake bunkers, we  might as well not mow the rough either.   Let's have US Open rough everywhere but the fairway, would make for some great long rounds

I would think most courses are trying to attract golfers of all skill in order to be profitable and enjoyable for the majority of golfers.  Not sure it makes economic sense to make it more difficult, especially when golf rounds are already in decline.  

But if someone would enjoy playing such a course, have fun, but the course wouldn't get my cash.  Although I'm a member at a Country Club and they aren't trying to attract me anyway.

[boogielicious]

9 hours ago, jsgolfer said:

Bunkers, imo, are already penal for the majority of golfers, no need to make them more so.  Same for being in the trees, pot bunkers and rough.  But if we aren't going to rake bunkers, we  might as well not mow the rough either.   Let's have US Open rough everywhere but the fairway, would make for some great long rounds

I would think most courses are trying to attract golfers of all skill in order to be profitable and enjoyable for the majority of golfers.  Not sure it makes economic sense to make it more difficult, especially when golf rounds are already in decline.  

But if someone would enjoy playing such a course, have fun, but the course wouldn't get my cash.  Although I'm a member at a Country Club and they aren't trying to attract me anyway.

This is key. I think eliminating some bunkers with rough depressions around the green may help. There is a perception that bunkers are harder by most average golfers IMO. Deep grass may be harder, but they may not see it that way.

[jsgolfer]

3 hours ago, boogielicious said:

This is key. I think eliminating some bunkers with rough depressions around the green may help. There is a perception that bunkers are harder by most average golfers IMO. Deep grass may be harder, but they may not see it that way.

That makes more sense to me.  Eliminating bunkers and replacing with grass depressions/swales wouldn't be a bad idea for some courses.  Especially if they aren't maintained very well.

[RussUK]

1 hour ago, jsgolfer said:

That makes more sense to me.  Eliminating bunkers and replacing with grass depressions/swales wouldn't be a bad idea for some courses.  Especially if they aren't maintained very well.

Im wondering how much it would save a club per bunker in replacing/topping up the sand alone.

Many of the Munies local to me have poor bunkers to the point that if we are playing a friendly round we agree to a free drop if we land in a bunker.

[kpaulhus]

My course removed or shrunk 26 bunkers on my course last year before the LPGA. We went to the billy better bunker method or whatever it is called. A lot less maintenance and bunker washouts are almost non existent now. The bunkers they removed were usually not even in a regular landing area anyways. Saved a lot of labor dollars raking every morning. 

[boogielicious]

1 hour ago, kpaulhus said:

My course removed or shrunk 26 bunkers on my course last year before the LPGA. We went to the billy better bunker method or whatever it is called. A lot less maintenance and bunker washouts are almost non existent now. The bunkers they removed were usually not even in a regular landing area anyways. Saved a lot of labor dollars raking every morning. 

http://www.billybunker.com/

 

[natureboy]

3 hours ago, RussUK said:

Im wondering how much it would save a club per bunker in replacing/topping up the sand alone.

Many of the Munies local to me have poor bunkers to the point that if we are playing a friendly round we agree to a free drop if we land in a bunker.

Sand is only slightly easier than the rough for the pros between 13 and 33 yards. Otherwise it's harder. Pros have excellent sand games relative to amateurs. I can't imagine sand is easier for amateurs at any distance.

That said, if you can't afford to maintain the bunker properly (keep enough sand in it e.g.) you should just eliminate it and let the rough grow and accept the slight reduction in scores.