Should bunkers be raked?

[2putttom]

With all of the rules changes currently being debated, at work today, we discussed whether or not bunkers should be raked. Since they are technically supposed to be punitive, it seems like they should be left natural (including debris, footprints, etc.). The point was made that leaving them natural would likely hurt pace of play, but it would also keep players from intentionally playing for bunkers when other options seemed less appealing. So, what say you?

ya because a 25 hcp playin from a green side bunker with tree branches behind your ball is gonna speed up play?

 

A player(s) ball lying in a green side bunker should be afforded the ability to repair the surface of a man made hazard after he/she has played from that spot, takes all of 15 seconds to repair the sand surface.

To the first part: Huh??? Who said anything about tree branches? How often do you find tree branches behind your ball in a bunker??? This is a unicorn example.

 

To the second part: Why? Why should they be afforded repair? And you even state a time (15 seconds) that that would take. Remove that step, remove that time.

"including debris and footprints etc..." I don't know were you play but; we have trees on our course and when the wind blows limbs (debris) end up in the green side bunkers.

 

second part . players should be afford the opportunity to repair footprints, splash marks or remove debris from a greenside bunkers. I wouldn't care to be a player who comes upon my ball sitting down in someone dug in footprint. That was not apart of the original course design or condition that existed when the course opened for play.

[williamsnrb]

Last thing I want to see is 72nd hole of a major come down to 18 and have a guy hit one in a bunker needing par to win only to be stuck in a footprint that wasn't there earlier costing him the tourney.

Last thing I want to see is a 72nd hole of a major where a guy needs a par to win, hits one into a greenside bunker, and has an absolutely perfect lie to give him a shot that he's practiced 1000 times, and perfected, and make an easy par.

 

Bunker shots of 10-20 yards (greenside bunkers, basically). . .in 2016, the you had to get down to the 136th ranked guy to get to someone with a <50% sand save percentage.

 

Bunkers are a joke. If you're going to have them, they should be penal.

 

#noRakes

 

Id rather tournaments and other places change the bunker sand to be fluffier and allow balls to plug more easily than not have them raked. That makes the bunkers more penal, no more perfect lies, but still allows them to be raked so you dont get screwed by another player. I think raking should be allowed, as aside from getting in someones head, you cannot directly impact another golfers performance on the course and allowing people to mess about in bunkers would allow them to do that.

 

Hey, now there's an idea.

[williamsnrb]

So basically it`s an argument about being penal vs being fair.

 

It`s hard to find any other sports where a governing body would lean in favor of penalizing the competition. But, if you own a course, you can make your own local rule... I think all else being equal, raking is the most reasonable way to go. And, all of the governing bodies feel the same way.

 

Further, we should do our best to fix all of the damage we do during the course of play. Replacing divots, fixing pitch marks etc. Why should sand be an exception?

 

Sure, sometimes the sand is the safer play... So what? Honestly? What difference does it make? You still have to hit the shot.

 

Bunkers are hazards. Hazards are not supposed to be fair.

 

No, but unlike a water hazard or lateral water hazard, you can not take a ball out of a bunker at the cost of a penalty stroke unless you return to your previous spot. But......

 

Imagine a soft bunker, late in the day. You get lucky and get a decent lie but then chunk your bunker shot and don't get the ball out of the bunker. It ends up in a footprint, you lash at it and again, find a footprint. It could take you many shots to find a lie good enough to even get out of the bunker. There is no option but to continue on. It is conceivable you could never get the ball out and would have to withdraw.

 

[williamsnrb]

By all means, let's make the game harder and slower.

^ this

^ that

 

. . .is like the golf equivalent of "won't somebody think about the children?"

 

Like "end of argument. I brought up slow play."

 

Think about that for a second though. . .

 

First of all, no rakes means no raking means FASTER play. And, I'm not just talking about the time it takes to properly rake a bunker. I'm talking about walking around the trap to get the rake, walking back with it, occasionally needing to go in on the low side when your ball is 20 feet away, etc etc. Raking is SLOW. Don't get me started on bunkers that are 30 yards long, 15 yards wide and have 2 rakes around them.

 

Second, take the raking time out of it. . .the slow play you're talking about is what? It's the requirement of additional shots that otherwise wouldnt' have been made because of unraked bunkers. . .

 

So, the situations where a player would normally get into a bunker AND has a lie that he COULD have gotten out of if the bunker had been raked, but now CAN'T get out of because of a bad lie. Well, good players are getting out of footprints already. Bad players aren't getting out of the sand anyway. So, we're talking about some middle ground of golfers who are getting into traps occasionally and occasionally having lies they can't get out of in 1, but they don't have to rake anyway, which usually makes up for the time of a couple of cuts.

 

And, if bunkers become so difficult, players will be forced to play away from them more often. Boom. Faster golf.

 

As to more difficult. . .cry me a river. Everyone's index goes up by .1 and we're all playing each other fair and square again.

 

I'm certain that we would be great friends. Haha We're on the same wavelength on this one.

[williamsnrb]

I played a course recently that only had waste areas all over the course, including around the greens. I absolutely loved it. Saved a lot of time for players not having to look for rakes and raking sand.

 

This might be a discussion that should be had with more course designers/developers. That sounds like a solid idea for several reasons.

[williamsnrb]

ya because a 25 hcp playin from a green side bunker with tree branches behind your ball is gonna speed up play? A player(s) ball lying in a green side bunker should be afforded the ability to repair the surface of a man made hazard after he/she has played from that spot, takes all of 15 seconds to repair the sand surface.

 

It makes some sense to have less maintenance on bunkers (less cost for the course) and creates a less inviting scenario as the result of hitting the ball in a hazard. I agree that the game is hard enough for a lot of players, but I am not suggesting we should make the game harder - simply asking what would happen if we quit continually improving the conditions of a hazard. Maybe a better alternative would be a waste environment.

[heavy_hitter]

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

[williamsnrb]

No raking or maintenance..wouldn't that be a waste area??

 

Also...rake and place...solves all the problems...jk.

 

Exactly. Rake and place, unless the ball is embedded in its own pitch mark

 

Should we also carry a strip of astroturf into lateral hazards with us? That way, no matter where the ball lies, we have a perfect lie. Maybe it could float in water, too.

[Sean2]

I am sure someone already mentioned this, but years ago bunkers were not raked as they were deemed a hazard. Today, many golfers would rather be in a nicely raked bunker than some heavy rough.

[williamsnrb]

With all of the rules changes currently being debated, at work today, we discussed whether or not bunkers should be raked. Since they are technically supposed to be punitive, it seems like they should be left natural (including debris, footprints, etc.). The point was made that leaving them natural would likely hurt pace of play, but it would also keep players from intentionally playing for bunkers when other options seemed less appealing. So, what say you?

ya because a 25 hcp playin from a green side bunker with tree branches behind your ball is gonna speed up play?

 

A player(s) ball lying in a green side bunker should be afforded the ability to repair the surface of a man made hazard after he/she has played from that spot, takes all of 15 seconds to repair the sand surface.

To the first part: Huh??? Who said anything about tree branches? How often do you find tree branches behind your ball in a bunker??? This is a unicorn example.

 

To the second part: Why? Why should they be afforded repair? And you even state a time (15 seconds) that that would take. Remove that step, remove that time.

"including debris and footprints etc..." I don't know were you play but; we have trees on our course and when the wind blows limbs (debris) end up in the green side bunkers.

 

second part . players should be afford the opportunity to repair footprints, splash marks or remove debris from a greenside bunkers. I wouldn't care to be a player who comes upon my ball sitting down in someone dug in footprint. That was not apart of the original course design or condition that existed when the course opened for play.

 

If this was in the collar of the green, I would agree with you. But in no other hazard is a player allowed to repair the ground prior to playing the shot. Why should bunkers be different?

[williamsnrb]

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

[TheGeekGolfer]

While we're at it, let's just let the grass grow and not roll the greens, either. The bunkers are 'punitive' because they are a different surface and require a different, more difficult and less exact technique. Yes, the pros are very good at bunker play and sometimes aiming for them over the rough is a strategic play. However, that is what makes it exciting. Making the bunkers 'unkept' would lead to sloppy play.

[heavy_hitter]

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

 

Poor comparison. Greens cost about 40 Grand to repair and or Replace. Tee Boxes not so much so but still very expensive to repair and replace. Destroying them would be vandalism. Not doing that in bunkers.

[vtnerf]

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

 

Poor comparison. Greens cost about 40 Grand to repair and or Replace. Tee Boxes not so much so but still very expensive to repair and replace. Destroying them would be vandalism. Not doing that in bunkers.

The point wasn't about $$$. It was about affecting others shots. Simmer down with the vandalism...

[AdamSecrest]

Last thing I want to see is 72nd hole of a major come down to 18 and have a guy hit one in a bunker needing par to win only to be stuck in a footprint that wasn't there earlier costing him the tourney.

Last thing I want to see is a 72nd hole of a major where a guy needs a par to win, hits one into a greenside bunker, and has an absolutely perfect lie to give him a shot that he's practiced 1000 times, and perfected, and make an easy par.

 

Bunker shots of 10-20 yards (greenside bunkers, basically). . .in 2016, the you had to get down to the 136th ranked guy to get to someone with a <50% sand save percentage.

 

Bunkers are a joke. If you're going to have them, they should be penal.

 

#noRakes

 

And to get below 50% save percentage from the rough, all the way down to the 163rd ranked guy. The comparable stat would be scrambling from the sand which to get a below 50% save percentage from the sand it's the 116th ranked guy.

 

The rough is a joke. If you're going to have it, it should be penal.

 

#snakesintherough?

 

In all seriousness, bunkers are penal to PGA Tour players, a little bit more so than missing the green into the rough. Here are the median stats for par saves from 2016.

 

Fringe save percentage = 89%

Rough save percentage = 57%

Sand save percentage = 51%

 

Bunkers are hazards but clearly not the same type of hazard as water because they are meant to be played out of.

 

 

[2putttom]

With all of the rules changes currently being debated, at work today, we discussed whether or not bunkers should be raked. Since they are technically supposed to be punitive, it seems like they should be left natural (including debris, footprints, etc.). The point was made that leaving them natural would likely hurt pace of play, but it would also keep players from intentionally playing for bunkers when other options seemed less appealing. So, what say you?

ya because a 25 hcp playin from a green side bunker with tree branches behind your ball is gonna speed up play?

 

A player(s) ball lying in a green side bunker should be afforded the ability to repair the surface of a man made hazard after he/she has played from that spot, takes all of 15 seconds to repair the sand surface.

To the first part: Huh??? Who said anything about tree branches? How often do you find tree branches behind your ball in a bunker??? This is a unicorn example.

 

To the second part: Why? Why should they be afforded repair? And you even state a time (15 seconds) that that would take. Remove that step, remove that time.

"including debris and footprints etc..." I don't know were you play but; we have trees on our course and when the wind blows limbs (debris) end up in the green side bunkers.

 

second part . players should be afford the opportunity to repair footprints, splash marks or remove debris from a greenside bunkers. I wouldn't care to be a player who comes upon my ball sitting down in someone dug in footprint. That was not apart of the original course design or condition that existed when the course opened for play.

 

If this was in the collar of the green, I would agree with you. But in no other hazard is a player allowed to repair the ground prior to playing the shot. Why should bunkers be different?

Williamsnrb that's a good question. I work for a golf management co. waste areas usually don't have steep faces and can be associated with generous landing areas. So if your in one it's because the result of the player(s) decision/ fault ... but a 120 yard par 3 surrounded with bunkers and severe slope or ridge in the middle of the green is penal enough and a player shouldn't be penalized for hitting the green and the result is the ball rolled into a greenside bunker and is sitting down below the natural level of the sand in someone's heel print. I'm not saying you or I should be allowed to repair the ground prior to the shot. I am stating that players should be afforded the opportunity to repair the surface after their shot as they should do in fairways by replacing divots or filling the divot with sand.

[williamsnrb]

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

Depending on how much sand is in the bunker, you could be playing from 6" holes in the ground. If I were playing to start the day, I would mess up every bunker I played in to get an advantage. I would dig and drag my feet.

 

For that very reason, bunkers should be maintained while playing the course.

 

Do you scrape your spikes all around the hole after you putt out and destroy tee boxes with your driver after teeing off, too?

 

Poor comparison. Greens cost about 40 Grand to repair and or Replace. Tee Boxes not so much so but still very expensive to repair and replace. Destroying them would be vandalism. Not doing that in bunkers.

 

My point is that the same gamesmanship that you show to your competitors on tee boxes and greens should extend to the bunkers. The cost of green construction has nothing to do with this.

[williamsnrb]

 

 

If this was in the collar of the green, I would agree with you. But in no other hazard is a player allowed to repair the ground prior to playing the shot. Why should bunkers be different?

Williamsnrb that's a good question. I work for a golf management co. waste areas usually don't have steep faces and can be associated with generous landing areas. So if your in one it's because the result of the player(s) decision/ fault ... but a 120 yard par 3 surrounded with bunkers and severe slope or ridge in the middle of the green is penal enough and a player shouldn't be penalized for hitting the green and the result is the ball rolled into a greenside bunker and is sitting down below the natural level of the sand in someone's heel print. I'm not saying you or I should be allowed to repair the ground prior to the shot. I am stating that players should be afforded the opportunity to repair the surface after their shot as they should do in fairways by replacing divots or filling the divot with sand.

 

Gotcha. I think the main reason this is debatable is because of the term 'hazard' when the rules describe bunkers. If they were not deemed to be hazards, then the player obviously has an expectation to play from a reasonably well-prepared ground condition, so raking the bunker after your shot to prepare for the next player is more than reasonable. However, since it is deemed to be a hazard, it conveys a certain amount of penalty as a result of hitting into it (regardless of whether it was a good shot that just got away from the player, got a bad break, bounced off of a sprinkler head, etc.). I feel that if bunkers are going to be deemed hazards, the save percentage from them should not be nearly equal to the save percentage from greenside rough.

[williamsnrb]

Last thing I want to see is 72nd hole of a major come down to 18 and have a guy hit one in a bunker needing par to win only to be stuck in a footprint that wasn't there earlier costing him the tourney.

Last thing I want to see is a 72nd hole of a major where a guy needs a par to win, hits one into a greenside bunker, and has an absolutely perfect lie to give him a shot that he's practiced 1000 times, and perfected, and make an easy par.

 

Bunker shots of 10-20 yards (greenside bunkers, basically). . .in 2016, the you had to get down to the 136th ranked guy to get to someone with a <50% sand save percentage.

 

Bunkers are a joke. If you're going to have them, they should be penal.

 

#noRakes

 

And to get below 50% save percentage from the rough, all the way down to the 163rd ranked guy. The comparable stat would be scrambling from the sand which to get a below 50% save percentage from the sand it's the 116th ranked guy.

 

The rough is a joke. If you're going to have it, it should be penal.

 

#snakesintherough?

 

In all seriousness, bunkers are penal to PGA Tour players, a little bit more so than missing the green into the rough. Here are the median stats for par saves from 2016.

 

Fringe save percentage = 89%

Rough save percentage = 57%

Sand save percentage = 51%

 

Bunkers are hazards but clearly not the same type of hazard as water because they are meant to be played out of.

 

I had not known the save percentage stats. Thanks for posting them.

[2putttom]

williamsnrd I get what ur layin' down. I happen to think most not all bunkers are penal enough and as some have suggested they should be made to be more penalizing buy not allowing the surface(s) to be maintained/returned to their previous condition. Imagine being on the dawn patrol and your in a green side bunker after your approach shot ricochet off a tree. Ya are already pissed because of the crappy shot ya hit and the result ya got. Ya walk up to the bunker and there's your ball in someone' s foot print from a day ago. Part of my job (and I enjoy it) is prepping the bunkers @ 0530, the waste areas don't/won't get nearly the attention as bunkers do. They are there intentionally and piss off players and can slow down the pace of play.(should you choose to land in one)

[ebk]

Where I play, hardly anyone seems to rake them, anyway. Can't tell you how often I set a set of footprints leading out of a bunker, and the clown had to step over the rake to exit the bunker...

 

[Vindog]

I smooth the sand as I leave, however I have ZERO expectation that the bunker will be raked perfectly when I get to my ball. And I am perfectly okay with that. Bottom line is, going so far as to smooth footprints and swing holes should be enough.

 

Anything else you're just gonna have to deal.

 

To open another can of worms here... ...where should the rakes be kept?

[jslane57]

When one thinks the bunker should be perfectly raked or they cry foul, yet don't mind divots being rub of the green, I simply SMH. I say don't leave rakes on the course. I've seen plenty of bad breaks from the rakes themselves. I'd be fine with curtesy being to fix bunkers with club/feet on your way out...

[Vindog]

When one thinks the bunker should be perfectly raked or they cry foul, yet don't mind divots being rub of the green, I simply SMH. I say don't leave rakes on the course. I've seen plenty of bad breaks from the rakes themselves. I'd be fine with curtesy being to fix bunkers with club/feet on your way out...

 

A-HA! I agree.

 

Many a heated discussion has become of where to leave them

[williamsnrb]

When one thinks the bunker should be perfectly raked or they cry foul, yet don't mind divots being rub of the green, I simply SMH. I say don't leave rakes on the course. I've seen plenty of bad breaks from the rakes themselves. I'd be fine with curtesy being to fix bunkers with club/feet on your way out...

 

A-HA! I agree.

 

Many a heated discussion has become of where to leave them

 

Oh no, now that's a can of worms! Lol

[playa]

Bunkers are not true hazards (despite what most posters in this thread seem to think) as you are forced to play from them. If you don't rake them then they should be treated as a true hazard and entitle you to be able to take a drop outside the bunker at the cost of a shot like other hazards. Personally I like things as they are now, being able to play well from the sand is a skill that should be rewarded.

Regardless of the playing options, bunkers are designated hazards by the rules. There are different types of hazards designated by the rules, but the rule book does not say that bunkers are 'not true hazards'. I do agree that biunker play requires a tremendous amount of skill as it is.

Yeah I guess by definition in the rules they are hazards, but the context posters use is that they are like other hazards and are meant to be equally penal. They are not like lateral and water hazards, which are what most golfers refer to as hazards. You never hear commentators call bunkers hazards. You would also never see a player deliberately aim for a water hazard on a par 5.

[williamsnrb]

Bunkers are not true hazards (despite what most posters in this thread seem to think) as you are forced to play from them. If you don't rake them then they should be treated as a true hazard and entitle you to be able to take a drop outside the bunker at the cost of a shot like other hazards. Personally I like things as they are now, being able to play well from the sand is a skill that should be rewarded.

Regardless of the playing options, bunkers are designated hazards by the rules. There are different types of hazards designated by the rules, but the rule book does not say that bunkers are 'not true hazards'. I do agree that biunker play requires a tremendous amount of skill as it is.

Yeah I guess by definition in the rules they are hazards, but the context posters use is that they are like other hazards and are meant to be equally penal. They are not like lateral and water hazards, which are what most golfers refer to as hazards. You never hear commentators call bunkers hazards. <B>You would also never see a player deliberately aim for a water hazard on a par 5</B>.

 

But that's the entire point. If bunkers are, in actuality, hazards, then shouldn't they play more like other hazards? Players don't play into water hazards (on purpose) because it's penalizing. So why should players be rewarded by playing into bunkers if they are hazards?

[b.helts]

Bunkers are not true hazards (despite what most posters in this thread seem to think) as you are forced to play from them. If you don't rake them then they should be treated as a true hazard and entitle you to be able to take a drop outside the bunker at the cost of a shot like other hazards. Personally I like things as they are now, being able to play well from the sand is a skill that should be rewarded.

Regardless of the playing options, bunkers are designated hazards by the rules. There are different types of hazards designated by the rules, but the rule book does not say that bunkers are 'not true hazards'. I do agree that biunker play requires a tremendous amount of skill as it is.

Yeah I guess by definition in the rules they are hazards, but the context posters use is that they are like other hazards and are meant to be equally penal. They are not like lateral and water hazards, which are what most golfers refer to as hazards. You never hear commentators call bunkers hazards. <B>You would also never see a player deliberately aim for a water hazard on a par 5</B>.

 

But that's the entire point. If bunkers are, in actuality, hazards, then shouldn't they play more like other hazards? Players don't play into water hazards (on purpose) because it's penalizing. So why should players be rewarded by playing into bunkers if they are hazards?

 

Players are "rewarded" by playing into bunkers?

 

No. Maybe occasionally they *choose* to try to hit into a bunker. But in reality, not all that often.

 

The myth that bunkers are easier than other shots is just that, a myth. ESPECIALLY in the real world where bunkers aren't perfect like they usually are on tour.

[Vindog]

I read from a poster whose opinion I trust that bunkers are not always supposed to be overtly penal per se, but rather are to affect the play of the hole and force the player to hit the required shot.

 

That said, i don't think they should be perfectly set up like a Bahamian beach.

[williamsnrb]

 

 

 

Players are "rewarded" by playing into bunkers?

 

No. Maybe occasionally they *choose* to try to hit into a bunker. But in reality, not all that often.

 

The myth that bunkers are easier than other shots is just that, a myth. ESPECIALLY in the real world where bunkers aren't perfect like they usually are on tour.

Yes, rewarded very much, actually, when alternatives are considered. And it is absolutely not a myth that bunker shots are nearly equally as difficult as other greenside options. Look at the saves percentages described above for clarification on your opinion.