Bunker rakes

[backwoodsman]

If rakes have a integral 'support' for the handle (its a disc on ours) then I really don't see an issue with them being left in the bunker - in the bottom, parallel to the long axis of the bunker. Due to the head and the support, the rake has minimal contact with the sand, won't iimpede the ball, and would rarely (very rarely) stop a ball rolling down a gradient. Admit i can see an issue with small pot bunkers though .

 

[jim8flog]

We have new bunker rakes now, which, although hard to explain their make up have a sort of closed in plastic circular shaped head, anyway they work well, they have a label on the wooden handle stating that the sand should he raked away from you and to then place the rake in the centre of the bunker, playing the medal on Saturday I must have moved about 6 or 7 that had been left half in half out of the bunker, some folk just can't be bothered apparently

We changed our rakes to that style during the past couple of years.

I am convinced that they are a poor design as they are not heavy enough and the tines are too short. There has been a noticeable increase in compaction since we started to use them.

Personally I am a believer in not leaving rakes in the middle of bunkers and have always left them with the handle just about touching the edge of the bunker with the rake head as far in as possible in the direction of play and as far away from the line of play as possible.

Years ago the advice from the R&A was to leave them outside of the bunker but in such a position that they would not stop a ball likely to enter a bunker from doing so. However in these days of green staff not wanting to get off a mower to move them the way I described it was we adopted originally.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

We changed our rakes to that style during the past couple of years.

I am convinced that they are a poor design as they are not heavy enough and the tines are too short. There has been a noticeable increase in compaction since we started to use them.

Personally I am a believer in not leaving rakes in the middle of bunkers and have always left them with the handle just about touching the edge of the bunker with the rake head as far in as possible in the direction of play and as far away from the line of play as possible.

Years ago the advice from the R&A was to leave them outside of the bunker but in such a position that they would not stop a ball likely to enter a bunker from doing so. However in these days of green staff not wanting to get off a mower to move them the way I described it was we adopted originally.

I think that this might well be the best option for my place - with the end of the handle resting on the top edge of the bunker surround.

 

[Imurg]

Surely the only logical way is to, simply, remove all bunker rakes and make it mandatory to carry a rake yourself or an attachment that can do the job.
No rake - No play..
Problem solved.

 

[DickInShorts]

Anywhere but in the front of the bunker - I’ve had several occasions where my ball has run into a bunker and been impeded by the rake head - leaving what is probably the hardest hit in golf - bunker shot from downhill lie.

I’ve become quite adept at throwing ours into the middle of the bunker but on balance think the best place is outside on the side of the bunker that is away from the direction of play - especially important if you have put bunkers where the rake would hardly fit in the bunker

 

[Neilds]

Surely the only logical way is to, simply, remove all bunker rakes and make it mandatory to carry a rake yourself or an attachment that can do the job.
No rake - No play..
Problem solved.

Or just stop raking the hazards
People will want water draining from the ponds and lakes next!

 

[BTatHome]

Lots of discussions ... and yet I don't think I've had an issue with a rake in/out of a bunker and a ball hitting it. Maybe that's just my luck but I always find it incredible the complexity of rules already and that there is always discussions about adding even more things that golfers must remember to do as well, regarding the location of rake, their direction of travel and possible deflection path etc.

I'm all for removing the need for rakes all together, and just get on with it accepting that you've hit a hazard (I bet you'll find just as many balls up against the face and the edge then too) ... of course that does mean that they bunkers will need raking properly by the greenskeepers occasionally to spread the sand, and that is probably the hardest thing as ours certainly don't know how to spread out the sand in them.

 

[backwoodsman]

Lots of discussions ... and yet I don't think I've had an issue with a rake in/out of a bunker and a ball hitting it. Maybe that's just my luck but I always find it incredible the complexity of rules already and that there is always discussions about adding even more things that golfers must remember to do as well, regarding the location of rake, their direction of travel and possible deflection path etc.

I'm all for removing the need for rakes all together, and just get on with it accepting that you've hit a hazard (I bet you'll find just as many balls up against the face and the edge then too) ... of course that does mean that they bunkers will need raking properly by the greenskeepers occasionally to spread the sand, and that is probably the hardest thing as ours certainly don't know how to spread out the sand in them.

Been playing golf for a lot of years, and I too , can't recall an incident of a crappy lie caused by a rake. Can't but think the issue is rather over-inflated?

 

[Foxholer]

...
I'm all for removing the need for rakes all together, and just get on with it accepting that you've hit a hazard (I bet you'll find just as many balls up against the face and the edge then too) ... of course that does mean that they bunkers will need raking properly by the greenskeepers occasionally to spread the sand, and that is probably the hardest thing as ours certainly don't know how to spread out the sand in them.

That might seem ok, but goes against the essential fairness - well, even-handedness - of Golf imo. In comps, early starters in would get pristine bunkers whereas those out late would get bunkers that have had almost a day's worth of footprint, stance and strike gouges etc.
I don't mind whatever arrangement is provided/decided. They are hazards after all, so I try to avoid them - though on 1 particular (long) par 3 hole, I've recently had more pars from bunker(s) than from chipping from the uphill approach!

 

[MikeB]

Been playing golf for a lot of years, and I too , can't recall an incident of a crappy lie caused by a rake. Can't but think the issue is rather over-inflated?

I saw it 3 weeks ago, some ejit left a rake propped up against the rear edge of a bunker and a players ball dropped in then was stopped by the rake approx 18 inches from the steep rear wall. Impossible shot, the player had to come out sideways.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Our rebuilt bunkers present a hard enough challenge as it is - unless you know HOW to get out of them. That simply requires knowing how to play bunker shots properly, and that's why our Pro runs Bunker Clinics We so do not need rakes left in dumb positions to make getting out at times almost impossible.

 

[salfordlad]

Been playing golf for a lot of years, and I too , can't recall an incident of a crappy lie caused by a rake. Can't but think the issue is rather over-inflated?

While rakes being left in truly stupid positions is not all that common (I estimate 3-5 per cent of the time in regular club competition golf), it is rare that it produces an outcome that is irretrievable. But when it does, and I have seen this a few times, the outcome is spectacularly disastrous for the player, resulting in an unavoidable 2 stroke penalty to a player that has done nothing wrong other than find a bunker - and recall Gary Player actually commonly played into bunkers intentionally.

 

[Neilds]

While rakes being left in truly stupid positions is not all that common (I estimate 3-5 per cent of the time in regular club competition golf), it is rare that it produces an outcome that is irretrievable. But when it does, and I have seen this a few times, the outcome is spectacularly disastrous for the player, resulting in an unavoidable 2 stroke penalty to a player that has done nothing wrong other than find a bunker - and recall Gary Player actually commonly played into bunkers intentionally.

What 2 shot penalty? Move the rake, if the ball moves put it back - surely?

 

[wjemather]

That might seem ok, but goes against the essential fairness - well, even-handedness - of Golf imo. In comps, early starters in would get pristine bunkers whereas those out late would get bunkers that have had almost a day's worth of footprint, stance and strike gouges etc.
I don't mind whatever arrangement is provided/decided. They are hazards after all, so I try to avoid them - though on 1 particular (long) par 3 hole, I've recently had more pars from bunker(s) than from chipping from the uphill approach!

Golf is not fair or even handed, otherwise (among other things) we'd have preferred lies everywhere and the option to relocate the ball after a "bad" bounce. When players would choose to be in the bunker over the alternative, they are not providing the obstacle they should be.

 

[Foxholer]

Golf is not fair or even handed, otherwise (among other things) we'd have preferred lies everywhere and the option to relocate the ball after a "bad" bounce. When players would choose to be in the bunker over the alternative, they are not providing the obstacle they should be.

That's not the version of 'fair/even-handed' I meant - and is the reason for the ' or at least, even-handed' addition. I agree there are times when it can be perceived as 'unfair', but it's rather 'random', so fair (even-handed) in that way. At least, that's the theory.
So equally randomly 'unfair' is fine, but organised in such a way that it's likely to penalise one set of players more than a different sets (the randomness of weather aside) is to be avoided, where possible, imo.

 

[salfordlad]

What 2 shot penalty? Move the rake, if the ball moves put it back - surely?

I've seen this bite a few times with ball towards back of a sloping bunker against a rake; player moves rake, ball rolls closer to the hole, rule 14.2e is invoked:
14.2e/1 – Player Must Take Penalty Relief When Spot Where Ball Will Remain at Rest Is Nearer Hole

When following Rule 14.2e, there is a possibility that the only spot in the same area of the course where the ball will stay at rest when placed is nearer the hole. In such circumstances, the player must take penalty relief under an allowed Rule.

The player is not allowed to push the ball into the ground to ensure it stays on a spot (see 8.2b/1).

For example, a player’s ball comes to rest on the downslope of a bunker against a rake and, in removing the rake, the ball moves. The player attempts to replace the ball as required, but it does not stay. He or she then follows the procedure of Rule 14.2e with no success and finds that there are no other spots to try in that bunker that are not nearer the hole.

In this case, the player must take unplayable ball relief either by using stroke and distance for one penalty stroke (Rule 19.2a) or back-on-the-line relief outside the bunker for two penalty strokes (Rule 19.3b).

 

[Foxholer]

I've seen this bite a few times with ball towards back of a sloping bunker against a rake; player moves rake, ball rolls closer to the hole, rule 14.2e is invoked:
14.2e/1 – Player Must Take Penalty Relief When Spot Where Ball Will Remain at Rest Is Nearer Hole

When following Rule 14.2e, there is a possibility that the only spot in the same area of the course where the ball will stay at rest when placed is nearer the hole. In such circumstances, the player must take penalty relief under an allowed Rule.

The player is not allowed to push the ball into the ground to ensure it stays on a spot (see 8.2b/1).

For example, a player’s ball comes to rest on the downslope of a bunker against a rake and, in removing the rake, the ball moves. The player attempts to replace the ball as required, but it does not stay. He or she then follows the procedure of Rule 14.2e with no success and finds that there are no other spots to try in that bunker that are not nearer the hole.

In this case, the player must take unplayable ball relief either by using stroke and distance for one penalty stroke (Rule 19.2a) or back-on-the-line relief outside the bunker for two penalty strokes (Rule 19.3b).

Cruel!

 

[AliMc]

Been playing golf for a lot of years, and I too , can't recall an incident of a crappy lie caused by a rake. Can't but think the issue is rather over-inflated?

Had an absolute shocker today, labels on our rakes state that they should be placed in the centre of the bunker, as I approached the bunker I could see that the rake was half in half out and my ball was under it on a downslope about 6 inches from the back of the bunker, on our links course where mostly the ground feeds into the bunkers it is frustrating as hell and happens a lot, I don't know why folk can't just follow the simple instruction, they might not agree with it but that is what the club have decided, as mentioned previously on this thread they probably either don't care or can't be bothered, another letter to the secretary on it's way !

 

[backwoodsman]

Given the responses above, I guess me (and my playing partners) have just been lucky over the years.

I fully accept there are "good" places, and "stupid" places within bunkers where one could leave rakes, and personally, I always endeavour to choose the former.

 

[KenL]

For me the best place is on a stand that props the rake up outside the bunker but happy to do as any club requires.

Those advocating removing rakes are being ridiculous!