[IIJohnnyRingoII]

i agree that a ball that trickles into a sand trap is not going to have a plugged lie percentage but, its also not going to have a 90-95% lie either.  ive learned how to hit sand shots over the years with the wide open club face but,  its still not going to be as easy to hit as a light rough hit ,  percentage wise. 
   Heavy rough is heavy rough.   if you're out playing and not cheating yourself by fluffing up a shot that lands in the heavy rough it can get pretty random.  you may get  a pretty decent lie,,,  maybe.  if you're lucky.  but most times the ball drops down in the deep grass and getting a percentage that's anywhere near the light rough or fairway percentage just doesn't happen.  in real life. 
  I don't know how anyone can expect HB to have a shot estimator that says, " oh its just off the edge of the light rough" so the penalty is much less then if its 10 yards off.  that seems like a tall request  besides, being just off the first cut and in the heavy rough can be just as bad sometimes.    I agree that you have random lies when a ball is in the heavy rough.  and, if someone creates a course that's got a lot of heavy rough and narrow fairways then that course is what it is.  it may not be everyones cup of tea

https://www.pgatour.com/instruction/instruction--lose-your-fear-of-greenside-bunkers.html

PGA Tour Pros simply do not fear being in a bunker (unless it is plugged).  They would prefer to be in the sand, versus the rough any day of the week.

Whereas the average TOUR pro or playing professional practices greenside bunker shots about two hours per week, the average golfer is lucky if they spend two hours a year in the sand. It’s no wonder why they fear even the easiest of bunker shots. The TOUR player, on the other hand, would much rather be in the bunker than in the greenside rough because they can control the spin, trajectory and distance much easier. All they have to do is change their entry point in the sand, the face angle, and the rate of their body rotation.

[jeffield]

also, why would anyone want to ruin the gameplay to compete with people who are circumventing the control design of the game?  the game should be designed to play like a round of golf,  either like a pro or like a semi pro or however they choose.  to try and compete with people who are using devices to get around this is ridiculous.  you're always going to have people like this in everything there is in life.
  but, don't ruin the gameplay for everyone else/ the majority who love golf.   my opinion on the whole "straight line shooter" theory.  and I will not call them "straight shooters" because that is the last thing that they are.

[jeffield]

notice I compared a sand shot to a light rough percentage shot ,  not heavy/ buried rough in terms of difficulty.

[gtgud]

This is a good point.  But also, just because HB's numbers equate to those of the average PGA pro standing on a driving range, why should those numbers necessarily be used in the game. It's not like the game provides any reliable mechanism to aspire to be one of the players whose average is over 300 yards.  As it is today, the game forces us all to be "average".

The 3-Wood distance was actually fine, before the update, with master clubs. Also, a well struck driver could carry well over 300 yards.

But, making the Woods much shorter is not something that made any sense, unless all of the other clubs were shortened... which is not something that needs to happen - if we're trying to simulate Tour golf, at least.

Personally, when compared to the Driver distance, I'd say that the Irons could be lengthened a bit, at the top end. The top pros are hitting 8-Irons closer to 175, but they can hit a good one about 190 yards.

[Leadbelly]

I didn't get a chance to try the bunkers and rough, but I would lean more to the casual player rather then the hard core player. They are more likely to be in those areas much more often, were the hard core player will rarely have to deal with ether or. Make things to hard and you will sour off your biggest customer base in my opinion.

[darvaan]

Really liked all the changes except for the ridiculous bunker shot penalties(52-67%). Should be more like 80-85% IMO.

[gtgud]

Really liked all the changes except for the ridiculous bunker shot penalties(52-67%). Should be more like 80-85% IMO.

Spot on. They just need to split the difference. Bunkers should be penal, but not completely unplayable.

[kgboomer]

i agree that a ball that trickles into a sand trap is not going to have a plugged lie percentage but, its also not going to have a 90-95% lie either.

It depends of the type of sand and how good the bunkers are maintained. A lot of courses don't care about their bunkers, and the 90-95% is what we're getting. Anybody can hit easily out of them. Other, like the Marc O'Meara in Muskoka, have a coarse sand almost like coarse salt. The ball will stop rather quickly when getting there and it won't get at the bottom of the bunker. It's always a downhill or sidehill lie and it's tricky to get out of that sand. The ball is just not getting easily out of that.

The best courses around here, they will maintain their bunkers. Some will add sand so you will never get the ball going at the bottom of the bunkers. Other, like my home course, they will actually replace the entire bunkers of sand every 5 years or so. When they're finished with them, the ball will stop quickly in that soft sand and the ball will actually sit in a hole by the weight of it. Definitely not 90-95% lie, and it's so soft that you have to be very precise to hit it solidly from a fairway bunker.

[spacialgroover]

Really liked all the changes except for the ridiculous bunker shot penalties(52-67%). Should be more like 80-85% IMO.

There should be a slight chance of a 60-70% lie if you are plugged (ball lands directly in the bunker).
A more likely chance of 75-85% lie for going directly in.
And if your ball bounces first and then rolls in, you should get an 85-90% lie.

[kgboomer]

i agree that a ball that trickles into a sand trap is not going to have a plugged lie percentage but, its also not going to have a 90-95% lie either.  ive learned how to hit sand shots over the years with the wide open club face but,  its still not going to be as easy to hit as a light rough hit ,  percentage wise. 
   Heavy rough is heavy rough.   if you're out playing and not cheating yourself by fluffing up a shot that lands in the heavy rough it can get pretty random.  you may get  a pretty decent lie,,,  maybe.  if you're lucky.  but most times the ball drops down in the deep grass and getting a percentage that's anywhere near the light rough or fairway percentage just doesn't happen.  in real life. 
  I don't know how anyone can expect HB to have a shot estimator that says, " oh its just off the edge of the light rough" so the penalty is much less then if its 10 yards off.  that seems like a tall request  besides, being just off the first cut and in the heavy rough can be just as bad sometimes.    I agree that you have random lies when a ball is in the heavy rough.  and, if someone creates a course that's got a lot of heavy rough and narrow fairways then that course is what it is.  it may not be everyones cup of tea

https://www.pgatour.com/instruction/instruction--lose-your-fear-of-greenside-bunkers.html

PGA Tour Pros simply do not fear being in a bunker (unless it is plugged).  They would prefer to be in the sand, versus the rough any day of the week.

Whereas the average TOUR pro or playing professional practices greenside bunker shots about two hours per week, the average golfer is lucky if they spend two hours a year in the sand. It’s no wonder why they fear even the easiest of bunker shots. The TOUR player, on the other hand, would much rather be in the bunker than in the greenside rough because they can control the spin, trajectory and distance much easier. All they have to do is change their entry point in the sand, the face angle, and the rate of their body rotation.

Greenside bunkers are now the easiest shot in golf with the wedges of this generation. On sand being used at most golf courses, you can hit anywhere from 1/2 to 2 inches behind the ball and get good results.

[IIJohnnyRingoII]

Really liked all the changes except for the ridiculous bunker shot penalties(52-67%). Should be more like 80-85% IMO.

There should be a slight chance of a 60-70% lie if you are plugged (ball lands directly in the bunker).
A more likely chance of 75-85% lie for going directly in.
And if your ball bounces first and then rolls in, you should get an 85-90% lie.

Agree completely!

[BSmooth13]

Bunkers now give awful percentages even if you roll in and don't plug. Not good.

And light rough needs to be bumped back up because it's way too penal. Hell in real lifestyle light rough often adds distance due to flier lies rather than reduces distance.

Bumping this with nothing else to add.  If this was the case post server update, we've now taken one step forward and two steps backward.  I hope they tweak when they re-release the server updates.

I've been pleasantly surprised at the volume of comments regarding how sand shots play irl. Before I start into this, we're not talking about plugged lies that result from flying the ball into a bunker, just to be clear.

If you get a roll-in lie into a properly raked bunker, you're going to have a great opportunity to make solid contact because it's an incredibly clean lie. That said, the swing is much harder to pull off, the margin of error is much larger as it requires precision at impact. Typically the swing required is one with less lower body movement to keep you grounded and stable, which can definitely mean less distance - but it's not a reduction in distance based on a bad lie, it's because you are swinging with clean contact in mind much more so than with a shot from the fairway. I could see a useful way of implementing this simply being a reduced club distance, maybe 5-10% depending on the club (longer irons punished more), instead of saying it's a variable distance due to a bad lie.

Also, as others have noted, with a full shot out of sand, you're going to get a lot more spin with clean contact than from any other surface. Again, that's due to how clean the lie is, but also because of the angle of attack required to hit it cleanly - meaning, more steep angle, less of a sweep - provided the player makes solid contact.

So, in sum, I think the most sensible way to build this into the game would be to have slightly reduced distances for full shots out of sand - 5% with wedges up to around 10/15% with long irons - but amore demanding blue swingline and tempo range to stay within, and the extent to which the player executes the shot within that blue line and tempo range moderates the amount of spin. Simply put in terms of how it would translate into gameplay, a straighter swing with proper tempo means crisper contact, which produces more spin, but is more difficult to do because of the precision required.

i agree that a ball that trickles into a sand trap is not going to have a plugged lie percentage but, its also not going to have a 90-95% lie either.  ive learned how to hit sand shots over the years with the wide open club face but,  its still not going to be as easy to hit as a light rough hit ,  percentage wise.

I think you're talking about something different, at least than the type of shot I'm referencing above. Yes, greenside bunker play is most often done with an open clubface, but 9 times out of 10 - unless it's some awkward yardage like a 50-60yd shot - you aren't going to open the clubface hitting a full shot out of sand from a fairway bunker.

[Mo3s4SBU35]

I've been pleasantly surprised at the volume of comments regarding how sand shots play irl. Before I start into this, we're not talking about plugged lies that result from flying the ball into a bunker, just to be clear.

If you get a roll-in lie into a properly raked bunker, you're going to have a great opportunity to make solid contact because it's an incredibly clean lie. That said, the swing is much harder to pull off, the margin of error is much larger as it requires precision at impact. Typically the swing required is one with less lower body movement to keep you grounded and stable, which can definitely mean less distance - but it's not a reduction in distance based on a bad lie, it's because you are swinging with clean contact in mind much more so than with a shot from the fairway. I could see a useful way of implementing this simply being a reduced club distance, maybe 5-10% depending on the club (longer irons punished more), instead of saying it's a variable distance due to a bad lie.

Also, as others have noted, with a full shot out of sand, you're going to get a lot more spin with clean contact than from any other surface. Again, that's due to how clean the lie is, but also because of the angle of attack required to hit it cleanly - meaning, more steep angle, less of a sweep - provided the player makes solid contact.

So, in sum, I think the most sensible way to build this into the game would be to have slightly reduced distances for full shots out of sand - 5% with wedges up to around 10/15% with long irons - but amore demanding blue swingline and tempo range to stay within, and the extent to which the player executes the shot within that blue line and tempo range moderates the amount of spin. Simply put in terms of how it would translate into gameplay, a straighter swing with proper tempo means crisper contact, which produces more spin, but is more difficult to do because of the precision required. [/quote]

This!! ^^^^  Would make play out of fairway bunkers 100% realistic!  A slight distance penalty, more spin, and more difficult to hit inside of the cone.  Ideally an imperfect swing path/tempo would result in loss of distance due to a fat/thin shot, but a perfectly executed shot should give the player the ability to, for example, hit a green with an 8 iron from ~160 yards.  This is without a doubt a realistic simulation of how golf is played by pros and decent amateurs alike. 

[blueisthecolour]

^^^ Is the above based on people's actual personal/shared experience of playing from high quality course bunkers? Or is it an assumption based on how you think they should play given the physics of the game?

[Mo3s4SBU35]

It's my experience playing probably 100+ courses, plus watching a LOT of PGA Tour golf.  A flat lie in the base of a fairway bunker does not mean less distance.  If struck properly the ball should travel (about) the same as the same club from the fairway, with more spin.  I play at a private club with beautiful traps, but I've also played many munis/public courses with terribly maintained bunkers or with a variety of types of sand.  With a well struck shot from a fairway bunker, the result is the same as I stated above.

My desire for maybe a slight decline in % and more spin on a fairway bunker shot stems from the reality of how fairway traps play IRL.

Additionally, greenside bunkers leave a lot to be desired.  I personally change my setup and shot type based on what I'm trying to do.  IE, in one scenario I will open my club face and try to hit the sand closer to the ball to generate a higher shot with spin.  And in another scenario I will use more of a square club face and try to hit further behind the ball for a "chunk and run", IE a lower splash out with more roll out.  (This is also what you'll see on the PGA Tour).  I think there are too few options out of greenside bunkers.

My priority for this patch is fixing the % distance available and spin rate out of a fairway bunker though.