[TEPaul]

"Then he surprises us all by throwing out the sand, fitting refrigeration and then each morning fills them with snow.  Canada's first natural golf course right?"

TonyM:

Interesting idea for an alternative to sand bunkering in the Canadian Rockies. Now, could you try to think of another interesting alternative to sand bunkering in the Canadian Rockies for the summer-time when people generally play golf in the Canadian Rockies?  

One you might want to consider that very naturally occuring material in the Canadian Rockies---eg rocks. At the very least we probably do know they can be maintained "firm and fast" without much trouble or much maintenance cost.  

[T_MacWood]

I more than realize what the historical model is for a golf course and golf course architecture. However, as Max Behr very correctly mentioned, the sand bunker on many courses in this world is not a natural feature and frankly is not really a necessary feature. There certainly are natural alternatives in various sites to the sand bunker, you know?

TE
When you gave us your example of a natural golf course in the Canadian Rockies, which specific golf course or courses were you thinking of? Banff? Jasper Park? If I'm not mistaken those courses have sand bunkers (very bold bunkers I might add), despite Max Behr's thoughts on the matter. Perhaps you had another bunkerless Canadian golf course in mind.

[TEPaul]

"TE
When you gave us your example of a natural golf course in the Canadian Rockies, which specific golf course or courses were you thinking of? Banff? Jasper Park? If I'm not mistaken those courses have sand bunkers (very bold bunkers I might add), despite Max Behr's thoughts on the matter."

Jeeesus Christ, Tom, just forget the question, forget Behr, forget the example of a course in the Canadian Rockies, forget sand bunkering in areas where sand is not natually occuring----it seems virutally impossible to have a discussion on most anything with you. How in the world can anyone get a simple dialogue as screwed up as that last post of yours?

It seems that whenever anyone tries to have a intelligent discussion with you your inclination is to answer any question with another question or to launch into some cyclical response that ends up either absolutely nowhere or at best right back where it all began.

The question is pretty simple really---eg why can't golf architecture manage to shed the total prevalence of the sand bunker, particularly in sites where there is no naturally occuring sand?

Last time I looked at a natural site in the Canadian Rockies I didn't notice any sand dunes or naturally occuring sand.

Did You?  

[T_MacWood]

TE
I'll try to make this as simple as possible.

Golf was born on the sandy hills by the sea. The first golf courses incorporated those sandy conditions. The bunker, as we know it today, is derived from the naturally occuring dunes on those first golf courses. This is the archetypical model for a natural golf course.

Can a golf course in the Rockies or on a farm in Ohio be naturally sympathetic to its envirmonment? Yes. Will it be as natural/typical as a golf course built upon a sandy site? No. Especially if it utilizes historic golf features/hazards.  

[TEPaul]

"TE
I'll try to make this as simple as possible.
Golf was born on the sandy hills by the sea. The first golf courses incorporated those sandy conditions. The bunker, as we know it today, is derived from the naturally occuring dunes on those first golf courses. This is the archetypical model for a natural golf course."

Tom:

How in the hell many times do I need to tell you I KNOW ALL THAT ALREADY!!!! I've known that for years. I'm sure most everyone on this website knows that. So why do you feel the need to keep saying it??

"Can a golf course in the Rockies or on a farm in Ohio be naturally sympathetic to its envirmonment? Yes. Will it be as natural/typical as a golf course built upon a sandy site? No. Especially if it utilizes historic golf features/hazards."

Good fellow, you're actually getting a tad closer to answering a pretty simple question. Why do you feel golf courses and golf architecture in parts of the world that has no natural sand needs to be as 'natural/typical as a golf course built on a sandy site'??

And lastly, why do you feel it's necessary for golf architecture now or in the future to utiilze golf features/hazards (the naturally occuring sand bunker of the linksland) of a time and place of which many sites today have no natural material for and consequently would have no "site" natural affinity with?  
 
 

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

If you are actually trying to say that you think sand bunkering should be used on all golf courses all over the world, and is therefore essential to golf architecture for the remainder of time simply because you feel the sand bunker is some kind of essential historical "vestige" or "link" to the original linksland golf and linksland courses, then I understand what you're saying.

However, that's something I completely disagree with, particularly as an example of a restriction for all time of golf courses and architecture in the future trying to get more "site natural", especially on sites that have no naturally occuring sand.

To be called transportation should all automobiles be required to have a buggy-whip between the seats?

[T_MacWood]

Why do you feel golf courses and golf architecture in parts of the world that has no natural sand needs to be as 'natural/typical as a golf course built on a sandy site'??

And lastly, why do you feel it's necessary for golf architecture now or in the future to utiilze golf features/hazards (the naturally occuring sand bunker of the linksland) of a time and place of which many sites today have no natural material for and consequently would have no "site" natural affinity with?  

TE
No I don't think golf courses in areas that have no natural sand need to be as natural/typical as a golf course built on a sandy site. I was simply pointing out that the courses built on sandy sites were more natural/typical....they would be closer to the naturally evolved historic model.

I don't believe I said it is necessary for golf architecture now or in the future (or in the past for that matter) to utilize sand hazards on a site which has no naturally occuring sand. The fact remains most golf courses built in the last 100+ years have sand hazards...it is a standard within the game and standard within golf architecture....despite Max Behr's ideas.

The exception to all this being High Sheep Country.

[T_MacWood]

You are the High Sheep Country expert. I could only hazard a guess....no pun intended. Because you only require a single pit when having your way with a sheep?

[TEPaul]

"The fact remains most golf courses built in the last 100+ years have sand hazards...it is a standard within the game and standard within golf architecture....despite Max Behr's ideas."

Tom MacWood:

That's precisely why I admire Max Behr and many of his unique philosophies on golf architecture. Behr was no fan at all of any push or evolution in golf course architecture towards any real "standards" within the game, within the Rules of the Game or within golf architecture. He didn't like the idea of "standards"---he thought they led toward formulaics and standardizations of playing fields by what he called the "game mind" of man----eg always to rigidly define and basically measure everything.

Behr felt that (standards and formulaics) just wasn't Nature's way in and for real natural golf, and I for one completely agree with him. His ideas about sand and sand bunkering was revolutionary, and hopefully some in the future will pay more attention to what he intimated.

[T_MacWood]

TE
Did Behr ever design or build a golf course without sand hazards?

[Kirk Gill]

Last time I looked at a natural site in the Canadian Rockies I didn't notice any sand dunes or naturally occuring sand.

I don't know about the Canadian Rockies, but here in the Colorado Rockies I can think of such a place:

(Photo used with Permission. A terrific site with lots of beautiful images)


That said, I've always wondered why in the width and breadth of the world that only grass and sand were allowed to be on golf courses (with obvious exceptions). There's a local course that winds through some lovely red rock formations, and on one par three a large formation is directly behind the green. On one occasion I overshot the green and my ball bounced off of the grass, hit the rocks, and bounded back on to the green. It's probably "not golf," but I really enjoyed it.

I have to admit that hitting off of different surfaces is an interesting aspect of golf, whether one is talking about hard-pan, or pine needles, or leaves.........the question is, how easily can surfaces besides turf and sand be integrated into courses, what other surfaces are to be used, and will golfers at large accept such oddities. Has such a thing ever been tried?

[Joe Hancock]

Kirk,

You might take a look at Greywalls website, or do a search on here for some pictures. It will show some rock incorporation to the golf course design.

Joe

[Kirk Gill]

Thanks, Joe. That is definitely one of the exceptions I was thinking of! As with Arrowhead (the course I was mentioning earlier), the rock formations are naturally occurring. I'm sure, though, there are examples of rock being introduced into the line of play on purpose.........

[TEPaul]

"TE
Did Behr ever design or build a golf course without sand hazards?"

Tom MacW:

Frankly, I don't know but I'd doubt it. The fact that Behr only did less than ten courses all in California might have something to do with that. Why do you ask?

"That said, I've always wondered why in the width and breadth of the world that only grass and sand were allowed to be on golf courses (with obvious exceptions)."

Kirk:

My feeling exactly! Hence my rather simple question about why the almost total prevalence of sand bunkering on courses the world over which some on here seem incapable of dealing with much less actually trying to answer the question.  

[George Pazin]

Just when I think Rich is making progress, he draws Sean into his trivial ideas....

Funny joke about Wales, though, Sean.

[T_MacWood]

Frankly, I don't know but I'd doubt it. The fact that Behr only did less than ten courses all in California might have something to do with that. Why do you ask?

TE
I would have thought based on your infatuation with Behr and his theories, you would found out if he put some of those interesting ideas into practice. Ten courses would seem like more than enough opportunity

[TEPaul]

Tom MacW:

Fortunately I don't suffer from some unrealistic assumption that if a man doesn't actually produce what he may have rather seriously or even passionately written about that it somehow devalues the importance of what he's written. I try to leave to others those kinds of assumptions and that kind of logic.

"Ten courses would seem like more than enough opportunity."

Apropos of this discussoin of sand bunkers or no sand bunkers on sites that have no naturally occuring sand, I suppose that would dependent quite a bit on where those courses of Behr's were and whether they did or didn't have naturally occuring sand, wouldn't you say?

[TEPaul]

Actually, Tom, it's pretty safe to say that Max Behr did not appear to be categorically opposed to sand bunkers on sites that had no naturally occuring sand, he merely stated that to build something that looked noticeably artificial and that also included totally foreign material to a site (in this case sand) was just not intelligent (the precise word he used). And furthermore he gave a very good and interesting reason what that lack of intelligence would eventually produce from golfers.

[A_Clay_Man]

Sean, Has any progress been made? Can you understand the subtext, that golfing in a natural enviornment is simply a more religious experince. I use religious because I have a serious lack of vocabulary.

[TEPaul]

Sean:

Listen, I apologize for hijacking your tete-a-tete with Tom MacWood away from you over the issue of the everlasting use of sand bunkering on golf courses despite the fact sand is not naturally occuring on a very good number of sites.

I was just wondering if you feel you've cleaned up any descrepencies with him about any comparisons in naturalness between high sheep country in either England or Wales and your wife's garden in which flowers tend to spill over the side in perhaps some mimicry of Nature's randomness and riot?

[T_MacWood]

TE
What can you share with us regarding Max Behr the architect and his actual designs? Do they have any common characteristics....the interesting use of natural features perhaps?

[Mike McGuire]

if not moving much dirt (numbers i've heard = 70,000 cubic yards on 4 holes) combined with some of the best terrain anywhere is natural....Erin Hills will be one of the new poster childs

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()