Cross-Bunkers

[Jim_H]

In reading about Olympia Fields, the course is said to have originally had a number of cross-bunkers, when designed by Willie Parks.  They are now essentially gone.
I know that the Yale Course also had a number of cross-bunkers when completed by Raynor, and they are now gone.  Those considering the restoration of Yale have discussed putting back some cross-bunkers.
I know, of course, that many, other old courses had cross-bunkers, but few remain.
My question--isn't there a place for cross-bunkers in modern architecture?  I know the argument against them would be that forced carries are unfair to the less-proficient golfer.  But why are they any different than other forced carries--ponds, marshes, etc.?  I would love to see some selective return of cross-bunkers in true restorations.

[Top100Guru]

Myopis Hunt Club's 2nd hole has a great cross bunker, as does #3, #11, #15, ironically, there were a few more at one time....I do not know of another course I have played in the US that has as many current cross bunkers as Myopia.....

[tonyt]

Jim_H, I agree.

Given that cross bunkers are part of the family of forced carries that allows the golfer to advance, find their ball and keep playing, I see no reason for them to become a no-no or a quirk of sorts. The forced carries that cause a player to re-load and/or loss of ball are more the type I would be happier to minimize.

Gives the player a fun challenge, without smacking them in the head if they miss.

[Chris Kane]

Tony,
How about RME17 and RME10?  Aren't they the perfect example of what a cross-bunker should be: strategic rather than penal?

[T_MacWood]

Jim
I agree with you. I believe incorporating a few crossbunkers adds to the variety of a design. Less penal than a crossing stream and there is something exhilirating about carrying a a well concieved cross hazard.

Can you recommend any good articles on the original architecture of Olympia Fields?

[BCrosby]

Among moderns, Nicklaus should get credit for building some good cross bunkers. No. 10 at Great Waters has a wonderful set of cross bunkers set at an angle. They require you to think hard on the tee about the carry/no carry choice. A really good hole.

He also built cross bunkers (and several centerline bunkers) at his Colleton River and Melrose courses.

(BTW, anyone else think that Nicklaus deserves more credit than he usually gets for his design work? I starting to think he has done some gutsy, interesting work.)  

I can't think of many other moderns that build cross bunkers. That's unfortunate.

Bob  

[Ken_Cotner]

Bob,

Forest Creek in Pinehurst (less than 10 years old) has at least one set of cross-bunkers and it is a terrific hole.  Par 5 on the front.

Ken

[Chris_Clouser]

I'll tell you after this weekend.  I'm going to look at his new course near my house and go walk around a bit.  Should be interesting.  Some of the bunkering looks great from a distance.  

[Nigel_Walton]

Perhaps more interesting than cross bunkers are central hazards which leave a line of play to the side as an option? Rereading Ran's Hidden Creek profile, we see several brilliant uses of central bunkers to create decision-making opportunities.

[ForkaB]

One of the very good (and distinctive) things about Bandon Dunes is its intelligently designed and effective cross-bunkering.

[Jim_H]

Tom--
I don't know any specific articles on Olympia Fields architecture.  I read about the cross-bunkers in Golf World.  I have always liked them as an architectural feature that brings back memories of the old style courses.  I remember playing several of the old courses in Chicago as a kid--Flossmore, Midlothian, etc.--and they all had great old style bunkering.  Also the first professional tournament I ever saw was the 1961 PGA at Olympia Fields.
I guess that some of the bunkers at Pine Valley could be called cross-bunkers--e.g., #7.  But those are more waste areas than defined cross-bunkers.  But still similar.
I wish one of the modern architects who visit this site would chime in here as to why cross-bunkers seem to be a thing of the past.

[T_MacWood]

Jim H
Thanks. That was an interesting article.
 
http://www.golfdigest.com/majors/usopen/index.ssf?/majors/usopen/gw20030606olympia.html

I'm wondering if the US Open program has an article on Park and his design--does anyone know?

[TEPaul]

It's pretty hard to find a good golf course that has as many cross bunkers (cross hazards) as does Pine Valley.

[ChipRoyce]

Great topic!

I would strongly agree with the argument that cross bunkers are appropriate for modern architecture - just as creeks, water hazards, etc...

I'm a strong advocate for reeling back the ball to reasonable levels. Until such is done, cross bunkers seem to me to be a straightforward way to add distance to a course. Specifically, causing players to play clubs other than driver off a tee, or to add risk reward with strategic placement, players are faced with different / longer approaches into greens, layup shots, etc.

Take Pine Valley, for instance. Would seem to me that longer hitters must select logn irons or fairway woods off of certain tees to keep the ball in play. As a result, driver & wedge may not be an option, despite the yardage on the card.