Designing Great Holes with 'Meaningless' Features

[Mark_F]

I have always been struck by the point of the bunkering from the tee up to the hill on Kingston Heath's 15th hole.

It makes the hole fabulous to look at, but does it really do anything from an architectural perspective?

I suppose it's function may be to intimidate the average duffer, but how and when does an architect go about creating such a 'meaningless' feature in a hole?

Are there any other good examples others can think of?

Chris/Matt please feel free to enlighten me.

[Dan Herrmann]

Sure - the waterfalls that we sometimes see.

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Mark

If it makes the hole fabulous to look at, then it does something very important from an architectural perspective!  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mark,

One of the all time gca dilemmas.  Its been a while since I have been there - any chance it is merely an obsolete bunker?

Beauty and strategy are both important components.  One gca who deep down, favors beauty, would likely put in a non play bunker, whereas another more strategically oriented one would leave it out. Or a marketing oriented on would put it in and call it both, giving it a name like "random bunkering"!

I know that Ross said they should serve both purposes, but every site usually presents itself with a great looking bunker or feature location that doesn't exactly come into play.  I am always tempted to add a bunker, if it helps artistic composition. That's because I got started in golf during the design low period of the 70's where every bunker that "didn't serve a purpose" had been removed, and courses seemed pretty dull.  The random bunkers came back into style, not coincidentally during a period of good economy, and I suspect they will go right back out of style as we revert to more normal (read: kinda sucks) economic conditions.....

[A_Clay_Man]

One of things that seems to get me scratching my head is when there is no reward for the risk of taking-on a bunker. ie. an inside dog leg bunker, where there is rough over the bunker, and no chance for any reward, no matter what section of that bunker the golfer challenged.

[Phil_the_Author]

The 11th hole at Bethpage Black has a series of bunkers so far right of the fairway at even its historically widest cut that even my world-class slice can't approach. These would only come into play if the fairway was extended over more than 50 yards, and even then not one sane person would take that line. Yet Tilly put them there & I can't fathom why.

The most frustrating aspect is that they are among thelargest, deepest and grandest on the entire course and yet are completely meaningless. Even someone such as myslef who loves the Black and thinks it the greatest non-seaside course built, question these.

[Mike Hendren]

The elephant buried under the right rear corner of the 17th green at Holston Hills.  Perhaps Messrs. Stiles or Doak can enlighten me.

Mike

[Bill_McBride]

Tom Doak restored all the "scare" bunkers behind #3, #15 and I believe #18 at The Valley Club of Montecito, which were missing for years and presumably allowed to disappear because they weren't in play.  Boy do they look great back there on the hillside behind each of those greens.  Meaningless or not from a strategic perspective, but beautiful stuff.

[ForkaB]

Mark

One man's "eye candy" is another man's "strategery."  If the owner lets (or demands that) an archie put in meaningless features, who are we (or they) to argue?  In non "GC" A these are called "follies" and are cool to look at and even contemplate, in an existentialist sort of way....

...and I should conclude with what Lord Berner said, regarding one of his follies at Faringdon, Oxford:

"The great point of this tower is that it will be entirely useless."

[Mike_Cirba]

That's because I got started in golf during the design low period of the 70's where every bunker that "didn't serve a purpose" had been removed, and courses seemed pretty dull.  The random bunkers came back into style, not coincidentally during a period of good economy, and I suspect they will go right back out of style as we revert to more normal (read: kinda sucks) economic conditions.....

Jeff,

That's a great point.

I played a course this past summer that had at least 140 or so bunkers, many in the oddest places simply for aesthetic purposes.

Although the club is doing fairly well, I walked around imagining which bunkers would die a lonely death should the economic situation decline precipitiously.  

I left convinced that one could remove at least 70% of the present bunkers without much changing either the strategic, penal, or heroic demands of the course.  

[David_Elvins]

I have always been struck by the point of the bunkering from the tee up to the hill on Kingston Heath's 15th hole.

It makes the hole fabulous to look at, but does it really do anything from an architectural perspective?

I suppose it's function may be to intimidate the average duffer, but how and when does an architect go about creating such a 'meaningless' feature in a hole?

Are there any other good examples others can think of?

Chris/Matt please feel free to enlighten me.

Mark,

Don't those bunkers serve a purpose of keeping play on the 14th hole away from the 15th tee?

Besides that, the bunkers look great, the aesthetics of a par 3 hole are incredibly important and one only has to look at a 1970s photo of the hole with no bunkers and tea-tree lining the right side of the hole for this to be evident.

[Mark_F]

Jeff,

I don't think they are obsolete - they look great, which is the point of them I guess.  it probably wouldn't be half as an impressive hole were they filled in.

I guess they would therefore be classified as purely aesthetic - I was just wondering what the decision making process was you blokes went through when putting them in.

I would guess they are more pevalent on par threes and short fours?

Rich,

I don't much like contemplation on a golf course.  I find it takes valuable energy that could be used hurling my clubs skyward.

How much would a course like Brora benefit from a little more eye candy? I think the front nine, for one, would be vastly different/better?

David,

I doubt that anything short of an armour-plated wall would keep most members' slices away from the 15th tee.

Didn't realise the bunkers were such a recent revelation.  They clearly 'make' the hole.  

[Tags:]

Tags: