This thread has moved in a different direction than what I thought it would. I wonder if the originator of it meant for it to turn into something about great courses without water. I think it has been adequately shown that there are a lot of great courses without water on them.
BUT.....
Think about courses without sand. Even if they have water, who cares?
No sand, none, zero, zippo. Olympic club comes close, it only has ONE fairway bunker, but the greens are littered with them. How many courses have no bunkers at all to speak of?
But can you imagine 18 holes of #14 at ANGC? Is there a course out there like that in the world??? Is it possible to keep us interested with no bunkers???
I suspect not.
Is that a dare someone is willing to take on? A revolutionary golf course architect?
I think all of us can come up with an interesting if not great hole sans bunkers. No reason one cannot cut and paste these holes into a course and an interesting one at that.
Why would anyone want to except for the notariety or to (Very expensively!) show that it
can be done.
Historically, TOC is littered with bunkers, has little water, and until courses were built in places where the sheer amount of water dictated that courses be built with water as a primary hazard (read: Florida) or environmental restrictions (USA USA USA) dictated that wetlands be treated differently, TOC was a guide. Bunkers endured with golf as the prime hazard, water
evolved as a hazard over time. (Medically one might say "Bunkers were inherited hazards, water was an acquired hazard.)
If you went to Tom Fazio with $40 Mil and said "I want a Top 100 course without any bunkers", his cut and paste method of terraformation could create you a Doak 5 totally without bunkers. And it would be his Masterpiece (see other thread).
And it would make Golf Digest's "Best New Courses". Guaranteed.
Also, I believe that Pocono Manor famous on All Star Golf with its 60 yard drop shot (Ross) has no bunkers. So someone must have given him $40 Mil and said
"Do it!".