[W.H. Cosgrove]

I had this conversation yesterday with one of our members.  Will there be a retro look where an architect builds bombshell clean edged bunkers and gets rave reviews?  

The earlier comments on Tumble Creek made a light go off for me.  The course which I have now played twice is fun and challenging.  It probably deserves a closer look next sumer by those of you travelling to the Pacific Northwest to see the new courses in Tacoma, Chambers Bay and another very good track with no name and seeking no publicity at this time.  (More later).

Tumble Creek is a golf course looking for an identity or personality.  Without the distinct look of Pac Dunes, Ballyneal or Stonewall, it appears less than those while providing a very intriguing playing experience.  It is probably being given short shrift while still being a very good golf course.  

Does a succesful architect get shoved into a box?  Like an actor typecast as a villain or ingenue.  Once there how difficult is it to escape?  Do they need to go into hiding until their adoring public forgets them?  Or is simply easier to simply go on like an aging rock and roll band doing the same set night after night?

[Tim Liddy]

The development of the ragged edge, natural bunker is the strongest development in golf course architecture in the last ten years.  They started with Dave Axland and C&C at Sandhills and have brought a new level of artistic and natural detail to golf course bunkers.  As much as Dye brought strategic golf and Scottish values to golf course architecture the development of this bunker style into clay soils is historic.  You may argue that this is a simplistic approach to an entire movement but understanding the construction technique and sophistication of these bunkers would support my claim.

The golf course bunker has always look artificial in the park-land golf course, which is why Dye has always minimized the sand with grass faces, but this new “Axland style” on the correct site makes the bunker fit its environment. I think they are great – and yes they will be imitated for years to come by more and more architects.

[tonyt]

I like Tim's post above.

Ian,

I would have to agree that it seems we are suddenly seeing these bunkers everywhere. I cannot deny it is becoming a movement that like many mass movements, results in a few square pegs in round holes to be a part of the wave. My dissention is that I don't think it is the worst mass movement. Cones, spheres and clover leaf bunkers were a movement I'm glad to see having to share space with the new rugged look. So for that, I thank the internet.

Bravo for challenging architects to come up with styles of their own, or to look at a site and conceive of a bunkering style both wonderfully integrated on it, and that refuses to conform with other contemporary work. You are of course right, as this principle is part of the nucleus of architectural evolution and growth. But whilst a good thing copied may be lesser than a good thing original, it is still better than a bad thing original. I'll take this current movement, and its success in dragging some designers away from the cookie cutter bunkers and give it a world of credit for that. It has made MANY lift their game and their expectations. Like all great movements, it may pass. And the best remaining examples of it (both those already here and those yet to be built) will be awesome examples of our time, and our success in breaking out of the clean cut resort course amoebas.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()