[Jaeger Kovich]

In any event, my earlier post was a feeble attempt to generate a discussion on bunker design theory, but I doubt this crowd is into it.  I am not even sure the architects here could clearly convey the basic theory guiding their bunker work, but it would be interesting to hear.

What do you mean basic theory guiding their bunker work?


This year I have built bunkers on 3 different projects:
1 - Brand new build, in clay, for another architect.
2 - Renovation, I am both architect and shaper.
3 - Restoration, I am working for another architect, rebuilding Tillinghast's work from pictures.


and to throw in another wrinkle, 2 of them are using billy bunker.


Some things cross over and hold true for me no matter what, others couldn't be more different. I'd say I've built 4 different styles this year alone. I'd say no matter how I'm building bunkers, I always spend a lot of time on the floors. I am always thinking about what the lie of the ball is going to be when it enters the hazard. You need to be thinking about how/where you are trying to influence the ball to come to rest to provide a proper hazard.


Do you want it to be sitting at the bottom of the bunker in sand? What happens if it gets stuck on the bank in grass? Is going to end up against a lip? Sometimes, like say I'm building a more of sandscape or rugged look, you need to be thinking a lot differently about how the plant material is going to effect the lie a lot differently than if you are draping "tight mow" into the leading edges, etc. Sometimes you want to make one really penal, and provide a super steep blast out which scares you from the tee if you miss on that side, sometimes you make it more penal by making is super small size so you the swing path or the stance are the challenge, sometimes you are building a bunker that you hope prevents the ball from ending up in an even worse place!


I could talk your ear off about line styles, edge styles, capes, bays, fingers, horizon line, foreground, what you can see, blindness, revetting, chunking, knucklebuckets, how to properly topsoil a bunker, sodding, hydromulching, fescue, mister irrigation.. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Exactly the type of discussions I was hoping to hear!

[Jaeger Kovich]

Exactly the type of discussions I was hoping to hear!

Well do you want me to continue with my never ending stream of consciousness Ala Will Farrell in Old School or do you want to ask questions and dig deeper?!


I've only played 1 of your courses, Sand Creek Station so I don't have a clear understanding of what your theories are. Although, I must say, the day I start thinking about sand pro turning radius using it as a guide for building bunkers I might just walk off the project


When I was building some sandscape style bunkers on Martha's Vineyard last summer some of the assistant supers were asking to space out some of the islands and little clumps of vegetation so they could get the sandpro in between... It kinda just made me want to make them even closer although I did appease them, sort of!

[BCowan]

I am convinced now more than ever that the average modern golfer defines an architects abilities by a complicated bunker edge and noticeable green contours.  This would have left a few of the ODG's out in the rain...
A couple of the modern sigs load their projects up with bunkers but pride themselves in the aesthetics while making sure they are placed so as not to interfere with the average golfer's game.

   I disagree, I'd say the average modern golfer is most interested in green speeds, followed by elevation change (elevation whore), and clusters of bunkers (more is better).  I've never heard bunker edge or bold green contours from average modern golfer.

[Jaeger Kovich]

I hear more memberships complain about not getting consistent lies from bunkers than anything else right now. (Living/working in the Met Area) Having super fast greens might be the first positive comment, but I'd say "bad bunkers" is the first negative remark.


I can't believe how many clubs #1 reason for doing a bunker project is sand quality. To go along with this they don't want their ball stuck in a jungle of over irrigated fescue nor do they want bare/worn out areas on the grass faces which is going to contaminate their sand. Clean edges seems to be what they want to compliment this.


Poorly maintained and over irrigated fescue can certainly be the end of someones architectural career. Although it is not really a good way to judge ones talent.

[JC Urbina]

Mike,


Could I ask the same question of the routing of a golf course, if you knew some basic understanding of flow could you soley base your talent level on just the routing alone.


Does a good routing mask the lack of creativity in greens and bunkers?


Does the conditioning of a golf course outweigh the talent level of the architect?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jaeger,

I worked golf maintenance in college, though and it affected me.  IF the bunker lobes were too narrow, the sand pro left a pile in the middle, and of course, I had to get off the rake and smooth it out, all while trying to stay ahead of golfers on a weekend morning.  Of course, with liners and hand raking, turn radius isn't often a consideration any more.  It actually makes more sense to make bunker lobes smaller, to save both construction and hand raking cost. 

It does illustrate the balance of such things in design.  On courses with strapped budgets, things like that are a consideration.  Paraphrasing what I said last month,  bunker art is like masturbation, you only have to please yourself.  Bunker design is like sex, as you have to please others.  In this case, its the superintendent!

I hate to stifle you and your stream of thought.  Of the topics you mentioned, the ones that interest me is chunking, knuckle buckets, topsoiling a bunker, sodding, and hydro-mulching, and how the interrelationship of those construction techniques affect the design/final construction.

It sounds like we consider similar things that I would consider basic design - line styles, edge styles, capes, bays, fingers, horizon line, foreground, and visibility/blindness.  I prefer visibility and usually end up with a simple front edge, with no mounds.

I recall playing with a JN associate once, who told me they (and Fazio) ended up with a catch basin in front of nearly every bunker.  The wanted the front edge to have a gentle concave swoop (not just be straight across) and that created a hole they had to drain.....so in went a CB.

I think I have told the story about Damian Pascuzzo and I doing the Wilson style bunkers at La Costa with the young shaper who did Sebonak's bunkers with JN and Doak.  There was a lot of nuance discussion. DP was more worried about the front of the bunkers. I was mostly worried about the sky line and top edge, making sure each lobe rose a different amount and was a slightly different size and shape.  The shaper was mostly interested in the mid slopes, like the angles of the noses and even which side of the nose the high point/ridge ought to be on, which I had rarely considered.  Of course, Steve Pate has a few ideas, too.

So the joke was, how many architects/shapers does it take to build a bunker?  LOL

[paul cowley]

Mike,


Could I ask the same question of the routing of a golf course, if you knew some basic understanding of flow could you soley base your talent level on just the routing alone.


Does a good routing mask the lack of creativity in greens and bunkers?


Does the conditioning of a golf course outweigh the talent level of the architect?

Hey Jim - I reversed the two comparisons in both your questions to check my answers...and still came up with "sometimes/maybe"




As for my own bunker design criteria I have two:


- Always tie bunkers into the site, whether it's natural or created...and regardless of style.


- I use the carpentry maxim of 'measure twice, cut once' when deciding whether or not to include a bunker...as in 'recheck my initial urge to create a bunker in a space before building it'.

I find a surprising amount of previously conceived bunkers don't make the final cut.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Paul,

Good the hear from you on this, as always.

I have a newly opened green that sort of matches your story.  On plan, I had clusters of 4 right and 3 bunkers left.  It is an uphill hole.  When building, the lower two just were never clearly visible, nor were the outside ones on the left.  It ended up as 2 and 1 bunkers, with grass hollows below in the shaped cavities.

Even then, one visitor said the second bunker on the right was "totally unnecessary."  Well, it isn't quite in play, and is elevated well above the fairway, so it does sort of guide you on the tee, so necessary is in the eye of the beholder.  If that guy was designing a golf course, he would have one bunker left and one bunker right on all 18 holes apparently. 

He also critiqued a long, angled ridge in front of another green.  Well, that's different, why is that there?  Um, because it is different?

I guess the relevant post to the OP is that I have long felt the need for variety of bunker types and sizes (including replacing many traditional bunker locations with some other hazard)  You know, pots, clusters, big bunkers, cape and bay, etc.  In general, I think we all tend to do the same thing over and over artistically (and even strategically) speaking unless we work hard to overcome that very human tendency to go with the "standard".

[BCowan]

I'd love to see Art Hills renovate the bunkers at Augusta or Pine Valley and see how this thread does

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()