[Jim Johnson]

In my three books covering the Augusta National Golf Club...Stan Byrdy's "The Augusta National Golf Club", David Owen's "The Making of the Masters", and Frank Christian's "Augusta National & The Masters"...all great books by the way...it is obvious that Augusta National has changed its bunkering style over the years.

What's interesting to me is that they have evolved from (originally) a scraggly, irregular edged look, to a formal, smooth edge look. And considering the budget that the course must have to work with, given the wealth of the membership, I would have thought that the opposite evolvement may have taken place.

Any idea as to about what year(s) the changes took place, and why?

JJ

[Adam Clayman]

Can't help on the exact year, but, there was a rerun of '78 Masters and the bunkers still had somewhat of a rough shape/edge to them. I wouldn't confuse them then, for the craggy shapes like that of say,,, Billy Bell's at Riviera, but it was noticeably less manicured than todays ANGC.

[Joel_Stewart]

It has evolved but the only rough edge bunker left is obviously the Mackenzie bunker on #10.   For some crazy reason, they keep that bunker as somewhat of a reminder.

The current bunkers are now a style in themselves.  I played a course last year that built their bunkers to look like Augusta.   

[Jeff_Mingay]

To my eye, the look of Augusta National's bunkers these days are representative of years and years of edging.

[Bradley Anderson]

When did the changes in bunker style take place at Augusta? And why" That is a very interesting question. But I think the current style does fit very well with the contours of the golf course.

I sometimes think that the edged bunker style evolved out the use of creeping grasses on the turf surrounds. The warm season grasses must be fairly aggressive at creeping in to the sand on bunkers, and probably need to be edged at least 6 times a year, or so I would guess.

I think where the lacy edged bunkers have held up best over time, are on the golf courses where fescue grows well as a bunker turf. Fescue has some creeping tendency, but not nearly as aggressive as most other grasses. And when do edge a fescue turfed bunker you can be more creative in what is ripped away, and what is left.

[Willie_Dow]

What has happened to eliminate the creative element in bunkering ?

Eg. a flat downhill approach to a downhill slope ?  Or a challenging long approach to a green from a restricted but acceptable lie ?

An elevated bunker, like Tom Paul wanted at Gulph Mills, which gathers h2o otherwise ?

A horseshoe, like Richie Valentine put on the left side of #9, because it woundn't drain ?

Everything shouldn't be the same, bunkerwise !

[Joel_Stewart]

Perhaps the 12th is a bad example because there is not much change. 

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

What golf courses haven't changed their style and maintainance practices in the last 74 years ?

[Joel_Stewart]

What golf courses haven't changed their style and maintainance practices in the last 74 years ?

None, but ANGC has taken it to an extreme.  It is voted the best conditioned course in the US by Golf Digest.

Furthermore, there are no Mackenzie courses other than ANGC which have abandoned their rough edge bunker look in favor of this razor sharp edge look.

Pat:  Can you explain why they leave the bunker in the 10th hole with the irregular shape and all others with the modern look?

[Jim Johnson]

I would have thought, obviously mistakenly, that with the wealth of the membership and the huge maintenance budget that they have to work with each and every year, that they would have kept the high-maintenance look of the ragged edged bunkers, which I would think would require more hand-raking and more fly-mowing, and not evolved into the smooth manicured look of the oval bunkers that are prevalent in later years. Not that those are "low-maintenance", but I would think that maintenance costs would be higher in keeping with the ragged edged look.

JJ

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

I would have thought, obviously mistakenly, that with the wealth of the membership and the huge maintenance budget that they have to work with each and every year, that they would have kept the high-maintenance look of the ragged edged bunkers, which I would think would require more hand-raking and more fly-mowing, and not evolved into the smooth manicured look of the oval bunkers that are prevalent in later years.

Financial considerations are not the driving factor.

IF ANGC wanted to have a ragged edged bunkers ..... they'd have them.

Obviously, the choice was made to go with another look.

ANGC is not alone, many other older courses have done the same thing.

Baltusrol used to have, and may still have, a great picture of the 4th hole, with ragged edged bunkers and tall grass behind the green.  I believe it's circa 1967, and I believe Trevino or Player may be in the picture.

That's all gone now, and I'd suspect it's gone .... intentionally.

Another point that many lose, is, that it's difficult to achieve certain conditons when you pay minimum wage, or other than substantial wages to  daily field workers who are charged with course upkeep and maintainance.[/color]

Not that those are "low-maintenance", but I would think that maintenance costs would be higher in keeping with the ragged edged look.

Cost is not the issue.[/color]

[Wade Whitehead]

What golf courses haven't changed their style and maintainance practices in the last 74 years ?

Pat:  Can you explain why they leave the bunker in the 10th hole with the irregular shape and all others with the modern look?

They do seem to enjoy pointing out that the bunker on the tenth is the "original" bunker in the "original" position.

WW

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()