The Art Of The Bunker--A Case Study #2

[Tommy_Naccarato]

OK, On to the next bunker.....


Once again, if you know this course or paticular hole, please refrain from letting everyone else know.

[Anthony_Nysse]

It appears to be a Ron Garl or Rees Jones style bunker, is it a picture from Wodden Sticks in Canada or Black Lake in MI?

[A_Clay_Man]

Once again it seems like an unatural feature and overkill with the tounges!  and the humps will cause what? rejection deflection frustration. It looks like a parkland course and those high maintence edges look expensive.

[Doug Wright]

Tommy,

I kinda like the tongues and the irregular shape. It looks like one could get a variety of lies in this bunker, and I don't think that is a bad thing... Also the depth below the greensite appeals to me. Those are my initial reactions, I could be wrong...

[Doug Wright]

PS I like #2 much more than #1; and Adam if those humps will cause rejection/deflection/frustration all the better IMO.   :)I'll give it a 6.

Happy Holidays,

[Craig Disher]

If that's sand flashed up into the shadow, it looks very contrived and artificial. I like the difference in elevation between the green and the bunker but would prefer to see the turf pulled down to the bunker bottom.  The 2 or 3 tongues of grass also look contrived to me. They're too perfect.

What happens after a hard rain? Doesn't the flashed sand wash down to the bottom?

The edges away from the green are more to my liking. Overall, a 4, maybe 5.

[TEPaul]

It's hard to say Your Honor; would you consider a recess? Even before you do I must say I'm considering pleading the fifth.

[GeoffreyC]

Tommy

I like this bunker quite a bit.  Based of the bunker rake, I would guess that this one is a good 4-5 feet below the surface of the green. It will take a well played shot to have a chance for an up and down.

Unlike the dreadful first example you showed, a wild shot here could likely miss the bunker and roll beyond.  This would leave a testy recovery over the bunker.  This is the essence of Mike Cirba's convex golf hole.  The bunker fits into the land and melds with the surroundings. The first example showed a concave bunker feature where a wild shot wide might actually hit the raised part of the bunker and fall back towards the green into an easy recovery situation from the shallow bunker.

I'll give it a 7

[A_Clay_Man]

I have to eat my words.. no problem. I just returned from a little road trip to a part of the county I haven't been in yet. And when we got to the most rural spot there was a canyon and on the edge of the canyon were formations very similar to the ridges seen here. The way the tounges tapered in nature was slightly different from these but close enough.

I rate this bunker higher than the first, I give it a 4. I do like the depth but not the severe slope which again without enough sand everything will roll back.

[Mike_Cirba]

Now we're starting to get there.  As others have mentioned, the depth and convex design are impressive, as is the way it works from the highest point near the green to the back edge along the flow of the land.  

The sand flashing is something I like, although the regularity of the cape/bay formations is a bit much.  

Actually, what I'd really like to see is that back right portion of this bunker extended another 5-6 yards towards the green, similar in style to many Tillinghast bunkers.  Personally, I think sand-flashed bunkers look best when they are cut almost right into the vitals of the green.

This one looks like it wanted to do that, but backed off cautiously at the last minute.  

I think we're certainly in the "6" range here, mostly due to the natural flow from high to low points.  

[Bill Wright]

Tommy - you're great, but...

This is like looking at a photo of half of one breast (or one cheek!), giving it a grade, and then hoping she's a knockout.

I CAN'T GET TOO EXCITED ABOUT IT!

[Mike_Cirba]

Bill Wright,

Love your commentary.  Hope you keep up the contributions!

Tommy,

Ok...perhaps it's late, or perhaps the Samuel Adams Winter Lager is taking it's toll, or perhaps it's a flashback from the 70s, but the more I look at that bunker the more I like it.

This is probably getting much too esoteric, but it's starting to remind me of a candle burning down, and oozing out on the front left some type of molten lava, which probably caused the initial erosion on the greenside slope.  If left unchecked, it will probably continue rolling along on a path of destruction, causing fires of vegatation in its path, until it cools, hardens, and perhaps spills dying into little rivulets of sand that extinguish themselves on the dewy grass.

And Rich Goodale says this isn't art.    

I think BarnyF would enjoy the subtlety of the natural flow, perhaps finding some analogy in either Irish Poetry or the understated lyrics of Barry Manilow.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Better, but still not great. Seems more like characature of some of the great bunkers. Its little more complex than the #1 which was irregular bunker outline in a simple bowl. It looks like it is either a rebuild of an older bunker or newer bunker that is attempting emulate the past. Too clean, far too many soft curves and the tongues are too regular/similar and with rolled convex appearance - a puffy appolstered unnatural look. The best bunkers of this type normally have a more angular quality in combination with curves and a more complex irregular landscape/surrounds.

[Doug Wright]

Tom McW, if this is a newer bunker trying to emulate the past that's much better than a newer bunker NOT trying to emulate the past...   Anyway, it's not too symmetrical for me, and the depth and apparent integration with the greensite seem to work for me.

PS I agree in principle with some other comments that it's difficult to evaluate these bunkers in a vacuum, and I'm not saying we need to know who or where these come from. However, I'm willing to do the freeform existentialist Miles Davis interpretation.

Happy Holidays,  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I admit, it is hard to look at something and try to give it a grade without seeing the full picture. But from some of the thoughts and commentary that you all are listing, it is exactly the point of topic.

Please also realize that this is all being done in an attempt NOT to be partial to any architect. If you doubt that, then I can only suggest to simply not particpate.

One of the main points is that we all have different ways of seeing things. Whose to say what I'm looking at is what you or he is looking at? I have been taught this by a very high authority, and it was a great lesson.  It was described in a sense of each persons vision being like that of a camera lense. It's up to you to learn how to focus that lense to capture what you see to the most accurate of your ability. To take that picture!

I'm hoping to pass it on to all of you who are either particpating or reading throughly, each and every view of the bunkers shown.

Look in-depth at each bunker and describe what you are seeing. Do you fel that you have come across things like this before. Heck, I don't even mind the guesses as to who may have designed and built these bunkers, as long as you are understnding the style that lies with-in and how it is a sort of finger print of the person responsible for it's creation.

Keep the stuff coming guys, because it is really good and hopefully many are learning the same as I have!

[GeoffreyC]

Mike- If this is a restoration on an older course then I suspect that the far side of the bunker WAS closer to the green.  I suspect that it could be that the green originally extended further toward the bunker creating a nicer back left pin location.

[Mike_Cirba]

Geoffrey,

Great Point.  Here I'm focusing on the bunker being extended, while it's more likely that the green should have been!  Or, perhaps once was!

The landform would indicate that you are probably correct.

[RJ_Daley]

Is this the newly remodeled green at the Riv that you and I saw where Thomas's bunker style is attempted to be emulated, but the remodeller winds up with the upholstered look in the fingers on the high greenside, and looses the idea of the high green side bays following a natural green side contour, and the lip-edge is now too far from the green putting surface - probably in defference to maintenance.  The outside edge on the low side away from the green is not bad, but it doesn't reach up into the fingers on the greenside correctly, if this is what you have shown us...

All that said and speculated, I would give the bunker a 7 on its own merits, but if it is a restore job of what I am saying, a 3.

[A Clay Man]

The area between the green and the bunker that may be a maintenance issue, as Dick points out, seems to have really become the norm in a standardization way.

I actually think the ridged tounges look like dolphins swimming, but can certainly see how teeth come to mind.

[A Clay Man]

I like the guessing part so I'd guess the new stuff at Torrey.

[Mike_Cirba]

Although I do like "the cascading flow" that I described above, one thing that I don't care for is the symmetry and very extreme, well-turfed definition that others have pointed out.  The bunker itself flows well with the surrounding landform, but I'd rather see it also much more irregularly integrated into the surrounding turf.  

I tend to love the ones where it's hard to tell where the bunker ends and the grass begins, although I'm sure it's against some USGA spec somewhere.  

[Jeff_McDowell]

I like this one less than the first. I think it is because of the symmetry of the capes. I also don't like how far the sand cuts into the capes. To me it appears as if the capes are floating above the sand, while it would be more attractive if the capes and bays seemed connected or integrated.

I do like how the flatish front section transitions into the side of the green. I also like the depth of the bunker.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy,

Is this the section where we evaluate an actresses looks, but never get to see or evaluate her personality and character ?  

The critical elements are the tactical worth of the bunker, and it's playability, evaluating the look is more closely related to one's preference in style isn't it ?

[ian andrew (Guest)]

Tom, please put the next picture in context. From the centre of the landing area and of the entire green. With good photography you can make an average bunker look good from an irregular angle, lets judge them from where their were designed to be viewed.

I love this idea, I'm just struggling with the angle.

Bill Wright, I haven't laughed that much in a long time; great comment!

[paul albanese]

great topic Tommy -- and I enjoy reading everyones different opinions.

I tend to agree that it is difficult to fully evaluate given only a photo -- but, that said, I still think this is a great exercise and helps one understand certain and specific forms are more or less appealing.