It's All Mackenzie's Fault

[Mike Hendren]

Jagged / frilley-edged bunkers everywhere one looks.  Up in the mountains, down by the water, heads Carolina, tails California.

Your thoughts?

Bogey

[PCCraig]

I think it's all good just so long as it's consistent throughout the entire course. Nothing worse than one hole with two or three types of bunkers.

Also, I think modern GCA's are using too many bunkers. Many times to "frame" the hole.

[Garland Bayley]

Bogey,

When I walk in a bank, I will expect clean geometric elements.
When I walk in nature, I will expect ragged, random elements.

Blame it on the creator!

[David Stamm]

Bogey,

When I walk in a bank, I will expect clean geometric elements.
When I walk in nature, I will expect ragged, random elements.

Blame it on the creator!

Well said, Garland. And let's not forget, MacK was not the first to use the style that's being described.

[Brian_Ewen]

Yes , but isnt it all a marketing exercise nowadays ?

[Jason Topp]

I agree that too many courses force this look.  If I were building a course I would try and do something different unless the location just cried out for rough edged bunkers.

[David_Elvins]

Jagged / frilley-edged bunkers everywhere one looks.  Up in the mountains, down by the water, heads Carolina, tails California.

Your thoughts?

Bogey

I blame the economy.  They only get built when people have a lot of money to build them.  I don't think you will see a frilly edged bunker built in the next 20 years.

[Phil McDade]

Jagged / frilley-edged bunkers everywhere one looks.  Up in the mountains, down by the water, heads Carolina, tails California.

Your thoughts?

Bogey

Michael:

I've seen the trend, as well, which was what made my visits to Milwaukee CC last fall for the US Mid Am so refreshing; I think you could cut something on these....

[Peter Pallotta]

Bogey -

I figure it's just like poetry. No matter how great a poem is or how praiseworthy, there's always an inherent and inevitable downside, i.e. the spawning of at least a thousand cut-rate and cringe-worthy imitations, by novice (or cynical) imitators in dorm-rooms all across the country.  I wrote more than of few of them myself, in the old days - less poems they were than puddles of spilled sensibilities.

pierre giuseppe   

[Joel_Stewart]

The problem as I see it is too many architects are using them poorly.  Gene Bates used them at Black Horse in Monterey and they are terrible.

[Ian Larson]

"I blame the economy.  They only get built when people have a lot of money to build them.  I don't think you will see a frilly edged bunker built in the next 20 years."


...here we go again. The misconception that the "frilly edged" bunkers cost more. If so then by how much? Theyre certainly not more to maintain. Those bunkers above from Milwaukee are awful. Those are the result of mismanaged maintenance over the years with edgers and weed whackers.
Its obvious they had a ton more movement and noses at one point. To keep any kind of bunker with sharp lips like those consists of a TON of man hours equating to a TON of MONEY.

The design should dictate maintenance, maintenance shouldnt dictate design.

I feel just the opposite in that I think we will see even more and more organically shaped bunkers that are maintained less and kept more naturally. Its not just an en-vogue fad. This is how bunkers naturally occur since the game began. Its how bunkers looked when the ODG's incorporated them into modern golf. Its not a fad its a revival which we should all appreciate. And you will once you realize that all the plain jane "saucers" are just mis-managed and over-edged "frilly" bunkers from years ago.

A good superintendent with brand new "frilly" edged bunkers will communicate and manage his crew closely when it comes to maintaining those organic shapes.

And yes, Allister McK was not the first to do it.

[Ben Sims]

Has anybody seen the worst of he worst?  Geometric bunkering and green shapes (a la Raynor and Travis) with scraggly and frilly edges?

I can't remember seeing this combo...

[Tom_Doak]

Ben:

The worst combination I've ever seen was at The Camargo Club.  Bob Von Hagge renovated the bunkers of a Raynor course back in 1963 to look all jagged and wavy-edged, up against rectangular greens.  Worse still, when they started restoring the bunkers back to their original form, they would do "problem drainage" bunkers first, so on one hole you'd have a wavy bunker left and a squared-off bunker right!  Thankfully it's all put back together now.

The squared-off tees in the foreground of Joel's picture of jagged bunkers at Fort Ord are an odd combination to me, too.  But Bill and Ben get away with the same thing ...

As for Mike's original post, I don't think it can all be blamed on MacKenzie.  Billy Bell is just as responsible in California, and several modern architects are responsible for re-starting the trend after it had been obliterated in 1950's and 60's design.

[Ben Sims]

Thanks for the info Mr. Doak.

Your comment Billy Bell's work in Cali reminded me of the fairway bunker on 10 at Augusta. Is that a Fazio? What is it doing there?  It might be my least favorite bunker in golf.

[Charlie Goerges]

Thanks for the info Mr. Doak.

Your comment Billy Bell's work in Cali reminded me of the fairway bunker on 10 at Augusta. Is that a Fazio? What is it doing there?  It might be my least favorite bunker in golf.

 

You're a bad, bad man Ben Sims  . I've heard that might be the last surviving Mackenzie bunker.

[Ben Sims]

Is that really a Mackenzie bunker? I wasn't aware.

All kidding aside, if Augusta is going to keep redoing itself for technology and "shot values", then why is a bunker that gets no play (and I mean no play) still there as a visual "sweetener" to a hole that needs no sweetener.  Where were all the people concerned for the Good Doctor's work when number 7 was being torn apart?

To tie that into this thread.  How many bunkers have you all seen in the image of that particular bunker that are needless?

Soapbox...over. 

[Charlie Goerges]

I want them to leave the bunker so that when they someday restore the original tenth green and make it a drivable par 4 it will have some connection to the past. And then I'm going to buy a lottery ticket.

I'll bet it gets occasional member and guest play. And that's got to be one hell of a tough shot.

[Ben Sims]

I was a kid in Atlanta when Billy Payne was head of the Atlanta Olympic Committee.  If what my parents said about Billy Payne was true in 1995-96, then I'm betting that he won't restore one iota of the original layout to Augusta. 

As for the occasional member and guest play.  You win, it probably does.  And it's probably a hell of a tough shot.  Damn, I've hijacked the original thread.  Somebody come quick and get us back on topic.

[Tom_Doak]

I was embarrassingly close to being in that bunker at Augusta the first time I played there, after half-shanking a second shot from the severe side-slope of #10 fairway.  I can assure you it does get some play.  (Also, Tom Weiskopf told me he drove into it once, back in the early 1970's.)

Back to the real thread ... I honestly think the constant discussion of bunker styling here is almost as off-topic as the political rants you hate, Ben.  Bunker style gets way too much attention ... bunker positioning, not enough.

[Ben Sims]

Mr. Doak,

Copy all. 

By the way. Nice positioning of the deep bunker left of the 14 green at Pacific. My ass was up against it's back wall and I had no shot to the green.  Now that was just plain mean. Kidding, I deserved it.

As for bunker positioning.  What courses stand out in your mind as being sparse in numbers but huge in effect?  Even if they aren't frilly.

[Tom_Doak]

Ben:

That bunker you were in at Pacific Dunes is about three feet deeper than when we built it, and that much more concave because it's so small.  The wind just eats it alive.

A very good question about courses with few but effective bunkers ... good enough that you should probably start a separate thread, and good enough that I can't come back with a quick answer, I'll have to think through it a bit.  Generally, though, it is hard to make a course interesting with only a few bunkers -- to do so, I think you have to have a really good set of greens, too, to defend the holes from the angles where the bunkers don't.

[Ben Sims]

Mr. Doak,

I'll be sure to post a new thread about it over the next few days so that you may reply.  But I think the answer is one small variable to the other thread I started about less expensive, but still strategic and interesting golf courses.  In my feeble architectural mind, it would seem less expensive to build a course with less bunkers to mitigate costs of excavation, hand cutting edges, etc.  But then again, the more undulated and contoured green surfaces and surrounding areas to still be well defended might make up for that cost savings.

But this is hijacking again, I'll either add it to my small firm architecture post or start a new one.  I'll be looking forward to your answer.

[Adam Clayman]

Billy Bell might get a mention if one were to see the old photos hanging throughout Riviera.

[Tom_Doak]

Ben:

Your post underlines the assumption of this thread, but an assumption I don't necessarily agree with -- that bunkers are necessarily expensive to build and to maintain.

In Scotland, they spend a lot of money and crew hours rebuilding those revetted faces, but during the playing season they send one man around the course in the morning, walking, and carrying a rake to take care of them.  I guess that costs $30,000 a year more than having no bunkers, or about $1 per round.  Are bunkers worth $1 per round?

Also, at least on sandy sites, building bunkers doesn't cost very much at all.  It certainly costs less to leave the sand than to irrigate and fertilize and mow the same area, so the only question is how much you are paying to shape all those bunkers.  It can certainly be quite expensive to get a contractor to rebuild them on an existing course and try to follow old photos of what they looked like with any measure of accuracy ... the cost might be $5000 or $7500 per bunker in that case.  But to create them to begin with is mostly shaping work, and the entire shaping budget for a course might be $300,000, of which maybe a third (and no more than half) would be assigned to bunker creation ... so are bunkers worth an extra $100,000 out of a $2 million or $5 million construction budget?

[Ben Sims]

Mr. Doak,

That is why I posted a hypothesis. To get info from someone who knows more than I do.  Thanks for putting numbers and experience onto my theory.  Once you talk about millions of dollars and add a $100,000 cherry on top; well that's not so bad for adding strategic interest.  But like your essay about 44 decisions on a Friday--where you widened a fairway that added a few thousand dollars worth of extra sprinkler heads at Rock Creek--small sums of money add up.  Just a thought.  But your argument is logical about the total cost of upkeep.  Whether it be frilly or clean shaped bunkers.

As Grant Rogers says "I think the key to being a good sand player is looking forward to your sand shots."  Obviously I should look forward to bunkers even more!