[Mark_Rowlinson]

Have you ever designed a course without sand bunkers? Under what circumstances might you consider doing so? Royal Ashdown Forest and Berkhamsted are pretty good golf courses without sand bunkers. Are there any courses which might be improved by the removal of their sand bunkers?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Have you ever designed a course without sand bunkers? Under what circumstances might you consider doing so?

Under circumstances where there is great topo and good soil...

If those two aren't in your favour, it's going to be mighty hard... It would probably be a toss-up between what you might save in maintenance costs against the increased cost of the construction to manufacture something interestiung in the first place...

[Adrian_Stiff]

Have you ever designed a course without sand bunkers? Under what circumstances might you consider doing so? Royal Ashdown Forest and Berkhamsted are pretty good golf courses without sand bunkers. Are there any courses which might be improved by the removal of their sand bunkers?

Mark- On a course where perhaps it needs to run on a tight budget, bunkers are quite costly to maintain and the bits around them. I have just finished a course and we ony have 20 or so and there are probaby 6 without any.

[Tom_Doak]

Have you ever designed a course without sand bunkers? Under what circumstances might you consider doing so?

Under circumstances where there is great topo and good soil...

If those two aren't in your favour, it's going to be mighty hard... It would probably be a toss-up between what you might save in maintenance costs against the increased cost of the construction to manufacture something interestiung in the first place...

I agree with Ally's take, but the best undulating and sandy ground is also the easiest and least expensive place to build cool bunkers!

I would only do it if it was a restriction of the property, as at Ashdown Forest, or if a client really, really wanted to take a stand.  But, I would advise such client that a course with zero bunkers would probably not be as popular with the public or in the rankings.  Having relatively few bunkers makes sense to me, but I can't imagine a property so good that you would find 18 holes where you didn't think a bunker would add to one of them. 

[Trey Stiles]

I own a course with no bunkers ... It's a January / Martindale special , vintage 1972 in East Texas ... My guess is that the plan was to go back later and put in the bunkers.

I've been planning to start the bunkering process for about 15 yrs , but the deal only works with very low expenses ... It's a small market , golfer demands are not that high an no matter what I do , it's never going to be the best course in the market ( Crown Colony ) ... I'm not sure I could charge more and theirs no question that the cost go up significantly.

For me , it was a question of making a profit , or not making a profit.

[Neil_Crafter]

Mark
we have just done a course without bunkers - admittedly its a par 3 course of only nine holes - its the new par 3 course at Barwon Heads GC in Victoria. It was fun designing it knowing that there would be no bunkers and contouring is our main hazard. The course is turfed in couchgrass (bermuda) including the greens and they putt a bit slower than the bent/poa greens on the main course, so we were able to put some much wilder contouring into the little greens. Here's a pic

[Karl Bernetich]

Robert Trent Jones Golf Trail at Hampton Cove
Huntsville, Alabama • 36 Championship Holes • 18 Hole Short Course
At the northern terminus of the Trail in Huntsville is Hampton Cove, a 54-hole facility with terrain that drastically changes from one side of the property to the other.

River Course, the only Robert Trent Jones layout without a single bunker. 

It was a long while ago, but as I recall it was a pretty nice track for a place to play while traveling on business.

[David_Madison]

I played the River Course at Hampton Cove a number of years ago as well. Having no sand bunkers really didn't jump out at all on any of the holes. The terrain, surrounding trees, and general low-lying feel of the course was totally natural, and the lack of sand didn't look or seem weird at all.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Jim Engh recently did:

http://www.fourmileranch.com/golf-course.php

[Sean_A]

Have you ever designed a course without sand bunkers? Under what circumstances might you consider doing so?

Under circumstances where there is great topo and good soil...

If those two aren't in your favour, it's going to be mighty hard... It would probably be a toss-up between what you might save in maintenance costs against the increased cost of the construction to manufacture something interestiung in the first place...

I agree with Ally's take, but the best undulating and sandy ground is also the easiest and least expensive place to build cool bunkers!

I would only do it if it was a restriction of the property, as at Ashdown Forest, or if a client really, really wanted to take a stand.  But, I would advise such client that a course with zero bunkers would probably not be as popular with the public or in the rankings.  Having relatively few bunkers makes sense to me, but I can't imagine a property so good that you would find 18 holes where you didn't think a bunker would add to one of them. 

I agree with Tom.  It is difficult to imagine some bunkers not being able to grace any course.  The problem is just as you intimated.  On cool land, some archies just can't help themselves!  On not so cool land, some archies just don't have the imagination to do something other than bunkers.  This is why Wolf Point looked so enticing to me - Nuzzo is trying all sorts of stuff to create interest.  I for one hope this route gets much more explored.  I think most golfers are ready for a change-up even if they never voice this opinion.

Ciao

[Andrew Summerell]

I’m not sure there would be many sites that were better with no bunkers, but I’ve played many courses that would be better with less bunkers. Often a lot less!

I often feel the need to bunker green complexes & design the contouring to fit the bunkers, takes the subtlety away.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

Letterkenny is an 18 hole parkland course in Donegal and it didn't have bunkers. This was mainly because it was constantly water-logged most of the winter.

Dónal.

[TEPaul]

Neil Crafter:

In my opinion, if more courses could be made that had the look of that hole you posted above I think it would be a truly positive thing for golf and golf architecture and its future, particularly if natural sand was not/is not part of the over-all enviroment. To me that hole (and a whole course of it) just looks so much more natural in that particular setting and environment. Put a bunch of sand bunkers on holes like that one and to me it sort of begins to look superfluous and naturally incongruous.

But we do have to remember that most golfers think sand bunkers are just a required part of golf and golf course architecture; and I think it's pretty true to say that most all architects are addicted to them for artistic and strategic reasons, as well as reasons to do with marketing and popularity.

As Max Behr said, sand bunkers are essentially that odd vestige of golf course architecture from the original sandy linksland sites that just hung onto golf and architecture all over the world where most sites don't have any natural sand or sandy soil at all.

[Yannick Pilon]

Great comment Tom,

I cannot agree more!

Neil,

Would you be able to post more pictures of this course. It looks fabulous!

Thanks.

YP

[TEPaul]

"Royal Ashdown Forest and Berkhamsted are pretty good golf courses without sand bunkers."


MarkR:

When one thinks about a good course without sand bunkers it seems like Royal Ashdown Forest always comes up. I think I recall that course can't have any sand bunkers because of some royal decree or something like that. You are so good on the histories of so many of those clubs over there, would you have any idea when that royal decree on Royal Ashdown Forest got handed down or why?

The reason I mention it is Wayne Morrison just sent me some photos of Royal Ashdown Forest that were in a 1901 British Golf Illustrated magazine and the course sure did have some sand bunkers at that time and frankly some pretty cool looking rough and scraggly sand bunkers at that.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Painswick is another without a single sand bunker. I cant really think of anywhere where sand would make a hole better there. It does not have the natural sandy topo, but its nice and rugged and drains well.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I toured a course yesterday that was designed to be a very good course, and had very few bunkers around the green sites, utilizing a variety of grass hazards instead on more than half the holes.  I didn't like it nearly as much as a I thought I would, and did miss the hole definition the bunkers would have given.

I will also say that many of my courses have done "favorite hole" surveys after opening.  Invariably, the holes with the best bunkering come out as favorites, even among those with fewer bunkers, but a better natural setting.

So, while interesting as a theoretical proposition of golf course architectural theory, I think if the design theory is to keep the customer satisfied (cue Paul Simon music) then a bunkerless course is not the ticket.

I blame MacKenzie!  He took the theory of bunkering from using natural sand pits to the theory of drop dead gorgeous man made abstractions, and 80 years later, we still can't think of golf courses looking much different.

[BCrosby]

I blame MacKenzie!  He took the theory of bunkering from using natural sand pits to the theory of drop dead gorgeous man made abstractions, and 80 years later, we still can't think of golf courses looking much different.

I think that's right. I might even put it a bit more strongly. After 80 or so years the look of those MacK/Thomas GA bunkers are still the standard against which modern bunker aesthetics are measured.

It's also remarkable how rapidly the look of inland bunkers evolved from about 1900 to 1925. And, as remarkably, the evolution stopped.   

The only minor novelty I can think of are the C&C bunkers at Cuscowilla where they built bunkers to look like they are native to the red clay soil on which the course is built.

Bob 

[Garland Bayley]

Mark,

Pete Dye's mentor, Bill Diddel, went through a period trying to design courses without sand bunkers, sometimes called gravity golf.
Here's a link to a thread that references at least another thread and a website dedicated to Bill.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,34005.0/

[Sean_A]

I blame MacKenzie!  He took the theory of bunkering from using natural sand pits to the theory of drop dead gorgeous man made abstractions, and 80 years later, we still can't think of golf courses looking much different.

I think that's right. I might even put it a bit more strongly. After 80 or so years the look of those MacK/Thomas GA bunkers are still the standard against which modern bunker aesthetics are measured.

It's also remarkable how rapidly the look of inland bunkers evolved from about 1900 to 1925. And, as remarkably, the evolution stopped.  

The only minor novelty I can think of are the C&C bunkers at Cuscowilla where they built bunkers to look like they are native to the red clay soil on which the course is built.

Bob  

Bob

Is this really the case?  Some might argue that Colt was the first one to really build bunkers that could match the aesthetics of seaside bunkers.  I must say, after seeing early Dr Mac bunkering, I would have to give some weight to this.  Like Park Jr, Dr Mac was prone to building mounds to house sand.  Look at some of his work for Troon Portland, Moortown & Alwoodley.  Then compare them to Colt bunkers.  I believe Dr Mac and all the early archies learned one heck of a lot from Colt as he set the bar for creating natural aesthetic.  

From a different perspective, I would also point out the creativeness of pots.  Not only do they tend to "tuck in", but the best are also effectively far larger than their actual size.  Who first thought of them I don't know - but what a creation.  

From an even different perspective, it would be interesting to know who originally thought of the rolled over look.  I am particularly fond of this style for parkland courses because the headline of sand is eliminated or vastly reduced - something which I believe blends much better than sand faces.

Jeff

What do you mean by definition around the greens?  Is this a way to avoid the word framing or do you not believe greens can be well defined without sand?  Do greens need to be well defined?  I know many, including Dr Mac, were against blind seconds or even when the surface of the green can't be seen, but the flag can -  I spose that rules out skyline greens.

As an example, below are some greens.  Let me know what you mean by definition using these.













Ciao

[TEPaul]

"It's also remarkable how rapidly the look of inland bunkers evolved from about 1900 to 1925. And, as remarkably, the evolution stopped."

Bob:

I suspect that might have something to do with the fact that maintaining (or holding) that original look of Mackenzie bunkering (CPC is probably the most appropriate example) was a lot more difficult than anyone at first realized, probably including Mackenzie too.

[BCrosby]

Sean -

No doubt Colt (and others) showed the way early on. My point is about aesthetics. Bunker style evolved to become ever more contoured, complex and artistic. So that by the early/mid 20's you were getting the MacK/Thomas and others building jaw-dropping, drop dead gorgeous bunkers. There were plenty of beautiful bunkers built before then, but the refinement of the art reached a peak at about that time.  

My point (and I think Jeff's) is that there was an evolution in bunker aesthetics that hit a high point in the mid-20's. The related point is that those bunkers are still the models for dramatic, eye-popping bunkers. Which, 80 years later and after hundreds of architects built thousands of new courses, I think is a curious fact.

Bob

[BCrosby]

"It's also remarkable how rapidly the look of inland bunkers evolved from about 1900 to 1925. And, as remarkably, the evolution stopped."

Bob:

I suspect that might have something to do with the fact that maintaining (or holding) that original look of Mackenzie bunkering (CPC is probably the most appropriate example) was a lot more difficult than anyone at first realized, probably including Mackenzie too.

No doubt. In fact one of RTJ's biggest selling points was that his modern bunkers would be cheaper to build and maintain than the frilly stuff from the GA. You could argue that not until relatively recently did gca get past the RTJ engineered look and dare to do bunkers that harkened back to the GA frillyness (sp?).

Bob

[Neil_Crafter]

TE and Yannick
Thanks for the comments. Most of the work is by partner Paul Mogford who runs our Melbourne office, but I managed to stick my nose in here and there and the 8th, our little Dell hole homage, was one I identified. The two hills that the green is sited between were already there and I just decided we should plonk the green between them. The tee is almost immediately above the flag in that photo from behind the green. It is a fun little hole.

Hole 1


Hole 1 also


Hole 4


Hole 6 green looking across to 4 beyond


Also Hole 6 green


Hole 7 our Dell hole

[Jeff_Brauer]

What do you mean by definition around the greens?  Is this a way to avoid the word framing?

Definition, framing - same concept.

Do you not believe greens can be well defined without sand?

They can be defined without sand, using steep banks, and other features. 
Do greens need to be well defined? 

Yes, I think so. I have read comments otherwise on this site for 8 years now, tried to convince myself otherwise, looked at the favorite courses out there which are mostly very well defined with the ultimate target/green very obvious and attractive, and with all due respect, and in consultation with many golfers, have determined that those who think we ought to hide or disguise the green have just missed the boat.

I know many, including Dr Mac, were against blind seconds or even when the surface of the green can't be seen, but the flag can -  I spose that rules out skyline greens.

Mac wrote that blind approach shots were not great and he tried to avoid them. I suspect he couldn't avoid them all or didn't see the final construction. I would also like a % of original Mac Green that are not well defined.  While there are some, I doubt that 5-10% of them aren't and I don't think those abberations reflect Macs ideas as well as his best greens, which are, BTW, very well defined.
 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()