[Neil White]

All,

With regards to their evolution in design and maintenance?

There was the sand blowout formed by animals and the elements and we seem to have found our way back there again with a plethora of alternatives in between...........?  All in a very short period of time ~125 - 150 years.

If not, how can bunkers be evolved further?

Neil.

 

[RJ_Daley]

It seems to me that bunkers are limited in their style, shape, size and slope by weather, native soil from which they are scooped, turf species that make up their surrounds, and budget of the facility. 

I still wish we would see more of the approach that we observe the Aussies present on their bunker styling, where the weather, soil and turf would allow such in the U.S.  Some of the sand hill courses come close.  There are a few courses that mimic the greenside bunkers that have the green mowing or collar cut right up to the fall-in straight bunker edges.  However, this risks crumbling edges, further eating into bowel of greens. 

Of course one could get into the merits of that whole Merion, 'upholstered' look, or the tongues and green waves of Riviera.  It simply is beyond most courses maintenance budgets to mimic those.

To what sort of style, construction, or maintenance regime, would you like to see them evolve?  Personally, I just like to see them draining well, holding reasonably consistent sand, and placed with some rationale that actually makes a strategic difference.  The overly bunkered course that seems to be more an eye candy theme is not my idea of a good way to build and present a decent golf course, particularly in parkland settings.

What do you think of the long FW adjoining bunkers of the P Dye, Bobby Weed style that run a hundred or more yards long, with steps every 30-50 yards to walk down into them?  I think it is a monumental waste of construction cost, and maintenance upkeep.  Or, do you like a diagonal, FW crossing bunker separating a very different challenge to set up approaches to a particular green?  I like that.  What about bunkers that create a sand island green on a short par 3 - Mac-Raynor style?  I like that too, but have also seen them segmented with turf for access and exit, which is OK and functional.  How about scabs and clusters at a dogleg?  Do you like scoops and flashed up, or flatish with grass mounds?  And, those that you like as they are; what do you think they could possibly 'evolve' to? 

[Bradley Anderson]

Neil,

In my opinion the white sand that comes out of the pits in Ohio is a further step in the evolution of bunkers. It really isn't even sand in the technical sense - it is a rock material that is chipped into smaller size faction. It doesn't play anything at all like mortar sand which was used universally until about 10 years ago. And it accumulates around the edges of greens much faster than mortar sand because it flies farther off the clubface.

Fifty years from now they will probably be talking about how much damage the white sand era did to putting surfaces.

[Neil White]

I'm not certain that bunkers are limited to variables such as soil, turf and weather - there is many a course out there where bunkers have been created that directly oppose the land on which they have been built requiring other means to keep sand in the bunker - overtly stylised bunkers where the costs of upkeep far out weigh their effectiveness as a hazard and courses which have a ratio of sand to turf which nears 50:50 for some particular reason.

What I'm getting at is that we taken a mere hole in the ground and for one reason or another developed it into something a million miles away from what its original intended purpose was.  Hundreds of thousands of dollars / pounds creating the eye candy RJ is referring to.  All this came at a time when actual golf course design became superfluous in its nature - man moving heaven and earth to create something that we now consider in some cases ugly and in others hideous.  However, at the time some followed the fashion and wooed the fact that a course had 200 yard long bunkers and that another had bunkers so intricate in their design that maintaining them became an alternative hazard.

Slowly we came out of this period back into an era where architects appreciate the lay of the land more and refrain from spending in excess to create something positively artificial, due in part to fashion and in another to the economy.

Bunkers have shrunk not only in their size but also their number - we have realised that too much is well, just too much.

Present day architects admire the style and design qualities of the architects of fore and either mimic them or return bunkers to how they used to be. 

The rough hole in the ground style is making a comeback.

Bradley makes a good case that the materials used may change - plastic bag type revetments and crushed glass as an alternative to sand - but how will these make a difference in what the bunker looks like? 

Did we peak too early? Are we able to take this mere hole in the ground and develop it into something else?  Is it likely that the excesses of before will make a comeback and if so will it be lauded as bunkers of today appear to be?

Who is out there doing something maverick, almost unique? 

Or have we gone full circle?

Neil.

[RJ_Daley]

Neil, given how little new course construction is going on here in the States, perhaps any innovation will come from the Asian or eastern Euro regions.  But, how much more can really be done in a depressed golf construction economy?  And, I fail to see what new thing can be devised in bunker construction or styling.  It seems anything within the realm of imagination has already been done, from this crushed marble, to coal tailings, to bunker woll, to various drainage devices and techniques, hairy lipped, crisp cut, fall in, un-maintained, rakes in - rakes out, tongues, capes and bays, scooped out, flat, flashed, humps and bunks, sod wall, turf wall, brick wall, RR ties, flower edged, heather edged... what is new under the sun?  I know... how about a floating platform of sand in a mini lake of water with swimming pool tile edges?  Or, maybe the Emerites will do an air conditioned covered sand bunker? 

[Neil White]

RJ your post - said in jest(?) - strikes exactly at the point I was trying to make.

Have we exploited all possible styles / types / technology already.  In your initial reply you alluded toward different architects and their style of bunkering.  Dye had his waste areas, Mackenzie his frilly edged type, Raynor used a heavily engineered style - who out there though now is taking strides forward and trying something new.

Are present day architects restricted, either by choice, fashion or money, to using a style that their forefathers had developed before?

Is there a bunker that one could immediately call a Doak or a Hanse or a Coore and Crenshaw?  I don't think that there is.

Is it possible that someone would dare be as bold as Desmond Muirhead in his complete going off at a tangent arty style?

If given a chance what style would architects nowadays want to try or experiment with - cost not being an issue.

Neil.

[RJ_Daley]

Neil, honestly I think a good bunkermeister can build and stylize anything and tailor it to the native soil, turf, and weather conditions. 

I'd offer Bruce Hepner as an example.  I observed him plan our some course reno, and particularly bunker reno at a course here in my area.  I'd say they were something on the order of the work done by Rennaisance (Urbina's work I believe) at The Valley Club of Montecito.  In my estimation, they are in Valley Club's, real MacKenzie reno, and in North Shore, a tribute to Mackenzie.  They seem to have a methodology of construction that follows principles and techniques that allow them to properly cup and segment different areas within those bunkers, and properly drain them, and leave it to the supers to maintain them properly according to design intent.

Yet, these same archi-constructors have done completely different styling where a different approach due to the native conditions require.  Same with the C&C crew and a great number of operators and designers. (there are a lot of talented people out there that don't have enough work) They all have internal company culture of construction techniques and methods, that I"m sure those bunkermeisters learned through trial and error, and what works best.  I just happen to think that within rational imagination, everything about style, construction method and techniques, along with all known materials has been tried.  Nothing new seems to be on the horizon of technology or materials development to alter the choices radically to a new direction in bunker design. 

I don't think the construction and method has gone full circle per se, because these craftsmen are still doing various style, all within their personal repertoire, when and where called for.  So, they keep changing it up rather than returning to settle on a given construction, technique, or style.

Would you agree with that?

[Bradley Anderson]

One of the ideas I have had (I am sure others have thought of it too) for making new bunkers on an established course is to set aside an area of nursery three years in advance and grow a nice crop of fescue grasses that can be harvested in chucks like the ones seen below for edging the bunkers. You could experiment with several mixes and choose the one that best fits your course. You might even consider growing the fescue on a sandy mix that will match the sand that you plan to use in the new bunkers.

These are some pics of Gill Hanse work at TPC of Boston which show that the edge of the bunker is planted with chunks of fescue sod that were dug up from the rough with a backhoe and dropped in to place on the edge. This is a practice that has been used by several architects in the last few years to provide a random and wild bunker edge.



The same concept of dropping fescue chucks around the edge. This works especially well when the fescue is mature. Seeding fescue around bunker edges can be a slow process to establish the wispy edge that lays over.



This is a grass bunker with rumpled contours and a couple different varieties of fescue.
 

[Jason Thurman]

I'd love to see more courses with native bunkers that aren't on sandy soil. In the Midwest, most soils are clay based. It's always seemed weird to see sand bunkers in this area.

Clay/dirt pits would be very hard to play from, and it's easy to imagine them being wildly unpopular with players, but I wonder if there's a way it could be done well. Otherwise, I'd like to see more grass bunkers, and perhaps there are ways to advance their design further. Could grass bunkers with revetted clay faces be designed, almost like bizarro sod-faced bunkers? I could see that creating a cool, rugged hazard. Perhaps the base could be grassed with clumping fescue varieties to give very random lies.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()