Discuss Flynn’s quote about bunkers.

[mike_malone]

“ Bunkers are thought by many to be put in as penalizers; they are primarily installed to present a problem or a mode of play”


  I find this to be a very radical idea.


 What other designer had a similar idea?


 What do you think of this idea?


  I have used a couple of phrases to help me understand this. “Take on the bunker not avoid it” and think of it as Flynn painting a white area to give you a message.


  The bunkers should fit the land and don’t require movement as time goes by because their placement is the key to them not the penalty they exact.

[Joe Hancock]

I’m interested in your *radical* take.


I often see bunkers along the edges, or sides of the corridor and wonder how those add any strategy to the hole. What they do is penalize an already off-line shot.


I’ve grown to appreciate that the bunker placement ought to force the golfer to consider the options of a) challenging the bunker, either by carry or in skirting it, or b) what is the next problem that arises if I purposefully stay clear of the bunker? Is it a green that tilts away from the safe play? Is it another bunker that I now need to challenge?


Placement and implementation of the bunker are both important. Bunker placement may be perfect, but if it is very shallow and not difficult to advance the ball, it may not functions as designed.

[mike_malone]

Joe,




  I’m wondering if Flynn is radical because most bunkers I see from others are designed to punish or just to be eye candy.


 I see so many green side bunkers that are parallel to play and don’t challenge the player to take them on.


As we work on our course’s bunkers there is a rare opportunity to just leave them where Flynn put them because the original placement was so determined by his philosophy.


  The mainstream golfer doesn’t think like Flynn. They have a tough time grasping the concepts in the quote above.


The chance to have a rule that deters future tinkering is worth a lot of money.  That alone should make Flynn clubs embrace his point of view.

[Jim_Coleman]

   This is a Flynn quote? Could be professor Irwin Corey. I’ve heard lots of experts sound smart and say very little.

[Sean_A]

   This is a Flynn quote? Could be professor Irwin Corey. I’ve heard lots of experts sound smart and say very little.

I agree. I am not sure what Flynn means. The language is so convoluted...downright Behrian.

Ciao

[Ira Fishman]

Irwin Corey is an awesome reference. I do think I understand what Flynn meant, but do not find it particularly radical or even distinctive. I am hard pressed to think of an architect about whom I think highly from OTM, Braid, and Low/Paton through Colt, Dr. Mac, Ross and onto Doak and C&C who did not implement that concept or follow that philosophy.


Ira

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think Mac and others said the same thing, hazards influence how you play the shot.  Of course, they need enough penalty or you ignore them, and if they have too many penalties, then you just steer clear, so there is a balance between placement and penalty, I think. 

[JNagle]

I don't find this quote to be "radical".  Flynn wasn't the only to be creating strategic bunker schemes in the Classic era.  Other architects had similar ideas where the bunker depths combined with the intended risk and reward seem to indicate the bunker was not there to just punish someone. 

To leave bunkers as they are because that is where they were when Flynn designed the course is short sighted and does not fully capture Flynn as a designer.  Without question his own writings and photographic evidence indicate he evolved as a designer as the game was changing.  His long term relationships with Philly and Lancaster (just two examples) clearly indicate his willingness to change and add to his designs based upon  his observations of how golfers were playing his designs, advancing equipment and the changing athlete. 

"In addition a new class of golf amateur and professional has developed.  The modern professional has achieved unbelievable distance and accuracy because he not only practices continually and intelligently but because he goes into physical and mental training for tournament play"  December 1938

Personally this quote on bunkering is one that I truly love.

“The best looking bunkers are those that are gouged out of faces or slopes, particularly when the slope faces the player. They are very much more effective in that they stand out like sentinels beckoning the player to come on or keep to the right or left”

His writings on strategy and variety also provide insight into his thoughts process.
“The principal consideration of the architect is to design his course in such a way as to hold the interest of the player from the first tee to the last green and to present the problems of the various holes in such a way that they register in the player’s mind as he stands on the tee or on the fairway for the shot to the green.”
“The best way to whet the appetite and improve the game of any golfer is to offer an incentive and provide a reward for high class play, and high-class play is meant simply the best of which each individual is capable.”
“The principal thought in designing a course is to produce 18 interesting holes with a variety of play. A course which has variety of play and character in its natural state can readily be made even more interesting by the installation of a limited number of man-made hazards.”

[Rob Marshall]

“The bunkers should fit the land and don’t require movement as time goes by because their placement is the key to them not the penalty they exact.”
[/size][/color]
[/size]I’ve only played one Flynn, Philly CC about 10 years ago. I still remember a bunker late in the round with a rock wall. One and only time I’ve seen that.[/color]

[JNagle]

Rob -

The hole you are recalling is the 17th.  The bunkers are left of the green

Very important point.  Moving a bunker because of changing equipment or the play of a particular hole must done, IMO, if the ground allows it.  Forcing a hazard into a area not meant for the bunker is not within the intention of Flynn and his design philosophies.

[mike_malone]

Rob -

The hole you are recalling is the 17th.  The bunkers are left of the green

Very important point.  Moving a bunker because of changing equipment or the play of a particular hole must done, IMO, if the ground allows it.  Forcing a hazard into a area not meant for the bunker is not within the intention of Flynn and his design philosophies.

This was whatcI should have said. Moving an original Flynn bunker isn’t a problem. Finding land similar to the original spot is difficult.

[mike_malone]

Is the first right fairway  bunker on 18  at Lehigh original?  I happen to love that one.

[mike_malone]

There’s a big difference between Flynn changing things and others changing things. Doesn’t mean others shouldn’t change Flynn. It just means it’s a totally different idea.

[Sean_A]

There’s a big difference between Flynn changing things and others changing things. Doesn’t mean others shouldn’t change Flynn. It just means it’s a totally different idea.

Thank you. There is too much talk about changing things by invoking what archies think a previous archie would have done.

Ciao

[Jim_Coleman]

   I don’t think anyone would suggest that, to defend a golf course for the the modern game, one should put a bunker in an ugly or otherwise inappropriate place. But it would be even more inappropriate and even stupid to place bunkers where they were 100 years ago just to be true to the original architect.

[mike_malone]

   I don’t think anyone would suggest that, to defend a golf course for the the modern game, one should put a bunker in an ugly or otherwise inappropriate place. But it would be even more inappropriate and even stupid to place bunkers where they were 100 years ago just to be true to the original architect.

It might surprise you that I totally agree with this.


I’m thinking that Flynn was just a pretty good executor of his philosophy. 

[mike_malone]

My interpretation of Flynn’s bunker quote is that you don’t need to move the bunker based on the modern game. It fits the land first, gives a message second, and has a penalty third.

[JNagle]

Flynn was more inclined to add bunkers as is evident on some of his courses.  However, there are instances where adding another bunker may detract from the structure of the hole - in other words there may be a preferred asymmetrical arrangement or grouping of bunkers and adding another to combat the changing game alters those arrangements too much.  In that instance, I feel strongly that one can achieve "restoration of design intent" by relocating a bunker farther from the hole to recapture its intended strategies.


Let's take an example that some may know - Mannie's 12th hole.  No doubt the trio of bunkers to the inside of the dogleg are set to the preferred line-of-play and challenging the bunkers (not just carrying them but also playing close to them) opens the green and 2nd landing area to the golfers. If a golfer plays away from the bunkers that golfer must contend with the short left fairway bunker.  Now Flynn designed the hole with a single bunker (the middle of the three) then returned in the 30's and added one short and one beyond the bunker.  He obviously felt that the single bunker was not having the impact he intended.  Now fast forward to 2022 and that 3rd bunker is now carried by many.  Would moving that bunker not be considered restoring design intent?  Adding a fourth bunker would detract from the visuals and variety of the hole.  Now, all that being said, the I am not proposing the bunker be moved.  Why?  Because the ground doesn't allow for it.  But, that particular arrangement would certainly be a candidate to do so if the ground allowed for it. 


Wish I could post photos to better explain the thought.


As for the bunker you mention on #18 is that Philly 18?

[mike_malone]

Jim,
  I’m sorry I forgot to note where that bunker on 18 is. It is Lehigh.


  Your example at Mannies is a good one. Your honoring of Flynn’s ideas there is admirable.


At Rolling Green there are only 7 original bunker complexes in the landing area so it’s a very economical idea. Other than 9 the land is very important not just for their placement but for the connection to the land around, and the message given.


I feel that the Flynn idea for bunkers is more important when the number is so few.