Best Modern Age Courses & Architects = Bunkers

[Kevin Pallier]

I was doing a bit of reading and came across this essay from our own Ian Andrew's which stated:


"In my experience only a handful of architects have been able to create bunkers that blur the line between strategy and art. The greatest of all was Alister MacKenzie who combined artistry with scale, a little intimidation, a tremendous amount of strategy and the greatest blending an architect has ever done. To this very day he remains the standard to which any architect must hold his bunker work because he is the only architect to manage to have it work perfectly."

A Complete Look at Bunkering - Golf Club Atlas


I agree and it got me thinking.


Which modern day courses (say post 1960) should be lauded for their bunkering? Why so?


Who are the best modern day architects who are able to blend both "strategy and art"?

[Thomas Dai]

Ian’s article is a fine piece so well done for raising its profile.
As to individuals, debating the merits and skills of those no longer with us is one thing. Not sure it’s appropriate to debate the merits and skills of those who are still with us however.
Atb

[Tom_Doak]

Ian’s article is a fine piece so well done for raising its profile.
As to individuals, debating the merits and skills of those no longer with us is one thing. Not sure it’s appropriate to debate the merits and skills of those who are still with us however.
Atb

Aw, everyone is just too afraid of being politically incorrect (or of sticking their foot in their mouths and being called out on it).


Frank discussion has died here.  But, honestly, it’s kind of a weird question because if you did have the discussion it’s probably going to be about the usual suspects.


I will give it a shot:  can anyone name three modern courses with really good bunkering that isn’t just that designer’s standard stuff?


We really try on most jobs to do something a bit different with the bunkers, but no one ever seems to notice, or at least to compare.

[Tommy Williamsen]

There is so much sand on some of the new courses that many bunkers blend in with the surrounding terrain.

[Ben Hollerbach]

The expectation around bunkering has changes so much over the last 50-70 years that it feels like today a bunkers place on the course is more visual than functional. Good players do not fear the bunker, but they expect the bunker to be present to help frame their shots.

In saying so, this makes me then reconsider Pete Dye's railroad ties and how polarizing they once were. Love them or hate them, their presences influenced play, heightening the feature back to the state of a hazard. Which at the end of the day, isn't that the most important aspect of a bunkers presence on a golf hole?

[Thomas Dai]

Ian’s article is a fine piece so well done for raising its profile.
As to individuals, debating the merits and skills of those no longer with us is one thing. Not sure it’s appropriate to debate the merits and skills of those who are still with us however.
Atb

Aw, everyone is just too afraid of being politically incorrect (or of sticking their foot in their mouths and being called out on it).
Frank discussion has died here.  But, honestly, it’s kind of a weird question because if you did have the discussion it’s probably going to be about the usual suspects.
I will give it a shot:  can anyone name three modern courses with really good bunkering that isn’t just that designer’s standard stuff?
We really try on most jobs to do something a bit different with the bunkers, but no one ever seems to notice, or at least to compare.

Not so much a question of being politically correct Tom, rather more a matter of respect particularly when those you are acquainted or friendly with may be involved.
Interesting that on another current Australia visit thread Ally mention comparing Barnbougle Dunes and St Patrick’s.
The only responses appear to be me about grass types (something I was actually hoping for some detailed clarification on given the difference in shot playability between the two surfaces, especially shots played from the fairway within 15 yds of a green) with a comment from Adam plus a more general comment by Sean W. Anyone care to comment comparing say, the bunkering on these two courses?
Atb

[Joe Hancock]

In the “MacDonalds Shinnecock” thread, there are some aerials that, in todays’ *judge from drone shots crowd*, would get roasted for excessive bunkering.

[Matt Schoolfield]

I don't really have any pushback to the question in the post itself, but only to the premise. Artistic bunkering is nice, but I see it more as an extravagance than an essential part of the artistry of the designer, even if it is artistic and should be lauded. I know I'm taking the losing side of an argument here, but I've even rolled my eyes at MacKenzie when reading him. Beautiful bunkering is very good when it's suited to the course, but not every course needs it.

I just think that spliting strategy from art isn't giving enough credit to the concept of art, which includes the strategy itself.

Which modern day courses (say post 1960) should be lauded for their bunkering? Why so?

I will say Sheep Ranch only to illustrate my disagreement with the premise, while I must also give credit to Jay Blasi's waste areas at GGPGC, which I think really captured the spirit of the old dunes in SF.

[Tom_Doak]

I don't really have any pushback to the question in the post itself, but only to the premise. Artistic bunkering is nice, but I see it more as an extravagance than an essential part of the artistry of the designer, even if it is artistic and should be lauded. I know I'm taking the losing side of an argument here, but I've even rolled my eyes at MacKenzie when reading him. Beautiful bunkering is very good when it's suited to the course, but not every course needs it.

I just think that spliting strategy from art isn't giving enough credit to the concept of art, which includes the strategy itself.

I agree with your second paragraph, and with most of the first.  Bunkers are at best my third or fourth highest priority, behind routing, greens contouring, and mowing lines.

[Tom_Doak]

Interesting that on another current Australia visit thread Ally mention comparing Barnbougle Dunes and St Patrick’s.
The only responses appear to be me about grass types (something I was actually hoping for some detailed clarification on given the difference in shot playability between the two surfaces, especially shots played from the fairway within 15 yds of a green) with a comment from Adam plus a more general comment by Sean W. Anyone care to comment comparing say, the bunkering on these two courses?

Those two are an interesting comparison.  Barnbougle and St. Patrick's are two of my best courses, and two of the lowest budget projects we've ever done.


At Barnbougle the budget was low because we didn't have much money to build the place, it was a gamble whether it would be successful.  We did not have enough $$$ for an elaborate irrigation system, which is necessary in Australia, so we had to make do with two rows of irrigation and only the width that would cover.  But with marram grass covering most of the rest of the site, that risked being unplayable, so I created a fair number of bunkers in the landing areas for the express purpose of adding width so you could find your ball!  I've not been there for a while, but after years of wind erosion, those bunkers are pretty deep and fierce . . . they don't spend the money to fill them back in with sand as often as they do at Bandon.  So there are quite a few that don't look anything like they did on opening, but they still have the same "blowout" feel to them.


At St. Patrick's, 16 years later, the budget was even lower by the standards of the day, because we didn't need much irrigation . . . the clients said they rarely used their irrigation on established fairways, and their water supply was very minimal.  Plus we did have some turf to start with for about 25% of the current fairway area.  So we really cut and pasted together an irrigation system for the tees and greens and some approaches and areas we felt we needed it for grow-in.  We were also careful to put back the loamier "top sand" instead of taking everything down to raw sand as we usually do, so that the fairways wouldn't dry out so quickly.


As for bunkers, with the experience of past courses regarding bunker maintenance, we tried to minimize the bunkering while keeping enough for the sake of drama.  We were also concerned enough about lost balls in the marram grass and mosses at the edge of the course, so some of the bunkers you find were more about stopping a shot from reaching lost-ball territory, or helping you get a line on where you went in.  The biggest bunkers are in places where your ball would disappear into a hollow and you wouldn't be able to keep a good line on it, so we opened those up to sand.


There are not a ton of green side bunkers on either course, but I think fewer at St. Patrick's, because the elevation changes create plenty of problems for recovery shots.

[Jeff Schley]

At St. Patrick's, 16 years later, the budget was even lower by the standards of the day, because we didn't need much irrigation . . . the clients said they rarely used their irrigation on established fairways, and their water supply was very minimal.  Plus we did have some turf to start with for about 25% of the current fairway area.  So we really cut and pasted together an irrigation system for the tees and greens and some approaches and areas we felt we needed it for grow-in.  We were also careful to put back the loamier "top sand" instead of taking everything down to raw sand as we usually do, so that the fairways wouldn't dry out so quickly.

That type of knowledge of how a course would need to retain some moisture for long term maintenance and play ability is very insightful to me who isn't in the industry. Next level knowledge and expertise.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Jeff - anytime you’re working on a GB&I links course, it is good practice to strip and mine the “black sand” from the top (usually 6-12”), then shape in the “white sand” before relaying the black sand / topsoil for the reason Tom gives, particularly when there is no fairway irrigation. (Noting that every course has a slightly different soil make-up so individual sites need to be considered separately).


Regards different bunker schemes with modern architects, I probably haven’t seen enough courses to really identify anything that stands out.


What I have noticed is that Tom / Renaissance have varied their “style” between many of the courses I’ve seen, more so than their contemporaries. I can’t think of any courses where bunker positioning is vastly different to others (in a strategic sense) although I’ve certainly noticed courses that have used a lighter touch vs a heavier touch. I’ve also noticed that certain architects are more inclined to close off the entrance to the green, even if that is dressed up in an aesthetically pleasing, natural style.


Most modern architects have become more playful than the previous generation in their placement of hazards, often enabled by the use of width and deception.

[Mark Pearce]

Not so much a question of being politically correct Tom, rather more a matter of respect particularly when those you are acquainted or friendly with may be involved.

Are you really saying that you/we can't discuss the work of living architects without being disrespectful?  That's utter nonsense.  The suggestion that this thread is inappropriate is equally nonsensical.  Isn't this what this site is supposed to be about?

[Thomas Dai]

Interesting that on another current Australia visit thread Ally mention comparing Barnbougle Dunes and St Patrick’s.
The only responses appear to be me about grass types (something I was actually hoping for some detailed clarification on given the difference in shot playability between the two surfaces, especially shots played from the fairway within 15 yds of a green) with a comment from Adam plus a more general comment by Sean W. Anyone care to comment comparing say, the bunkering on these two courses?

Those two are an interesting comparison.  Barnbougle and St. Patrick's are two of my best courses, and two of the lowest budget projects we've ever done.
At Barnbougle the budget was low because we didn't have much money to build the place, it was a gamble whether it would be successful.  We did not have enough $$$ for an elaborate irrigation system, which is necessary in Australia, so we had to make do with two rows of irrigation and only the width that would cover.  But with marram grass covering most of the rest of the site, that risked being unplayable, so I created a fair number of bunkers in the landing areas for the express purpose of adding width so you could find your ball!  I've not been there for a while, but after years of wind erosion, those bunkers are pretty deep and fierce . . . they don't spend the money to fill them back in with sand as often as they do at Bandon.  So there are quite a few that don't look anything like they did on opening, but they still have the same "blowout" feel to them.
At St. Patrick's, 16 years later, the budget was even lower by the standards of the day, because we didn't need much irrigation . . . the clients said they rarely used their irrigation on established fairways, and their water supply was very minimal.  Plus we did have some turf to start with for about 25% of the current fairway area.  So we really cut and pasted together an irrigation system for the tees and greens and some approaches and areas we felt we needed it for grow-in.  We were also careful to put back the loamier "top sand" instead of taking everything down to raw sand as we usually do, so that the fairways wouldn't dry out so quickly.
As for bunkers, with the experience of past courses regarding bunker maintenance, we tried to minimize the bunkering while keeping enough for the sake of drama.  We were also concerned enough about lost balls in the marram grass and mosses at the edge of the course, so some of the bunkers you find were more about stopping a shot from reaching lost-ball territory, or helping you get a line on where you went in.  The biggest bunkers are in places where your ball would disappear into a hollow and you wouldn't be able to keep a good line on it, so we opened those up to sand.
There are not a ton of green side bunkers on either course, but I think fewer at St. Patrick's, because the elevation changes create plenty of problems for recovery shots.

Thank you.
Atb

[Thomas Dai]

Not so much a question of being politically correct Tom, rather more a matter of respect particularly when those you are acquainted or friendly with may be involved.

Are you really saying that you/we can't discuss the work of living architects without being disrespectful?  That's utter nonsense.  The suggestion that this thread is inappropriate is equally nonsensical.  Isn't this what this site is supposed to be about?

Whatever.
Atb

[Mark Pearce]

Not so much a question of being politically correct Tom, rather more a matter of respect particularly when those you are acquainted or friendly with may be involved.

Are you really saying that you/we can't discuss the work of living architects without being disrespectful?  That's utter nonsense.  The suggestion that this thread is inappropriate is equally nonsensical.  Isn't this what this site is supposed to be about?

Whatever.
Atb

Really?

[Jeff Schley]

Jeff - anytime you’re working on a GB&I links course, it is good practice to strip and mine the “black sand” from the top (usually 6-12”), then shape in the “white sand” before relaying the black sand / topsoil for the reason Tom gives, particularly when there is no fairway irrigation. (Noting that every course has a slightly different soil make-up so individual sites need to be considered separately).


Regards different bunker schemes with modern architects, I probably haven’t seen enough courses to really identify anything that stands out.


What I have noticed is that Tom / Renaissance have varied their “style” between many of the courses I’ve seen, more so than their contemporaries. I can’t think of any courses where bunker positioning is vastly different to others (in a strategic sense) although I’ve certainly noticed courses that have used a lighter touch vs a heavier touch. I’ve also noticed that certain architects are more inclined to close off the entrance to the green, even if that is dressed up in an aesthetically pleasing, natural style.


Most modern architects have become more playful than the previous generation in their placement of hazards, often enabled by the use of width and deception.

Thank you Ally. Example of how much we can learn from the wider community here of knowledge.

[Tom_Doak]

I can’t think of any courses where bunker positioning is vastly different to others (in a strategic sense) although I’ve certainly noticed courses that have used a lighter touch vs a heavier touch. I’ve also noticed that certain architects are more inclined to close off the entrance to the green, even if that is dressed up in an aesthetically pleasing, natural style.

Ally:


The one thing I would say that we do repeatedly [and so do Coore & Crenshaw] is to use the bunkers as a transition from tight turf to native grasses.  I picked that up from Royal Melbourne, and it wouldn't surprise me if Ben did, too, consciously or not.  It is just a great way to make the mowing lines start to disappear in the landscape, and I think it's one of the main reasons people like our courses visually.


The down side of it is, you're generally bunkering the outside edges of play, instead of closer to the centerline.  On a dogleg, you may be close to the "line of charm", but everyone knows not to aim at the line of charm anymore!


Another thing is that it's VERY hard for us to put bunkers in places where the ball gathers into them, as on links courses.  Even when we are trying to do it -- and I've tried to do it on a couple of recent courses -- the shapers are just so ingrained in keeping drainage out of the bunkers [and in trying to make them visible] that it's hard for them to do the opposite.  And of course you can only do that on light soils, so there are many projects where it's not practical.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
A lot of golfers don’t understand how hard it is like you say to put bunkers where balls would gather because of drain issues. I just played Hoiana Shores in Vietnam yesterday with their GM. They’ve got numerous issues now where several of the bunkers are constantly wet because they were built too close to the water table which has risen over the last few years. It’s a problem and they’re going have to rebuild these bunkers and raise everything up. We discussed how some will be relatively easy while others will take a lot of work and a very large area of disturbance.

[Ira Fishman]

The artistic aspect of bunkers does not do mean much for me. Placement and depth are the two variables that influence me the most. Of the modern courses I have played, the bunker placements on the “potato holes” at Friar’s Head strike me as the key to making them work, and the bunker placement on 12-18 at SS Blue help make that one of the best stretches of holes I have played. I also think that the combination of placement and depth at Cog Hill 4 before the R. Jones renovation elevated the course to the status it once had.


Ira