Geoffrey Childs, TEPaul & Tom MacWood,
T Fazio, R Jones and R Rulewich shouldn't be singled out as altering existing bunkers or infusing restorations with bunkers that look nothing like the originals.
At a classic period course that I'm familiar with, that is considering restoration work, an architect other than those mentioned above, indicated that he would show the committee a series of bunker designs and that they could then pick the one they liked the best.
What would you call that process for selecting bunker design ?
Is the architect shirking his architectural responsibility, and merely taking the money and letting the club decide what bunker design the committee wants to select ?
Do you think that architect would want their name bandied about for that type of work on this site ?
Why do you just list the names of Fazio, Jones and Rulewich ?
Who is more disengenuous, the above three fellows, or the architect who holds himself out as a restoration specialist, but, employs the above technique in selecting bunkers for a golf course from the "golden age" ?
Ask youselves, who has altered more classic or "golden age" golf courses, the above three fellows, or other architects that you have chosen not to name ?
What does the Donald Ross Society have to say about what architects have done the most damage to Donald Ross courses
Is it any of the three fellows you named ?
Or, have others done far more damage ?
And, if others have done more damage, toss their names out into the public arena, just like you have with Fazio, Jones and Rulewich.
That's fair, isn't it ?