Modern Courses with LOTS of bunkers

[Anthony_Nysse]

On the Steve Smyers note.....Old Memorial Golf Club-Tampa, FL
Rees' Atlantic Golf Club-130ish
Rick Smith's course at Treetops
Fazio's Sand Ridge in Chardon, OH
Colleton River-Dye Course-HHI, SC

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

I can list one of your personal favorite courses with plenty of sand and in some unique shapes -- Shoregate !!!

Remember Mike ...

[Michael Dugger]

Nick Faldo...Chart Hills, is it?

a lot of bunkers on that course

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike:

I can list one of your personal favorite courses with plenty of sand and in some unique shapes -- Shoregate !!!

Remember Mike ...

If ever a course makes a case for building a course with the absence of bunkers....    

[TEPaul]

Maybe a lot of the old courses did have an enormous amount of bunkers but ANGC didn't exactly get panned with its 22 total bunkers!  

The more you learn, Mike C, the more you'll come to realize that in the general area of golf course architecture there's a very important theory at work---It's called "The Big World Theory." (eg, there always needs to be something for everyone).  

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Yes, but ANGC was built at the very end of the Golden Age, and broke a long trend towards a general plethora of bunkering.  

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
Yes, but ANGC was built at the very end of the Golden Age, and broke a long trend towards a general plethora of bunkering.  

MikeC:

It's probably safe to say that golf course architecture continued to evolve in interesting ways in the 1930s and that MacKenzie and Jones were no dummies in the art and philosophy of golf course architecture and its evolution!  

Have you ever read Geo Thomas's treatise on "half strokes for putting"? One of the primary reasons for it was so golf courses could be built more economically so golf could be more affordable. Less bunkers was a significant factor in that treatise on "half strokes for putting" because Thomas believed that with that alteration in the game more "half par" holes could be built and he felt "half par" holes with "half strokes for putting" could be done with less bunkering (which he said was costly to make and maintain).

There seem to be a lot of interesting and nuancy thinking and philosophies involving those old architects that some of the participants of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com are either not aware of, have not fully come to terms with yet or are not of a mind to admit, probably because they shatter some long and firmly held beliefs on here.

GOLFCLUBATLAS.com is good but it too needs to remember to keep and open mind---particularly when it comes to some of the things their idols really did feel or tried to experiment with.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Yes, I've read the Thomas essay on half-strokes and agree that these guys speculated in a lot of creative directions.

Still, I'm willing to bet that at least half the major courses built between 1910 and 1930 had at least 80-100 bunkers, and sometimes much more.  

That's what kept Tillinghast so busy during his "sell-out" period!  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

You've been doing this stuff a long time now and dedicatedly as I have. Both of us have also read a great, great deal about the evolving philosophies of some of the best architectural minds in the history of golf course architecture.

And because we have, I think it's pretty clear to see that some of them have looked upon bunkering in golf and architecture as both a blessing and a curse!

For anyone to say that the extent or number of bunkers on a golf course is a pat prescription for quality architecture is a relatively foolish remark, in my opinion. It may be in some cases but it's definitely not a completely necessary ingredient.

In the various ways they dealt with golf architecture, Thomas, Jones, Mackenzie, Ross, Flynn, Park, Behr and even Tillinghast had to have known this. I'm not certain of Colt, Fowler, Travis, Emmett, Macdonald, Raynor, Banks on this and apparently the likes of Crump, Hugh Wilson and particularly Fownes were probably exceptions.

[Marc Haring]

Steve Smyres’ Chart Hills does indeed have a mass of bunkers. It’s a very good course with as much strategy as I’ve seen. There are maintenance issues in the upkeep of so many bunkers. When I played it you could see the problems they were having with raking and taking the weeds out etc. I think the original concept was to try and take advantage of the relative dearth of accessible golf courses around the London area and create an upmarket pay and play with high presentation levels but of course the bubble had well and truly burst by the time it was opened.

Here’s a typical hole at Chart Hills. #16.

[Craig Van Egmond]

The Faldo (Curley/Schmidt) course at the Marriot in Scottsdale has lots of bunkers, as do most of the Curley/Schmidt courses.

I think its the Magnolia course at Disney that has well over 100 bunkers.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Paul,

Who said that number of bunkers is a pat prescription for quality architecture?  Certainly not me.

In fact, the point of this thread was challenging that notion, having recently played a modern course with 140 bunkers.  It just occurred to me how many classic courses were also built with a preponderance of bunkers and how it was virtually impossible for some percentage of them to be strategic for any class of golfer, and instead leaned more to the penal approach.

That's all well and valid, and there are great courses with scads of bunkers and other great courses with few.  However, I found it a curiousity that SO many of the classic courses had great numbers of them, yet we so often cite the strategic nature of their architects.  

I think my overall point is that most of these guys had a pretty penal streak in them as well, if not as overtly as perhaps the Pine Valley or Oakmont models.

Also, I wanted to explore how courses with lots of bunkers are being built today, and the purposes they serve.

[Kirk Gill]

Is a sand bunker really more penal than a grass bunker?

Couldn't many bunkers be replaced with grassed-in depressions that could be easily mowed which would provide a similar strategic penalty? The longer the grass in the depression, the greater the penalty.

If this is so, and I'm not entirely certain that it is, then is the reason for using sand more of an aesthetic one (and certainly a traditional one, given the growth of golf from sandly links courses) ?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Although often overused, bunkers are a very integral part of "hazard" golf.
I think most architects understand their value and limitations, although Whistling Straits is certainly visual overkill with its iveruse of them.
I would certainly rather see the use of bunkers versus the addition of a man made lake to frame a hole, as was often the case in the courses built circa 1970-1990.
I have no problem with strategic bunkers in the middle of fairways, but I do not like bunkers on both sides of fairways, unless one side is used strictly as a visual framing.

Certainly the overuse on a course can ruin the flow of a layout, and I often wonder about the use of say ten small bunkers on the corner of a dogleg as opposed to placing one lager bunker.

[James Edwards]

Robert,

I am a member at Chart Hills and there would be 150 bunkers if they divide the 400 yard bunker on the 5th, which runs from 100 yards out to the green into 20 or 30 or so separate ones...  Amazingly, the 8th has none?

Also, I would add that I rarely go in any? which may back up the comment about eye candy...

All that being said, its a great course!

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Regarding your post #37 and why some or even many courses of the Golden Age had as many bunkers as they did is of course a question to which there probably never will be a conclusive answer.

But architectural strategy or penality et al may not have even been foremost in some of those architects minds when it comes to the amount of bunkering.

Geoff Shackelford once mentioned a point about bunkers, where they are or were, why there may've been more of them than seems to us to be strategically logical that many on here may never have thought of before. That is that those old architects in what they actually built, often such as large greens, tees and some earth contouring, generally leveling ground to be more accomodating of golf were simply looking for fill nearby where they needed it. There's no question at all that the primary generation of fill is from areas nearby that will then double as a sand bunker!  

I don't know that anyone has said that the number of bunkers is a prescription for the quality of a course's architecture but it does seem Tom MacWood was implying that on these lagubrious Aronimink threads that he keeps maintaining the latest bunker project was a mistake.

I'm not sure I see what the difference really is between Ross's designed single bunkers that fill the same space and place as the app 200 bunkers that were nothing much more than those Ross's singles divided into 2s and 3s in the same place and space. It seems Tom MacWood must think 200 bunkers in the same space and place are better somehow than Ross's app 80-90 singles. Otherwise what is it that he thinks constitutes such a mistake?

[TEPaul]

Steve Smyers does have the reputation as the modern architect who does more bunkering or bunkering of massive extent compared to the others.

Should all that Smyer's bunkering be considered too penal?

I don't know, maybe not but one time some years ago I was driving past Blue Heron East with Bill Coore in the car and there was a ton of bunkering and of massive scale in view from the road. I asked Bill Coore if he thought that was excessively penal and he said he didn't really know but he sure wouldn't want to have his ball in the middle of one of those things because it looked like it was a long way out.    

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I have had a couple of very interesting experiences at Chart Hills in tournaments.  I think it is an excellent tournament course--examines every aspect of a players game.  More importantly, an absolute pleasure to play.  This is a course one could play every day and never get bored!  There may be some overkill on the bunkers, but overall, the strategic placement of bunkers is superb.  

[James Edwards]

Robert,

Nice to hear you say that about the course - I keep telling everyone to come and play and experience its challenge.

Last weekend we hosted the LET Tour - English Open and the course was looking majestic.

There are now plans for a hotel to be built on the current short game academy outfield thus showing their intention to host a bigger event - which it can do with ease.  Its a fantastic spectator course and plenty of feature for television - especially the island green 17th.