[Brian_Gracely]

I was thinking about this idea that gets kicked around here from time to time.....a bunkerless course.  And when I consider Raleigh CC, I actually think the course would play just as challenging without any bunkers (chippings areas in their place), with the except of #9, where the bunkers effect a player that attempts to drive the short Par4.

Can anyone else say that about their home course or a nearby favorite?

[Jason Tetterton]

I would definitely agree with you on Raleigh CC.  That's a tough course especially with quick greens.  I like bunkers better than the rough; it allows you to put spin on the ball...if the bunkers are pretty well kept.  I try to plan for my misses to end up in bunkers.  But, this could also raise a debate on how bunkers are maintained; they don't really seem to be the penalty that they were intended to be.

[A.G._Crockett]

Brian,
Would you feel the same way about Raleigh CC in the winter time as to chipping areas instead of bunkers?  Thick bermuda in August is more challenging than bunkers (IMHO), but a lot of that goes away from Nov.-May.  

[Tim_Weiman]

Brian:

I've expressed before that among the world's great courses Ballybunion may stand out for the limited impact removing all bunkers would have on playing the course.

Mind you, some of my "local" friends disagree with me on this point. Indeed, we have very different views on specific holes. For example, on the short par 3 8th hole I feel one could remove the pot bunkers in front of the green and not effect play that much. However, my friends who play the course 3-4 times per week (as opposed to my 3-4 times per year) argue quite strongly that the bunkers do effect play quite a bit.

Anyway, I hold to my view that a large number of holes don't require bunkers at all (#2,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14,15, and 17. Even if one eliminated the bunkers on hte remaining holes, not much would change, though I'll acknowledge they do play an important role on #1,3 (maybe), 5 (for sure - the cross bunker) and 16 (where the blind bunkers impact trying the cut the dogleg corner).

[John_Conley]

Rochester doesn't have many and doesn't need any.

[Brian_Gracely]

Brian,
Would you feel the same way about Raleigh CC in the winter time as to chipping areas instead of bunkers?  Thick bermuda in August is more challenging than bunkers (IMHO), but a lot of that goes away from Nov.-May.  

Actually, when the bermuda goes dormant in the winter time is one of the few times when the surrounding areas are firm and allow bump & run shots.  So to answer your question, yes it would still be a good challenge....just a different sort of challenge.

[A.G._Crockett]

I hadn't thought about the bump and run possibilities in the winter, even though I've skulled enough approaches and watched them run onto the green on dormant bermuda over the years!

[patrick_burton]

I would advocate that course without bunkers would be a breath of fresh air - most courses (in general) are overbunkered. Far too often, other hazards could be used in there place ---  as Tim indicates by using Ballybunion as an example, courses with awesome contouring and fearsome rough could do without them.

Tim -

I disagree whole-heartedly in regards to losing bunkers on No. 8; balls feed into them, almost madating an aerial approach, or, a hell of a lot of luck if you bump it in there. On No.15 - the bunkering on that tee shot creates the 'pucker' factor, would hate to lose that as well. Great point though on the other holes....


-jj

[Tim_Weiman]

Jack Johnson,

My close friends in Ballybunion - people who know every inch of the place having played the course a few thousand times, probably - agree with you when it comes to #8. They see the bunkers having a big impact.

But, here is why I disagree:

the configuration of the entire green complex assures there would be very interesting recovery shots from many points around the green even without bunkers.

My point is that bunkers may add to the interest or challenge of playing the hole - I won't debate that - but the hole could be damn good even without them.

Put another way:

Remove the water around #17 at the TPC and the entire hole changes and becomes far less interesting. No similiar "depreciation" would result from removing the bunkers on Ballybunion's 8th.

[Lloyd_Cole]

Our little 9 hole semi muni (Beaver Brook, MA) just removed a bunker from the 6th hole (citing maintainence costs, I hear)  it was a great bunker, a feeding bunker which accepted any misssed shot short or mid left of the green. Without the bunker, as exampled by this afternoon's play, my left miss fed down below where the bunker used to be, almost to the hazard 20 yeards left of the green, leaving me a much more difficult shot than I would have had.. We have only 8 bunkers left, we're getting there.

[Doug Siebert]

There's a relatively new course around where I live called Saddleback Ridge that I personally think is pretty damn good, if quirky, and it has exactly two bunkers.  A bunker back right of the par 3 4th, which really doesn't come into play at all and wouldn't be tough to escape from, and a bunker on the corner of the dogleg on the par 5 5th.  It affects play but could be replaced with a deep grass bunker to preserve the strategy.

That's it, two bunkers that are within 150 yards of each other, for the whole course.  At first I thought they might be planning to add more later, since there are some deep grass bunkers in places where you'd typically expect sand bunkers to go, but those, along with the contours, mounding and fescue do a better job than all but some really grade A bunkering would for the strategy anyway, so if I were in charge there I'd remove both of 'em and save having to rake them each morning.

[Evan_Green]

How about Royal Ashdown Forest in England! Take a look at Ran's great writeup of that course.

[TEPaul]

The famous and august Joe Dey while virtually controlling what went on on the golf course at The Creek club for many years must have actively considered this question here....

"Your course without bunkers..?

The reason I say that is he clearly had so many of them obsoleted! Did Dey think it made the course play better strategically or something?

Apparently not exactly. He simply felt maintaining bunkers was a waste of money. Joe Dey apparently was an unusually frugal man. Frankly, it's a very good thing he was so frugal as he apparently never much thought to have the bunkering he wanted obsoleted actually removed in any comprehensive way, only perhaps to have grass grow up within those bunkers basically obsoleting them. If a club wants to restore bunkering treated like that fortunately it's not such a difficult thing to do than if they were totally removed!

[TEPaul]

What golf course actually has more bunkers today than when it was first designed and built? I'm sure there may be a few but I bet the vast majority have fewer and perhaps far fewer than when they began.

[THuckaby2]

Interesting ESP going on here, Brian.  Yesterday very early in the morning, before an off-site work outing, I played the back nine of a course that at one time had NO bunkers, now unfortunately has a total of 4, all of which are unnecessary... the course works perfectly being totally bunkerless.  What makes the approach shots and chips challenging are VERY severe contours/slopes, and some darn creative use of humps and mounds around a few greens.  It's a local fave of mine that I seem to be the only one to like - nearly everyone I ever mention it to seems to hate it.  Oh well.  But in any case, the idea of a bunkerless course was bounding around in my otherwise empty noggin as I played!

I think it can work.  The thought of existing courses with bunkers being just as good without them though... well that's a tough task.  I think it's better if you create the course from the start sans bunkers.  But hell of an interesting topic, though!

TH

ps - the course I reference is Spring Hills GC, in beautiful Milpitas, CA, and it most definitely has more bunkers today than when it first opened - 4 to zero.

[Clay Huestis]

What golf course actually has more bunkers today than when it was first designed and built? I'm sure there may be a few but I bet the vast majority have fewer and perhaps far fewer than when they began.

ANGC comes immediately to mind.  

Personally, I am partial to the less is more approach when it comes to bunkering.  Isn't it more strategic to have one bunker that dictates strategy and approach lines than to have several bunkers circling a green, catching any wayward approach?  Isn't this the essence of strategic vs penal architecture?

Didn't Dr. MacKenzie refer to short grass as the ultimate hazard, and preach parsimonious, judicious and strategic use of bunkering?

I also think that the vast majority of courses (excluding private courses and resort/upscale daily fee courses) do a poor job of maintaining the bunkers they have, due to cost considerations.  

Now, for the flipside of your question, the prize for most bunkers added since conception must go to the re-design/re-routing of Pinehurst #4.  The new product is flashier and looks better in brochures, but I prefer the old version.

[BCrosby]

TEP -

I was going to make the same point.

The Athens CC (Ross) was designed and built with 90 bunkers. Today it has about 30. The few survivors are toned down and don't come into in play often. My guess is that is pretty typical for a course from its era.

You can play ACC for months and not have a bunker shot. But its basic bones are good enough that it's still a great fun.

Bob  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()