Dual Personalities - Merion's Bunkers

[Willie_Dow]

Ed

I think your Mom would have said: "Thank you son!"

My Mom would have probably asked: "What does Mary think?"

Willie

[Mike_Cirba]

Ed Baker;

I hope you didn't bite your tongue off, because golf needs more people who aren't afraid to ask tough questions and call them as they see them.  

Nobody likes to offend others, particularly people who might be well-intentioned, and sometimes there is a fine line between arrogance and candor, but when I think of this website, and it's true value, my biggest worry is that we will collectively turn into some type of accommodating, milquetoast version of ourselves just to avoid ruffling feathers in high places.  

Posts like yours give me confidence that we will not.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Ed and all, (especially the new guys!)

Just a reminder, the material used was not Bunker Wol, but a product called the Sand Trapper.

Yes, Merion is a private course, one of the best courses in the game that totally represents us as American's, as a whole.

It was conceived in an early age of golf in these United States, where the thought on golf design revolved around emulation, (not copying) the great courses of Great Britian. the person who designed the course-of which I'm forever an ardent admirer and consider him one of the great souls of the game--Hugh Wilson, was an AMATEUR architect, yet seemed to know more about how a golf course should play and look then Tom Fazio, McDonald Duck, or Buddy Marruci could ever hope to dream. He was elected by committee to see what golf was all about in Great Britain, and he brought those experiences back to not just his club, but the game of Golf in America. Charles Blair McDonald furthered his insight, and if I'm the only one that finds amazment that after one amazing night of discussion between the two probably was one of the more defining moments of Golf Architecture in America.

The club even has an annual tournament in his honor called the "Hugh Wilson." (we are also very gifted here on Golf Club Atlas to have several people that play in this great tournament and know exactly how prestigious of an honor it is to play the event.)

So why on earth would the club so desperately look to alter it's heritage with such "ILK" that they have passed over asThe Great White Faces? They hire a man that has admitted to having NO connection what-so-ever to the classic courses of the game, and he puts an underling of an associate in charge of the task of change. He is to work with one of the more respected amateurs of the game, along with one of the least desirable contractors to build them.

85+ years of phenominally evolved history was taken away from the game when these types of bunkers were built. Personally, I think it is just another precedence that has further alienated the game from its roots. (Like the man said, "Scotland's Gift-Golf.")

But the sad fact isn't that this whole ordeal and attack against the game was based-off of ego and politics. One only has to see that Merion was on the correct path to rejuvenation, but it was more about WHO was actually out there doing the work--the guy that knew these bunkers best and how EXACTLY they should look and play--Bill Kittleman.

But that is another story for another time.

Still, I think history will decide who was right, because despite the Mike Tirico's of the media, there are in fact people out there that do know how to read and do research. They also know how look at old pictures and say to themselves, "Can you believe how fearsome these bunkers looked?!?!?" And hopefully our childrens, childrens, children will know the same.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I'm a little confused.

Your very first post on this thread seems to be totally contradictory to your last post on this thread.  Perhaps you can clarify which post is representative or your thoughts.

Tom, I'm just curious to learn how things evolved, and I'll accept whatever the answers are, though I might not agree with the decisions, done is done, I'm just trying to learn about how the project went from concept to paper and into the ground.

I'm sure Bill Greenwood is a terrific gentleman, I'm just curious as to why certain bunkers received one kind of treatment, and other bunkers received another.  You yourself admitted that you too, were curious.

I'm also curious as to why a bunker design, similar to a bathtub, making access and egress difficult, would be adopted.  Chip Oat indicated that that problem would be corrected, but I'm curious to understand how that problem got missed in the concept, design and construction process.

Lastly, I'm curious as to how the bunkers with the convex wrap around lips into the sand will be maintained, and what type of impact that specialized maintainance will have on the budget.

You must remember, great clubs like Merion, set examples and precedent for other clubs.  If someone sees a feature at Merion, Pine Valley, NGLA or ANGC they sometimes want to import those features to their club.

The influence of what Merion does extends far beyond their property line, and that is why I'd like to know more about the subject of the questions I raised.

[rob_mauer]

I have one question.  Why have the geniuses of (whatever the name of that golf course is on Ardmore ave is,because it's not Merion. That one is gone with the wind.)not contacted the man that knows that course better than anyone alive besides the former Golf professional,RICHIE VALENTINE? Wasn't it Richie's father who was there in the beginning? Maybe the committee is too ashamed to get an opinion from someone they discarded like a bad cancer. How many superintendants have they gone through? How many more will they go through? Richie was a gentleman and knew every blade of grass on the course, Hell, There is a strand of bluegrass found behind the 17th tee that is named after the place that his father found ,no?

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Maybe my first and last posts do seem contradictory.

I thought you asked orginally on this thread why Merion had two different styles of bunkering.

Certainly when you look at the bunkering on the 1st hole, for instance, as we did, the bunkering does look different from bunker to bunker and sometimes even on a single bunker like the right greenside bunker.

But why does it look different from one to the other or even on different parts of a single bunker? As far as I can see only because the grass on the surrounds of some is mowed short and on others it's kept long and even on that right greenside bunker its' short next to the right green surface and long at the far end of the bunker and on the right side of the bunker farthest from the green surface.

There's no doubt that gives the various bunkers a different look from each other and even some parts of that one bunker a different look from other parts of the same bunker. But is that a different bunker style or is it simply different grasses and grass heights on different bunkers or even a single bunker?

I say it's different grasses and grass heights on the bunkers all of which are constructed in the same style.

If Merion wanted to they could probably change those differng looks simply by mowing or not (and maybe eventually surpressing a particular grass type like fescue and letting the blue emerge dominant.

I think the style of architecture of the bunkering is consistent throughout just that the grassing is different.

And I thought that's what you were talking about in the first place. I thought you were asking, why the different grasses and grass heights in different places?

I think that's a good question. But that particular look is not unique at all. I certainly saw it that way at Atlantic City C.C. and also very much on many of bunkers at Hanse & Co's Applebrook and frankly many other courses.

I don't think that look has anything to do with the actual architectural construction of the bunker but it might. I think it's only about different grassing patterns on different bunkers or part of them.

I feel the logic of it is probably to deal more harshly with a shot that's farther off line since the higher grassing seems always to be on the parts of bunkers that are farther away from where normal play is expected to be.

So it's not architectural (actual bunker construction) it's only about grassing. To me it's seems like sort of a maintenance application (grassing and mowing patterns and heights) instead of the architecturally higher outside faces of certain bunkers that Ross recommended on certain bunkers. Ross even explained the architectural and strategic reasoning for that kind of architectural style. It was to catch balls that were hit further offline.

But it's still a good and valid question of yours. It's just that we probably disagree on the answer. Is it architectural or is it just grassing and grass heights (at Merion)?

I think it's the latter and you appear to think it's the former. It shouldn't be very hard to find out. But the more general question is, even if it is just grassing (and not a different architectural style), why do courses do it that way--does it have some application to strategic concept, in other words? Obviously it must.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

The question is, what determined what style of bunker went where ?  Was it a strategic decision, an aesthetic decision, or was it done at random ?

The next question is, why two styles, what was the intent ?

I'm also curious as to how the convex wrap around bunkers will be maintained, it looked like it was going to be a difficult, labor intensive and expensive process.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Robert M.,
I'm sorry that I also forgot to add Richie to the fray. He certainly is deserving of much recognition in what could be easily termed as some of the most dramatic bunkering the game has seen.