Rich,
To me, the brilliance of saucer bunkers on links courses is how the surrounds integrate with the smaller sand area and feed into them and in most cases, their placement.
Sean,
I wanted to post some drawings of Flynn holes where he used zero bunkers or very few on dynamic sites such as Eagles Mere. Unfortunately, without knowing the topography, it wouldn't show anything in 2D. He only used 21 bunkers on that course and consistently used few bunkers where "gravity golf" would do to dictate strategy. As for repetitiveness at Rolling Green, his bunkering of the par 3s consisted of multiple bunkers on one side below green level and a single bunker on one side at green level.
John,
While I do criticize the look of Raynor and Banks courses and a few Macdonald courses other than NGLA, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy their shot values and playability, especially for Macdonald. It is clear to me that their courses do not stand up to the test of time as well. Maybe Macdonald didn't care all that much. I think he, and particularly Raynor and Banks lacked the foresight that other architects demonstrated. I do criticize Raynor and Banks for their narrowly defined work and how closely they followed their mentor. A reliance on templates is to me a lack of creativity and respect for the ground and letting nature in the equation. CC Charleston and Fox Chapel are examples of this. Those that claim brilliance in routing, other than Donnie Beck at Fisher's Island and the architects that contribute on this site, are merely guessing.
David,
I need to gather my thoughts on the MacKenzie issue. I'll get to it. Redundancy, framing of greens with mounds (artificial and green sites in natural bowls) and an inability to hold up over time are surely components of my critique of MacKenzie. However, given his method of operation, it is hard to determine what is MacKenzie and what results from his local crews.