Flynn's Bunkering

[Craig Rokke]

Flynn has long been a favorite of mine. As mentioned by a few on the other thread, the consistent quality of his efforts
was very predictable.

From what I can gather, he was a forward-thinking architect who was especially strong in his routings, use of the land,
a mixing together a good variety of very strong holes. He always seems to present a challenging decision for the golfer to make.

Thinking back to the Cascades round I played a couple years ago, I feel that the course exhibited these typical Flynn strengths. I especially found some of the greens to be subtly deceptive.

But how about the bunkering? Was this a strength of Flynns? Much of what I can remember was fairly non-descript. Most of them were pretty shallow, ovalish or banana-shaped--certainly nothing that I would characterize as works of bunkering art.

What do you think of Flynn's bunkering? How is the bunkering on some of his other courses? Did he have much of
a hand in the well-known white faces of Merion?

[Mark_Fine]

I've played close to 20 Flynn designs and have found his bunkering to always be well placed but relatively non-descript much like you described.  A Thomas bunker for example is "wild", while a Flynn bunker is generally "conservative" in appearance.  

[Mark_Fine]

Craig,
Meant to type non-dramatic vs. non-descript!  You know what I meant (I hope).
Mark

[wsmorrison]

Craig and Mark,

Although I have not yet played 1/2 of the courses that Flynn was involved with, I have played more than 1/2 of the courses where Flynn did the original design work on. Through the course of my research, I have seen detailed drawings and photographs of others that I have not yet had the pleasure of seeing/playing first hand.  This spring and summer will be spent adding to the list of Flynn courses that I witness first hand.

I, too, feel that there is a simplicity of the margins of many of Flynn's bunkers.  There may not be drama in these outlines, yet there certainly is drama when it comes to their locations (as Mark points out) along with the visual impact and strategic impact of play that they invoke.  

Some drama can be seen in the size of Flynn's bunkering as well, take for instance the bunkers around the 14th green at Philadelphia CC, that was so well recently worked on by Ron Forse, Jim Nagle, Mike McNulty and others.  There are, of course, other examples of bunkers, such as at Shinnecock, Lehigh, Rolling Green, CC Brookline, Pine Valley and others in hillsides and built-ups around greens that look great and play great as well.  Definitely high drama and done right!

I understand from the historian at Elyria (JCallihan) that there is outstanding work in the three Cleveland area  courses, especially the CC in Pepper Pike.  Aerials sent to me from DWexler of Pepper Pike and the CC from 1937 show some of Flynn's large and conservatively shaped bunkering but also what appear to be highly complex works as well.

Of course, if we view the evolution of Merion as a collaborative effort between the kindred design spirits of HWilson and Flynn, the shapes and surrounds of Merion are far from simple with a great deal of human shaping and a hand made look that surrvived until so recently.  Yet the bunkering at Indian Creek (What a great golf course and engineering achievement!!) is very reminiscent of the Merion bunkers at least in the beginning.  At present day, the outlines have been simplified for maintainance considerations.  Yet they were originally something far from what is considered typical Flynn.  

It seems as though Flynn's body of work demonstrates that he was often times revolutionary, had great vision for the future of golf, and was not compartmentalized into narrow design tendencies and proceeded to push into many outstanding design directions.  And let us not forget his many similarly outstanding contributions to green keeping, use of trees, and turfgrass research.  He was a rennaissance man in golf.

I have approached an outstanding person to help develop the Flynn book project that I have been hard at work on.  I think with his help, the project will be completed sooner (by the 2004 Shinnecock Open perhaps) and with far greater expertise.  Certainly, the subject matter demands an outstanding effort.  

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Wayne
Don't you think Flynn's bunkering evolved over the years. A little simpler early on and by the late 20's and early 30's a combination of his older style and some fairly wild naturalistic stuff? I also agree that Flynn was great at placing his bunkers in/on some very dramatic locations and natural features.

[grampa (Guest)]

I would have to agree that Fynns' bunkering is nondescript and simple in shapes and forms. The work at Merion isn't a reflection of Flynn or Wilson in any shaoe or form. If you were to look at old photos of Cobbs Creek G.C. you would see that Wilsons' bunkering is much more uninteresting then that of Flynn. The real genius of Merions bunkering was in the talents of Joe Valentine. I have seen old photos of other Phila. area courses that have been known to had Joe Valentine consult  and the similarites to Merion are shocking. McCall Field which is adjacent to Cobbs Creek is a perfect example to compare the styles of work. Other area courses such as Paxon Hollow G.C. and # 18 on the West ( Merion) have the same feel as the OLD bunkers on the East.  

wsmorrison

How would you compare the the drama of the bunkers at Rolling Green, Phila. C.C., Lehigh, etc. to that of the East Course? And what era are we talking about? ( is it current form or a certain time period)

[Craig Rokke]

Grampa

It sounds like you're pretty familiar w/ Phila-area golf.
Was Valentine indeed involced w/ Paxon? Have you ever heard
whether Flynn or Wilson had any involvement with Cobb's
Creeks's sister course, Karakung?

[wsmorrison]

Grampa,

Thank you for reminding us of the work that the Valentine's did at Merion and in consultations at other courses.  I was certainly remiss in not acknowledging the work of the Valentine's, both Joe and Richie, in the work at Merion.  Of course Joe was working intimately with Wilson and Flynn and that all three collaborated at Merion resulting in the outstanding course that it remains today.  The Valentine's had a great deal to do with the evolution of what is now Merion East and West.  Many other keepers of the green have had great impact on other courses pre WWII, that was part of their job.

I don't follow when you say that "the real genius" in the bunkering at Merion is in the talents of Joe Valentine.  I would say that the real genius lies in the collaborative output of all three gentlemen and subsequently Richie Valentine.  The consideration includes the overall shaping, the surrounds, the depth and internal contours within the hazard, and of course the placement within the context of the hole.  Why is the real genius limited to one Valentine?  Of course Joe Valentine was very integral to the process, yet not as you claim the only "real genius" involved.

When discussing Merion West, it is certain that Richie Valentine did some awfully good work there in green sites and bunkers (especially 13).  It is not certain what roles Joe Valentine, Wilson, and Flynn had on this delightful course which made Merion the only club at the time with two full 18s.  Richie Valentine, according to his father, and others have stated that the West course was mostly a Flynn design.  Originally I believe there were only a few bunkers on the course.  However, it needs to be established who did what, where, and when.  Two distinct sets of recently discovered Flynn drawings may hold the key and distill speculation into fact.  Until a proper study is done and it is known who did what, any comparisons and contrasting is premature.  I think that work will be done correctly in the near future.

Of McCall Field, Jim Finegan states that the original 1919  9 one-shot holes created by Ross evolved into an entirely new 18 by Flynn with the first nine open in 1923, 15 holes open in 1928 and a full 18 in 1935.  I have not yet found other documentary evidence for this and would be pleased to learn of Joe Valentine's involvement.  I know that we are in the early stages of establishing the design history here and welcome information.

As to a comparison between various Flynn courses and Merion East, I am not prepared at this time to state authoritatively on the subject,  honestly there is a great need to do more research.  However, I do feel that Flynn's design tendencies seem to be born or perhaps nurtured by the work at Merion East.  I would defer to another more knowledgeable in the subject to tackle your question.  What are your own thoughts?

I would think that if a comparison is to be made, it would best be made at the time of design and construction (Flynn built not exactly as he designed but instead thought the work in the field paramount versus the work on paper) because that would serve to best determine the intentions of the designer.  However, proper context must be considered.  Designers worked for the club and their instructions and desires must also be factored in for a proper un-biased comparison.  Rarely does a designer have complete carte blanche so there are other influences at play.

Contemporary comparisons will merely consider accumulated design of the many men, both informed and not, that influenced the design of the courses.  A comparison of the courses today is best conducted in relation to previous incarnations of the same course back to its original state.

I know that you compared Paxon Hollow and Merion West's 18 to the OLD bunkers at Merion.  Are you comparing the original work at these clubs or what is found now?  Your own comparisons are not clear.

Yet, you do point out the importance of proper acknowledgements in the design process.  I hope that the research that is ongoing will serve to make clear what has been not at all so.

[Mike_Cirba]

Grampa,

I second Craig's questions about Paxon Hollow and Karakung.

My research on Paxon Hollow indicates the course was designed by former GAP President Francis Warner with an assist from local golf mogul and part-time designer J. Franklin Meehan (i.e. North Hills, Ashbourne, Sandy Run, and a few others).

My research on Karakung has yielded NADA.  Even newspaper accounts from the opening of the course do not mention the designer.  This has led me to wonder if Wilson didn't lay out the course as part of the overall original plan for the Cobbs Creek park, but it wasn't built and opened for play until 11 years after the original course (when the amount of play dictated a second course).  I did hear that Valentine and Flynn were involved with the original.

Any light you can shed is most appreciated.  Thanks!

[wsmorrison]

Tom MacWood,

As to your assertions that Flynn's bunker designs developed over time, I think you are correct.  I am far from fully understanding his maturation as a designer, yet a distinguished architect familiar with Flynn also stated this, but went further in including his overall design developments.  He said that Flynn, more so than other great architects, clearly showed an ability to get better as they got more experience.  It is interesting to note that some of the best golf courses in our country (Oakmont, Pine Valley, and Merion) were the first and in some cases only courses built by amateur or inexperienced designers.  

An interesting question is whether many of the great architects did their best work early in their careers or progressed through various stages until they became masters at their craft.  Flynn was an intelligent man and listened and learned from all his colleagues throughout his life, whether in design, green keeping, turfgrass research, and knowledge of trees.  What other architects demonstrated that their early work was perhaps not their best and they got better as they got older?

[TEPaul]

It's a great question about Flynn's bunkers and what they had if anything in the way of style or theme!

He seem to use bunkering as a real architectural expression, no question of that, and possibly more varied on a single course than any other architect ever. An aerial of Shinnecock in the 1930s shows more kinds of shapes, sizes and every other kind of thing, like an amazing array of different arrangements than I've ever seen on any one course in my life.

On the ground though they seemed to be generally quite large and dished in shape with not much in the way of "faces" unless they happened to be supporting something like the side of a green. And it seems he occasionally put interesting shapes of grassing within them too.

Flynn certainly used bunkers for strategic reasons like every good architect but the visual impact of the sand seemed like his primary architectural use and most consistent use. He may have even used bunkering in areas that really weren't in play that much like some of the holes at Indian Creek and certainly Shinnecock. Sometimes filling up sort of dead areas with bunkering!

Oddly this was sometimes akin in overall scope to the extraordinary "imitation sand dunes" idea of Chandler Egan on #7 & #17 Pebble, some of which were so far out of play way out on the flanks of holes.

[TEPaul]

To understand Flynn or even his bunkering, which I don't at all well, I think it might help to look at other areas of his architecture and also at his other strong beliefs and principles and maybe those he worked with too for clues and keys.

One thing that probably should be known better about him first is what exactly his duration at Merion was and also his exact involvement during that duration and maybe later too. He did live in Philadelphia afterall! There could be a lot of indications of many things in that. He and Hugh Wilson had also planned to form an architecture company partnership--cut off by Wilson's death.

When the Merion bunkers are discussed and how they actually evolved in maturity quite slowly from the beginning when they appeared very bland and generic to maybe 10-15 years later when they had been "matured" by the inclusion of wonderful capes and bays and a beautiful grassy "edginess", it's been sort of accepted that this was the work of Joe Valentine! It may have been Joe Valentine day to day, but personally I don't believe that's even 1/10 of the story. I believe all of it probably emanated from Flynn.

Here's why. We know Flynn was Merion's first greenskeeper and that later he personally trained Joe Valentine. We know Flynn was a workaholic, an efficiency expert, a cost analyzer supreme (he knew the exact maintenance cost to the dime of every single Merion green)!

More importantly we know he was a true innovator and that he was apparently as interested in experimenting with agronomy and varieties of grasses as he was in golf architecture. C&W mentioned that on one Chicago course he experimented with fifty types of grasses! That could be really key!

This could be a real key to the sometimes long duration of the evolutionary maturity of some of his bunkering and its look. We also know that Flynn was very big on "elasticity" in design that did not only include routing to make space for future back tees but also very much included not even placing bunkers (fairway) sometimes until the courses could be experimented with by play!

This whole architectural style and modus operandi is in stark contrast to Alister MacKenzie's "instant maturity" opening look at Cypress and MacKenzie's fast moving "get on to the next project" design style!

It's just startling to me that Flynn is not better known! It appears to be coming out so slowly that he really was an amazing man; a little Irish guy from Boston that the American golfing Wasp tycoon-like aristocrats took to and treated like their own. He had a powerful wit and also temper, he was innovative, effecient, cost effective, a daredevil and obviously a charmer and leader!

But as to his architecture and specifically his bunkering style there might just be another really interesting key that can be seen not only in the strength of his career design inventory but probably even more in its size. For a man like Flynn with basically a forty year career his inventory was exceedingly small!! Why?

And that might be the key not only to his bunkering but his entire architectural career. Just like the men he came up with and were basically his clients and friends, many of them the so-called great amateur American architects, but also the mega rich clients, he may not have ever thought much about opening day! Like those super low production amateurs that were always around him he may have felt that he was never really finished--that things needed to take time and be constantly worked on!

This is a great subject for another topic! There appears to be a real consistent theme with those amateur architects that built such great and lasting courses that Flynn knew so well. Their courses were their architectural labatories, that they may have felt would never really be finished unless a depression or death stopped them as ironically in many cases it did!!

Best example may have been Crump himself! He started in the end of 1912 and did not stop until he died in the beginning of 1918! He brought his course into play incrementally but ultimately very slowly! His membership would ask him occasionally when he thought he would ever be finished and his true documented answer was: "NEVER!"

There's one other startling and very little know fact about PV. That some of what's there today Crump actually considered TEMPORARY!! He planned to get the course into play and then tinker, experiment, improve, refine or whatever for the rest of his life. His life just ended so suddenly and so unexpectedly and actually so young!

And how much more ironic can it be that a golf course that he probably felt was not even near finished made its way anyway and quite quickly to the very top of the list!

The theme of the other four architects of the "Philadelphia School", three of them amateurs, and their modus operandis had to have one helluva interesting influence on Flynn and his own style including probably his bunkers!

A great subject for another topic---how did it influence him?

[Grampa (Guest)]

wsmorrison & Mike Cirba

The reason that I feel that Joe Valentine was the genius behind the bunkers is quite simple. All of Flynns other course bunkering doesn't in anyway resemble the work on the east. And Wilson didn't really finish much anything else.Yes it should be considered a collaboration since all three were involve in the course but when you think about the work I give the credit to Mr. Valentine. I had once had a conversation with Richie Valentine regarding his fathers other consulting works. He had stated that his father had done bunker work on both McCall Field and Paxon Hollow a.k.a. White Manor ( you all know that Paxon was the orginal White Manor prior to the relocation ). Also I believe that both Richie and his father were involved in the work on # 11 and 18 on the West course. The 18th hole (green complex and approach ) were cahnge with the addition to the current parking lot. After research at Hagle I noticed some similarities between the bunkers at all respective courses. The shapes, character, stlye and sand faces were similar. I guess that I concluded that Joe must have either developed or enhanced this style and used it in his own consulting business.

Craig

I hope that Valentine, Flynn, or Wilson had no involvement in Karakong.

TEPaul

I have to question wether the maturation process of the bunkers at Merion was enamated by Flynn. I noticed that Valentine continued to use the stlye of bunkering that existed at Merion. I'm not quite sure that  Flynn ever recreated these types of bunkers on other projects. If you have any examples of Flynn doing this style of work I would be interested in taking a look. You reasons and knowledge of Flynn are vast but I think you are giving him to much credit on the bunkering. I guess that I wonder why Valentine was able to successfully recreate that bunkering style while Fynn never seemed to duplicate that wonderful work that used to be present at Merion.

[Grandma]

Granpa
What are you talking about, the Merion bunkers as constructed or their evolved look? Describe the bunkering style of Valentine.

[Willie_Dow]

Grandma/Grandpa:
I'm working on this, but I don't know how to post some old pictures on this site for you all.
It is from a disk.  I can do it if I log off, but not within the context of GCA.
Willie

[Mike_Cirba]

Grampa,

Thanks for the information.

I'm sure it's easy to dismiss Karakung, and there is surely no architectural genius exhibited there, yet a couple of holes near the road bear an uncanny resemblance to some on the Cobbs Creek course.

I also know that all three (Wilson, Flynn, Valentine) were active in building the Cobb's course, and if Flynn and Valentine were busy next door during the mid-20s building McCall Field, I would think it not inconceivable that they did a quick and dirty "overflow course" which would be Karakung at Cobbs.  

Karakung opened in 1927, so it figures it was probably constructed from say 1924 or 25.  The whole history of Flynn in the Philly area is fascinating, and Wilson's portfolio is so limited and Valentine such an agronomic genius, so I'd love to know the whole story

[TEPaul]

Grampa;

You seem to have very good knowledge of early Merion!

I certainly do not know at this point whether the manner in which Merion East's bunkering "evolved" emanated from Flynn or not--it's merely my supposition at the moment.

The reason I have such a supposition has more to do with trying to analyze how these men worked with each other going all the way back to the beginning of their involvement with Merion and what that involvement was through a period of maybe 10-20 years. I think it's also important to look carefully at this period, what might be considered Merion's "maturation" period which could have taken up to almost 20 years (1912-early 1930s). So their particular involvement during that period needs to be studied closely.

We do know that Hugh Wilson died young in 1925. I believe we know that following Wilson's death Flynn made the quite significant changes to Merion (4 holes) that brought it to what it is today (design-wise). So it seems logical to me to assume that Flynn's involvment with Merion was very significant and ongoing throughout this period despite whatever else he may have been doing elswhere. And the fact that he lived in Philadelphia makes this far more logical!

I also can clearly see that the bunkering of Merion was very "generic" in shape and detail probably up to the time of Wilson's death. Photographs clearly show this. By "generic" I only mean that Merion East's bunkering had very little "detail" to it's edging and the shapes of the edges and some of the interior grassing.

The key to me are two photos in GeoffShac's "The Golden Age of Golf Design" and specifically the greenside bunker on #12, particularly the rightside one. If you compare the earlier aerials (1924) to the onground photo on p. 70 you can see a very marked difference in "detail"! Very marked! In fact some very sophisticated "edginess" appears on p. 70 as well as two "capes", one being probably 20 ft in length!

If Flynn was doing finishing design work at Merion design-wise and otherwise following Wilson's death (post 1925) it seems logical to me that the significant differences in the "look" of Merion's bunkers (from the earlier "generic to the later "detailed") must have had much to do with Flynn!

I can understand that Joe Valentine may have actually done the work on the bunkers day to day but I cannot believe that it was NOT at the direction of Flynn! The look is simply too different and too extensive to assume that Joe Valentine would have made these additions himself and on his own! The alterations, in my opinion, go somewhat beyond just maintenance and begin to almost enter into the area of design changes!

And I think there are many logical reasons, other reasons, that very well may have more to do with the  very "evolutionary" work and design modus operandi of both Wilson and Flynn than it has to do with the sole maintenance practices of Joe Valentine. We can't forget either that Flynn was Merion's extremely effective first greenskeeper who also trained Valentine.

I'm just trying to follow what seems to be a logical flow of events here that seem to be evident through photographic comparisons as well as other evidence!

You ask if there is other evidence of a "Flynn bunker look" similar to the "matured" Merion bunker look. There is in my opinion! look at the photo p. 113 in GeoffShac's book of the 4th hole at The Country Club, Brookline. Very similar in detail and edginess to the "matured" bunkers on #12 Merion! Same small capes and edgy detail and although the holes are different apparently the same basic shape of the lips in a design sense (relatively low profile to their surrounds).

But I completely agree with Wayne Morrision that research needs to be done in many areas and what I've said so far is only supposition.

[Grampa (Guest)]

TEPaul

Lets agree that the bunkering at Merion and all golf courses are a collaboration of talents. As to who the actual designers/architects were is all in what you believe architecture REALLY is. If you feel architecture is only from the plan view and how the location of the bunkers work with the strategy then yes you can give the credit to Flynn. If you feel, as I do, that the people in the field working the relationships of the features into the existing ground while creating interesting visual forms ( I believe people on this site consider it the 3rd dimension ) then I would have to say Valentine should get the credit. But knowing that it is virtually impossble for one person to design, shape, build, and complete all the necessary work involved in building a bunker then we HAVE to consider it a team effort right down to the old italians who worked the plows and shovels.

Grandma

The contructed look is the first step in the process. This is were the simple shape and forms begin. It is these shapes and forms that set the stage for the evolved look. As far as what I believe Valentines style is would be quite simple. Take alook at Flynns' bunkering on all of his other golf course and compare that style to the style of bunkers that Merion once had. The difference is Valentines style. Constructed and/or evolved it doesn't matter. This style could very well have come from his collaborations with Flynn but lets' stop giving Flynn so much credit for the bunkering style. Yes Flynn is a great and understated architect. He was wonderful at using the natural features to route a golf course ( lancaster ) and his green contours are also amazing ( all his works). The way the grasses and agronomics blended with the shapes proves that he wasn't affraid to experiment. But lets be serious his bunkering wasn't anything to write home about. I'm sorry I just don't see that he went to any great lengths to consider the 3rd demension that you all discuss. It really wasn't until he worked with Valentine that this style became evident. I know that I'm a cranky and stubborn old man but I just don't see how Flynn was a good bunker builder.

[Grandma]

Grandpa
It seems you've broken it down into very simplistic terms 3-D vs 2-D. Valentine is 3-D and Flynn is 2-D. I don't agree with your opinion of Flynn's bunkers: his orignal bunkers at Shinnecock were 3-D, as were the bunkers at The Country Club (Pepper Pike), Boca Raton, Glenview, Spring Mill, Huntingdon Valley and number of other courses.

Originally Merion's bunkers were nothing to write home about and if I'm not mistaken they were the result of Wilson, Flynn and Valentine. They were tranformed in the mid-20s by Flynn and Valentine, or if you wish Valentine and Flynn. Did they both go through some type of catharsis or only Valentine. How many projects was Valentine involved in without Flynn? I don't think you have done a very good job of making your sace and differentiating the character of their work.

I'm off to church, we're having a bake sale afterward. I made muffins and their 3-D quality is breathtaking, too bad they taste like crap.

[TEPaul]

Grampa:

I just don't accept your assumptions of Merion's bunkers at all--none of it. Because they're only that--assumptions!

I'm not saying Valentine did NOT do all of that "evolved" and "mature" look at Merion East, I'm only saying you don't know that--you're only assuming it and you seem to want to make those assumptions---conclusions, for some reason!

That's not the way to go about it, in my opinion, particularly if there very well may be a trove of documentary evidence to prove otherwise or even prove what you say to be true. Just be patient and the truth will be known when that can be analyzed.

If the documentary evidence does not exist or after careful research it is wholly inconclusive then is the time to feel free to make suppositions into assumptions and assumptions into conclusions--but not until!

I don't really care who did it, Wilson, Flynn or Valentine on their own or together somehow--I just want to find the facts!

I feel the same way about Burbeck and Tillinghast! I would not want to give either of them credit until facts can really be analyzed and then if the truth lances some massive incorrect assumption extant all these decades, so be it. If it doesn't, that's just fine too!

Assumptions should never carry the day in historic architectural research, yours, mine or anyones! That time should only come if nothing is ever found!

As for Flynn's bland bunkering everywhere, as you contend, did you bother to look at the photograph of the 4th hole at The Country Club, Brookline?

[Willie_Dow]

Where does Howard C. Toomey fit into this dimensional discussion?  
Let us not forget he was considered to be "responsible for much of the firm's construction" after World War 1.  Strange though, he is not listed in "The Architects of Golf" Cornish and Whitten as being involved at Lancaster.  Is this a mistake?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Willie
Excellent point, I was wondering the same thing.

[wsmorrison]

Mike Cirba,

Please let me know any info you may have for flynn's involvement at cobb's creek.  it would be very helpful as i have not seen anything (come to think of it i never checked for flynn's involvement at cobb's in finegan's book) and would welcome your assistance for the flynn book project.  thank you.

Wayne
wsmorrison@hotmail.com

[Craig Disher]

Flynn also worked a little in Florida. I believe that the demise of his Boca Raton design cut what's left of his work in that state by half! Ron Forse's recent restoration of Indian Creek shows off Flynn's ideas in spades. This shot is taken about 80 yards short of the 18th green. Flynn designed this uphill hole as a 465 yard par 4 although the members play it as a 5 from a slightly farther back tee.

The flashing of the sand on the fairway bunkers contrasts with the rolled look of the bunkers that are by the green. This pattern is consistent throughout the course. Most of the greens have bunkers beautifully sculpted into their sides and Joe Pantaleo's maintenance scheme puts them into play for the ground game. I'll post an example later.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

So..... your seeking the facts before drawing conclusions ?

I'm proud of you, you've come a long way.  

I don't have the depth of knowledge on this topic that you fellows have displayed, but the evolutionary process that bunkers go through includes tinkering and alterations by green chairman, Presidents, green superintendents and committees.  Often, evidence of those alterations are only maintained in the memories of the remaining members and employees,  which fade and disappear with time.

There may be no remaining ABSOLUTE Flynn bunker/s at any golf course, hence analysis, comparisons and definitive conclusions may be difficult to achieve in the present day context.

How would you compare Flynn's bunkers to those of his protege's, Dick Wilson ?

Wilson's time was more recent than Flynn's yet I would offer that most of his work has been tinkered with and altered over the years.  

Does anyone possess photos taken when each course opened ?