Is this a radical bunker idea?

[Ken Fry]

Eliminate all sand bunkers and waste areas in non sandy soiled areas.

While driviing by The Warren Course at Notre Dame today, a good portion of the parking lot had piles of new sand for bunkers and top dressing.  It got me thinking about bunkers.  Between liners, drainage and bringing in new sand, should bunkers not be placed on courses where there was no natural sand?

The sand hills region and most seaside courses are built on sand along with other native sand based areas like Pinehurst.  Are we forcing sand bunkers into design because that's what's expected in any golf course?

When Warren opened, we tried to use what looked like a more native sand to the Northern Indiana area:  brownish in color which would match with the native terrain.  After a few years, the sand became an issue and all bunkers were rebuilt and replaced with a more "tourament quality" sand.  Can a chapionship level course survive without bunkering?  Should a clay base course have bunkers at all?

Ken

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ken,

This is a very interesting topic. I recently wrote an article that appears in the July 2011 issue of Golf Course Architecture magazine discussing this very subject relative to Dr. Mackenzie's original design at Augusta. If interested, the article's here: http://www.mingaygolf.com/Bunker_Blitz_at_Augusta.pdf

As I state in the article, I think in many cases bunker have been, and are overused. And, like you, I've often thought about whether or not bunkers are in fact forced into the design of golf courses on a non-sandy sites. As you know, because golf was born on those sandy coastal properties in the UK, where bunkers exist naturally and were incorporated into the design of nearly all links, they have become traditional features and certainly make the game more interesting, and courses more attractive than otherwise in many instances - even where sand does not exist naturally. 

I do think a world-class golf course can be built without sand bunkers. Obviously, the key is contouring through the green. With enough interesting contour, complimented by bouncy turf (and wind), bunkers aren't necessary for interesting golf. But, as others have stated, would a course without bunkers be accepted by the golfing public at-large... no matter how good? And, how many developers would agree to allow a course architect design/build a course without these traditional features?

With enough money in our pockets, and an interesting property to work with I know a few designers, including myself, who would like to try to create a top-notch course sans bunkers. 

[Mike Hendren]

Ken, I immediately thought of the following photograph from Ran's excellent profile of Dye's course at French Lick.



Would it be just as hazardous if the sand was replaced by rough?  Even better, fairway so that balls could feed right into the "trap."

Personally, I think abrupt grassed berms are the most underutilized architecture feature today.

[Rick Shefchik]

Ken, I have always thought that trucking sand to a golf site that had no sandy soil was a curious habit that could be done away with. I am only slightly more likely to get up and down from greenside rough than I am from sand. Sand flusters those who don't learn proper bunker technique, but for most competent players, it's just a wayward shot that usually means another bogey.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Two bunkerless inland courses that come to mind are Royal Ashdown Forest and Berkhamsted. (There's also Piltdown, but I don't know it well enough to use it as an example). Both RAF and B'sted have enough natural hazards in the way of ridges and hummocks, dry ditches and so on that sand bunkers are not missed. Presumably some man-made hazards were utilised, particularly swales and moundwork, and they are convincing. But both courses have age and tradition on their side and one wonders just what the modern player would feel on a contemporary course if he were not able to demonstrate his exceptional skills with the sand iron, even though he may find himself in a far worse predicament in a dry ditch or swale.

There is something man-made and artificial about both these courses - very early earthworks in the case of B'sted. They look severe and austere and certainly don't appear to have evolved naturally out of the land. (But then nor do many bunkers these days.) I think the real challenge would be to create a bunkerless course that looked not to have been constructed by man.

[Tim Nugent]

Ken Dye and the Warren course, now that brings back a memory or 2 

Ken, that was an idea my father had when we did Willowhill. Knowing that it was to be a short, 9-hole family course with wind and undulating farways, it was planned for no sand bunkers. Grass bunkers yes, but no sand.  Perfect venue and our partners had given us carte blanche on the design. But, as you predicted, this was to big a stretch for even our partners  and they didn't go for it so we were outvoted and acquiesced to converting around 20 of the hollow to sand.

It just goes to preception and the Total Package. The average players know that everyother course they ever played on had sand bunkers.  So, if you present them with one that doesn't, it just looks like something is missing.  Like a cake without frosting, it sure tastes good, maybe even better than with frosting, but.....you just can't help think something is missing.

[Ken Fry]

I do think a world-class golf course can be built without sand bunkers. Obviously, the key is contouring through the green. With enough interesting contour, complimented by bouncy turf (and wind), bunkers aren't necessary for interesting golf.

Jeff,

I think this is the key moving forward.  Might the more mainstream view about contouring, both on greens and through the green, lead to more acceptance from the general public?  It seems contouring is something mainstream golfers are beginning to recognize and acknowledge.

Ken

[Ken Fry]

Ken, I have always thought that trucking sand to a golf site that had no sandy soil was a curious habit that could be done away with. I am only slightly more likely to get up and down from greenside rough than I am from sand. Sand flusters those who don't learn proper bunker technique, but for most competent players, it's just a wayward shot that usually means another bogey.

Rick,

I've always found it interesting at some private courses to hear them brag about having their sand trucked in from half way across the country.  Maybe in this economic and competitive envrionment, this practice will disappear.

Courses under stress tend to let the conditioing of bunkers go first.  Tillinghast recommended all those courses during the depression era to fill their bunkers in to save money.  Might we see another big push for this again?

ken

[Bill_McBride]

A course that's of interest in this discussion is Cuscowilla, C&C's course east of Atlanta.  That course is built on good old Georgia red clay, and the sand in the bunkers has a red coloration.  Because it's on and made of clay, I guess the designers didn't worry too much about draining the bunkers.   There are usually a handful of washouts but somehow it really works.

Alrthough there are a few bunkers on the course, the early gem Huntercombe's greens and approaches are very well protected by humps, hollows, bumps, berms and contours.   It's a real workshop.

Here's Ran's recent profile:  http://www.golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/england/huntercombe-golf-club/

See any need for a bunker here?  

[BCrosby]

JH Taylor's 'alpinization' at Royal Mid-Surrey (circa 1913) was about minimizing traditional sand bunkers in favor of grassy humps, ridges and swales. Whether there were some sand bunkers there, I don't know.

Tom Simpson, Max Behr, Mack and others wrote at different times about minimizing the use of sand bunkers. Simpson liked the idea of a course with no bunkers at all in his book with Wethered. But I don't think any of them ever actually built a course that had no sand bunkers.

The reddish clay/sand bunkers at Cuscowilla are terrific. The sand looks like it is native to its setting. I have heard, however, that the clay content in the sand has been a maintenance problem. But the look is great.


Bob

[Rick Shefchik]

A course that's of interest in this discussion is Cuscowilla, C&C's course east of Atlanta.  That course is built on good old Georgia red clay, and the sand in the bunkers has a red coloration.  Because it's on and made of clay, I guess the designers didn't worry too much about draining the bunkers.   There are usually a handful of washouts but somehow it really works.

Alrthough there are a few bunkers on the course, the early gem Huntercombe's greens and approaches are very well protected by humps, hollows, bumps, berms and contours.   It's a real workshop.

Here's Ran's recent profile:  http://www.golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/england/huntercombe-golf-club/

See any need for a bunker here?  

Bill, to my mind, that hole already has a bunker -- a great one. The miracle is that the desire to fill it with sand was somehow resisted.

[Mark Saltzman]

A couple of pictures of the 13th at Crag Burn near Buffalo (RTJ Sr).  The bunkers were undergoing some sort of maintenance work, so they were filled in with grass.

I had the same thought, these look really cool and would play more difficult for low handicaps and easier for high handicaps. Why don't we see it more?

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

  This is an excellent topic and deserves much more attentiion in the future.  Give the economics of golf I think future designs will need to reduce the luxury items and find creative ways to save money and still privide an interesting and fun challenge.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mark,

I'm just guessing, but they're probably using that turf in the bunkers as a liner. You turf the bunker cavities, let the sod knit then kill the grass and re-fill with sand as opposed to using a synthetic liner.

[Mike_Young]

Bill,
The sand that is put in the bunkers at Cusco is white but the red clay silt mixes with it and creates what is there now.  If oyu ever play a tournament there and there is a heavy rain the bunkers are unplayable the next day.  It's not the supts fault it just what happens with that type of bunker in that area.  AND I like the course and the bunkers mucho....Crenshaw can do that....I would be fired for it.  BUT just tto be clear ther eis no red sand there.

[Pete Lavallee]

When you boil it right down, people love bright white sand, they'll tolerate red sand, heck even black sand has been used. But if the sand was green who would like it? It's still sand and provides the proper penalty, but without the color contrast it would be universally decried. So in the end it's not about the penalty, but sheer beauty to the eye.

[Mike McGuire]

Sand in bunkers in green side bunkers is crucial for a couple reasons.

The contrast in color / texture. Green everywhere is boring. Same effect as fescue next to rough.

Green side sand ADDS options. If you have an edge pin with an elevated green you CAN NOT short side yourself in rough next to the green. Therefore you are forced to aim to the center of the green on your approach. If you had sand you have an option to attack knowing you have a chance to get it up and down.

Our 1930 Langford nine was designed with green side sand around every green. Very little was installed. Kye Goalby put sand next to our 2nd green where none was and EVERYONE loves it.

The rough next to the green can be almost unplayable in the spring with muddy conditions. Sand gives you options that rough does not.

[Sean_A]

Folks know I have been ranting about bunkers forever... and forever before any of you knew me.  Even so, what I would like to see is bunkering like it was originally at Augusta.  In other words, a balanced set of hazards and natural or man-made features.  To me this essentially means one thing, the features, be they sand, humps, hollows or water, needs to be mainly in the middle of the park or guarding against shots to the middle of the park.  I have about run out of time for wing bunkers and I would have thought by now, some 75ish years since we have seen what is probably the best bunker guy in the world of architecture, Tom Simpson, that archies would get the trick. 

What makes Huntercombe so compelling is exactly because the features are in the middle of the park.  For this reason the design can never be considered passe - despite how poorly the club has done with controlling tree growth.  Just visit Huntercombe, New Zealand and Kington with open eyes and I guarantee that any reasonable person should away thinking most courses really don't need 50 bunkers let alone 100.     

Ciao   

[Bill_McBride]

Sand in bunkers in green side bunkers is crucial for a couple reasons.

The contrast in color / texture. Green everywhere is boring. Same effect as fescue next to rough.

Green side sand ADDS options. If you have an edge pin with an elevated green you CAN NOT short side yourself in rough next to the green. Therefore you are forced to aim to the center of the green on your approach. If you had sand you have an option to attack knowing you have a chance to get it up and down.

Our 1930 Langford nine was designed with green side sand around every green. Very little was installed. Kye Goalby put sand next to our 2nd green where none was and EVERYONE loves it.

The rough next to the green can be almost unplayable in the spring with muddy conditions. Sand gives you options that rough does not.

Sorry Mike, but that is heinous.  That hollow is 60 yards out on a par 5 and would be terrible as a bunker.   I hope you get to play Huntercombe some day, it's as much fun as there is.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,
The sand that is put in the bunkers at Cusco is white but the red clay silt mixes with it and creates what is there now.  If oyu ever play a tournament there and there is a heavy rain the bunkers are unplayable the next day.  It's not the supts fault it just what happens with that type of bunker in that area.  AND I like the course and the bunkers mucho....Crenshaw can do that....I would be fired for it.  BUT just tto be clear ther eis no red sand there.

That's why I said it had a red coloration.   It does have an interesting look with that red tinge.

[Bill_McBride]

A course that's of interest in this discussion is Cuscowilla, C&C's course east of Atlanta.  That course is built on good old Georgia red clay, and the sand in the bunkers has a red coloration.  Because it's on and made of clay, I guess the designers didn't worry too much about draining the bunkers.   There are usually a handful of washouts but somehow it really works.

Alrthough there are a few bunkers on the course, the early gem Huntercombe's greens and approaches are very well protected by humps, hollows, bumps, berms and contours.   It's a real workshop.

Here's Ran's recent profile:  http://www.golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/england/huntercombe-golf-club/

See any need for a bunker here?  

Bill, to my mind, that hole already has a bunker -- a great one. The miracle is that the desire to fill it with sand was somehow resisted.

Ain't that a beautiful thing!   

[Mike McGuire]

Im sure I would love Huntercombe,

Perhaps this hollow works fine but I cant see a bunkerless course being better than one with a proper number of them.

[Sean_A]

Ace

You are thinking of the 16th.  Imagine if that pit had sand!  Of course, the photo is of Huntercombe's 4th, a short par 4.

Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

Bill,

Sean got there first but that hollow is the greenside hollow short right of the short par 4 4th.  You're right, though, Mike's change would be one for the worse.  A crime, in fact.  It would make recovery easier, rather than harder, too.

Two of my most enjoyable rounds of the year have been at Kington and Berkhamsted, with not a single sand bunker between them.

Mark

[Scott Warren]

Mike,

How many bunkers is a "proper" number for an 18-hole course?

Huntercombe has, from memory, 13 bunkers. Is 13 an improper number of bunkers?