[Niall C]

Craig

I think we basically agree. It just comes down to your preferences of what you want to see. In my case I've found my tastes have changed and I'm now quite relaxed about features with a less than "natural" appearance such as square greens etc. and indeed like the look of them.

Niall

[Garland Bayley]

Niall...and a links course isn't?

Craig -- I believe Niall was saying that parkland itself was artificial, not parkland golf. And contrasting this with linksland, which is natural.

If he was saying that, then he just doesn't know natural parklands.

Parkland in its pure sense -- the parks around large country houses created by the likes of Capability Brown and Humphrey Repton -- is 100 per cent a created landscape.

That would be an unnatural parkland. I believe Rock Creek Cattle Company would be a natural parkland (I have only seen pictures). Perhaps Missoula Country Club (where Craig works) could be considered natural parkland.

[V. Kmetz]

Sure, sand bunkers would not be natural to most inland sites and yes the great preponderance of common inland courses see them over-populated, wrongly placed and costly to maintain...


Ok, we'll work on that... but when we largely finish that work -- reducing their number, judiciously placing that fewer number and styling them as less labor intensive ... the basis of the OP's "Rant" fizzles out:

• Are you going to label the remaining bunkers at Merion or Town and Country "useless" monuments?
• Don't parkland/inland design deserve to incorporate the challenge of "change of surface" and "obstacle tackle" that the links' bunker courses do?
• Aren't riveted faces and sleepers unnatural to those links bunkers/hazards?
• And doesn't the imposition of an a priori material disagreement (bunkers don't belong where sand doesn't naturally occur) actually limit creativity?
• And why we should be deprived of charming parkland course looks such as this... surely all 13 of the bunkers (the famed Eleanor's Teeth 326 yard 4th hole at Apawamis) are not necessary,  very well could be costly to maintain; but the playing is a joy, even if the sand is not "in situ."

[Sean_A]

There are a few levels useless monuments.

1. Bunkering that is so OTT that no discussion is necessary. Whoever was responsible was out of their mind.

2. Bunkering that is a bit overkill/repetitive etc.

3. Bunkering which asks nearly all the questions. No room for contour, slope, mounds, hollows etc.

Sometimes it's easy to remove bunkers and the problem is solved,especially
if the remaining bunkers are well placed.  Sometimes the interest of a hole is bit naked if a replacement feature isn't introduced. This can be tough because the course then may not tie together well unless many holes have replacement features.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Over bunkering or not is sometimes related to the local golf market.  Take a course like Gary Kern's Purgatory, with over 100 bunkers.  It certainly had to stand out in the Indiana/outer Indianapolis market, and probably needed to draw golfers out there.  Took a quick look at Google Earth and they don't seem to have been removed so far.  Most places would have taken out the ones that saw too little or too much use, whatever that range is. 


Other courses around it might have removed all bunkers to stand out on the easy end.  As soon as the second course with 100 bunkers opened in the area, one or the other would probably suffer biz wise.  The owner probably felt pretty safe that another wouldn't emulate it, but it never hurts marketing wise to be unique in some area.

[Garland Bayley]

Not only do we now have Church Pews as useless monuments, we also have Eleanor's Teeth. How can anyone get more butt ugly than these two examples? (Other than Desmond Muirhead with his ridiculous effort.)

[Garland Bayley]

"Bunkering for art's sake adds little to playing quality, but much to the maintenance budget." Ross p 157

He called it bad bunkering.

[Craig Sweet]

"I believe Rock Creek Cattle Company would be a natural parkland (I have only seen pictures). Perhaps Missoula Country Club (where Craig works) could be considered natural parkland."
[/size][/color]
[/size]Garland, I think you are spot on regarding Rock Creek...The Missoula Country Club is on ground that was probably not moved around very much, but I have seen old photo's and just about all the trees have been planted in the last 100 years.[/color]

[Kalen Braley]

I've played both, and based on Websters definition, I wouldn't describe RCCC as Parkland...but I would agree that Missoula CC certainly would qualify in its current form.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parkland

[Garland Bayley]

I've played both, and based on Websters definition, I wouldn't describe RCCC as Parkland...but I would agree that Missoula CC certainly would qualify in its current form.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parkland

That's fine Kalen, but Websters doesn't define my term "natural" parkland. I.e., a natural landscape that resembles a park landscape.

[Kalen Braley]

I've played both, and based on Websters definition, I wouldn't describe RCCC as Parkland...but I would agree that Missoula CC certainly would qualify in its current form.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parkland

That's fine Kalen, but Websters doesn't define my term "natural" parkland. I.e., a natural landscape that resembles a park landscape.

That was the point Garland,

You take away the golf course, and Missoula CC would be exactly that...a park landscape.  I can envision picnic benches out there and it would look similar to many I've been to.

RCCC on the other hand...not in the slightest.

[Forrest Richardson]

It's been a few years, but we did an average of my courses and the bunker count was...a resounding 21 average per course! I have always believed that most courses are over-bunkered. There are so many wonderful "surprise" "hazards" that do not involve sand and a more complicated drainage infrastructure.

Trees, as mentioned, can be great — although I found out early in my career that they die occasionally   Here is one that we took great care with, and 20 years later it was gone:




Some other "hazards" Swales, bumps, counter-slopes, hollows, sleeper walls, ditches, rock outcrops and waste areas.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()