[Tom_Ross]

Couple of random thoughts:

1) Some of the finest and most challenging holes in the world are bunkerless, namelly #11 at Ballybunion, #14 at Dornoch, etc.

2) Other than seaside linklands, the Sandhills of NC or NE and a few other places, sandy areas or even sheep-made wind-protecting indentions are not natural.

3) Bunkers are costly to maintain and upkeep and overtime are frequently lost.

But yet we never see architects building bunkerless courses that challenge the players like the holes mentioned above.  Why not....  

Would it not still allow players of all skills to enjoy the course?  

Would it not offer a variety of strategic options if maintained firm and fast?  

Would it not provide a level of elasticity since players would not be able to use technology to overcome shorter bunkers?

Would it not offer interesting putting and chipping options?  

Would it not allow affordable courses to be built and maintained?  

[Tim_Weiman]

Tom Ross:

One could probably eliminate all the bunkers on Ballybunion Old and not really change the course that much. It just has so many little things happening on the ground all over the place to create many interesting recovery shots.

During the 2000 Irish Open, I spent four days serving as a steward overlooking #7 green (which played as #2). It was great to see guys just barely miss this green and try to get up and down.

To make this concept work, you need interesting land.

[Dan Kelly]

To answer your questions, Tom Ross:

Yes, it could.

Yes, it could.

Yes, it could.

Yes, it could.

Yes, it could.

I'd love to see such a course someday.

[ian]

Hockley Valley, north of Toronto, is a reasonably good budget job without one bunker. Its unusual to see 18 holes without bunkers.

[Brian_Gracely]

Ian,

What does Hockley Valley primarily use to defend par (or some score)?  Is it the contour of the land, or punishing rough, or does it have varying wind patterns?

[Craig Van Egmond]

Floyd Farley built two 18 hole courses in Guthrie, Oklahoma with nary a bunker on either one of them. Fun courses and challenging enough for most golfers. It took me a few holes before I even noticed there wasn't any bunkers.

That Floyd was a minimilist before it was cool.

[TEPaul]

Tom Ross;

This is a concept that's been discussed on here a number of times. The concept absolutely fascinates me.

However, sand bunkering is what I call that not particularly necessary feature that has hung on in golf since the linksland. Why did it do that? Good question really, and the answer is probably as simple is it just happened to be that single vestige that reminded golfers of the linksland. But bunkers are everywhere in golf and have been since golf left the linksland. Probably on 90% of the courses in the world today sand is not natural as it is in the linksland.

To go bunkerless on a course today would be a real switch and the course would probably have to have some damn good topography to compensate strategically.

William Flynn went light on bunkering on land he felt had good topography or some really interesting natural features and he went heavier on bunkering on flat land and land without natural feature. To Flynn sand bunkering was a bit of a supplement in architecture!

There might be an even better reason for the prevalence of sand bunkering on golf courses throughout man-made operation though, particularly in the old days. Particularly around greens, cut and fill operations basically leave "cuts" that can easily be filled with sand---that's probably how and why the majority of the bunkers in the old days came to be. It was sort of form following function.

[Paul_Daley]

Until quite recently, the Irish links - Dooks - had a mere 12 or so bunkers sprinkled throughout its layout. Donald Steel's firm upgraded and added some, but it would still be one of the least bunkered anywhere.

[bodgeblack]

In Britain we generally regard Royal Ashdown Forest as our best course without any bunkers. As has been mentioned already by Tim Weiman, it is the undulating character of the land that helps make this course work.

This best compliment that can be paid to RAF is that you don't realise the complete lack of bunkers when you play the course.

[Andrew Summerell]

I find, in many occasions on a course with good topography, that greenside bunkers are often more desirable to be in than playing from the turf. Even on courses with deep bunkers. In most cases a splash shot will suffice with 90% of the greenside bunkers you get into & you will leave yourself in a good position to make par & no worse than bogey.

Playing from the turf can leave you with up, down or side hill lies, from tight grass through to rough, & a myriad of options on what shot you might play. On a well designed course, it is these shots that give more difficultly than most of the bunkers.

This, of course, is all conditional on being a reasonable player out of bunkers.

[allysmith]

Tom,


Braemar Golf Club is Scotland's highest 18 hole course but it is easy walking. Situated at the foot of Glenclunie, the River Clunie splits the course into two, with water playing a large part in 12 of the 18 holes. As a par 65 it makes an ideal holiday course, with each of the par threes being completely different in style, from the 103 yard, 6th to the near impossible 2, 4, 5, 10, 17th. The second hole is the signature hole. At 69 yds it sounds short, but the fairway lies between heavy rough and the river Clunie, the second shot is to a large elevated green that makes the hole much longer than it looks.

The main thing is it doesn't have ANY bunkers.

[Tom_Doak]

This is kind of like asking why they don't make movies in black and white anymore.  They would be cheaper to make and more traditional, but they would not be as popular.

The principal reason you don't see bunkerless courses is that the only kind of ground which has the sort of natural hazards that would adequately replace bunkers is ... linksland, where it's so easy to dig a bunker.  All of your fine examples of bunkerless holes are on linksland.

[Jack_Marr]

I think there's only 18 bunkers in Carne, and none of them are pot bunkers. I would prefer if there were more. I love the look of pot bunkers, which would protect the course when there's no wind.

[Pete Lavallee]

I agree with Jamie that Royal Ashdown Forest is a great example of how to build a very challanging bunkerless course. The undulations near the greens really do help to protect par, but the presence of heather is what really makes these rippling folds work so well. Eliminate the heather and this course would be 3 to 4 shots easier. Many of the heathland golf courses employ heather as a very successful hazard; natural, escapeable (with a high degree of uncertainty), and provides a nice color contrast when in bloom.

[Pete Buczkowski]

Another example, though not necessarily great architecture, is the River course at Hampton Cove (part of RTJ trail).  I remember a few interesting holes; there is one with an old tree in the middle of the fairway and many of the greensites have interesting undulations around them.  

[JNC Lyon]

Ray Floyd built a bunkerless course in Naples, Florida called Raptor Bay. It does not have any rough, but there is probably water on every hole.

Durand Eastman in Rochester, NY is another example of an RTJ bunkerless course. Believe it or not, it is one of the most interesting courses in the area. It uses hilly terrain, a stream, and tiny greens to defend par.

[ian]

Brian,

The bunkers were shaped but seeded to be stripped out later. They were never stripped, so that you have many rough hollows around the greens. the course also has a LOT of elevation change. Its built at a ski resort.

I certainly would like to try the idea out to see if it could be made interesting enough. The tough part is the loss of contrast from the sand. It would remove a major framing element. I wonder if you would be forced to use native grasses for contrast, as to avoid a uniform green looking playing field.

[rgkeller]

Replacing the bunkers with small ponds would be appropriate in certain instances.

[Brian_Gracely]

Ian,

If the concern is uniformity of "green-ness", couldn't you use watering patterns (ie. minimal in the fairways) to distinguish between fairways and rough?  Native grass could also assist in this.

And wouldn't some deep contouring create shadowing that could be visable from the tee at certain times of the day?

Could you create "pot grass bunkers" without severe drainage issues?  Might be an interesting concept to experiment with.  

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ian,

What about Highlands Links, in terms of the absense of driving area bunkers?

#1: none (par 4)
#2: none (par 4)
#4: one (par 4)
#6: none (par 5)
#7: none (par 5)
#8: a couple (par 4)
#9: none (par 4)

#11: none (par 4)
#13: none (par 4)
#14: none (par 4)
#15: none (par 5)
#16: none (par 5)
#18: one (par 4)

Less the five par 3s, we're left with 13 holes featuring just four driving area bunkers. A result of the inherently severe ground contour, no doubt.

Interesting, eh.

[Lou_Duran]

There are many in Ohio, and most of them are goat tracks.  Do they have to be so expensive to build and maintain?  For the average player, are bunkers not a hazard of consequence without being overly penal like water?

Reasons for bunkers- variety, interest, TRADITION, flexibility in levels of difficulty/penalty, aesthetics, consumer demand, etc.

Can one imagine CPC without its beautiful bunkers?  How about Olympic-Lake without the well guarded greens, or, alternatively for the fairways, without trees?

[Bill Gayne]

I quickly perused the yardage books that I have for Irish links courses to identify courses with holes without a bunker. I found that either the courses had multiple holes without bunkers or all bunkers.

Those with bunkerless holes:
Royal Portrush Dunluce 4 holes (5,6,8,14)
Ballybunion old 4 holes (6,7,9,11)
Carne 7 holes (1,3,6,12,14,18)
Royal Portrush Valley 7 holes (1,4,7,8,9,10,13)
Doonbeg 2 holes (5,14)
Tralee 5 holes (2,8,12,13,15)

Those without bunkerless holes include Lahinch, Portmarnock, and Ballyliffin, Ballybunion Cashen.

It tough to imagine a better stretch of holes with minimal bunkering than 5,6,8 at Portrush and Ballybunion at 6,7,9

[Tim_Weiman]

billg:

It is misleading to mention Ballybunion's Cashen course as being without a bunkerless hole.

Even more than with the Old course, one could remove every single bunker on the entire course and not really change the way it plays very much.

I can't think of a single tee shot or approach shot where bunkers really even enter my mind.

[Bill Gayne]

Tim,

I only looked at the holes as presented in the yardage books. I've played the Cashen course twice so my knowledge of how the bunkers come into play is limited. There are probably holes on all of these courses that the bunkers may have little impact on play.

[Mike_DeVries]

At Greywalls, the project growing-in (well, not exactly at this time of year ) in Marquette, MI, there is great contour to the land and multiple sites of rock walls or rock outcroppings.  So there are 7 holes without bunkers (2, 4, 5, 6, 14, 15, 18) and that kind of surprised me when it turned out that way.  In addition, there are 2 holes with only 1 bunker (9, 10), others with bunkers in play but more as a separation off landing areas(1, 7), one with "savior" bunkers behind the green (16), 3 with more traditional greenside bunkers (3, 12, 17), and three with bunkers in multiple areas (8, 11, 13) -- really only 6 with "conventional" bunkering schemes.  36 bunkers in total, which is about 100 less than Kingsley -- different site, different parameters and features to highlight.  I think despite the big difference in the numbers of the two courses, each is appropriate and fits with its landscape and design.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()