Whether the architect is Park,
MacKenzie or Colt, the same is true - that all features throughout the design of each hole relate back from green to tee, rather than forwards from tee to green. The way in which the green is protected by bunkers, grassy hollows, mounding, water hazards, etc., directly influences the approach shot into the green. Moreover, the position that the approach shot is played from affects the drive and the choice of club - wood, long iron, etc. - to be played from the tee. Bunkering and featuring at the landing area impacts directly upon whether the golfer wants to take on more or less of a risk - the choice determines how difficult the approach shot into the green will be. The greater the risk the greater the reward. While Willie Park Jnr. and Harry Colt
were transforming the placement of bunkers, and their influence upon the design of golf courses, Alister Mackenzie was refining the shaping and style of
All features throughout the design of each hole relate back from green to tee, rather than forward from tee to green
memorable golf courses in the USA - Crystal Downs, Cypress Point, Pasatiempo (Mexico) and, most famously, Augusta National. Sadly, the bunkers at Augusta have been tampered with by numerous golf course architects over the years, mainly Trent Jones, and the only one remaining that looks remotely like MacKenzie’s style is on the 10th fairway, but it is now pretty redundant in playing terms, being as it is mid-point between fairway landing area and the green. In general, there are many bunkers
throughout the world that fail to provide a suitable and relevant hazard for a number of reasons. This may be because the placement is not correct in relation to distance from the tee, line of approach, slope of the fairway/landing area, visibility, fairness, challenge, etc. the list goes on ... The reason why bunkers don’t achieve their true potential can also be due to poor maintenance, and the difficulty of maintaining a good grass and/or heather
deteriorate and look unsightly, especially on exposed sites. On links courses these bunkers sometimes need to be replaced or renovated every two to three years. Also, because of the effects of erosion by the elements, golfers’ feet and maintenance vehicles, the bunker lips collapse, creating, in some cases, unplayable lies. As greenside bunkers advance towards the green and the faces wear away, the size of the green aprons reduces, restricting access to golfers and, more importantly, to maintenance equipment around the greens. This eventually results in a considerable reduction in the size of the greens themselves. Where greens are already small this is unacceptable, creating further wear problems on the putting surface.
15th green at West Hill GC - Bernard Darwin’s favourite par-3 hole
bunkers themselves. The ‘lace-wing’ style, still visible on some bunkers at Headingley and Harrogate Golf Clubs in Yorkshire, which he developed and used successfully at numerous golf courses throughout the UK and USA, was revolutionary (if a little more difficult to maintain). These bunkers soon settled into their location and had a more natural character, moving away from the more maintained style being developed by not just Park and Colt, but by John Abercromby (at Worplesdon) and Tom Simpson (at Chantilly and Morfontaine, both near Paris). MacKenzie went on to design
22
sward on the surrounds, slopes and banking. In general terms, the sand faces advance forward into the mounds they have been built into, due to the way golfers play from them, normally with a sand iron, eventually creating a steep face with a cliff or lip at the apex of the mound. Where there are also drainage problems, and where sandy soil sits on top of clay, the entire bunker face can collapse following heavy rain. On many inland courses, bunkers have
previously, and inappropriately, been revetted, which has created specific problems. These bunkers are notoriously difficult to maintain and can very quickly
At the same time, the aprons immediately adjacent to the bunkers wear away with little grass cover or, in some places, none at all. The shape and close proximity of the greenside bunkers encourages sandsplash onto the apron. Over the years the sand builds up to such an extent that the topsoil is buried, creating a very sandy, drought-prone and hostile growing environment for the grass. This dries out more readily in summer and, in wetter conditions, encouraging moss and weeds to grow. Even if grass does begin to establish, the sandsplash would continue to restrict its growth under constant build up from golfers. Bunkers degrade over the years, not necessarily due to poor management, but to a number of factors; possibly a poor original shape or a bad location. Add to this a higher number of golfers now playing the game and the increased general wear associated with the playing of bunker shots. When thousands of shots are played from a bunker, this will inevitably lead to a change in the character of the bunker shape and this problem worsens over the years.
Due to the distances that
golfers are now able to hit a golf ball there are many bunkers that have become redundant and contribute little to the playability or challenge of the course. This may provide potential for the construction of new, well-placed fairway bunkers, which would make the courses considerably more testing to play. On some heathland and moorland courses, heather growth on the bunker banks and surrounds gives them a very attractive look, but makes them difficult to maintain in a neat and tidy state and sometimes creates ruling problems - i.e. is the ball in the bunker or not when it is sitting in overhanging heather?
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115