Courses With Fewer Bunkers
Posted 08 June 2015 - 02:05 AM
Is there any data on resource requirements?
I am trying to get consideration for removing a few bunkers to assist with managing costs.
An ongoing issue is that the standard of bunker condition slips to poor levels easily. Other aspects get priority.
I think it is possible to have an excellent golf course with few bunkers.
It would help me to have a list of some well regarded Australian courses which have a modest number of bunkers. Reference to any independent rating would be really good to have.
Posted 09 June 2015 - 01:04 PM
Um, I think it sort of depends on where you are.
In Perth the sand is just what you find when you dig a hole rather than being brought in, so while there is perhaps a little more maintenance, the marginal cost is not horrendous.
Also consider that bunkers can be placed in areas where there would otherwise be weak turf or lots of divots and so can actually be used to reduce maintenance if they replace grass that would be hard to maintain.
Posted 09 June 2015 - 02:23 PM
IMO, a great course is not defined by the number of bunkers it possesses. It all depends on the design of the course and how the bunkers have been positioned to fit in with the nature of the terrain.
Bunkers that are placed simply to frustrate the average golfer are incorrectly placed. They should be positioned so as to present risk for the more daring golfer. Risk/reward is fair enough IMO. That's what makes a golf course great.
- chinaalan, CaNadiAn MiCk, Bluethunda and 1 other like this
Posted 12 June 2015 - 02:26 PM
The course looks scenic and very mature.
I guess it would have a high slope rating if one were done.
Thanks for the reference, Rhombus.
Posted 04 July 2015 - 05:27 AM
I know nothing about golf architecture.
Posted 04 July 2015 - 11:07 AM
As do 99% of the people on Golf Club boards and committees but many mess with architecture just the same.
I know nothing about golf architecture.
- jetset, RobNewy and Itchy4Scratch like this
Posted 08 July 2015 - 11:10 AM
I am at Coolangatta Tweed and we had over 160 bunkers on 36 holes. We have just removed 26 bunkers completely and reduced 8 in size (according to our supers blog) and you wouldn't know anything has happened. The works were supervised / suggested by an architect I believe and done very professionally. You wouldn't know there was a bunker there in every case. More are to be done in the next year I believe which has to reduce maintenance costs and it has improved the golf course no end. Not that it needed improving grass wise - just more enjoyable to play now. Most of the bunkers were old out of the way fairway bunkers that were more of a leaf collector than a bunker. Maybe our super has actual savings but the improvement in the playability is worth it alone.
Posted 08 July 2015 - 04:50 PM
Glad to hear positive feedback about the bunker works at Cooly-Tweed.
I was the arkie involved and for some years I;ve been telling them 80 odd bunkers on each golf course is just far too many. Not only are they a drain in maintenance resources but many of them provide little in regard to playing strategy.
I earmarked 40 to be filled in and this was just the tip of the iceberg. Fairway traps are much easier to fill in thad greenside so these were the first to go. The Superintendent and shaping team were awesome. I gave minimal instructions other than to ensure good drainage of the surrounding land and MAKE SURE THEY DON;T LOOK LIKE FILLED IN BUNKERS. The end results are superb.
With an average age of the club nearing the late 60's I trust the changes are received well. There are always a few naysayers that whicge about the rating number dropping a few points but as I said at the club information night...I don;t give a rats about the rating number. I'm trying to givre you a golf course the members can enjoy, beit 2 markers or 36 markers.
Happy to talk to other clubs that wish to head in a similar direction.
- BumpunGrind, languid, Jack_Golfer and 1 other like this
Posted 09 July 2015 - 11:36 AM
She is playing women's comp today. I played yesterday at home Club Blackheath.
Had a look at C-T website. Aerial photos show magnificent green-side bunkers. Anyway we must make a trip there soon. Romantic reasons the best.
Back to the architecture discussion.
We need to rebuild some existing bunkers. Cash is very limited. What do you recommend as best value drainage methods?
Geotech fabric has not lasted well. Must have been 12 years since this was installed. Has been causing problems and not doing much of a job for many years.
Posted 09 July 2015 - 12:39 PM
I think the days of carving out a clay subgrade for a bunker and filling with sand are gone. You really need some sort of interface between the clay and the sand. This is to stop contimation between the clay and the sand and improve drainage.
There are bunker fabrics and there are bunker fabrics, lots to choose from. Geofabrics Bunkermatt is the best on the marker by a mile. Needs to be installed correctly and pinned down. If care and attention you should get a good result for a minimum of 5 years.
Next step up are the newer lining products that include Matrix (porous bitumen), Pro Liner (bitumen), Capilliary Concrete and Kuston bind, to name a few. They act on the same principle as the fabric in that they create a new intermediate surface between the sand and the clay. Water runs through this surface and into a gravel base in the bunker, similar to a USGA green construction method.
These liners are expensive but do work. Whether they last 2, 5 or 10 years is the big question as none have been on the ground for more than about two years.
Cheap solutions probably mean more regular maintenance of the sand and the drain lines.
Oh and design of the bunkers must be done to reduce the amount of water runoff into the bunkers, to give them half a chance.
Edited by golfer69, 09 July 2015 - 12:41 PM.
- Itchy4Scratch likes this
Posted 09 July 2015 - 01:26 PM
Thanks for that information. I have had a look at Geofabrics website. Read about Bidim A14 being used at Bargara to wrap the drainage line and Bunkermat on the slopes. Do you have an opinion on the use of Bidim?
Our course Super has done a nice job doing a stacked turf face reconstructing one smallish bunker. This is an interesting alternative to sand covered slopes. The slope is moderate but if you get really close to the revetted face the lie is unplayable towards the flagstick. The benefit is less sand and avoiding issues with retaining sand on the face of the bunker. There are pros and cons to everything.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users