Bunkers are perhaps the most debated feature in golf course architecture. Are they strategic hazards designed to test skill and decision-making? Are they aesthetic elements that frame holes and create visual drama? Or are they simply maintenance burdens that slow play and drain budgets?
The Golden Age Approach
During the Golden Age of golf architecture — roughly the 1910s through the 1930s — bunkers were placed with surgical precision. Architects like A.W. Tillinghast, Seth Raynor, and Charles Banks didn't place bunkers randomly; every trap served a purpose.
What made Golden Age bunkering special was the integration with the land. The best bunkers of that era looked as though they'd been there for centuries — natural depressions in the earth that happened to be filled with sand.
The Modern Debate
In modern golf, bunkers have become a flashpoint. Many courses have reduced bunker counts to lower maintenance costs. Others have opted for flatter, more uniform bunker styles that are easier to maintain but lack the character of their Golden Age predecessors.
The courses I visited on the Northeast trip — Winged Foot, Friar's Head, Stonewall — all approach bunkering differently, but each proves the same point: when bunkers are designed with intention and maintained with care, they elevate a course from good to unforgettable. They are not a burden. They are the beauty.