by David White

Associated as I am with golf course constructors, it is not uncommon for me to be quizzed by golfers and golf club secretaries on all manner of things relating to golf courses, though not necessarily always relating to their construction. One such recent query got me going, though, for it posed the vexing question of sand in bunkers; concerned especially to ascertain correct depth, consistency, texture, ‘feel’ and appearance. Most important, the gentleman was eager to determine what the ideal preparation of bunker sand might be. As his enquiry came via e-mail, I guessed it might have been prompted by a less than happy personal experience, my vision being of a golfer cursing his ill fortune at failing to ‘get out’ with a single shot, or even two!       

First, I explained that constructors follow detailed specifications laid down by the architect. Modern practice suggests an even spread of 100mm (say 4”) or very occasionally 150mm. Next, the constructor will exercise those skills necessary to prepare the contours and cavities, (installing adequate drainage, for example); such that a consistent spread of material is the end result. I pointed out the necessity for using sands of specially chosen grade and consistent quality, warning that failure of a bunker to perform satisfactorily was much more likely should this principle be ignored.

Finally, I made clear that new sand first should be ‘tamped’, raked with the flat (backside) of the rake to leave a smooth finished surface, then left to settle. The same rules apply later, when the greenkeeper begins his periodic reparation, with ‘tamping’ an essential part of the materials renewal process. It went without saying that sand is a movable material, with golfers themselves scattering it over bunker flashes and onto greens, plus high winds and rough weather making their own distinctive mark.

What sealed my few comments, however, was highly opinionated. I said that bunkers are meant to be punishment, that hazards are supposed to be hazardous and were not always meant to be fair.  “So what is fair punishment”, came his reply, “can punishment ever be ‘fair’?”  It was a good retort.

The point is, golfers today have come to expect and in some cases demand that their golf be ‘fair’. Pro golfers are the worst offenders, I fancy, their whingeing the norm if every blade of grass or grain of sand is not uniform. Yet hazards make the game a proper trial comprising equal parts luck and ingenuity. Without them, golf would be unutterably dull. Not for nothing have bunkers come to be known as traps, for that is what their purpose is — to snare the unwary and punish the wayward. Funny, too, that bunkers alone come in for such uncalled for tongue-lashing, when the whole course comprises hazards such as ditches, rough, bushes and trees, fences, walls and no-go areas punishable by stroke and distance. As five-times Open Champion Peter Thomson once noted, ‘It takes character to come face to face with a footmark in a bunker or not to whinge upon finding the ball nestling nicely against the butt of a tree.’ 

Personal opinion, again, but I think (St Andrews Old excepted) that bunkers are unfair only if they cannot be seen from the tee, while being useless when they are of substantial acreage yet lacking in substance, often being no more than two inches or so in depth. Even the lowliest duffer can hike his ball away from them, while the skilled practitioner can land upon the green with ease and with backspin! These are not proper bunkers and present a lesser penalty than the first cut of rough.

A lesson in history will show that bunkers at first were not man-made, but craters formed by wind and weather erosion on linksland frequented by sheep. They created quite a protective barrier for the flock, thus when man came to thump his ball, they were natural obstacles. Simplistic by nature, and the better for it, what a travesty it is that some architects working today think it a good wheeze to design bunkers shaped like huge fish, Marilyn Monroe’s breasts, or the State of Texas!

The late Peter Dobereiner, a truly gifted writer, once suggested that all bunker rakes should be gathered together and burnt, thereafter returning to real golf, by which he meant golf as it was meant to be played, with hazards which strike terror into the golfers vitals as he stands on the tee. No bad thing, in my view.

Privileged to attend the Walker Cup in 1985, it was my greatest thrill to play over the legendary Pine Valley course soon after we British had been thoroughly drubbed. I have conveniently forgotten my score, but will never forget the thrill of playing the ball as it lies, which at Pine Valley meant traversing all manner of sandy acreage that had never seen a rake. It was adventurous, to say the least, while attempting to clear some of this rugged country required a hefty wood shot, then another, then another…  

Watching ‘new golfer’ on many courses, I’m convinced that most of them haven’t a clue how to wield a rake, while others could care less, so I’m all for returning to the pre 1900 scenario, when rakes were unheard of. It could bring back pleasure to a game that was, as Old Tom Morris once observed, ‘eternally humbling’.