[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Ventola,

The green speeds on holes # 9 and 18 weren't necessarily different.  The agronomic practices were.  The intended result was uniform green speeds, in light of severer slopes on #'s 9 and 18.

[T_MacWood]

Jeff
I do understand what you are saying about the simple shaped bunkers somtimes looking more interesting from ground level -- a 3-D effect. The 4th and 17th come to mind. I still wish they would bring back some of the original outline and dirty up the super clean lines.

I don't know much about Dornick Hills, how good it was or wasn't in Maxwell's day. But I'd hate to have my work's fate come down to the opinions of my nieces and nephews. "Yes I do think that looney Uncle Tom should be institutionalized" or "With all due respect to our late Uncle Jeff, this KSU course is in need of more waterfeatures and a waterfall or two. Go ahead Tommy Fazio and update this museum piece."

[Mike Ventola]

Patrick

How can you have uniform green speed without uniform agronomic practices?

I think they raised the height of cut on those greens or rolled them less or watered them more but in any case that would make the stimp meter readings corrected for slope differ from the other 16 holes on the golf course.  

[RobertWalker]

The OPEN course should be set up in a consistent manner. All greens should be rolling at the  same speed.
Does that mean that the USGA should have slowed down the other 17 when they learned about 18? I walked most of the course with the last 4 pairings on Saturday, and I must say that 18 looked lush, compared to the other 17 greens. That had to have an impact on Cink, Brooks, and Goosen.
But look at http://www.walkerpix.com/2001usOPEN/USsunday/SUNDAY.html,  and tell me that Goosen's 1st putt was horrible.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Ventola,

If a flat, low green sits in the shade all day, do you think it will putt at the same pace as a green that is elevated, with severe pitch, that sits in the sun all day, if the identical agronomic practices are used on both greens ?

[Mike Ventola]

No green should be in the shade.
Plants get their food from light.
Without it there will be no turf or lean plants that are very fast because they have very low density.

Remember the USGA says the Stimp meter is to keep the greens consistent.  

[Mike Ventola]

Recent research at Michigan State University shows that most golfers can tell a 6 inch difference in green speed.  I think that is a reasonable tolerance to shoot for....

Remember at these championships the greens speeds are checked and rechecked each day.

At Pinehurst some greens were mowed up to 6 times a day to get them the same speed.
The practice green was mowed 17 times Wendesday to get it to the speeds of the course.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom,

DH was built on his dairy farm, and my understanding is it was his first course, so I expect he himself would believe later examples of his work are better.  The first course is, I guess, signifigant and sentimental both. Perry is buried next to the 17th tee - and of course we went to pay our respects every day.  oes anyone know if Press is buried there too, since his death a few years ago?

It is always a shock to hear some of your work is being remodelled, but, as the bumper sticker says "It happens". On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the pain experienced by being turned down by the class beauty on your invite to the prom (I was watching "Pretty in Pink" with my 15 year old daughter tonight) the first time you hear of your work going under the knife, is about a 7, going down to about a 2 or 3 after you have it happen five times or so.

You can't take it personally when a course gets changed - and you can take solace from the fact that you are in some very, very, good company.  As "crazy" Tom Fazio says in his book, there are lots of reasons for it, and most of us would like to change several things anyway.  That's why I am not at all sure that the holy grail of "the architect's original intent" is really so holy....I suspect many changes (although not in Fazio's case) really stem from not having enough money to do it right the first time.

Jeff

[TEPaul]

Tom Egan:

Good honest post! I agree with you completely.

Paul Turner:

You and I weren't seeing things or dreaming. Retief Goosen seems to be an unusually calm, steady and collected golfer and I suppose that what Cink did before him sure didn't help him but I really don't think Cink's three putt or missed short putt hurt him all that much and I don't think the inconsistent green speed did either.

The crowd, the shock and emotion of what Cink was doing probably threw him off a bit but to me it may have been as much the wait. But I really believe his entire demeanor was beginning to change from what it had been during the round. I looked at the tape again and Goosen still looked somewhat cool and collected but nothing like he had on the previous holes.

Far more than Cink or greenspeed inconsistency, I think "The Moment" and the import of the whole thing was quickly overtakening Goosen.

Cink just lost his concentration totally because he obviously believed he'd just lost the US Open with his par putt. Brooks had a difficult two putt but even he was probably captured by the enigmatic problems of "please God somehow let me two putt" instead of just concentrating on executing doing just that!

Goosen clearly had a fairly simple 9-12ft putt but the fact that he only had to two putt to win the Open definitely wasn't lost on him.

It may seem odd, bizarre or contradictory but knowing that you only have to two putt,  even with a simple putt like that, can really play tricks on the mind. I have no doubt whatsoever that if Goosen knew he had to sink that first putt to win the Open he would have hit a good putt 1000 out of 1000 times.

But knowing that TWO PUTTS were all you had to accomplish to acheive everything you ever dreamed of and all that stands between you and the US Open is a different matter. I have no doubt that when he was over that putt his thoughts were probably more of "please God let me get this at least so close I won't even have to think about it" instead of just executing.

When he didn't do that the shock of it must have been immense and the doubts about missing a two foot putt became extrapolated many fold more than the problems of two putting the first putt. The doubts and fears of two putting and then making the come back were obviously more prevalent in his mind than just executing.

I'm sure all of us somewhere in our different levels and experiences can relate to what he went through.

I'm sure most of us know the feeling whether it's a money match, a club championship, a state amateur, a tour event or a US Open.

"The Moment" clearly captured Goosen on the first and certainly the second putt. And yes I'm glad he won, although I did want Brooks to win in 72 holes because I really thought he played a better and a smarter US Open.

[T_MacWood]

Jeff
I don't know that much about the original quality of DH, only what I have read over the years and it was highly regarded. It was the first course Maxwel built or at least the first 9, while he was still a banker in 1913. The second 9 was completed after he left banking and become an golf architect in 1923. He continued to live there until 1946, so it seems odd for you would conclude that later works would be better. Maybe not odd because certainly it might be true, but even if he did design better courses, one can not conclude that DH was inferior, especially when you consider he lived near it for 33 years and was eventually buried there.

I suspect the work of Nugent didn't help much and maybe it was impractical for you to restore both nines to there original form--I have no idea. I'm a little uneasy with getting his neices and nephews to sign off on the changes, why not Press or his daughter, they would seem more qualified, although I'm not sure even they would as qualified as yourself armed with proper research. Perhaps it would have been museum piece, but aren't most of our greatest courses museum pieces?

Courses do get altered, but that doesn't make it right. Just because it is present reality and everyone does it, does not mean it should continue. Didn't you mother ever ask you if a friend jumped off a bridge first, would you follow him--hell yes I would, but I was young and stupid. A '7' is a pretty significant pain, I would think you boys would do something to protect your long lost predicessors important work, for future generations to study & enjoy and because one day you will be long lost predicessor.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Ventola,

Thanks for the information.

I believe the many trees surrounding the greens at Southern Hills, and other courses cause many of their greens to be in the shade for a good part of the day.

Now, could you please answer my question.

[Mike Ventola]

Pat

I believe that the green you speak of will be within 6 inches, the detectable tolerance for the human hand if the agronomic practices are the same.

As I stated there are many factors moving your dark green to the speen, not density of a green in the sun.

Cheers
MWV

[Mike Ventola]

In addition aditional mowings at the same height can speed up slower greens to where they are consistent.
Remember the USGA repeadely stimps greens before play to assure they are of near equal speed.  
That is why I feel the maintenance for 9 and 18 at SH was such a step backwards for maintenance at National Championships.

[Goose]

Jeff (or others),

Off the subject a little:  Regarding another Maxwell course (Press) Pecan Valley in San Antonio. (site of the 01' US Publinks Championship)  Can you comment on the Cupp modernization? After playing the new course, the greens seem to have lost some of their roll and do not seem as severe s they were.  How about the placement of the new clubhouse in proximity to the 18th green.  By the way, from my memory, the 9th and 18th greens had more than there share of roll in comparison to the rest or the greens.  Still very enjoyable, but???

[Brad Klein]

Patrick, 16 greens at Southern Hills were cut to .130-inch; the 9th and 18th were cut to .145=inch.

That's different enough to make a difference. Whether it caused the fiasco at the 72nd hole is another issue, and I just don't know.

Jeff Brauer makes a great point; how we would have reacted to Keith Foster having softened the greens to accommodate the new bentgrasses. I think when greens are 5-6 percent slope and they are softened to 3-4 percent slope, that's reasonable and still keep the character; when the go down to 1 or 2 that's not. I know it's dangerous to play a numbers game. Also, I know that it's crucial to preserve ground contours. But unless they're willing to keep green speeds to 8-9 on the Stimpemeter, then something has to give.

By the way, the scary thing about SH is that Foster oversaw removal of 100 obtrusive trees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brad Klein,

Your original post stated or implied that there was a design flaw in the 18th green.

I don't feel that is the case, and tried to get everyone to look at the green from the membership's long term playability point of view.

This green will serve the membership well for the next umpteen years, with or without future events, and as such, the design of the green is inherently sound, not flawed.

I can think of many greens that have suffered, and become almost unplayable at higher stimp speeds.  # 18 at Seminole is one, almost any green at Deepdale and Stanwich are others.

I would be very surprised if this was the first time a green was treated differently from the other greens.

[RobertWalker]

When I covered the Amateur at the HONORS in 1991, I remember Pete Dye complained to different people that the greens were way too fast for the designs.
Could it be that the USGA has let the green speed get a little out of hand?
What were the speeds at the TOUR Championship in 1996? Did 9 and 18 putt at different speeds?
Did players complain?

[T_MacWood]

Why would you want rebuild the greens when the US Open comes every 20 years or so? Is there any guarantee that those rebuilding the greens will replicate the exact nature of the slopes? Do you have to rebuild them again in 20 or 30 years when the standard becomes 13 or 14 on the stimpmeter? Isn't it all relative, putting on greens that have 5% slope and stimp at 9 compared to 3% slope and stimp 11 or 12? These greens are plenty exciting, interesting and difficult at 8 and 9. Shouldn't the standard for speed be the Old Course, certainly we wouldn't want to tone down those greens for more speed? Isn't it easier to keep a green healthy at 8 or 9?

It would seem to me that stopping this trend at 8 or 9 would be much better for the game. It would prevent many of these vintage greens from getting out of hand and prevent them from going under the knife, evasive procedures performed by golf architects with a varying degrees of skill and respect for the past. It would also allow modern designers to create equally interesting and creative greens. If flattish greens are more exciting at 11 or 12, then they should be enhanced and made more interesting for 8 or 9--flat greens have always been boring. I say forget about trying to increase speed and concentrate the effort on increasing firmness on the green and through the green.

[Jeff_Brauer]

goose,

Haven't seen Cupp's work there.

Brad,

I agree with you.  John Harbottle had a similar task at LACC, and I have putted his greens at a speed of 10 plus.  He reduced 5-6% to 3-4%, and they were tough, but fair.

I have heard Keith talk about tree removal, bunker movement, etc at SH, and I know it was a struggle, as it is most places, to remove trees.  Hundred sounds like a great accomplishment!

Jeff

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

I would agree with you, understanding that Southern Hill's greens were rebuilt due to a broad based act of vandalism, requiring that 6 or more greens had to be rebuilt.  I doubt anyone wanted 12 greens of one consistency and 6 greens with another consistency, hence the decision was made to redo all the greens in an effort to achieve uniform consistency on all 18 greens, and I'm not just referencing putting.

[Mike Ventola]

Nice article Brad
Superintendents News 6/6/01
I can still not believe that the USGA would set up greens to roll 18 inches slower then other greens on the same course??

9 & 18 were at 10 and the rest were at 11.5

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()