News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


TEPaul

Re:Green speeds and green reconstruction
« Reply #50 on: July 13, 2004, 06:03:44 AM »
Phelps Morris:

Thanks for that post---it's very informative and in line with what we've been finding with a similar process and "reasonable maximum" green speed study at my course--Gulph Mills G.C. (Ross-1916) in Pa.

I've been to and played Crystal Downs a number of times over the years and have been aware that a number of people (I think including Tom Doak) felt the club was running speeds too high for the types of greens the course has.

Some of the greens of Crystal may have a bit more slope on them than we have, but perhaps not. It sounds to me like the membership greenspeed survey as to what's ideal or the "reasonsble maximum" green speed (9.5-10.5) for that course is right on the money and completely in line compared to what we're finding!

However, there seems to be a couple of interesting factors involved with playability when putting greens reach the 11 area on stimp reading. That is at right around that reading and green speed the putting surface loses the necessary friction to bring the ball to rest and the phenomenon of "ball creep" enters the equation of playablility where the ball on any kind of slope or contour simply loses its ability to come to rest and continues to move obviously taken by the effects of  gravity. One thing all should come to realize with putting speeds with this phenomenon at work is none of us are going to alter or reinvent physics!

A good example of "ball creep" due to lack of necessary friction on the putting green to bring a slowly moving ball to rest which some might remember was the putt of Phil Mickelson's on Saturday on the 7th green of the US Open at Shinnecock. He had about a 10 ft putt for par breaking right to left from slightly above the cup. The ball missed and the camera followed it very closely as it ever so slightly continued to roll very slowly (ball creep) until it appeared to almost rock and catch perhaps on a single blade of grass app. 20 ft below the cup. If that single blade of grass had not caught the ball it would've continued to build up speed on the higher slope below it and roll into the bunker to the left of the green.

Speeds that high (obviously over 11) with the inherent lack of friction on the putting surface incapable of holding even an extremely slowly rolling ball is really playing with fire in the area of playability.

In my opinion, a stimpmeter reading in the range of 11 may be the magic greenspeed number that no greens anywhere in the world ever need to exceed again! It'd be my hope that the USGA Green Section may step in soon and make this declaration officially to golf courses, supers and green and golf committees everywhere!

It's looking to me like the universal maximum speed limit on greenspeed may've now been identified and determined and that it's apparently right around 11! Anything over that stimpmeter number will get into the freakish problem of lack of necessary friction on putting surfaces with any amount of slope and contour to allow a rolling ball to come to rest! Clearly this is a problem with playability that putting greens  never had before in the history of golf until relatively recently!

I have no problem with putting greens that're interesting and very challenging requiring large amounts of imagination and concentration that may even require taking some lines of putt heretofore unthought of but it appears even slightly above 11 on the stimp with greens with any kind of slope or contour even for the best players in the world speeds have entered the area for everyone of just "no can do!" And when that starts to happen the only thing anyone can expect is simply non-stop "train wrecks" on the putting greens.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2004, 06:05:46 AM by TEPaul »

Willie_Dow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Green speeds and green reconstruction
« Reply #51 on: July 13, 2004, 11:13:58 AM »
TPaul

You have me convinced!

It is'nt just the settings on the mower's height is it?  These new machines that verticut seem to give a new texture to the surface which seems far more "slippery".

Willie

tlavin

Re:Green speeds and green reconstruction
« Reply #52 on: July 13, 2004, 12:02:54 PM »
The idea that you develop a golf course's optimal speed based upon the majority of the greens with the understanding that a certain number—one, two, three or more—will be over the top makes no sense to me. This predicament is precisely why so many greens have been altered over the years. I will not be surprised when the 7th green at Shinnecock is altered as some point prior to the next US Open.

I also wonder if an exciting green for the accomplished golfer at 10.5 or 11 might be terrorizing and unmanageable for the average to poor golfer. If it is too difficult for the rabbit the speed is wrong, no matter how much fun it might be for the scratch golfer. We should maximize enjoyment for the greatest number of golfers.

Therefore the overall speed should not exceed the reasonable speed of the most severe green. We should be looking to increase the number of interesting hole locations, not eliminating them. We should be promoting more reasonable speeds universally if we are interested in seeing more interesting bold greens on our modern golf courses. Pushing the envelope is not healthy.

IMO the most enjoyable conditions consist of firm turf, allowing for the ground game option, in combination with contoured greens at a reasonable speed. I do not believe greens that are kept at the speed brink promote the ground game (US Open and Masters as examples), defeating the purpose for firm conditions.

 I played Lost Dunes last month and the combination of greens and bold contouring was nearly perfect—I’d guess the greens speed was 9 or 9.5, maybe 10. I’ve played the course when it was 10.5 or 11 and although I enjoyed the challenge, I also heard a number of golfers (and continue to hear) say the golf course and its greens were idiotic.


TMac:

I played Lost Dunes last week and I would have to echo your comments.  I talked to the asst. pro who told me that they try to keep the greens around 10, which seems to satisfy most everybody.  We played greens that were just a little slower, due to a recent top dressing, but they were fun to putt.  The pro also told me that they had the greens at 12 for a club event and everybody was miserable.

The upshot to this, of course, is that greens maintained to play at a reasonable speed on a regular basis (9.0 to 10.5) will be more playable, more enjoyable and much healthier.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back