[BCrosby]

There is a lot of talk about firm and fast greens here. It's as if the concepts are joined at the hip.

But the best greens I've played have been firm and not so fast.

Wild Horse last summer was, I thought, perfect. The greens and surrounds were rock hard yet stimped at no more than 9 or so. Ditto for TOC, Cruden Bay and Muirfield two summers ago. ANGC for non-tournament play is often set up that way. The greens barely dent, even high approaches would take big, healthy bounces - but they didn't putt super fast.

Perfect green conditions, imho. The interplay of speed and contouring is ideal when set up this way. I wish we saw them more often in the US.


Bob

[THuckaby2]

Great call, Bob.  I faced those conditions a lot in Scotland also my last time over there also, and I called it "firm and slow."  It's difficult to imagine unless you play on it... but it does happen.  Rock hard bounces, great for the ground game, but relatively slow putting.  Perfect in a situation with a lot of contour, like most links.

TH

[Mike_DeVries]

Bob,

I think greens that are firm and roll true are the best combination to play, regardless of speed.  The ideal speed will vary from course to course, depending on the slope in the greens.  Very good examples you presented.

Mike

[Brent Hutto]

If I could wave a magic wand and produce the perfect conditions at my home course, what you describe is pretty much it. Our greens have multiple tiers and a mixture of subtle and not-so-subtle contours. The course plays most interestingly when the greens are hard and the speed is moderately-fast at about 9.something.

My ideal would be firm greens, even firmer surrounds and speeds in the 9's. Given the nature of our terrain, climate and member expectations such conditions pretty much never occur except by happenstance but once in a while we get lucky.

[TEPaul]

Bob:

As you probably know by now, I don't agree with you on that but any disagreement between us is only in the degree of what ideal green speed for all really is. I've done some pretty extensive research this year on greens of numerous courses regarding green speed differences and differentials and the effects of those differentials on playability. To me green surface firmness is a wholly different matter when looked at from the perspective of how various levels do and can handle it.

The most alarming thing I found this year is how much different 10.5 is from 9 and 11 from 9.5 in playability. That one foot to one and a half foot differential in that seemingly small 15% increase in speed is remarkable. The differences in what it takes in concentration and imagination to negotiate successfully that seemingly small increase is truly remarkable. But I think that fact is pretty neat because logically it only takes concentration and imagination and not strength which is the vast difference in the levels of players in most of the "through the green" areas of golf.

We know the little old lady or man will never be able to hit a golf ball anywhere near as far as Tiger Woods but there's nothing that could logically say they can't have somewhat the same concentration or imagination in putting on fast greens if only they'd take the time to understand it and apply themselves to it. The fact that it doesn't take strength is the key. Technology is something that has probably done real damage to golf and architecture in the vastly increased distance the good player level of golfers is experiencing now but there isn't a lot technology can ever do in the realm of putting, in my opinion.

And so putting and particularly on faster greens than 9 is probably the area that golf does have the capacity to create more democracy in the playing of the game.

This is not to say that highly sloped or contoured greens automatically does help the poor player more than the good player but I do think it has the capacity to for the reasons given---it doesn't require strength just concentration and imagination and that isn't exclusve to the good and strong player as is the distance differential "through the green".

The reason for this is that the very good player will struggle far more on greens with slope and contour at 11 compared to 9 and this does give the less strong player a better opportunity, at least, to take advantage of that fact on greens of 11 compared to greens at 9.

Plus, this year, for reasons I have never been aware before the greens on my course and all that can be done on them at 10.5 or 11 that we can now consistently run compared to the 9 or so we previously could consistently run is remarkable beyond words. The things you can do at the high end of that differential in speed compared to the low end is fun and cool beyond words.

I am aware now though, that on our greens at least, just a little above 11 our greens and putting and playing on them goes way over the top for all---good and poor players alike.

But again, the differences between 9 and 10.5 or 11 are remarkable beyond description and I'm so glad that this year for the first time in my course's history we can experience that. I am putting in a proposal though that slightly over that level (11) for our course anyway---is the real danger zone in playabiliy---and for all!

[Scott_Burroughs]

Gee, and all these years I thought all the "firm & fast" talk on here had to do with conditions anywhere but the green.

I always hear firm & not so fast on the green side, as long as the greens are contoured well.

[TEPaul]

Scott:

Whenever I talk about "firm and fast" conditions to anyone I always make the distinction between firm and fast conditions "through the green" compared to on the greens otherwise I've found almost everyone assumes you're only talking about the greens themselves.

[Doug Siebert]

I know that TEP has been going on and on about this business of greens "coming alive" at those speeds when there's a lot of contour to the greens, but I just wanted to add my comments to that and say that he's not alone.

I had privately mailed him early this spring asking about his experiences with A4 bent since my club had closed last August for this regrassing and was due to open in May, and his club had regrassed with A4 bent the year before so he had already seen how things turned out firsthand.  He told me that by the end of the first season the greens would already be better than they had ever been before, and based on some other clubs in the area that had done this a year before his the second year they'd only get better and better.

I've definitely seen that this year, and the effect on play has been remarkable this year since previously our greens would work something like this:

April 1 typical opening day
April - greens still waking up from dormancy
early May - aeration with 1/2" cores to remove thatch
rest of May - greens recovering from aeration
first half of June - greens great, very fast up to 10.5
mid June to end of August - heat & humidity creates stress on greens so they are only sped up for tournaments, rest of time run about 9
first few weeks of September - greens great, very fast
around first day of fall, more 1/2" core aeration
late Sept to mid October - greens recovering from aeration
rest of season - greens good but all the leaves blowing onto the greens are your big problem

When they first opened with the new greens in mid May they were probably about as good as they would usually be at that time of the year, but have been getting better and better all season.  Around the end of June when they'd usually be cutting them higher and overwatering to keep them alive, they've been staying fast and firm -- if they were watering them at all during the dry periods this year it was certainly never evident.

The amazing thing is that they just keep putting truer and truer as the season goes on!  Between that and fixing a long time stupidity in my putting stroke my confidence and results with my putter have improved by a large margin this year, and that's carried over onto other courses I've played.  Plus playing them when they've been running fast all summer has been a real treat in terms of forcing some real imagination with the short game and putting thanks to my incredibly awful iron play this season.

Certainly the approval isn't 100%, there are some who complain about "unfairness", but when I've played with a few people saying that "its impossible to stop a ball by the hole from here" I'll drop one after we putt out and show them how its done.  They might think it is ridiculous that a 20 foot putt should take 25 seconds to get to the hole, and its luck that it actually stops somewhere near it, but I think it shows you shouldn't be there if you can't handle the putt.  For some reason I take such a delight in the look on people's faces when I aim for a 20 foot break on a 15 foot putt I almost want to seek out such spots just for their expression when I'm lining it up!

[BCrosby]

Tom/Doug -

No one would deny that there is a thrill to putting on ultra fast greens (say, 11+). It can be a real trip.

But at what cost?

First, greens speeds over 9 were rarely found until a couple of decades ago. Over the long haul, they are historical aberations. They are as unimaginable to Golden Age architects as 460cc drivers, two piece balls and sans-a-belt slacks.

Second, fast green speeds didn't arise in isolation from other architectural developments. They are a by-product of the USGA's drive to protect older courses from low scoring in tournaments. Fast greens are - historically - cousins to pinched landing areas, tall rough, tree-lined corridors, the whole RTJ monster course thing. The technology and grasses necessary to fast greens were not developed to make greens more fun to putt on. They were developed to make putting harder.

Both aspects of fast greens - I think - result in troubling anti-architectural consequences. They have an adverse impact on classic designs. They give clubs a rationale for flattening classically designed contours. They limit pinnable areas. Equally bad, the need for speed gobbles up big chunks of maintenance budgets. Funds that could be better used elsewhere. (A topic for another thread.)

I guess where I come out is that I don't think those costs are worth the frisson of a 12+ dipsy doodle putt. A steady diet of those sorts of putts wears out most golfers. For me at least, those speeds get to be oppresive after a while. It doesn't take long for the thrills to morph into abject terror. If fun is the measure, I would argue that contoured, Golden Age greens are much more fun to putt on when they are slower (9 or so) rather than faster (10.5 or so). Closer to the speeds envisioned by the architects.

Bob

   

[Bill_McBride]

If you want the thrill of 12+ greens with 9 maintenance, just hit the ball above the hole on any one of a number of Ross courses!  My favorite example is the Broadmoor in Colorado, where you can't even tell a putt is uphill or downhill, breaks left or right, until you look up at the mountain and locate the carillon!

Point is, I guess, that slope is as important as stimp.  Look at Pasatiempo, almost any green, for a prime example.  If you cut and roll those greens to 11 or 12, fuggedabout it!  

But most modern architects don't dare have 6% slopes because the members will demand high stimpmeter readings.  It's really more fun the other way.

[TEPaul]

DougS:

Very interesting post there. You're experiences on your new greens this year are very similar to mine. It is really interesting to me to factor in that "ball creep" and play those huge breaks on some puts. There're also so many more things that can be done on our greens than before. This year on some putts to some pins I actually have some very distinct OPTIONS. Never had anything like that before and it really is fun although it can get intense. We really are aware, though, that our speeds are at what I call our course's "reasonable maximum". This A-4 certainly can be cut lower and the greens could be a lot faster with virtually no stress and I'm happy to say the club seems to be buying into my proposal to not exceed this speed and to be considering a resolution to never tamper with our slopes and contours in the future in the name of increasing our green speeds.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()