News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #75 on: June 17, 2005, 01:11:34 PM »
Eric Johnson,

My statements are clear.

Your conclusions are your own, and flawed.

In the U.S. Fescue has limited application.

If it was such a universally wonderful grass it would be utilized a lot more, but, it's not.


Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #76 on: June 17, 2005, 01:24:37 PM »
Eric, I'm a greenkeeper. I am curious about fescue, its use and history on golf courses in the USA .

I will be out your way in late September to attend a wedding and I hope to play Bandon, and some other courses on the way out and back to Montana.

They have fescue fairways at the Old Works. They're very,very nice! Probably mowed at 3/4"????  

No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #77 on: June 17, 2005, 01:26:26 PM »
Pat Mucci...Wonderful? Please describe your definition of "wonderful".



No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Eric Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #78 on: June 17, 2005, 01:36:06 PM »
Eric Johnson,

My statements are clear.

Your conclusions are your own, and flawed.

In the U.S. Fescue has limited application.

If it was such a universally wonderful grass it would be utilized a lot more, but, it's not.



If they were clear I would not have posed the questions to you.

I don't have any conclusions, just observations.

Yes, in the US fine fescue has limited applications (probably fewer than that) but, without research into "gray areas" there wouldn't be creeping bentgrass grown in warm-season zones.

You're right, fescue is not universally wonderful but neither is any other turfgrass.

 

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #79 on: June 17, 2005, 04:53:08 PM »
Craig Sweet,

"Wonderful" = Unusually good, Marvelous, Astonishing.

Eric Johnson,

While it's true that no grass is universally wonderful, fescue has a narrow, far more limited application than many others.

I never indicated that ongoing research shouldn't be conducted, but, 100 years of experience isn't a bad teacher either.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2005, 04:54:40 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #80 on: June 17, 2005, 05:16:26 PM »
Pat, given your definition of wonderful, I'll have to admitt, I've seen very few "wonderful" putting services in my 40 plus years of playing golf.

I've seen some greens with "amazing" contours, and "unusually good" green color, but seldom the complete package.

How do you know that fescue has a "narrow, far more limited application" than other turf grasses? Have you done the research?

If by "application" you are arguing there aren't many fescue greens in the world, you might be correct. And the limiting factors would have to be examined. If you are arguing that there is a limit as to where fescue greens can grow, you are probably wrong.
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #81 on: June 17, 2005, 05:38:20 PM »
Craig Sweet,

My definition of "wonderful" is from Webster's dictionary.

It doesn't matter what the limiting factors are.

They are significant enough to prevent its widespread useage, and the term "widespread" is being extremely generous.

It's not out of service because of its outstanding qualities.


« Last Edit: June 17, 2005, 05:39:13 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #82 on: June 17, 2005, 05:51:01 PM »
Pat, fescue is not out of service because of its outstanding qualities?

Intersting observation.

As a turf grass fescue has a huge range from Maine to Georgia to California. As a grass for greens it is limited by golfers perceptions that greens need to be very green, very fast and mowed below a tenth of an inch.

In other words, cosmetics is 75% of the bais toward fescue.
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Don_Mahaffey

Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #83 on: June 17, 2005, 06:30:20 PM »
Craig,
Just curious, how much golf have you played on fescue greens? Don't get me wrong, I love the courses I've played that have fescue on the greens, but I don't think you can use it as a golf turf in all that many areas. You've heard from guys like Dan Lucas who grows awesome fescue that it has problems when the temps are over 80 for any length of time, and then you mention Georgia? It's a great grass for golf in the right environment, but I don't think you'll be seeing any fescue greens in the transition zone or south anytime soon and it's not because golfers need the color green.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #84 on: June 17, 2005, 06:41:47 PM »
Don, I have played but one course with fescue greens. It was great.

No, you might not see any fescue greens below the transition zone, but the grass will grow there and that was all I was stating.

When I started this thread it was to get some information about early golf course construction in the USA, and the possible use of fescue for the greens back then. Were courses being built in 1890-1920 that had, or had attempted to grow, fescue greens?

I figured there had to be someone on GCA that had knowledge of early attempts to establish fescue greens on those courses.

In my searching through the internet I found several old Green Section articles that ridiculed the use of fescues for putting surfaces. Was this early USGA bias against what many greenkeepers had been doing for decades in the UK? What were all the factors that led to the USGA saying fescue was not suitable?

Unfortunately, this thread is now a discussion of where and why fescue won't work today. Its been informative, but has strayed from the original. However, the BIGGA research is asking the question "are fescue greens getting a second look, and do they merit a second look"....I don't think they'll recieve much attention from a closed mind.

No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #85 on: June 17, 2005, 06:51:20 PM »
Maybe here is another way to judge the conventional wisdom or learned tradition of using fescue on greens.  Every turf book I have does not describe or advocate for fescues to be used on greens, other than overseeding.  Some speak of them to be mixed in polystands for roughs, tees, and fairways.  But, the amount of discussion of the fescues by the turf professors in their books is limitted.  

Since the density of the red fescue is comparativley low (which is the only "creeping" cultivar rather than bunch growth habits of all the others) why would one try to use it for greens without another mixed species of a bent cultivar to fill in the density to promote truer ball roll?   Why would one want to try to get a fescue sward on a green, when it can't be cut lower than the 5mm described above?  I think it is fine for surrounds or even as a blend with other in fairways to reduce maintenance inputs.  And, it seems like it is a good backup in a polystand in FWs in droughty conditions.  

But, I have to agree with Pat, that it didn't become widely used over time for good reasons.  The only reason it is great on the surrounds at Wild Horse is the very fact that the whole design incorporates the playing ideal of sandy growing medium for firm surrounds for interesting approach bounces, and cut to a height that offers putting bumping and chipping.  Fescue performs under those criteria.  I'd hate to even see them try to match the performance of their super fast and healthy bent greens with fescue on the actual putting surfaces.  That would be a serious step backwards.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #86 on: June 17, 2005, 06:58:55 PM »
Craig, you speak of fescues for greens getting a second look.  From whom, the turf research scientists?

Maybe fescues only were used up to the point of 190s or so because turf science passed them by due to the universal acceptance that bents were vastly superior on greens, and bermudas for the south.  We don't see any more research or continued production of the old all black tin lizzies that Ford produced.  We moved on...  If you want a nostalgia trip, there is always someone keeping the old traditions and cars alive for a special Sunday drive.  But, we don't drive them on the interstates no more than we play the modern game on fescue greens.

I don't think the turf community dissed fescue for greens to be exclusionary, they found vastly superior species and cultivars of bent that offered them more experimental possibilities.  
« Last Edit: June 17, 2005, 06:59:24 PM by RJ_Daley »
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #87 on: June 17, 2005, 07:01:23 PM »
RJ, a couple of things here...

"Fescue performs under those criteria.  I'd hate to even see them try to match the performance of their super fast and healthy bent greens with fescue on the actual putting surfaces.  That would be a serious step backwards."

That is the point, fescue will not be super fast. It can be just as healthy, if not healtier than a bent, but not as fast. Why would slower, but healthy greens be a "step backwards"?

Lets assume for a minute that the local conditions are ideal for either fescue, bent or a mix of the two.
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #88 on: June 17, 2005, 07:09:23 PM »
RJ, the turf industry has found superior varities of bent and they have done a great job promoting them. Green and fast is better than yellowish and slow. We all know that, right?

Ah but wait! What about Poa? What about dependance on chemicals...growth regulators,fungicides,ferts....What about managing your course right to the "edge" in an ever greater desire for firm and fast, and shorter mowing heights. What about water out here in the droughty west?

Just playing the devils advocate, but this argument is not unlike the equipment is ruining the game argument.

Have you read this?

http://www.randa.org/news/files/Promoting%20fescue%20in%20Denmark.pdf
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #89 on: June 17, 2005, 07:13:30 PM »
Craig, I understand that the inputs for fescue are a positive aspect.  I understand that its very use can promote firm conditions due to less watering.  

But, one of the most compelling reasons to play at a place like Wild Horse are the super fast, firm, and very true rolling greens.  Can you achieve that with fescue.  I don't think so.  

I understand Craig that you are asking a legitimate question about whether we MUST have speed.  I agree that speed isn't everything , depending on the specific course.  For instance, Lawsonia (that we are speaking of in another thread) doesn't need super speed because of the contours of the greens.  But, it need true ball roll to achieve the ideal playing condition.  With the far lower density of the leaf shoots of fescue, the need to have longer leafs or higher cut, doesn't that tend to cause bumpier or less true rolls?  And, under the stress of many rounds played, doesn't fescue heal far slower than bents?  

I really don't think the bias against fescues has been about the color.  I think it is about the overall functionality to stand up to modern conditions of use-stress and consistency season long.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #90 on: June 17, 2005, 10:31:27 PM »

As a grass for greens it is limited by golfers perceptions that greens need to be very green, very fast and mowed below a tenth of an inch.

In other words, cosmetics is 75% of the bais toward fescue.


Craig, that's not true.
It's not used because it doesn't perform well.

Golfers aren't making the decisions with respect to fescue greens, architects and superintendents are.   And those folks have made the decision not to use it, historically and currently.

You're trying to force a square peg in a round hole and it just doesn't fit, never has and chances are it never will.
[/color]




Micah Woods

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #91 on: June 19, 2005, 11:41:59 PM »
Craig,

You have suggested that the USGA had a bias against fescue greens and have inquired about the factors that led to the USGA saying that fescue was not a suitable turf for putting greens.

I don't think there was any bias at all. With the advent of systematic turfgrass research in the early part of the 20th century, it became obvious that creeping bentgrass produced a superior year-round putting turf for almost all northern golf courses.

Beautiful lawns of red fescue could be established, and they produced a fine turf in spring and fall. However, Fred Taylor's lawns of red fescue in Philadelphia were decimated by fungal diseases in the summer. On putting greens, even as early as 1916, it was well-known that fescue thinned when mowed at the desired cutting height for putting greens. An article in 1924 (Journal of the American Society of Agronomy) explained the morphological differences between red fescue and creeping bentgrass that led to thinning of fescue (but not bent) under low mowing heights on putting greens.

Even so, many courses did continue to use fescue, either on its own or mixed with bentgrass. In 1912, Hugh Wilson seeded greens at Merion to a mixture of creeping bent, Rhode Island bent, and red fescue. He subsequently wrote, "when reseeding our greens, which we have done either once or twice a year, we have used nothing but creeping bent, as the red fescue did not grow well in our greens."

At Columbia Golf Club, near Washington D.C., a mixture of red fescue and creeping bentgrass was also used to seed and overseed putting greens. However, these greens proved unsatisfactory, and a much improved surface was obtained with pure creeping bentgrass beginning in 1919.

C.B. Macdonald seeded some greens at National Golf Links to red fescue, some to various bents, and some as a mixture of bents and fescue. He reported that fescue made a fine putting surface but that in the summer months at Long Island it becomes brown sooner than the bents. If by brown he meant dormant, then we can imagine what sort of recuperative advantage creeping bentgrass would have over fescue if summertime play created wear and tear on the greens.

It is clear that fescue was given a fair chance as a putting surface at many of the best clubs in the USA. Creeping bentgrass consistently produced a better putting surface, and by the 1920's the newly established Green Section of the USGA was overwhelmed with requests for advice on converting existing greens to pure stands of creeping bentgrass. The Green Section provided unbiased information on this subject, and it was obvious by the early 1920s which grass provided an optimum putting surface under most conditions in the northern United States.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #92 on: June 19, 2005, 11:45:25 PM »
Micah..thanks, this is the sort of information I was looking for!

Could you post sometime any links you have to the information you posted?
No one is above the law. LOCK HIM UP!!!

Micah Woods

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Fescue Greens
« Reply #93 on: June 19, 2005, 11:55:25 PM »
Much of that information is from C.V. Piper and R.A. Oakley's _Turf for Golf Courses_ (1916). The final chapter has sections written by Macdonald, Wilson, and Dr. Harban of Columbia Golf Club. Also, if you read the entire Bulletin of the Green Section, beginning in 1921, it soon becomes clear that creeping bentgrass outperformed fescue as a putting surface, and not just because it was greener.


Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back