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.


Kyle Harris

PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« on: July 27, 2005, 01:50:28 PM »
Just got back from watching some of the action at Huntingdon Valley. Also met one Mr. Tom Paul for the first time.  :)

Some notes:

The course is playing very firm and fast. A lot of the players seemed keen on playing position golf and opting for angles in lieu of distance, though a few of the long hitters were pressing their advantage, particularly on 16, where a number of players had less than 100 yards to the green. (For those that have been there, the tee shots landed near the front of the right greenside bunker complex).

The hole location on 11 was back left, and it took its toll on several players who couldn't make it to the outside of the dogleg.

Scott Anderson mentioned that the greens were stimping around 11, and I got to get up on the third green and roll a few balls to get a feel for the speed and grain. Very very true even with the noticable grain in the green. Apparently, the root zones are down 11 inches so he is able to promote a firm and healthy turf throughout the dryness. He was syringing some of the greens for about five minutes when the last group had played.

It also looked like the 18th holes had been opened up a bit on the right side off the tee, which was very nice to see. Players seemed willing and able to carry the bunkers off the tee with a well struck tee shot.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2005, 06:09:49 PM »
Kyle Harris,

Playing conditions as you describe don't happen by accident.

It requires leadership that "gets it", that understands golf and the value of the playing surfaces.

It's almost to the degree that it's a product of the culture of the club.

It's unfortunate that more club leaderships don't have a better understanding of the concept of fast and firm and what it takes, including compromise, to achieve them.

Kyle Harris

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2005, 06:16:15 PM »
Pat,

I discussed that a bit with Scott during the brief moment I had to talk with him and he basically told me what you just did. As noted before in some other threads his maintenance program has been happening over the past three years, and that he is only now getting results he wants to work with.

I also asked him about the membership's reaction and he mentioned that they were very very supportive.

Very interesting comment about culture, as HVCC is very much known through the section as a "players' club." The membership there, or its leadership, seems dedicated to understanding the conditions that bring out the course's strengths.

wsmorrison

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2005, 06:45:59 PM »
Kyke,

I know that Huntingdon Valley CC has been leading the way with Scott's maintenance practices and an actively involved membership including Linc Roden and Jim Sullivan.  They've been on this road for far longer than three years, probably going on 10 or 15 by now.

Today it seems that Randy Rolfe is following the right path as green chairman.  He's also playing awfully well in the PA Am at his home course.  I don't know what the final results are, but he was leading after 2 rounds I think.

The wind is really picking up over here.  I just saw Dorothy and Toto fly by.  At last the front is going through and we can say goodbye to 101 degree weather and 115 heat index.  I know, Bobsy thinks us weak...but I'm glad its gone.  I walked 27 holes yesterday following groups at the PA Am and then played 18.  I was wiped!

I did watch Tug Maude make 6 birdies in a row (16,17,18,1,2,3).  That was impressive!

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2005, 07:32:45 PM »
Those were some hot three days.

If you think HVGC was firm and fast this week you should have seen it on Sunday. It was twice as firm and fast and the club and Scott Anderson were really hoping they could take that through the tournament.

But it's pretty amazing how fast it recovered after an pretty strong thunderstorm shut us down for a few hours on Monday.

Alex Knoll won the tournament with rounds of 69, 69, 70=two under for 54 holes to win by two over young Dan Walters at even and HVGC's Randy Rolfe at +!, Michael McDermott, Chet Walsh, defending Champion Blaine Peffley, John Sawin, Sean Knapp were next in line.

Scott Anderson has been on a pretty unique firm and fast process for nearly 20 years now. He told me a few things about going through that process that're real interesting.

I think Ran is going to interview Scott and he says he's gonna tell it like it is. This golf course is about as organic as it gets in this day and age. Watering is very minimal. They don't even do 8 million gallons per year on 27 holes!!

Scott Anderson is the first to tell anyone if they want to get their course to go firm and fast like HVGC has in the last decade or so the membership has to be really educated and get behind it. It obviously isn't as easy as most think, even most on this website. He said if a club goes down this road as thoroughly as they have you have to be prepared for some years of significant turf loss and some obviously don't think that's too pretty. But after about 3-5 years of that the grass will be like they have----tough, strong, deep, firm and fast.

This course is what I call the "Ideal Maintenance Meld" when they have it like they want it---like it was on Sunday and getting back to that today. It's a playablilty that's really interesting. It takes not just a good golfer but a real thinking golfer to score well on it when it's the way they like it.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2005, 07:37:20 PM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2005, 08:02:45 PM »

Scott Anderson is the first to tell anyone if they want to get their course to go firm and fast like HVGC has in the last decade or so the membership has to be really educated and get behind it. It obviously isn't as easy as most think, even most on this website. He said if a club goes down this road as thoroughly as they have you have to be prepared for some years of significant turf loss and some obviously don't think that's too pretty. But after about 3-5 years of that the grass will be like they have----tough, strong, deep, firm and fast.[/color]

TEPaul,

This is why I said it's cultural.

A club has to understand the process, buy into it, and execute it.  It takes time, some difficult conditions, but, the end result can be exceptional.

Huntington Valley should be applauded for their efforts.

« Last Edit: July 27, 2005, 08:04:12 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

PAW13

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2005, 09:10:50 PM »
Kyle, Tom Paul said it all, the golf course you saw this afternoon was only half as firm as HV would like it to play.  

I played the last three days and only late in the round today did the greens start to bounce like normal.  I know Scott and the membership was disappointed the rains came on Monday morning.  In 1985 or 86 the PA State AM was held at HVCC and Gordon Brewer won the event in 297 (17 over par for 72 holes).  The scary thing was the 1st round leader was under par.  That is the HVCC the local amateur players are used to playing, very firm and fast.

The second round scores (12 players broke par, with 3 tying the competitive record 66 -4) were as low as I have ever seen there for an amateur event.  David Brookreson (long time HV member and multiple USGA event competitor stated that the low scores were due to the fairways drying out but the greens were still receptive to approach shots.

As I have stated in previous threads they promote grain in their greens and it makes them very difficult to putt.  They do not feel that they need rough to protect the course, the firmness and the angles do a very good job a protecting par.

By the way I was one of those players that struggled on number 11 today (Triple), and they didn't cut enough trees down on the right side of 18 for my tee shot.

Wayne, I belive Mike Dougherty is the current greens chairman, Randy stepped down in the last year or two.  Mike also made the cut.  Randy played a great tournament and really kept the pressure on the young guys, and had the lead through 26 holes.

Kyle Harris

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2005, 09:17:26 PM »
Chet,

I actually saw you make that triple...  :-\

Billy Stewart did similarly, though his ball was behind a rock the size of a golf ball in the back right bunker.

I was the guy walking around with the tan shirt and dark shorts. Not following any particular group.

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2005, 09:54:04 PM »
Scott Anderson mentioned that the greens were stimping around 11, and I got to get up on the third green and roll a few balls to get a feel for the speed and grain. Very very true even with the noticable grain in the green. Apparently, the root zones are down 11 inches so he is able to promote a firm and healthy turf throughout the dryness. He was syringing some of the greens for about five minutes when the last group had played.

11 inches - wow :o, that is impressive (I assume that it is one of the new hybrid bents, particularly given the grain comment/prior discussion.  It cetainly ain't poa).  I assume the greens turf is more than two years old.  If so, and the roots are staying at 11 inches, that is a really wonderful achievement, and part of what enables firm and fast on the greens.  If it is new greens turf, I would be interested to see the depth of roots in a years time.
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

Kyle Harris

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2005, 11:42:09 PM »
James,

I asked Scott about Poa because I noticed very little. Apparently, they're at about 30%, which is pretty low for the area. He chooses not to kill it with water, just let it go dormant and come back when it wants.

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2005, 12:21:32 AM »
Kyle

70% bent and 30% poa is good, and enables the green to supply a nice surface even when the poa is under stress (as the bent is generally running at that time in summer).  Ideally, we wish to get to 80% bent, with roots exceeding 4 inches (hence my 11 inch wow!).  Some greens are nearly there, others (older) have further to go. A couple will not make it without rebuilding (shade, structure).

We've also discouraged the poa from the surrounds and tees through a different program - again aiming to reduce the risk of turf loss in summer whilst reducing the irrigation.

I think Joe hancock posted separately on two issues not yet present at sebonack - poa and thatch.  Absolutely right.  Greens, tees, surrounds, fairways and roughs.  I remember in the early 1990's when we had soft grass fairways (bent/poa) that we got a lot better results (summer and winter) when they had been cored in spring, because of thatch.
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2005, 07:51:20 AM »
"11 inches - wow , that is impressive (I assume that it is one of the new hybrid bents, particularly given the grain comment/prior discussion."

James Bennett:

No way. Actually Scott Anderson appears not to like the idea at all of these new hybrid bents. His grass is old---it's taken them a long time to get those roots down that far. I think the bent on their greens is L93.

The greens were just around 11 on Wednesday (maybe a tad less). I know because I did the stimping with Scott standing right there. Frankly, I couldn't even imagine that HVGC has a spot on any green you could properly stimp (Scott says he generally uses the practice putting green) but I tried it first on the front (rightish) on #9 and unbelievalbly the two way was just a tad more than a foot difference.

I tested all the pins on Wednesday morning too, and the only one that got changed was #10. The reason why is pretty interesting and probably worthy of a separate thread on the suject.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2005, 07:53:27 AM by TEPaul »

PAW13

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2005, 08:40:52 AM »
TP

I was wondering why the pin got changed on #10.  Could you not keep the ball close to the hole if you were below it?

Kyle, did not see you yesterday, but then again I was seeing alot of red after number 11.

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2005, 09:07:43 AM »
"TP
I was wondering why the pin got changed on #10.  Could you not keep the ball close to the hole if you were below it?"

Chet:

I went out and putted all the greens before play and was told the ones to really look at were #10 and #16.

#10 was in that little shelf on the left about 2/3 of the way into the green. Mark thought a ball putted from below the pin might come back and you know if it did come back off that first up-tier there was a chance it may build up enough speed to filter all the way down off the green and about 10-20 yards into the fairway.

I spent about 15 minutes putting from all over that green to that pin and it seemed fine from below. I even showed him how leaving a putt from below about 6-7 feet short would stay. A greater problem was if someone was on the level above that pin particularly off to the right. I tried that from directly above that pin and above it from the right and although it was a tricky putt speed wise it certainly would stay on the pin's level unless hit too hard or too low off the down tier above the pin (if it was hit too low or too hard it could catch the next down tier and go off the green into the fairway).

But Mark just didn't want to take a chance that one pin position would dominate a really great tournament and great final round and that's his call and he's right about that.

However, I think that pin was OK to putt to or even chip to. It was a bit intense but so were some of the other pins--eg #6 from the front, #15 and #16.

But the thing I really started thinking about with #10 is we just couldn't tell how receptive those greens were on Wednesday (obviously we didn't go out in the fairway and hit a bunch of wedges and 7-9 irons to test that).

We thought if those greens were still real receptive (where the pitch marks would pull up dirt) that the players could hit a really good approach shot right to that shelf the pin was in or to the up-tier just behind it and get so much spin on the ball (from the deeper pitch mark) that the ball could suck back enough and build up the speed to come back off that shelf and filter down the front of the green back into the fairway.

To us that would've been too unfair for players who hit really good and accurate approaches in there and ended up getting royally screwed by excessive spin. You know as well as I do that kind of thing infuriates players probably more than hitting a putt a bit strong from a position on the green they probably shouldn't be in to a fairly intense pin.

Mark made the right call---that's why he's such a good Exec Director, but I watched most of the groups come through and even those who flew the ball into that tier were able to keep the ball on it.

But as you know in that kind of set-up thing caution is generally better than risk. The repin on that hole was a pretty good one I thought because there was so little room left behind it. You hit a great shot in there (actually it almost hit the pin) but you ended up in the apron behind it. Nice putt by the way.

And congratulations on going on that mini run on #13, 14, 15, particularly on #14. How the hell did you birdie that hole to that pin?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2005, 10:30:33 AM by TEPaul »

PAW13

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2005, 09:34:57 AM »
TP, thank for the low down.  It was actually Blaine's ball that almost hit the pin and went to chipping area, my ball stayed up about about a foot short of going to the chipping area.

I got a little lucky on 14 as my approach shot hit the hill just below the bunker and bounced to 5 feet behind the hole.

Too many mistakes over the three days, double on 12 monday and the triple on 11 on wednesday.  Also I got thinking about my round on Tuesday if I don't have to putt as defensive as I did, it could of been 61 or 62, but that is what HV does to you.  Too many 8 footers that you have to protect against going too far by.

Kyle Harris

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2005, 10:01:17 AM »
Chet,

I was standing next to Tom when your ball struck, and I thought it would go the way of Peffley's. Though yours landed about a few feet short of the hole on the upslope, while his landed on the level part right next to the hole.

Both sounded like they hit a deck in someone's back yard when they landed.

As an aside with the hole locations, I felt they were very well selected from the holes I saw (all the back nine, the 3rd, 7th and 9th). Of particular note were the holes on 9 and 11, but oh which placed a particular premium on angle of approach.

The 9th was just on top of the shelf in the middle of the green, however, an approach from the right would find the green sloping away just a bit whereas from the left you were hitting into the slope. Since the fairway slope gives you a draw stance, it was important to come into that green from the left side to hold it - else you had to bail out to the right side, making for a large sweeping putt.

As mentioned before, the 11th hole was on the left side of the green forcing the player to have to get as far down, or outside the dogleg as much as possible in order to have a good line in. Though I did watch a player make birdie from the left fairway bunker (stuck the approach to within 10 feet).

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2005, 10:45:30 AM »
"Too many mistakes over the three days, double on 12 monday and the triple on 11 on wednesday."

Chet:

Sorry about that one on #12. There's a moral to that situation though, I guess. That is if you have as many guys looking for your ball "through the green" as you had for five minutes on #12, tell at least one of them to comb the creek because after your time was up and you moved on we found your ball as visible as a light bulb right in the rocks in the creek. I gave it to your caddie on #13 (as long as I've known him---he said he's been with you for 17 years now---I've never figured out whether you're calling him Petro or Pedro).

Anyway, great tournament on your part. I've seen Alex Knoll before but I really don't know him. There was something about him from day one though that was telling me that was his tournament. He was basically in control the whole way. I realize mid-way through the last round he probably needed someone like Randy to come back to him if he didn't make some birdies but that's to be expected of course.

Face it, a guy like Tiger Woods is otherworldly good but when he isn't out there performing the magic I know he's putting some kind of East Asian hex on the rest to come back to him. Obviously half the time you don't win touraments so much as wait for others to lose them. In Tiger's case I think he has something that forces that issue, though---some kind of actual hex he hasn't yet mentioned to the rest of us and probably never will. ;)  But what would you expect from a guy who's the Second Coming of Christ?  ;)

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2005, 11:04:02 AM »
"The 9th was just on top of the shelf in the middle of the green, however, an approach from the right would find the green sloping away just a bit whereas from the left you were hitting into the slope. Since the fairway slope gives you a draw stance, it was important to come into that green from the left side to hold it - else you had to bail out to the right side, making for a large sweeping putt."

Kyle:

That pin on #9 was an interesting one but we weren't at all concerned about it because it's one the club uses all the time. Trying to putt to it from way over on the right is dicey but it was doable. I spent about ten minutes on that one and the ball could stop about 3-4 feet below that pin. I tried putts across a spectrum of breaks of about 20-25 feet if you can believe it and the lower side of that spectrum gave the best results. The reason was the higher up you went the more speed the ball had coming down. However, Sean Knapp played one from over there all the way up to the fringe which was even higher than I thought to try and he made birdie with a ton of whooping going on. If his putt had missed the hole though it may've gone off the front of that green.

There two clear ways to play to that pin---one very conservative and one pretty aggressive and I saw some of the players do both. The conservative way is to just leave the ball well below it with a relatively long but simple putt right up the hill. The aggressive one is to land the ball well above the pin on that big slope and it would filter right back down around the pin. If you went over the green though, you were super screwed with basically no way of getting up and down other than to hit the pin with a lightening fast chip. Miss the pin and the ball would be gone all the way to the bottom or off the front.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2005, 11:35:39 AM »
Interesting observations about HVCC on many topics.

I had the chance to watch a little bit of the tournament and have to agree with Tom's assesment of the "maintenance meld" prep for the week. Sunday evening it was right there ready to go, and a few hourse of steady rain slowed it down enough to be there for the taking on Monday and Tuesday.

As for Tuesday's great scoring, I see two variables in addition to the one Chet referrenced from Brooke; the pins were generally as accessible as possible, and secondly there are a ton of good players who can hit the ball miles and putt it great. For Wednesday's final round the pins were good and hard both to get to from the fairway and putt to once on the green. Only one player broke par on Wednesday and only a couple matched.



Tom,

I am curious about your comment:
"Scott Anderson is the first to tell anyone if they want to get their course to go firm and fast like HVGC has in the last decade or so the membership has to be really educated and get behind it. It obviously isn't as easy as most think, even most on this website. He said if a club goes down this road as thoroughly as they have you have to be prepared for some years of significant turf loss and some obviously don't think that's too pretty. But after about 3-5 years of that the grass will be like they have----tough, strong, deep, firm and fast."

Specifically the 'significant turf loss' part because I am only 30 and may not have been aware of this 15 or 18 years ago, did Scott describe any detail of the turf loss during this philosophical transition? Were the fairways dead? I just don't recall any season in which the fairways and/or greens were lost. Chet, any memories of this.

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2005, 12:19:04 PM »
"Only one player broke par on Wednesday and only a couple matched."

Sully:

It probably tells something to mention who that player who broke par Wednesday was and perhaps even why. It was Sean Knapp, perhaps the premier player year in and year out in the state for the last few years.

Sean wasn't too happy with his Monday and Tuesday performances---he'd had a couple of typical accidents which on a course like that one tend to really compound and they did.

Sean's a real competitor and he probably threw caution totally to the wind on Wednesday, stepped on the gas totally and just let it all hang out. In his mind he had nothing to lose. He got lucky too, as good rounds tend to get---he sunk that incredibly tough bomb putt from the relatively impossible right side of the green on #9.

I spoke to him about his round on #10 fairway---I think he said he was 3-4 under to that point and if he could keep that pace going he thought he might have an outside chance. Obviously he didn't keep that pace going as he finished -2, 68 for the final round which may've been the only under par round of the day. Obviously he knew he couldn't win at that point because I noticed when they called out the top 18 finishers he was down the road to Pittsburgh.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2005, 12:44:15 PM »
Tom,

I'm not what makes you so sure he has been the premier player the last few years at the State Am, I just looked up his results and here they are:

2005      T-8
2004      2nd
2003      DNP (pursuing Walker Cup points)
2002      3rd
2001      5th
2000      5th
1999      DNP (pursuing Walker Cup Points)
1998      2nd (Lost in Playoff)
1997      1st
1996      5th
1995      2nd
1994      4th
1993      4th
1992      10th
1991      15th
1990      5th
1989      T-6th with the one and only Tom Paul.


Seriously, he is the bar to measure yourself against these days in PA. Buddy had that mantle for a number of years and Jay prior to that.

When I heard he shot 31 on the front nine (4 under) I thought he would have a real chance to get down close to par for the tournament (began the round at 7 over) but the back nine obviously did not go as expected. I saw a three putt from about 20 feet on 16 that was sort of the nail in the coffin. Amazing what you tell me he did to birdie the ninth, if the ball got close to the apron before turning towards the hole it certainly would have fallen off that ledge and finished 30 or 35 feet away but that's golf.

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2005, 01:02:53 PM »
"Specifically the 'significant turf loss' part because I am only 30 and may not have been aware of this 15 or 18 years ago, did Scott describe any detail of the turf loss during this philosophical transition? Were the fairways dead? I just don't recall any season in which the fairways and/or greens were lost. Chet, any memories of this."

Sully:

On that one I think I just might tread a little lightly for a while. It seems that Ran Morrissett is going to do an interview on here with Scott and this time he says he feels like just letting everything hang out and tell it like it is.

Scott's agronomist over there---he sure knows better than the rest of us the details of how to do things the way your club did for a lot of years now.

I come at this issue from the point of view of playability and Scott comes at it from the point of view of agronomy.

Obviously people like Linc Roden and your Dad came at it from both points of view and got the club to buy into it. But you should know how unique it was what HVGC has been doing, particularly how unique it was in the beginning.

Scott told me some years ago and he told me again yesterday that back then he and you all over there were totally on your own this way. Nobody was out there as a resource. The USGA Green Section wouldn't even talk to you about what you were doing agronomically. It just wasn't in their mindset then. If Scott and you guys fried that course and totally lost it I guess they didn't want the responsibliltiy of being part of any of it.

The processes that you all developed maintenance-wise were basically OJT. Scott doesn't mind admitting this anymore.

One time some years ago I asked him if he minded if I talked to him about the things he was doing over there and going to my club with his information. To my total surprise he said he sure did mind. When I asked him why he said because I should go to the people in your club first who let him do it and ask them if I could take that kind of info to my club or others.

I think Scott also felt or maybe still does that appearing to propose to others maintenance practices that different appears critcal of what other supers do and he doesn't want to appear that way. This is why he's always said to me that these kind of things have to start within the membership first, as they did at HVGC.

Now that anyone can see that other courses are doing what you all did way back then Scott's getting more comfortable about talking about it to others.

But you're asking about what he said about turf loss. That's what he told me yesterday, that a club has to be ready for the fact that in those transition years the turf loss can get significant. I think he said maybe 20-30%. What that kind of thing means to him agronomically, I believe, is to just get ready to kill grass and grass types that aren't strong and won't survive that kind of program. When you do that at the end of the mission the goal is to be left with grass that's really hardy and strong and will survive most anything naturally.

That's what you guys have now after all this time. At least that's the way he describes it.

Now, I can't go naming names here but some of us have said for some years to our clubs and others that we want the type of firm and fast playability HVGC has and the answers were---"Oh yeah, and do you want fairways and such that look as ratty as theirs do?"

I never exactly noticed that except once about 2-3 years ago. I remember I was on #2 fairway and I said to myself---this really does look ratty as hell. But you know what, it doesn't matter---that fairway and the rest of the course PLAYED great despite it.

The only good courses I've seen in modern times that can and have looked rattier now and then are Fishers, Maidstone and Newport. You should've seen Maidstone about three years ago in the Maidstone Bowl----the fairways were totally fried, all of them. But the thing most don't seem to realize is it really doesn't matter---even totally friend the play just fine---actually more than fine---very interesting. In conditions like that things like fat shots are actually very minimized.

And on courses like that as soon as it rains, it simply amazing---in just a day or two they are green again.

This is Nature's way Sully, and HVGC for years now is maintaining their golf course in Nature's way, not in some artificial "emergency ward" type way most others do with huge and unnatural over reliance on artificial irrigation and chemicals.

But you know what I guess most of us are coming to understand now or better now? All those courses that look so immaculate and persumably heathy because they're so green, really aren't very healthy. We now know they sure as hell aren't agronomy that's very tough. They exist in a pretty looking state but none-the-less in the agronomic "emergency ward" with over-reliance on artifical water and chemicals just like sick people rely on drugs.

I talked to Linc this morning at length. He wants HVGC to be noticed for what the course is and how it's been maintained. I talked to a few supers today who've been reading this.

Scott might take his processes on the road one of these days and tell others for the first time what he and you all figured out basically on your own. He'll probably do that if he thinks the memberships of other clubs are willing to listen. But if he thinks they aren't he may not do that.

First and foremost Scott Anderson is an advocate that these things have to start within a membership. Supers can do them but they can't do them on their own without some understanding and support amongst the membership. I guess supers can do it on their own if they want to but they'd pretty much have to be willing to put their jobs on the line each and every day.

What I do not know, in answer to your basic question, is if what Scott Anderson refers to as 'significant turf loss' that occurs to the tune of 20-30% during this kind of transition is exactly the same thing as what some of us refer to as "browing out".

That question needs to be answered first and really answered accurately if we on here are going to have an intelligent and benefical discussion on this general subject of firm and fast conditions that're prevalent at all times when it doesn't rain like at HVGC.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2005, 01:16:36 PM by TEPaul »

PAW13

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2005, 04:02:40 PM »
Sully, I do not ever remember serious turf loss.  I have always kidded Scott about HVCC's moto being "Yellow is beautiful".  It is fun to play when it is firm and fast and you have to hit good golf shots to score well.

By the way Knapper's record in the Am is pretty impressive and you didn't even mention his three Mid-Am wins, including last year at PCC.

How much longer until we have to deal with you again in the amateur ranks?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2005, 04:25:00 PM »
Sully, I do not ever remember serious turf loss.  I have always kidded Scott about HVCC's moto being "Yellow is beautiful".  It is fun to play when it is firm and fast and you have to hit good golf shots to score well.
What Tom describes above is understandable (20-30% loss). Not that I recall it, but the logic behind killing off the weaker grasses with lack of nutrition seems pretty sound for this type of endeavor.

One thing about that approach Scott took is that we never had to close down for the nine months it takes so many other clubs in the area to "re-grass" their golf courses.
[/color]

By the way Knapper's record in the Am is pretty impressive and you didn't even mention his three Mid-Am wins, including last year at PCC.

How much longer until we have to deal with you again in the amateur ranks?
Soon Chet, very soon.[/color]
« Last Edit: July 28, 2005, 04:25:57 PM by JES II »

TEPaul

Re:PA Am at Huntingdon Valley
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2005, 04:28:28 PM »
"Sully, I do not ever remember serious turf loss.  I have always kidded Scott about HVCC's moto being "Yellow is beautiful"."

Chet:

I sure hope more people think like you do on that and firm and fast generally will be a whole lot easier to bring back into function on more golf courses. I don't even remember HVGC being yellow over the years to be honest. The only thing I noticed about it compared to most of the other courses I knew was HVGC had a whole lot more of what I call "that light green sheen"---and you know what that is and what it means---eg screaming fast firm conditions! At this point I don't even have to hit a shot on a golf course that's got that "light green sheen", I can just tell how fast it is by just looking at it. The only time I noticed HVGC was sort of ratty (turf loss?) though was one time when the 2nd fairway just did look sort of ratty, but maybe I was looking for that after what some said to me about it when I started asking why we couldn't get into firm and fast too. It wasn't yellow or brown just a whole lot of stuff going on on that fairway about 3-4 years ago.

But I sure did learn more about the details of this prescription talking to Scott about it this week. The course looked great to me and to most of us but it's sure not that super immaculate look that some of these courses have and seem to want and expect.

Not until this week did I realize the significance of that as much though. Really good firm and fast golf courses aren't even supposed to look immaculate---I guess in an odd way they even can't----because the sort of immaculateness that some courses are and so many have gotten used to are inherently too artifically maintanined. The kind of immaculateness that some have gotten used to on some courses just isn't "Nature's Way" and it never will be!  ;)

How about those greens this week Chet? Were they any good? It's a good thing nobody in that field was putting against me when I was testing those things for a few hours early Wednesday morning or I would've won the Pa Amateur. Of course somebody like you would have to get me from the tees to the greens first!   ;)

Is there such a thing in golf called a "pinch putter"?  If there isn't there should be.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2005, 04:33:00 PM by TEPaul »