[JESII]

I've never held a committee position at a club so I ask those of you that have;

When an "educated membership" is discussed on here, in terms of making a maintenance methodology decision and/or adjustment, are we really talking about the greens chairman and maybe a couple of other influential individuals and that's it, or does the membership as a whole get involved in these decisions?

[TEPaul]

Sully:

Nah, memberships almost never get involved in the type of specific decision making green committees do. Even in the most democratically run course imaginable that's just too hard to do and frankly an entire membership would never want to get into all that. Memberships react to playing conditions and playabilty only. If it's good you don't hear all that much from them but if it's not (up to whatever their expectations are) you hear from most all of them all the time.

If you make a transition like HVGC did or we did to a smaller degree you basically just hope they like the transition and alterations generally in a maintenance approach like soft and green to firm and fast that a relatively limited number of people suggest.

Of course if a limited number suggest an expensive restoration or some other expensive project you have to take it to the membership generally because it's their money you'll be spending, and they've got to buy into the value of it to agree.

[JESII]

Tom,

That is what I hoped and expected to hear, now tell me this. Why would the green chairman (assuming they're interested in golf conditioning but probably not educated in it) not implement a program that can be shown to increase the health and welfare of his golf course and save loads of money at the same time?

[TEPaul]

"...now tell me this. Why would the green chairman (assuming they're interested in golf conditioning but probably not educated in it) not implement a program that can be shown to increase the health and welfare of his golf course and save loads of money at the same time?"

Sully:

I obviously believe that's what green chairmen should do. But why they haven't yet as prevalently as they probably should and hopefully will, is, at least in my opinion, for the reasons I mentioned above.

But someone has to explain this type of thing to even the green chairman or whomever it is in a club who suggests these things to the club and then works to convince those in clubs that make decisions. Maybe you tihnk what happened at HVGC with Linc Roden and your dad is normal or should be. It isn't, at least it sure wasn't when they did it. I'm not sure anyone told this stuff to Linc way back when, I think he came up with it on his own. That's why some of us on here call Linc Roden "the original purist". You are aware, aren't you, that Linc (and his ideas) was out there on his own in the wilderness for perhaps decades? People thought Linc was crazy. Thankfully people like your Dad listened, and you had a super who bought into that playability bigtime and figured out with very little, if any, help from the outside how to turn that course's maintenance program around and do what's been done. You are aware that back then even the USGA wanted no part of that kind of program. Even they viewed it as too radical. Think about that, and you can see how far this stuff has come already.

As Tom Doak mentioned, there were always courses out there that always did things the way you guys do, but they always did because they didn't have the alternatives or couldn't afford them. Valley Forge is such a course. HVGC may've been the first to go from the way most do it today to the way it's done now at HVGC.

Don't get me wrong, HVGC doesn't burn up their fairways into the total dormancy Fishers, Newport, Maidstone have to sometimes because HVGC doesn't have to go that far--at least they have a fairway irrigation system. They're just going down the right road with their irrigation system's use and getitng away from the over-reliance on chemicals and such.

[Craig Sweet]

I think a lot of board members and green chairman have an axe to grind. And in many cases the club policy encourages turnover in these positions. Thus, it becomes difficult to establish a consistant maintinence program.

[TEPaul]

" think a lot of board members and green chairman have an axe to grind."

Craig:

What do you mean and axe to grind? In what way?

Sully:

I'm glad you're asking these questions. It sometimes seems all so obvious to some of us now, I guess----it's anything but. It makes me think back to where I came from only about 5-6 years ago on this overall subject.

Maybe ten years ago and back I was aware of this kind of playability but honestly I think I just thought how lucky I was to catch a course this way in dry weather and in a tournament mode set up that couldn't be allowed to last more than about 5 days to a week---and then had to be whipped back into that over-irrigated soft mode "comfort zone" just to survive. I don't think I thought a single thing past that. Other than that I guess I thought all courses needed to be soft with no real ground game for some agronomic reason other than those brief tournament mode set-ups that supers needed to really work to prepare for and then snap the course out of it.   I'm not kidding on that.

Now, if you think of how far the understanding has come. It's not easy to know for people who don't get into this stuff like many of us do on here.  Supers know it, architects do, but not most golfers. I believe that's changing now because some courses have made the change in maintenance practices for the first time in memory.

[Ted Kramer]

Tom,

The comments that I made were based on simply looking at the world around me. Technology moves fast. And it moves in ways that often times can't even be imagined under the current/modern paradigm.

Frank Thomas knows a lot more about physics than I do, that can't even be debated. But any time that I hear anyone say that technology is maxed out, I call bullshit.

-Ted

[Craig Sweet]

TEPAUL...regarding axes to grind. I think that axe can be anything from wanting memorial trees planted, to more tee boxes, to feeling the greens are to slow compared to the course down the street.

More importantly though is the turnover. Our muni has a boad and most have been on for a couple of 3 year terms at least.

[Craig Sweet]

redanman...it really takes a lot to kill grass. Brown turf is generally dormant turf. A perfectly normal response to hot weather.

[TEPaul]

"Tom,

The comments that I made were based on simply looking at the world around me. Technology moves fast. And it moves in ways that often times can't even be imagined under the current/modern paradigm.

Frank Thomas knows a lot more about physics than I do, that can't even be debated. But any time that I hear anyone say that technology is maxed out, I call bullshit."

Ted:

There's obviously a big difference between saying technology is maxed out period in golf's I&B and saying what Frank might be saying that they believe it's maxed out within the USGA/R&A I&B rules and regulations.

Look, these guys in the tech center look at this stuff quite differently than we do. To them in there who have to test this stuff the real deal is in the tests and testing they do. Back then the tests just weren't very sophisticated. Thomas took the sophistication a long way in his tenure. The USGA doesn't go down to Home Depot or something and buy the lastest ball and impliement testing machine. The USGA designs and makes themselves right there everything they use to test I&B---they always have.

His optimization test he designed and created is a sad day in the USGA's annals, in my opinion. I think I'm pretty clear on what happened. That wasn't Frank---the manufacturers objected to it and the organizations caved on that---not Frank. Why did the manufacturers object to it? I think the reasons are obvious---Frank had probably found a better way---maybe even a really good way of figuring out what could come down the pipleline at them before it got designed and made and tested by the USGA and/or out there before they could really determine of quantify not just what it was doing but why.

These guys have to quantify accurately to deem something non-conforming and they're older tests weren't doing an adequate job of that. That's precisely why the manufacturers managed to create all this new distance in the hands of some players and to do it within the old rules and regs, particularly the ODS rules and regs of the USGA.

In a word, the manufacturers outfoxed them within their own rules. Frank could see it coming but he couldn't convince the board to do what he suggested. Remember how the "USGA Optimization Test" was brought out to great fanfare on their website. Then all of a sudden it was gone---no mention of it. And Frank was gone too---let go essentially.

But now they think their testing is better or their data information is more quantifiable to deem non-conforming what comes at them before it gets out there and surprises them by doing something they didn't forsee with the tests they had.

Have you read that quote in the Joint Statement of Principles yet? If so, what does that mean to you? To me it means they have stated they reserve the right to deem anything non-conforming for any reason whatsoever that they believe their test show is creating additional distance.

That's probably why Frank said technology has come to an end to create additional distance. He means it within the rules and regs. Frank is certainly savy enough to understand if there were no rules and regs the manufacturers could probably come up with a golf ball next month that Tiger Woods could carry 500 yards.

[TEPaul]

"TEPAUL...regarding axes to grind. I think that axe can be anything from wanting memorial trees planted, to more tee boxes, to feeling the greens are to slow compared to the course down the street."

Craig:

I agree---there's too much of that. I believe on most of this stuff these committees need to just come up with what works best on these courses, quantify and qualify it and just stick with it----PERIOD. There needs to be far more formalized criteria that any incoming committee needs to understand they have to conform to on certain things. I'm trying to work on that at my club---it isn't very easy. The most important one is green speed. That needs to be carefully analyzed and then just CAPPED course to course---and I mean FOR THE REST OF TIME. A new incoming green chairman may want to make his own changes but one thing he ain't never gonna change is PHYSICS!

[TEPaul]

"-We have to syringe the greens (Because the roots are too shallow and the grass will die if we don't wet them)
-The greens are dying, in spite of the syringing because the diseases love it wet, the greens become "chocolate pudding""

redanman;

Wrong! Basically two different things. Irrigating the greens substantially is one thing. Syringing them something else. Basically even with deep roots syringing greens is necessary in intense heat. Syringing isn't irrigation the way you may be thinking of supplying water to the roots---its just cooling the surface and the top of the plant off.

Stick to orthopaedics and let the supers handle the grass. They don't tell you how to operate on a knee, do they?  

[Craig Sweet]

Tom...I'm not sure I agree that green speed is THE most important issue. It might be at your course, and perhaps that is what you ment.

My take on green speed is it is a component of a larger package of maintinence practices. I don't see a need to adopt an edic that caps the speed of the greens once you have decided on your overall "maintinence meld" or philosophy.  And if you are into "natures way" let the greens be what they will be. I doubt they will get **that** fast even in these dry and hot conditions..after all, they do get watered. A course like Fishers is probably playing pretty fast from tee through green right now, but in another month when some rains come everything will slow down in proportion. Right now, without "tricking them up" Donnie's greens are probably matching the general conditions of the course. I think that is cool. Firm and fast now and as the weather changes so does the course. In other words, don't speed up the greens when everything else is sloppy wet, and don't worry about speed when everything else is playing firm and fast.

[TEPaul]

Craig:

I don't know, I think green speed is pretty important. Maybe not the most important thing but at this time in golf's evolution I think a better understanding of it needs to happen or these greens will keep getting recontoured to maintain ever increasing speeds and that's an ongoing tragedy that's happened all over the place before our eyes in this time we're getting into restorations. I do believe every course should cap their greenspeed in the name of not recontouring their greens in the name of increased speed.

Actually Donnie wrote a post less than a month ago how he realized how his greens just popped alive in exciting playability at a slightly faster speed than he's been used to. I think they need to find that speed, stick with it but cap it.

[Craig Sweet]

redanman...at my course we hand water for some very specific reasons. We also syringe for specific reasons.

We mostly hand water areas where we have LDS...localized dry spot...this generally occurs where the sand the greens are built on interfaces with the soil in the surrounds...long story short, the soil around the plant roots becomes hydrophobic, so wetting agents, and lots of water are needed to correct the problem. This is pretty heavy watering intended to add soil moisture and correct a problem.

The syringing is done to cool the grass blades and reduce stress. It isn't intended to replace soil moisture so the H2O amounts are light. We haven't done this too often and to be honest with our heat and low humidity it probably has little effect, but who knows???

[Craig Sweet]

Tom I remember his post.

My question is this: How did your course play when it was first built? Firm and fast with slow greens (due to the equipment at that time)?  Was it designed for firm and fast with hard greens, but long and grainy grass?

I hope Donnie reads this because I would like to know if his greens speed matches the overall course speed and whether that greens speed occured naturally or whether he lowered the cut. If he did lower the cut, did he do it to match a course that was drying out and becoming fast?

[Craig Sweet]

Speaking of a tough summer...I'm looking out my upstairs window and seeing a lot of smoke in the sky from several fires that have kicked in in the past two days. Several right along I-90 just mnutes west of the city. The Interstate is closed. Fishing and other recreation on the Clark Fork river is closed along a 30 mile stretch so firecrews can get water.

99 degrees today at 5:30pm with humidity at 12%...variable winds of 8mph gusting to 12.

[TEPaul]

"My take on green speed is it is a component of a larger package of maintinence practices. I don't see a need to adopt an edic that caps the speed of the greens once you have decided on your overall "maintinence meld" or philosophy.  And if you are into "natures way" let the greens be what they will be. I doubt they will get **that** fast even in these dry and hot conditions..after all, they do get watered. A course like Fishers is probably playing pretty fast from tee through green right now, but in another month when some rains come everything will slow down in proportion. Right now, without "tricking them up" Donnie's greens are probably matching the general conditions of the course. I think that is cool. Firm and fast now and as the weather changes so does the course. In other words, don't speed up the greens when everything else is sloppy wet, and don't worry about speed when everything else is playing firm and fast."

Craig:

I'm very interested in this take of yours. A new wrinkle---a new way of looking at the "parts" that fit different "wholes" that occur naturally at different times?

Very interesting. Please elaborate. I'm always looking to perfect the overall "maintenance meld" concept---and variability, particularly extreme variability, particularly if it plays into seasonalism is most interesting. I've never been a fan of standardization in most any form in golf and architecture because it certainly isn't the way the world works naturally.

Any golf course that has the capacity to play as different from time to time as night from day is certainly interesting, That's why I've always loved Maidstone so much. With that course it can be the vast variability in the ground conditions through the seasons but mostly its the wind and weather that can change so much, and change the course so much from day to day,

[Craig Sweet]

redanman...I believe studies done on syringing greens shows a rapid cooling, but not a long lasting effect. I doubt it has any effect on disease one way or the other, but some east coast supers. might have a better idea about that.

Here in the west disease is not a big issue. I'm sure in the mid-west and east there are courses that spray every 10 days or so...

Just a word on "shallow rooted" and "fragile" grass...every situation is different...obviously healthier plants can cope with stress better than unhealthy plants...whether its cold stress or heat and drought...but plants are remarkably resilient...they do know how to "take care of themselves"...shut down and preserve...especially in heat and drought....it does sound like this year in some locals in the east the heat and drought was over the top bad...the healthy plants will be ok and later this Fall or next Spring they'll be looking good again....shallow rooted or not....I think those greens that had disease issues this summer, and then got hit with the heat and drought are going to be in rough shape for sometime to come...

[Craig Sweet]

Tom, I don't think its a "new wrinkle"....this has been going on for a long time...but I do think its a more complex issue in the east than here in the west...growing grass here is relatively easy compared to back there....we do not have to work so hard for "firm and fast" nor do we have the disease issues

On our course we water when the rain stops to keep the grass from dying...dormant grass is ok...it will turn green when the rains come back...dead grass won't....so we water "just enough"...we tinker with the amounts...we don't want the fairways soggy at 6am...but in general we don't worry about it a whole lot...the greens speed up from maybe 9.5 to 10.5 or 11...we could mow lower than we do, but we don't (I have no idea what height we're at now)...the greens get faster without us doing anything different maintenence wise...we might roll once a week, but that is not intended to do anything but smooth out the lumps and bumps...in a month we'll actually start mowing the fairways a little higher to let the grass plants do some adjusting for winter...

Maybe if we had fairway or green grass with roots 11" long we could not water at all and the grass would not die...I don't know....I'm not sure our course would play any different than it does now, but I'm pretty sure, if we had 11" roots we would have a healthier, hardier course with no poa in the fairways and less poa on the greens...



 

[Craig Sweet]

Tom...lets look at all the elements that influence how a course might play from day to day and seasonally.

Wind
Sun
Clouds
Rain
Humans
Length of day

Are there some more?

The only ones I have influence over is RAIN and HUMANS.

I can do nothing about excessive rain. No rain, I can irrigate.

The other human impacts I can modify or eliminate entirely.

This is over simplistic, but finding a balance with "natures way" is not all that complex, though some would prefer complexity because it justifies so much of what they do.  

I will guess that Donnie Beck has figured out the right amount of complexity and it now allows him to fish more often.

[TEPaul]

"Tom...lets look at all the elements that influence how a course might play from day to day and seasonally.

Wind
Sun
Clouds
Rain
Humans
Length of day

Are there some more?"

Craig:

There sure is one more. CARTS! That is unless you're making humans and carts totally synonymous----which would be OK by me.  

Carts are just driving upcoming US Am on-site qualifying site Philadelphia C.C's super Mike McNulty crazy these days with the hot dry/wet conditions zoomng around on his fairways---all 75 of them. He says if he didn't have to deal with that many carts he could get the course firmer and faster "through the green." Interestingly, PCC has very little in the way of cart paths on the course which certainly makes it look a whole lot better in a general aesthetic sense.

[Craig Sweet]

I hate carts!  I mean, I understand their convenience, but still....they do a lot of damage.

Yes, by humans I mean everything...the use of equipment,the thinking, the need to "meddle" with natures way....etc.

I'm not a superintendent, but it seems to me that you should always be striving to reduce the impact of humans on how the course plays and allow mother nature to dictate conditions as much as possible.  This is the way I look at it...a healthy person has very little need to see the doctor. A healthy person copes with disease and stress better than an unhealthy person...A person can turn to medication and other chemicals to maintain their health or they can take a more holistic approach....either way you might reach a balance...but to my thinking the holistic approach is better in the long term for many number of reasons.

A golf course isn't any different. Golf courses breathe in and out just like you and me...

[TEPaul]

"I'm not a superintendent,"

Craig:

You're not? I'll be damned. I've been thinking you are all along. What the hell are you then---a silly rabbit?  

[Steve Okula]

[quote author=Craig Sweet
Tom...lets look at all the elements that influence how a course might play from day to day and seasonally.

Wind
Sun
Clouds
Rain
Humans
Length of day

Are there some more?

Yes.

Temperature, humidity, insects, weeds, diseases, and available maintenance resources.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()