I want to preface this post by saying that I am an assistant superintendent, I have been to Oakmont, I know people who work at Oakmont, I greatly admire the work ethic of the staff and have the utmost respect for the high level of quality they produce. Having said that, however…
I feel like playing the part of the cynic.
Aren’t many of their methods extraneous and, at times, a gross misallocation of resources? Quintuple cut, double roll, weekly growth regulator applications, a top-of-the-line irrigation system that goes largely unused in favor of hand watering. And why do they do this? Because of the legacy of a steel magnate who wanted to build a supremely difficult golf course and a century old stigma attached to the relative speed to the greens. Oakmont is, of course, not alone in this. Many of our golden age courses, and many of our newer courses, simply throw money around to temporarily solve a problem, and, once they have thrown it, they must continue doing so, or jobs will be on the line.
And more than this, it’s interesting that many on this website long for a day when course conditioning doesn’t play such a role in playability, yet we are often astounded and impressed when we here about the lengths that superintendents go to live up to some arbitrary standard set over 100 years ago. Indeed, there are those who celebrate it.