[Joe Hancock]

Guy,

I have some areas with perrenial ryegrass, the main target of grey leaf spot. However, here in Michigan we don't experience much in the way of GLS. We do have a fair amount of pressure from dollar spot, but I water as little as possible (fertilize very little as well) and I tolerate what disease I get in my fairways. I treat greens, tees and approaches as neccesary.

Dan Lucas, at Kingsley Club, is as wise about managing disease as anyone I know. His goals include keeping thatch at minimum levels, as many disease pathogens love taking up residence in the thatch layer. He also manages fertility at at low levels, keeping succulent leaf tissue at a minimum.

I think a common denominator at all those high level clubs mentioned above would be an intolerance of anything but green. Over-irrigation and over-fertilization is more the norm than managing for truly healthy turf.

Of course, all of the above is my humble opinion. Golfers across America don't neccesarily share my goals and objectives for the game of golf.

Joe

[Joe Hancock]

Mike:

You seem to be trying to find where the differences are in budgets of different courses and I submit that a lot of it has little to do with the architecture and everything to do with the ego of the club.

The reason that maintenance budgets on the East coast are $1.4 million and budgets in Scotland are a third of that has a bit to do with chemicals, etc., but most of all it has to do with labor.  Most of the big Scottish courses have maintenance crews of six or seven; East coast courses have 20-30!  That's because they mow more frequently, fertilize more, trim around the clubhouse and the cart paths, and all get around on Cushmans.  None of which is really necessitated by the layout of the course.  Winged Foot was in good shape 30 years ago at a fraction of the cost.

While I agree with you for the most part, I also know of at least one club here in Michigan that spends upwards of $100k on chemicals alone. That's a significant difference between high end clubs here and most UK courses, I would imagine. Of course, there's still a lot of room to get to $1.4 million....so you're correct about that labor bill.....

Joe

[Mike_Young]

Tom,
I agree....I think I heard labor is around 65% of budgets across country last year....and if I look back at a WF and the maintenance conditions, I would have no problem....as you say..you could tell there was much less detail in the maintenance....even so at ANGC.....I just don't know how it reverses itself.....
Tom, I also think over all SIZE of the course has a lot to do with it....

Joe,
yep...GREEN is the problem....

[Scott Witter]

Wayne:

Though it may have come out that way, my intention was not to compare Rochester and Philly...I am quite well aware of the seasonal differences (Kyle) with obvious off setting costs.  It was simply to point out that very nice clubs, that just so happen to be in Rochester, are able to provide excellent condidtoning and at much reduced cost.  My reference to Philly was only a coat tail follow up from T Pauls original statement and his local.

"In our opinion, the very best explainer and detailer of this particular fact is Merion's Matt Shaeffer. He has said to us and to other club representatives  we have brought to him to learn that if a club wants to go that last 10-15% in championship conditioning most of the time if it is possible weather-wise as Merion East does it will really cost you."

I have no doubt that Matt is confident in this approach, but we are talking about opposite ends of the spectrum here between Merion and say the nice clubs that Mike Young is  referring to.  Are CHAMPIONSHIP conditions honestly necessary?  Do we think the maintenance/playing conditions in the UK are unacceptable?  Are they championship?  A few perhaps, but I am willing to bet that most are far from it as I suspect Mark Fine was referring, their budgets are likely much less that the US on a comparable level of club.

Aside from soil conditions which again do have a profound impact on the options available to the super to achieve certain conditioning, I believe the understanding and attitude of the UK golfers are vastly different than in the US, but we already know this.

"Don't think these high end clubs that are spending the big bucks don't fully understand what they want and what it costs to get it.

Is the gist of this thread actually something like---this sets a bad example in golf?"

Sure Tom, they who can afford it are quite aware, but as you point out this sets a bad example.

Why must it be in excess?  Were the budgets of these clubs at the same level when these members were growing up?  Have they inflated naturally during their 30 and 40 years of golf at club XYZ, or have they skyrocketed due to keeping up with the Jones and TV Golf conditions and the members have lost touch with reality...simply because they can afford it??

"From my experience of both sides of the pond I think much of the difference in maintenance cost is expectations.  I think expectations in the States are higher because members of private clubs there are on a whole far wealthier than Brits.  I think a lot of Brits travel and really appreciate all the "extras", but many would be loathe to pay for it on their course."

Sean, I could comment on the income differences, but I would agree on the expectation level.  Personally, the 'extras' just waste $.  

[Joe Hancock]

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=27641;start=msg527906#msg527906

The link above is to a thread that ended up not geting much attention. Marc posted some photo's, and I admit, they aren't very good at showing what I want to convey. Marc posted two of the three pics under false pretenses...they aren't in the UK, they are in Michigan. My point is, and was, that maintenance practices can "approach" the UK model here in The States, in many locations.

Joe

[Mike_Young]

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=27641;start=msg527906#msg527906

The link above is to a thread that ended up not geting much attention. Marc posted some photo's, and I admit, they aren't very good at showing what I want to convey. Marc posted two of the three pics under false pretenses...they aren't in the UK, they are in Michigan. My point is, and was, that maintenance practices can "approach" the UK model here in The States, in many locations.

Joe

Joe,
And wouldn't you say they do at least approach UK or maybe less in over 12000 courses here in the US?

[Mike_Young]

I was fortunate to work for Toro from the late 70's until the mid 80's calling on golf courses.  I called on over 1200 courses at some point during that time...
I have seen :
A 20 inch Jacobsen rotary mower with a roller welded to front and back used as a green mower.
Bushhogs mowing rough
labor shoveling topdressing onto greens and spreading by hand
irrigation from a water wagon
pocketknife removal of crabgrass
a three gang jake fairway unit pulled by a Willys jeep ctting rough at Cypress Point
a 15 year old Jake tri king mowing approaches at CP
And I could go on....it happens all across the country....what most of these places have in common is THEY ARE LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE TO MAKE A PROFIT...not real estate amenities being subsidized by lot sales....

Recently I have a friend that was the Director of golf Maintenance for Reynolds Plantation for since inception...before that he was asst at AGNC....he just bought a course I designed in Athens 12 years ago....he now has it in great condition and I think his budget is under $350,000.  Oh...and he makes a profit...

[JMorgan]

Can one of you please itemize/guesstimate -- for the uninitiated -- the various maintenance categories and approximate costs associated with each area?  Thanks.  

[Ron Farris]

Geography, Topography, Soil types, climate, LABOR, turf types and of course the number of time required to mow are all great factors in building and maintaining.  In the Midwest there are great extremes.  I can think of a few courses that are not too far from each other:

9 holer ($40,000 maintenance butget) built for $800,000 [Yes a one man show]. heavy clay soils, moderate humidity

18 holer ($415,000 maintenance) 2.5 hours from 9 holer on heavy soils

18 holer ($350,000 maintenance [supt. said he could do it for $250,000 a few years ago])

[Mike_Young]

Can one of you please itemize/guesstimate -- for the uninitiated -- the various maintenance categories and approximate costs associated with each area?  Thanks.  

LABOR*                     64.0%
   FERTILIZERS       15.0%
   FUEL & OIL            2.0%
   EQUIPMENT (parts)      2.5%
   IRRIGATION (parts)      1.6%
   PESTICIDES               3.4%
   TOPDRESSING          2.5%
   SEED                 .8%
   SOD                  2.0%
   SMALL TOOLS & SUPP  2.0%
   CLEANING SUPPLIES        .2%
   UTILITIES            3.0%
   MISCELLANEOUS      1.0%

  *Includes superintendent & two assistants
This is old and % could vary due to parts and fuel etc.c
Mike

[Joe Hancock]

Can one of you please itemize/guesstimate -- for the uninitiated -- the various maintenance categories and approximate costs associated with each area?  Thanks.  

LABOR*                     64.0%
   FERTILIZERS       15.0%
   FUEL & OIL            2.0%
   EQUIPMENT (parts)      2.5%
   IRRIGATION (parts)      1.6%
   PESTICIDES               3.4%
   TOPDRESSING          2.5%
   SEED                 .8%
   SOD                  2.0%
   SMALL TOOLS & SUPP  2.0%
   CLEANING SUPPLIES        .2%
   UTILITIES            3.0%
   MISCELLANEOUS      1.0%

  *Includes superintendent & two assistants

Mike,

Need to put some money in for capital expenditures (equipment purchases, irrigation upgrades, etc.)

Joe

[Mike_Young]

Joe,
Yep......seems like so many clubs don't put capital expense in the maintenance budget but the GM's around here put it in another budget...I don't know why...but you are correct...

[JMorgan]

Thanks, Mike.   And how does labor break down into time spent doing x y z?

[Ron Farris]

This is from a gc in the Midwest exactly 6.5 hours drive from the Sand Hills GC and on completely different soils.

This course is always well maintained and a great pleasure to play.  Built in th 1970's using Push-up greens.  They have a good 6-8" of sand topdressing built up over the years.  The greatest asset the course has is that it drains well. It is a great private club in an environment where the average Joe can join for pennies.  I think the initiation fee is in the range of $3500 with payment options.

[Mark_Fine]

Just back to my computer and I've enjoyed reading lots of great comments from everyone.  

Guy,
We collected all kinds of maintenance data and budget numbers from all over but it wouldn't be appropriate to post them here.  I trust you understand.  We did include some examples of bunker/hazard maintenance in our book.

Sean and Tom D. suggest "expectations" and "ego" are the culprits.  I think you guys are right on!  

Though it is unfortunately changing   , the budgets of many courses (inland and links) in places like the British Isles are far less than what we would spend in this country.  Expectations are a big part of that.  One of my favorite maintenance stories was from not too many years ago when I flew over to England a few months before the British Open at Royal Birkdale.  I wanted to get in another round at the course before the tourney and was playing it with a buddy who is prominent member.  I said to him, "So John, what do they do here to get the golf course ready for the Open?"  He looked at me a bit strange as if he didn't know what I was asking.  I said to him again, "What special preparation is nessary for the course?"  He finally said, "Mark, all they do is put up some stands, throw a little extra seed on the fairways, open up the back tees, and let the big boys have a go!"  

Sadly, I am not sure it is quite the same right now but this all goes back again to "ego and expectations".  

This thread was not to blast courses that spend zillions of dollars trying to make their golf courses look perfect.  However, I do think they set the wrong example and when it comes in particular to the maintenance of hazards, many many courses go way over the top.  

Maybe some of what we communicate on this site, what we all write about in our books and articles or present in our talks will help change that.  None of us are not trying to prevent progress of improved maintenance.  We are just trying to remind golfers that if we strive to sterilize our playing fields with perfect conditions, not only will the expense spiral out of control and set a bad precedent, but much of the true spirit and interest of the game will be lost.  

[wsmorrison]

"This thread was not to blast courses that spend zillions of dollars trying to make their golf courses look perfect.  However, I do think they set the wrong example and when it comes in particular to the maintenance of hazards, many many courses go way over the top."

I think most confuse a course that looks perfect with a course perfectly set up.

This isn't to say that clubs with a certain culture ought not to have their course play in championship condition on an everyday basis given the whims of mother nature.  I think the members are well aware of what it costs and are willing to foot the bill.  One size does not fit all.  It never did and it never will.  It would seem there will always be a bell curve of expenditures and there isn't anything wrong with that.  If you think it leads some clubs to go beyond their means and spend too much (let alone unwisely) then the responsibility is theirs and not clubs that do things their way because of their established goals.

[Anthony_Nysse]

We need to remember that many of the golf courses that were talking about having huge budget with much of the labor being handwork are also the course were initiation fees are $250,000+ and dues are $20,000+. Personally, if I'm spending that kind of money, my playing surfaces had better be very close to perfect. Most of the very high end courses in the Philly area, New Jersery and up to New York, a $1 million budget is common place. One also must remember the area and climate that a coure is located in. Take Five Farms, Caves Valley and Congressional for example-Those courses are located very near the transition zone, where the humidity is very high for bentgrass to really thrive. Because of this, alot of handwater, handmowing and extras chemicals are used in the summer months. A million Dollars really isn't that much to maintain those types of courses. In fact, one would be suprised as to how many of those types of  courses are closer to the $2 million mark than the $1 million mark.

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[TEPaul]

ScottW;

In your post #29 I'm not sure what you're really trying to say other than perhaps Merion is setting a bad example with their desire to have a course in championship condition and the cost it takes to do that.

And maybe I wasn't very clear when I mentioned Matt Shaeffer as a good explainer and detailer of what it takes and costs to do that.

In my opinion, when we brought some clubs to talk to him it seems to me in a sense he was probably purposefully  discouraging them from emulating Merion by explaining to them in detail what it costs to emulate Merion, particularly the cost of the last 15% or so in this kind of conditioning and playability. He didn't actually say it but it seemed like his gist was to ask them why they'd want to emulate what Merion is doing these days. As everyone knows Merion has a whole stream of top flight tournaments coming down the pipeline in less than the next decade.

Is the budget at Merion a whole lot higher than it was (relatively speaking) 25 or 30 years ago? There can't be any question about it---it could be way higher but the way the golf course is today vs back then is way different, and way better if one likes these kinds of championship conditions all the time as obviously Merion East does now. Unlike most other golf clubs they also have another course so this kind of thing works well for them now.

I'm getting kinda tired of hearing people say that a Merion is setting a bad example. I think other people and other clubs have their own responsibility to understand what they want and what they can afford.

The point is a guy like Matt Shaeffer is both willing and able to tell any club what it costs to have a course like that. He's willing to explain this in detail where a club like ANGC maybe never has been willing to explain it.

At that point any club that comes to see him can then just go home and decide for themselves if they are able to afford some of the things Merion East does because Matt has explained the whole thing in detail to them.

I have no problem with any of that. What I don't much like to hear, though, is other people saying that Merion shouldn't do what they want to do on their own course because it sets a bad example for others. It's their golf course and if they know what they're doing and if they know what they want to do and what it cost, let them do it without criticism.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Maybe this should be it's own thread, do most golfers know is the tees, greens or approaches are walked mowed or mowed with a Triplex? I'm a turf guy, so I can always tell, but do most notice? For their own sake, I hope that they do or would start to notice because that is a big reason as to why greens fees can be so high.

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[wsmorrison]

Tony,

I would be surprised if more than a few percent, if that, have any idea at all let alone most.

If anywhere, it will be noticed around greens (I look very carefully at that these days) as it relates to the outlines and proximity to bunkers and falloffs.  So many great pin positions have been lost over time.  The return of these with proper green expansion might even be a better defense against par than lengthening.  Cheaper too, I would imagine.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom/Wayne,
Don't develop a complex because I don't think anyone is selecting out Merion.  I'm sure not.  I know Matt Shaffer very well.  He was a big contributor to and supporter of our bunkers book.  I will give Matt the courtesy of not speaking for him in a public forum, but I will say he would be very much in favor of keeping mantainence costs to a minimum.

But where I will disagree with you is that other courses do try to emulate these top clubs (or the top clubs in their respective areas).  Whether you want to admit it or not, they are leading by example and do influence what other clubs do.  The old saying, "Keeping up with the Jones" is very much a part for the setting of golf course maintenance budgets.  

Tony,
You would be very surprised to learn that there are many many more clubs than you think that have seven figure maintenance budgets that are not charging anything close to those entrance fees and annual dues.  

Wayne,
Your comment about looks perfect vs. perfectly set up is a good one but is still very subjective to most golfers.  The most popular perception has a lot to do with where the maintenance budget ends up.    

[Mark_Fine]

One more important point to add - though it varies from club to club, if the "ideal maintenance meld" (as some like to call it) is very expense to achieve, then maybe they should either not be pushing for it, or change their paradigm of what is ideal.  Aren't some of the courses we talk about that approach this ideal, costly to maintain.  I wish I could post some numbers but I will refrain.  Thoughts anyone?  

[Anthony_Nysse]

Mark,
  I'm well aware of this-We don't here, in fact most clubs around me arent even close to 6 figure fees. I'm talking about some of the big clubs in the mid Atlantic, Philly and the northeast. Just think of some of the clubs that have really made a splash as of late-Kinloch, Sebonack, The Bridge, Trump National(s), Robert Trent Jones International, Atlantic, Caves Valley, Galloway National, East Hampton, Bayonne Golf Club, Liberty National and Nantucket. In fact, 5 of GD's best New privates have initiation fees of $100,000+

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[G_Tiska]

labor rates from region to region are the biggest factor.
hourly laborers on east end of LI may get $11-$13 per hour
rochester area maybe in the $9-$10 rate..if that
labor costs can 25%-30% different
adding that in.... increases liability & workers comp insurance costs
so it's not as simple as it may look
just my thoughts

[wsmorrison]

Mark,

I do think you are mistaken in taking to task or condemning in anyway a club that decides to adopt a certain maintenance practice because of the impact it may have on other clubs trying to keep up with them in a real or perceived fashion.  You've taken this stand before and like then, I think it is ill-conceived.  You place blame on a proactive group that does what it decides to do and you don't blame the reactive group that follows in lock step when it may not appropriate.  They are to blame for their own misfortunes, no one else.  Your criticisms don't make sense to me.  The proactive clubs don't owe anything to you, the club down the street or golf in general.  They have free will to determine their own course of action.  If another club follows their lead for good or for bad, that is their decision and they are responsible for it, nobody else.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()