[TEPaul]

I'm beginning to think that almost all of you architectural experts are cop-outs on firm and fast!

You think everyone else wants lush, green and soft.

That's just BS! Most people don't even know what firm and fast really is or plays like. But if they did they would universally love it!!

Don't hide behind something like the 99% rule! That's BS--things can definitely change to firmer and faster--simply because it's total commonsense!!!

[Paul Richards]

I'll take firm and fast over lush and green.

Anyone who has played golf in the British Isles knows how awesome firm and fast plays!!

[Steve Lang]

I played TOC with two gentlemen from NY & NJ... they didn't appreciate the F&F through the green one bit when their balls repeatedly rolled into the gorse or into some of those bunkers... prudent strategy dictated going left that day and away from trouble or potential trouble, but you had to execute.  I suppose this all argues that the USGA set-ups for the pros is appropriate?  

[michael miller]

I agree that the average golfer is not educated enough about the game to appreciate the "correctness" of F and F.  Further, course design and topography are big factors as many are not layed out properly, or the site is such that  fast conditions are not practical. Additionally, public courses are always encouraging faster play, which translates to more green fees.  "F and F" will slow play down, whereas "soft" conditions, "through the green" and greens  that "hold" and have slower speeds, will always allow for faster play.
Ideally, though, as we all realize, golf will be ay it's best when the options and strategy that are inherent in good architecture, coupled with the "proper" course condition, usually to include the "running game", are in play.

[Dunlop_White]

FIRM AND FAST CONDITIONS ARE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS WHICH WILL HELP REVIVE THE MENTAL CHALLENGE!!!!

There is nothing too interesting or thought provoking about plush, green surfaces where the ball's reaction can be anticipated with certainty. Many golfers today will reach down for their little, wooden tee even before their ball hits earth. Soft conditions are simply too comforting, monotonous and predictable! Little forethought is given to quirky bounces or extended rolls as native ground game contours are no longer examined. But just as a brisk wind or a swirling breeze forces the golfer to step back and ponder, so does the mystery and the intrigue of firm playing surfaces.

Dry, lean conditions require a golfer to think! Likewise, they require a golfer to make a multitude of strategic decisions including club selection, shot trajectory, and preferable angles and diagonals of approach. The challenge is more complex than simply determining where the ball will land. Rather, where the ball will come to rest is the ultimate dilemma. Here, thought and deliberation must accompany shot execution as integral ingredients.

[Tim Weiman]

Tom Paul:

I wasn't aware we had any "architectural experts" participating in these discussions. Nor did I think Corey Miller was a "cop out" for sharing his view that a great many people prefer green and lush to firm and fast.

You may meet many people who like firm and fast, but that hasn't been my experience, at least not when playing here in the States. Across the pond is a different matter.

What I was trying to get at was the challenge of trying to encourage "firm and fast" and why it is so difficult in the U.S.You seem to think a "universal" love affair with this approach to maintenance is coming. I'll believe it when I see it.

[Patrick McGuire]

Most would agree that firm and fast makes for better golf.  But there should be some discussion here regarding turf-types.  If you're talking fescue or bent, no problem.  But where I'm from, we get over 100 inches of rain per year and the native poa has difficulty tolerating drought conditions.  If we push the firm and fast concept too far, we get thinning turf, more weeds and more susceptibility to fungus and other disease.

Firm and fast is great, but if you're on the west coast please cut your super a little slack!

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
You are fooling yourself and you know it!  My 99% rule is not a cop-out, it is reality!  You can have firm and fast conditions everyday over here if you want, just go play your local muni's.  I grew up playing these courses and they were all firm and fast and burned out.  I hardly knew what a ball mark was until I got to play the local private clubs!  

Let me tell you something, all those muni players playing on firm fast conditions just would love to see their course lush and green and soft like the ones on TV and like at the high end private courses and resorts.  

Get away from the computer and go play the local $25 golf course and you'll get your firm and fast conditions.  Unfortunately, the only golfers who like that stuff are the 1% like us  

I can picture 99% of America golfers flying over to Southern England, then driving down to play a course like Deal and saying to themselves when they arrive, "What the hell is this cow pasture".  

Until you've done this a number of times and learn to appreicate what "real golf" is all about, forget it.  

One last point, why do golfers over here (intelligent ones I would think) pay $250,000 to join a club that "hand mows" their fairways and has lush soft conditions?  They have the money to do anything they want.  You tell me?

Mark

[TEPaul]

OK, Mark, I will tell you. You think that 1% of golfers in America like firm and fast conditions and 99% don't.

What I take from that number, that statistic, is the implication that these kinds of conditions (firm and fast) are never going to happen because there's too much resistance to them! Your implication is that 1% (who you imply is not much more than us) likes this condition and 99% don't and so consequently nothing is going to change!

I don't believe that! What I believe is that there are a number of MISPERCEPTIONS about firm and fast conditions and that it might not be that difficult to correct those misperceptions! How can it be then that a number of clubs have overcome those prevalent misperceptions that saddled much of the overirrigated modern age of golf and it's design?

One of the overriding misperceptions is that firm and fast conditions on a golf course results in burned out, weedy, crummy turf conditions like one might find on a $25 muni course. That's what you said in your post!

And that's simply not true at all!

Maintaining firm and fast conditions on a golf course is a dedicated "maintenance process" that takes research and thought and a dedicated maintence application!

And it has nothing to do with having an overabundance of money or not having and overabundance of money either. If lots of money begets lush and green playing conditions everytime, everywhere, then why is Merion, PVGC, HVGC, NGLA, Aronimink, Oakmont, PCC, Easthampton, Friar's Head, Applebrook, Shinnecock etc, etc. striving at this time to establish maintenance programs that maximizes firm and fast conditions and a reestablishment of the ground game on their courses? Those are just the courses that I know about and I doubt it's just a Philly or LI thing!

Why did I see a half dozen maintenance crew out on Aroimink yesterday syringing fairways? Why did I see a notable course with a great ground game going and greens that only lightly dented--making that necessary firmness between "through the green" and the running game combined with greens that were bit dicey to aerial shots? Why has PVGC started to topdress their fairways?

That was a perfect indication of what I call the "ideal maintenance meld" and I really doubt it's happening by accident! If those courses wanted just lush and green conditions they'd probably just turn on their irrigation systems every night and soak the hell out of the course--but they apparently aren't doing that anymore!

So you tell me what's going on! And history probably tells us that when clubs like those mentioned start doing things differently a lot of other clubs will take note and try to do the same.

And every course I mentioned does not have burned out, weedy, crummy turf conditions either. None of them do! They have turf conditions that are a much lighter green that indicates visually and in play a firm and fast condition that highlights the architecture of the golf course--all of it!

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
I remember having this same discussion with you (probably over two years ago when I first proposed that 99% rule).  Of course I hope you are right and the more "converts" we can get and the more education we can all provide, will help push golf in the right direction.  But I do believe we are starting from the 99% base.  Most golfers love to spin there golf ball back on the greens.  There is nothing better right    They love their "walk in the park" which is one of the reasons we have so many darn trees cluttering up our golf courses, reducing playability and causing turf problems.  If they are going to pay their hard earned $100 or so to play a round of golf, they want perfectly manicured green grass.  There is a lot of educating to be done!  

By the way, there was a suggestion box at the one course I recently played.  I put a note in it suggesting if they want to up their ranking and get my vote, they at least better firm up their turf  

Mark

[George Pazin]

Well, everyone ignored my last post, so I'll try again. Could someone please enlighten this poor muni golfer as to the differences between firm & fast & the burned out conditions one experiences at the local muni? And how do you achieve F&F?

[Mark_Fine]

George,
The only difference is one the plant is dead and the other the plant is alive.  They are still both firm and fast!
Mark

[Tim Weiman]

George Pazin:

Don't ever expect people here will answer your questions. That's not what we do here!

Anyway, I'm probably not the most articulate on this subject but I'll give it a shot. For starters let me say that in the past couple years my playing experience has been (in order):

local muni
links (Ireland)
private club (surprisingly little)
CCFAD (very little)

The most "firm and fast" golf I've played has been the links experience. Guys like Tom Paul can give lengthy explanations, but I think of it mostly in terms of the ground conditions. "Firm" means that you have to think very carefully about what will happen to your ball when it lands. In short, when playing "firm" conditions the ball is likely to end up quite far from where it lands. This can be good or bad (from a scoring point of view), so far more thought needs to be put into shots.

Playing in Ireland has had a long term effect on my golf game. I tend to play bump and run shots far more than most Americans I see always trying to do their imitation of Phil Mickelson.

So, how are local munis different? A couple weeks ago I played a real burned out "mom and pop". The course obviously has very little money or maintenance budget and is so bad some of my golfing buddies wondered why I wasted my time.

But, I enjoyed it.....sort of. It was semi "firm". By that I mean that the fairways were rock hard, but the area around the greens had been well watered and were actually kind of soft. So, you had to go in and out of the "firm and fast" mode meaning that you really couldn't hit run up shots like one can do on links.

Obviously, all of the maintenance budget went toward making the green complexes as lush and green as possible and the rest of the place was totally burned out. Calling it "semi firm" is probably being kind. Clearly, it is not "firm and fast" as we understand the term when we play links golf.

While this course was an extreme, I have noticed the same maintenance pattern on other low cost daily fee courses here in Ohio.

[TEPaul]

GeorgeP:

When you asked that question about how to achieve firm and fast conditions on a golf course it seems like Tim Weiman might have only answered how it "plays" on various types of courses, not exactly how the condition is "achieved".

But it sounds like you want to know how it's actually done in a maintenance sense.

Certainly one way to do it is just not use much water or none at all at anytime and then the course would look like some of the munis do or even Fishers, Maidstone and Newport might in drought conditions (since they have no fairway irrigation systems).

But the better way to manage and maintain firm and fast is to regulate the irrigation during times that are otherwise dry!

Unfortunately, it can be much more complex than that though and gets very much into the subsurface soil conditions!

Subsurface soil conditions that are very dense don't perk well and consequently water doesn't go down into the soil but runs off. In this kind of situation the roots of the grass can't go deep either--simply because they can't get through very dense soil and also because roots are always looking for water (underneath) and since this type of soil doesn't perk (allow water to seep down) there is no water down there anyway for the roots to seek even if they could go down!

So the only way to irrigate this kind of soil is to basically keep the surface really wet and that creates soggy conditions (and can certainly create lush grass).

So if you have that dense subsoil on a golf course you'll have problems creating firm and fast playing conditions. So you have to remediate that somehow and that takes tining and deep tinning the soil to break it up and make it perk. You can also topdress it but that's another story! If you can do that the water will filter down and the roots will grow deeper following the water way below and the surface will stay much drier and play firm and fast!

Of course on naturally sandy soiled courses you don't have those problems because the water and the roots filter down more easily.

And the truth is that grass with deep roots is far healthier than grass with shallow roots (generally over irrigated grass) although it may not look like it because grass with deep roots that's dry on top looks much lighter and sometimes browned a little.

But this type of browned condition is OK for the health of the plant (unless you take it too far!). Healthy grass that's dried out can even be call "stressed" to an extent but as long as the deep root is OK it is too and will green back up some with natural rain and seasonality.

For those who think the options are super lush green and soggy or burned out turf like an under-irrigated muni basically just don't know what they're talking about.

You take a look at those courses I mentioned on the other post this morning, like PV, Merion, Aronimink, Shinnecock etc and their grass looks nothing like an under-irrigated muni and nothing like a emerald green over-irrigated golf course either!

Those courses mentioned have a light green color (maybe with areas of slight browning) and their grass is healthier than any other and their playing conditions are firm and fast too where the ball will really bounce and run and the architecture will be "highlighted" because of it.

These conditions don't happened by accident though. Those clubs know what they have and they dedicatedly maintain it that way! Sometimes they may need to remediate subsoil and such but they do it because they understand the value of maintaining strong (deep rooted) grass and what that means in playability---ie firm and fast!

Hope that helps.

[Mark_Fine]

Tim,
My guess is the course you played did not have fairway irrigation and the greens were probably hand watered.  We have courses around here like that.  They are just trying to keep their greens alive and can't afford to risk losing them.  They may also have water restrictions to deal with (assuming that they did have irrigation).  

You can always play off dead fairways, but not dead greens.  
Mark

[Tim Weiman]

Mark Fine:

Your guess is correct. FYI, I know of a few Mom and Pops that have made some irrigation investments since I first came to Cleveland more than twenty years ago. From what I've observed, people like it.

Tom Paul:

Thanks. I wouldn't even try to explain what the John Zimmers of the world do. I can only take a shot at explaining the result.

[Joe Hancock]

TEPaul,

I'm trying to figure your stance on this issue. You're selling the maintenance program fairly hard, but I still don't know whether you believe the masses would embrace F&F. As many have stated, F&F is more strategic, fun, healthier for the turf,etc., but what about Joe 6-pack? Is he really a potential convert? I hate to be cynical, but I think giving the masses too much credit for engaging the thought process during a round of golf is asking a bit much. Hang out at your local mom & pop, muni, daily fee for a few days during league time and tell me I'm wrong.

Not against F&F at all, just think it's a limited market concept that is being carried out quite well at a few courses in a position to do it. As your reply indicated, F&F isn't a cheaper way of maintaining.(How many guys hand-watering fairways?)

I hope I'm wrong,

Joe

[Steve Lang]

TEPaul, et. al.:

If you have entre' to PV, Merion, Aronimink, Shinnecock and other course that have their grass looking nothing like an under-irrigated muni and nothing like a emerald green over-irrigated golf course, can you inquire as to whether they are using their common sense (in a maintenance-meld-mode) or utilizing basic water balance approaches and taking sample cores and measuring % moisture and organic matter and watching the weather forecasts to help determine watering needs?

Per my experience in environmental engineering-ground water monitoring/hydrogeology, what you need to quantify is the so-called vadose water, or water in the zone of aeration.  This is the water subject to effects of evapotranspiration either directly from the soil or plant material. Big loaded words, but worth their weight in understanding this turf issue...  

The light green conditions so warmly spoken of should have a characteristic distribution of moisture in the topsoils... One can discern such with an auger and many samples.  You must then use some geo-statistics to extrapolate across the much greater area of concern (acres of fairways) from a limited sample (plug samples inches diameter).  

A good hydrogeologist (aka MM supt) would place nested level piezometers to measure the near surface soil water pressure levels and their trends to watch the water balance in his soils of interest.  If you've ever seen a soil survey from you local Cooperative Extension Service (Soil Conservation Service) you'd appreaciate  how many varieties of soil types can be distributed, especially in the many areas that were subject to glaciation 10,000 years ago.

A brute force approach in groundwater investigations is take a backhoe and cut an inpection trench and look for the layers bearing water and physical/color changes... In NW Ohio you'll find brown clay overlaying grey clay... Its the same stuff, however the brown is oxidized (marks the vadose zone limits) and carries more water than the grey clay which is very tight.  In the Michigan Basin, you can find 8000'+ of sand to bedrock... with locallized clay on top.

An indication of vadose water can also be gleaned from soil boring logs done for foundation work (look at "blow counts" adn soils characterizations) and in almost every locale one can find it in the local water well logs filed with the Geological Survey or Water Department etc... or from waste management facilties or chemical plants and refinereys etc..  In these logs the regional depths of surface soils and major features influencing ground water levels (i.e., recharge and discharge) can be studied.

Unfortunately, the typical supt. is not going to have a BS degree in hydrogeology... but he could have a consultant, if he had $, or could barter golf for services!

Now, why isn't the USGA Green Section working on specifying this type of thing as part of water conservation efforts?

However, I played at a course on the GA/SC border (near Greeneville, on GA side) this spring that was taking muni wastewater as irrigation water...  they were irrigating the woods and rough becasue they had to take so much a day!

[A.G._Crockett]

Whoa!  There is a big, big difference between "hand-watering" fairways and maintaining FF conditions!  I've never seen hand watering of fairways, probably because here in the south with bermuda fairways it isn't necessary.  I HAVE seen hand watering of the greens (syringing) and that's really only parts of the greens where hot spots are developing, but that is not a crippling maintenance item--one worker can syringe a green in several minutes and rarely even delay play on a busy day.
Again, heavy watering at night (of any grass anywhere!) leads to disease problems.  Good supers know how to:
     1. keep ALL their grass alive
     2. prevent disease
     3. hold costs to a reasonable level
     4. HUSTLE!!!  There is no doubt that it is easier to cut
         on the sprinklers than to syringe.  The super has to
         really, really care.

[TEPaul]

TXseve:

Wow, I really don't think the supers who are into maintaining firm and fast conditions around here are probably into all that technical stuff you wrote in that last post! But I'll be sure to ask them.

My experience has been if for some other reason a super doesn't really want to transition his course to firmer and faster conditions he might start to throw all that technical stuff at a club or committee but this really isn't rocket science although a few try to make it seem like it is.

The ones who have done this say a few basic things.

1. Every site is different or potentially different (subsoils) and that has to be taken into account to understand how to achieve various conditions and playabilities! Some sites are easier and others more problematic but for every problem there's generally a solution and all it takes is finding out what the solution is and what it costs and if that's worth the value of firm and fast to a club!

One size rarely fits all in golf, golf architecture or course maintenance and it's important to find out what works best for your own course!

Our local USGA agronomist (and the USGA's national agronomist) concurs in what I'm saying, and have said in my post above and frankly much of what I said came from them!

My sense is that this type of thing is not as easy as some think it is and it's by no means as hard as others say it is!

JHancock:

I can't believe I haven't made myself clear after all this time on the subject of firm and fast. My feeling is that it works extremely well on some architecture that was designed for fast running conditions for the ground game (although maybe not on other architecture that wasn't designed for it).

That's about all I'm saying here! I realize it may not be for everyone and that's fine. But I think it is for those courses  that were designed for it and also that memberships that aren't that aware of its playabilities would universally love it if they could try it. I don't think many golfers would complain about what I've seen recently at Oakmont, Aronimink and Merion, PVGC, PCC, for instance! For some reason those memberships aren't although they probably were before the club did it simply because there were so many misperceptions floating around!

But maybe you think otherwise, and maybe you're right.

I'm really not that concerned with those you call Joe Sixpack, and I really don't give a damn what they like, firm or fast or soft, lush and spongy or just the cart girl. All I care about is that they feel they're having a good time playing golf (on whatever conditions) and if they can't stand firm and fast I feel that's no concern of mine at all!!

[Joe Hancock]

TEPaul,

Thanks for laying it out. I guess I didn't know where the F&F target was, and I agree that Joe 6-pack is not going to care one way or the other. I probably, and wrongly, assumed we were discussing the possibilities of taking F&F beyond those clubs that are beyond most peoples means. Keeping the context of the discussion in what we all know are high dollar budgets/ memberships makes it easier to assume that F&F is a possibility.

Joe

[Steve Okula CGCS]

TXseve,

I nominate that post for The Most Pedantic Ever.

 Congratulations on being the first person ever to suggest glaciation is relevant to golf course irrigation.

A "commonsense approach" combined with  "...nested level piezometers.."  If only we knew!

I never met the GCS who goes out with a backhoe to determine irrigation requirements.

A good superintendent will note the evapo-transpiration rate, use a hand-held soil probe to check, refer to his own experience with the site, consider the desires of his bosses, the paying customers, and apply water judiciously.

I've ben a GCS for 20 years and never used the word "vadose".

I have used effluent water a lot. the USGA isn't taking the approach you describe because it would either befuddle or alienate everyone who needs to make a living in the golf industry.

[Dan Kelly]

What an outstanding thread this has been.

I hope I don't ruin it!

I want to go way back to the beginning, where Tim Weiman wrote: "Is the preference for 'green,' well watered fairways and greens just impossible to overcome? Or have those who prefer firm and fast just not presented a strong enough case?"

Since then, in quite a few posts, we've heard references to Joe Sixpack and his (or, of course, her) preferences.

Quite a few of you think that Joe's not very bright, because Joe doesn't see what's so obvious: Golf is a better, more interesting game when the course is firm and fast -- through the green, on the green, everywhere except on the damned cart paths! It might be a more difficult game (and it might not be), but it's sure as hell a lot more fun and more entertaining when the ball bounces and rolls.

As I've said in some other threads: I don't think you're giving Joe Sixpack enough credit. He's smarter than you think he is; he's just not EDUCATED -- and THAT'S NOT HIS FAULT!

How in the hell does anyone expect Joe to GET IT, whatever the IT of the moment happens to be (in this case: the beauty of fast and firm conditions), when (a) NO ONE is standing up to tell Joe about the beauty of firm and fast conditions, and (b) the only times Joe is exposed to firm and fast are the times Joe plays the firm, fast and burned-out conditions at some crappy, underfinanced, styleless municipal course with crabgrass fairways?

Where does Joe learn about golf?

-- Joe reads the golf magazines. Have the golf magazines -- any of them? -- ever made a point of advocating the joys of firm and fast conditions? If they have, and they may have, I've missed it.

-- Joe watches golf on TV. Have any of the golf broadcasters ever advocated the joys of firm and fast conditions? Well, maybe at the British Open they have -- but they always act as if those conditions are eccentric freaks of nature, a little goofy (you know: British!), and not worthy of emulation; I'd be very surprised if any TV commentator has ever taken the next step, to say: Not only are these great conditions for golf, but they're BETTER than those lush green, overpriced golf courses in America, where balls plug in the fairway.
    The broadcasters gush, gush, gush about the lush green of Augusta, every April. They talk about the slight browning of the greens at the US Open ... and not-so-subtly imply that that color is freakish and unnatural -- the work of those sadists at the USGA. They ooh and ahh, moronically, every time one of the pros spins an iron backward toward a pin (or off a false front). Can you blame Joe Sixpack for wanting to do the same?
     The broadcasters never, of course, talk about how dull it is to watch these pros playing golf as if it were an odd outdoor form of darts -- because it's their job to pretend that this is golf entertainment of the highest caliber!

-- Joe plays golf -- mostly at those crappy, underfinanced, styleless muni courses with crabgrass fairways, and occasionally, when he's feeling flush or his company has an Outing, at those shangri-la-dee-dah Country Clubs for a Day ... where he finds lush green conditions ... which he quite naturally prefers to the rock-hard, burned-out conditions at his crappy, underfinanced, styleless municipal course with crabgrass fairways. He sees a ballmark in the fairway -- and he thinks he's died and gone to Heaven! And I, for one, don't blame him. Look at the Hell where he usually plays.

At the risk of repeating myself: How in the world is Joe going to learn about (and become an advocate for) Firm and Fast, unless SOMEONE IN AUTHORITY makes the case for Firm and Fast?

To address Tim's questions directly: "Is the preference for 'green,' well watered fairways and greens just impossible to overcome?" No. I agree with Tom Paul: Most people would (some of them grudgingly) come to like Firm and Fast if they were ever exposed to it on a good course. I have no doubt that many Joe Sixpacks have GOTTEN IT after a single trip to Great Britain -- where Joe Sixpack is welcome on excellent golf courses maintained firm and fast.

"Or have those who prefer firm and fast just not presented a strong enough case?" I don't think they've presented any case at all!
    Where are Jerry Tarde and George Peper when we need them? C'mon, Peter Alliss! Tell it as it is -- or should be.

PS: Just a quick, possibly apropos observation from the PGA Championship at Hazeltine:
      Even before the big rains came, the fairways -- which I walked across every day that week -- were SOFT! Soft, I tell you. Spongy, even. I noted as much, with some distaste, to my daughters, as we crossed the first fairway for the first time, early Monday morning.
      Why did the PGA have the fairways soft? A guess: Because the USGA-led redesign (widely applauded, though not by me) took so many of RTJ's original doglegs and straightened them that that huge course would have played TOO SHORT with firm fairways.
      Bring back the doglegs! Let the course play fast and firm!
      Question: Are doglegs (or central hazards) ESSENTIAL to firm and fast golf?

[Steve Wilson]

Tim Weiman,
     Your reply #37 reflects the playing conditions I think of as concrete and pudding--and anyone who plays much golf on low budget munis knows what I mean.  Airport runways for fairways and wetlands for greens.  It does introduce an element of unpredictability.  You just never know exactly where the runway ends and the bog begins.
 

[Joe Hancock]

I think the Joe 6-pack I see is different from what you guys are describing. The one I see usually doesn't have a game going on in his round...no competition factor. He hits the ball, has another beer, then acts like an idiot with his cart. Or, on a less generalized level, they pay a green fee, go for a nine hole walk while hitting a ball, then load their clubs in the trunk and go home. Sorry I don't give them more credit, but I just don't see any true interest in the game very often. Must be I'm blinded with cynicism.

Joe

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()