Quirk and maintenance

[TEPaul]

I was reading the topic that mentions again (and has original and digitally enhanced photography from TommyN) the highly quirky (radical some might say) original 12th green at GCGC.

Jeff Brauer mentioned he recently tried to do a variation of this original radical green but basically the super freaked out forseeing maintenance nightmares with it!

TommyN said Jeff Brauer should be admired for even trying such a thing and I agree but all of us should be congnizant, I think, about other issues involving architecture that might involve interesting quirk like the ongoing maintenance of it after the architect is long gone!

This kind of issue, ongoing maintenance and the potential problems with it, should be understood and failing to do these things architecturally should not be blamed on the architect.

No one should be blamed really if it fails to happen to some degree. I think architects have to be realistic with future maintenance and at least seriously defer to people like supers who might be left with some real ongoing problems.

But I think all of us--architects, supers, members, guests should do our best to try to understand the value of interesting quirk in architecture and try harder to figure out some ways of incorporating it!

I've certainly noticed that Bill Coore in contemplating some interesting architecture--for instance more creative internal green contouring with a pushup green vs less contouring with a USGA spec green, basically defers to the super and what he thinks he can reasonably handle in the future.

That certainly seems only fair.

But should everyone try harder to figure out ways of designing interesting quirk and maintaining it somehow?

[A_Clay_Man]

Part of the assumption is that all supers know what will become headaches and then there's a diff between what they will determine to be a headache.

I think most supers are still under the impression that green is good and few have realized that having some brown can be a good thing. What those who saturate don't realize is that this philosophy creates playability problems to many more people than the size of thier crew.

Here at Pinon, the mounds or high spots are the first to turn brown. Mostly because the irrigation system is wholely inadequate for the task at hand. The system was also installed without proper protection to the pvc pipes, so the compaction has caused many to crack or break. Is this the archies fault? I'd say partly but someone should've anticipated this and it probably should've been either the super or the irrigation contractor.

Specifically what headaches are caused by these mounds that a hover mower won't cure? and why won't some type of a drip line or sprinklerhead at the apex of said mound be the solution?

[Joe Hancock]

T,

I think I understand what you're saying. I think that the supers input is critical when the architect has design ideas that would push the maintenance envelope. It also should be discussed with ownership, because they are the ones who will pay for the maintenance.

Today's golfer (anyone who plays golf, not just the hardcore group) is very fickle about what they accept as good or bad on the course.

I personally like the quirk, especially around greens complexes. It doesn't get built very often any more. I would venture a guess that the reasons are as much from the maintenance aspect as any other reason. Steep slopes, almost synonomous with "quirk", are difficult to keep green. I was going to write more here, but that about sums it up.

Joe

[Dr. Reynolds]

This is the type of post that exemplifies why some are superintendents and some can never be!

[Pat K]

Clayman assumes improperly when you state that the super doesn't get it when speaking of brown turf. Maybe it's because I'm a greenkeeper but most of the professional turf growers I associate with know the value of dry firm conditions during the playing season. The main reasons it is otherwise is because of the chairmans wishes or the  knowledge that  the people paying his or her salary equate good turf with green turf and they are just trying to pay their mortgage.
   When the course I care for is playing its best it is very brown (as it was this past August) . However it can't be kept this way for too many weeks because the heavy traffic would wear many areas out. This and the fact that not many people can play the ground game and they get tired of hitting wedges back to every green they bounce over.  
   I hope you don't place too much blame on supers for not liking quirks . I have 186 acres of them and I'll never have enough labor to care for them all properly. It's extremely hard to live up to modern standards and allow for quirks.
        It's enough to drive a man to drinking, which is what I'm about to do so I can accept the quirks of myself and my course.  

[TEPaul]

Pat K:

That's a good and realistic post! I guess my real question is IF the club asked you to maintain the course firm and fast and even brownish, could you do it given some of the quirk of that course that may be hard to maintain as to turf conditions.  

My point is, let's say firm and fast and even browning out becomes something that is of VALUE to the club and it's membership could or would you feel comfortable maintaining the course and its turf that way?

Dr. Reynolds:

Could you expand on your last post?

[A_Clay_Man]

I certainly didn't intend to put all super's together in the GIG catagory. I know plenty that do understand, but at the moment I am immersed in the antithesis.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

 When finally asked to turn off the spiget because of the severe drought, our muni super, who's bosses are Baseball players and not golfers, informed us that the course would be turning south in a hurry and his biggest concern, (besides losing the turf) was what would the he say to the Golf Digest guy when he showed up and asked "what happend?"

 

[Jeff_Brauer]

In the big picture, with water rations looming at some point in most areas of the country, I have to believe it will be the death knell for repetitive fairway flanking mounds, because they just need more water than flat or gently rolling ground.  And, if they don't get it, the difference can be appallling.

As for green contours, ADA, green speeds and water restrictions will probably combine to reduce contours even further.  I know that I like to  roll the edges of my greens, and those often struggle, requiring hand watering or other special attention, especially if traffic, shade, wind or other factors are present, and they usually are.

If that becomes the "standard" for very valid reasons, our attention as architects must turn to other challenges - smaller greens, differenent or harder hazards, etc.

[Joe Hancock]

We've been in a green and lush golf world for over a quarter century(widespread installation of auto irrigation). I imagine that IF there was ever a turn towards a "less green" golf world, it would take that long to get the trend reversed. Aestheticly, golfers want green. Supers maitain green to cover their 6's. Club Pro's want it green so they don't have to listen to the complaints. Architects design for green to satisfy the client. TV shows us the "Lush & Beautiful" fantasy every weekend. So how is it that the supers are going to jump into this idealistic brown and firm and dry maintenance meld? Not with both feet, I guarantee it. I bet the turf would need a few years to be brought back to that level as well. We're all fat, dumb and happy, including the turf.

Let's hope for a less green future, but be patient.

Joe

[Pat K]

   I can and do maintain the course with burnt out edges. And I diagree with the comment that  the mounds will need to be more gentle with water restrictions.
    A long time ago I learned that turf can withstand quite a drought in midsummer and respond quite well with the September rains. However the turf will puke if it is soaking wet and it's 90+ degrees for any lenth of time, and once it's dead it's dead. However I do water often in March and April.  
         And the idea of losing mounds is foreign to me. Big deal . If they have the right mix and the right soil they'll be just fine. Will they be pretty for TV and 100% tight knit turf ? No, but are they supposed to be. I'm lucky that I maintain a 85-109 year old course.(depending on the hole) The mounds should be a 1/2 stroke penalty.
     It really comes down to what the customer wants. Truthfully most golfers want pretty. The majority of players don't have the time to understand the subtlies and nuances of an early american golf course. They can't explain it to their friends and the quirks stand in the way of their low scores.
   There are very few people who can appreciate the beauties of  an old course which has been dried out. It is brown and yellow and the hole idea of definition is different from what they are used to in the modern world.
    And I'm not even going to start on the idea of chance being brought into the equation from a bad bounce or roll.

[A_Clay_Man]

PAt K- You are so right about the beauty of the brown mounds. Here in Nm. everything is naturally brown. So, the tie-ins with the surrounds is not only beautiful but naturally,so. As I stated above the last thing our guy wants is for it to show brown at all. Imagine how much water is necc. to keep them the green, that is mistakenly wanted... ALOT.

The irony is: Every green front (cept one) has room to play the ground game, but due to conditions, it's a guaranteed dead cat bounce.

I pray for an early winter and the firm conditions which will allow those of us with creativity, to have multiple options which alters the definition of "perfect shot".

[A_Clay_Man]

Oh yeah...

DR. Reynolds- Your post, exemplifies everything this site is NOT.

Being critical, without educating.

[bhampson]

Interesting thread indeed.  Without quoting anyone I will add my two cents.

Unfortunatly, maintaining a living breathing surface is something of an art form supported by some science.  A lot of supers pride themselves on the art form portion and lose sight of the scientific portion.   For example, there are some courses out there (more than you would think) where the greens get watered every night no matter what they look like.  And yet, there are other courses where most of the watering on greens goes through a hose.  Two very distinct products from each method.

I myself take alot of pride in the science end of things.  If the powers that be want it brown, then I will push the grass to the edge of wilting and keep it there.  However 90% of the people out there like it GREEEEEEN.  In fact the greener the better.

As far as the learning curve is concerned.  When the water restrictions tighten up and people are required to use less water.  I suspect it will only take a couple of days for people to figure out how easy it is to keep something brown.

There is a bigger picture here to look at.  New courses today are Irrigated wall to wall with the finest in irrigation technology.  The use of such irrigation requires more use of intricate drainage plans to handle the over use of water that will certainly show up.   On these modern courses  the "quirks" will show up much faster when you shut the water off.

However,  turfgrass is incredibly resilent sp?  You can beat it up kick, it in the teeth, and stomp on it till your blue in the face and with the right care it will come growing back as good as ever.

Theres an old saying I have picked up from some friends and people on the agronomic side of the business.   The first thing you do as a superintendent on a new job is "turn of the water"  you would be surprised what that will do for a golf course in a matter of days.

out of breath and sorry for it

[Anthony Pioppi]

I find it interesting that if a superintendent has a difficult time maintaining a golf course it is because he lacks talent. At Coore and Crenshaw's Easthampton, original green contours HAD to be modified because they were too severe for the mowers which continually dug into the mounds and scalpled the grass. Is that the superintendents fault or should Toro get the blame for that one?

It is an incorrect statement to say most superintendents prefer green. I find the opposite to be the rule of thumb. Greenchairmen and course owners prefer green and they are the bosses.

A Clay Man, I'm not sure I understand the hover mower reference to the mounds. Are the brown knobs you speak of located in the rough, fairways, greens?

[Rick_Noyes]

Anthony,
"hover" mowers are often referred to as a "fly" mow.  The early "fly" mowers were outlawed because they were too dangerous to operate.  Now you have something like a weedeater fly mow.

[A_Clay_Man]

Anthony- My outside the box notion, was in reference to the mounds in the picture that was the impetious of this post. As for my home course(Pinon Hills), the mounding isn't as severe as that but are located everywhere but the fairway.

[TEPaul]

Anthony Pioppi:

You're a good writer and I very well may be wrong but when you said;

"The green contours at Easthampton HAD to be altered because the greens were too severe and the green mowers dug into the contours and scalped the mounds and the grass", I would very much appreciate it if you would prove that!!

My understanding is what had to be altered was the green mowers NOT the green contours!

Again, I may be wrong and if I am I will be the first to admit it, and if you are you should be too!!

[BCrosby]

Having played N. Berwick, Prestwick and TOC recently, I was not prepared for the severity of the green contours. Simply amazing. Until I saw them in person, I didn't think such greens were possible.  

On seeing these amazing surfaces, my first thought was how did the greenskeepers manage to cut them without scalping the ridge lines? I asked around and was told it was not hard,  no big deal. My inquiries were pretty much dismissed as those of an out-to-lunch American.  

These greens are far more severe than the most severe green I've personally played on in the US. Yet somehow it is a problem in the US to maintain mere pale imitations of these greens? Even on Long Island in sand-based soils?

I mean, we know it can be done, afterall. Visit no. 16 at N. Berwick.

What am I missing?

Bob

[bhampson]

Telling you it was easy to mow such contours was a relative statement.  If they are constructed properly and floated with an implement that is sized properly it would be easy.  However that is sometimes not the case and you end up with a countour that can not be mowed.  A standard greens mower is 22 inches wide and any transition or contour that is severe over a space of 22 inches or less will produce scalping

[TEPaul]

It's no different than the problems with scalping at Easthampton and what the perceived reasons were.

First everyone thought Coore and Crenshaw built the green contours too radical and they couldn't be maintained without scalping. Bill said they weren't done any different than he'd done elsewhere that were fine.

So what the hell gives here with those people! What was the reason the greens were getting scalped.

So Ben and Bill went down there and showed them how they were mowing them wrong and with the wrong equipment.

So now they have the right equipment and they are mowing them correctly and there's no more scalping!

Jeeeeus do people jump to conclusions sometimes!

[Anthony Pioppi]

Tom,

I was specifically told that the mounds had to be altered because of there severity. Other than raising the height of cut, not sure there is much you can do to make the mower fit the tight mounding.

I think there is an assumption here that scalping is a rarity after the construction of a green. It is not. On many occassions, greens are scalped through normal mowing because of the angles in the new contours. Often times settling of the soil leads to depressions or ridges that mowers (walking or riding) cannot negotiate and eventually scalp. Sometimes the weight of the mowers smooth out the problems and other times the superintendent perform a little corrective surgery without architects or golfers having any knowledge of the change. I've been part of crews where both scenarios happened.

The same with irrigation breaks, they too are not uncommon after construction for a variety of reasons including settling. In areas where frost gets into the ground, the heaving can also lead to breaks in the first couple of years after installation. It does not take a very big stone to crack and irrigation line with the escaping water doing the rest of the damage.

The reason for my question on the fly mowers was this, if the entire rough is being cut by one kind of mower and the tops of mounds are mowed by hand there is going to be inconsistency in the height of cut. For those who have used fly mowers you can understand why it is nearly impossible to maintain a perfect height of cut.

[Bradley Anderson]

Yes

Those of us involved in maintenance should always seek to allow quirkiness to grow and evolve on our golf courses.

Golf legend and lore accounts for half the charm of the game. We have so little legend and lore these days because we do not permit quirkiness on our golf courses. We remove it like a weed.

The problem is quirkiness is ussually not fair, and there's the rub.