The failure of the Maintainance Meld

[Adam Clayman]

When recently asking an architect why the bunkers on his course were shrowded in rough, he said, he liked the contrast the grasses provided, visually. The course happens to play extremely firm and fast and I thought the aerial assualt bottlenecking like mowlines were redundant. Shows how little I know.

[Dan Herrmann]

Troy,
One of the reasons for the longer rough is that it costs a lot less to maintain.  You simply don't need to cut it that often.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Troy,
One of the reasons for the longer rough is that it costs a lot less to maintain.  You simply don't need to cut it that often.

Dan,

I don't buy that argument.

If grass grows at a universal rate, once you determine the desired height, you must cut it on the the same schedule.

It wouldn't matter if it's at 2", 4" or 6", the mowing schedule and costs would be the same.

[Craig Sweet]

Pat is correct...it all gets mowed,it'sjust a question of when?  

I think Troy would like something close to wall to wall "fairway" and firm and fast conditions so the ball rolls out more and brings different angles into play....and those nasty fairway bunkers that are currently ringed in rough.

[Tom_Doak]

I've been moving into a new home this week and I don't read every thread on here anyway, so I missed this before now.

First of all, the position of mowing lines is a function of architecture or consulting, and I wouldn't put it in the context of "maintenance meld" at all, as I understand the term anyway.  But, it's a new term, I could be wrong.

As for the realities of consulting, one of the main reasons I do less of it nowadays is just exactly the kind of thing in this thread.  I've already made a visit to the course and showed them how to fix the mowing lines, and one of my associates has gone back a couple of times to show them again.  It's another thing to keep going back every year and make the same recommendations and see them being ignored because the members are worried about losing points on their Slope rating.  I let my associates make those trips now, because I might lose patience with the whole process.  On a new course, I stick a flag in the ground and it's done ... until some committee of members starts second-guessing me a few years later.

I played High Pointe the other day and the fairway lines were awful ... and it's four miles from my house.  Consulting is just a waste of money if the client isn't going to listen.

[Dan Herrmann]

Tom,
It's goofy because those same members that ignore you are probably the same corporate types that require a consultant before making any decision.  We "fans" know so little about architecture compared to the professionals that it's foolish NOT to take what the architect says at face value.

Why would you pay the architect if unless it's just for CYA, as is the case so often in the corp. world.

[Troy Alderson]

Pat and Craig,

Craig is right in his assumption of what I prefer in golf course architecture.  I prefer tall thin rough way out of play, if you hit it in there you are way off target, much like what we see on links courses.  American rough developed when the courses were over-watered and over-fertilized, creating an aerial game instead of a ground game.  The rough was added to toughen up the game with narrow fairway.  Both these aeras use to be called the "through the green".

As for maintaining tall rough, if it is thin and not watered or fertilized, the mowing only occurs once to twice per year (spring and/or fall).  Usually this cut is 4"+ or higher.

Troy

[Patrick_Mucci]

Troy Alderson,

I think you'll find that the location of the irrigation heads will deteermine the caliber of the rough.

Today, many systems are designed with throw radii that incorporate fairway and rough in the same pass.

I'm against that, but, few clubs call me for my opinion and vote prior to approving their system.

[Doug Siebert]

Patrick,

Granted that grass grows at the same speed whether its cut at 2", 4" or 6".  But its a difference of degree, and an extra 1" from a few days growth on top of those amounts is a much bigger change in playability when starting at a lower cut height.  Maybe you need to think of it in percentage terms.

Consider it from a fairway perspective, and compare a course with a really tight fairway cut at 1/3" versus a muni at 1", and which one would need to be mowed every day to maintain the same playing characteristics versus one that could mow a couple times a week for much of the season.

[Craig Sweet]

Some thoughts...

Patrick, all you have to do is (a) mow those areas that are currently irrigated rough and call it fairway, or (b) if they are as far removed from "play" as Troy is advocating,shut those heads off...

The members at the course across the street from mine decided that their rough was not high enough and members found it difficult  to adjust to "deeper" rough when they traveled to another course...so...they raised the height of the rough cut to 2"....after about one month the members decided that it was too deep, but the previous height of 1 1/2" was to short...so the Greens Committee told the super to cut it 1 3/4"....now think about that...and think about trying to maintain even a relatively constant height over 70 acres of rough...impossible to do. Playability??? Suck it up and deal with whatever it is...thats golf.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Granted that grass grows at the same speed whether its cut at 2", 4" or 6".  But its a difference of degree, and an extra 1" from a few days growth on top of those amounts is a much bigger change in playability when starting at a lower cut height.  Maybe you need to think of it in percentage terms.

Your confused.

Once the length of the rough has been determined by the club, it has to be cut on the same schedule, irrespective of the height chosen.[/color]

Consider it from a fairway perspective, and compare a course with a really tight fairway cut at 1/3" versus a muni at 1", and which one would need to be mowed every day to maintain the same playing characteristics versus one that could mow a couple times a week for much of the season.


We're not talking about fairways, we're talking about rough and the mowing schedule needed to maintain it, which is the same irrespective of the height determined, ie, 2", 4" or 6".

Clubs usually cut roughs two or three times a week.

Fairways tend to be daily.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Craig,

One of the problems I've noticed is the tendency of clubs to plant the roughs as one type of grass and the fairways with another.

[Craig Sweet]

Patrick...if they have rough grass and fairway grass then the architect must have had certain fairway lines, angles of attack,etc in mind and is using the contrasting grass to denote the difference...as if you didn't know you were in the rough when you can't find your ball!  

Some grass moves...invades...better than others, and with a little neglect your rough grass becomes fairway...

[JSlonis]

Craig,

One of the problems I've noticed is the tendency of clubs to plant the roughs as one type of grass and the fairways with another.

Pat,

With the way different types of grass grow and the mowing heights necessary to keep Bent Grass in good condition, you really need a couple types of grasses between fairways and roughs.  Have you ever seen bent grass rough?  We had some in an area on our 14th hole before our restoration and it was awful.  As the bent grass grew higher, it became fluffy with thinner blades than the normal Blue grass rough.  The higher bentgrass doesn't support the ball at all. It was very difficult to play from.  The ball sank to the bottom every time.  I think having the different grass is a function of agronomics and playability.

I do agree with you regarding one issue that you told me about earlier in the phase of our restoration.  The blue grass rough can be extremely difficult to play out of around the greens.  Especially for the higher handicap players.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JSlonis,

Some architects have been known to plant different grasses for fairways and roughs so that the fairway lines can't be easily altered.

I'm not a fan of Blue Grass rough, I think it's too difficult for the general memberships.

I think the trend started with courses preping for big tournaments and the desire for "consistency"

With respect to the bent, one has to view the rough in terms of it's purpose, its function.

I tend to dismiss the need for perfect consistency in rough, as I do for bunkers.

I think local clubs have/had become enamored with deep rough, because that's what's pointed out and promoted at PGA events.   Trying to emulate the big boys, clubs become misguided and attempt to make their roughs devilish in nature.

The odd thing about the culture of golf and the culture of clubs in particular is that everyone DOESN'T want their club to be deemed a pushover, or too easy.

I feel just the opposite.

The course should present an ENJOYABLE CHALLENGE for all members.

Rough at 2 to 2.5 inches is plenty.  

You're not old enough to remember, but, before their were irrigation heads every X number of paces, roughs used to burn out as the summer progressed, leaving them thin and managable for most golfers, so, they could be at 4 inches or 5 inches late in the season and they weren't overly penal..

Today, with fertilizing and unlimited water, roughs beyond 2.5 inches are beyond the memberships ability.

The rough at Oakmont was brutal.

On the 2007 Highlights last night on the Golf Channel, someone refered to it as sticky, meaning that in addition to its height, it had a velcro like quality making it even more difficult to extract the ball.

If a world class player like Furyk can't get out of it or manage it, how is the average member going to cope with it.

The mimicing of Major venues, for every day play is one of the great absurdities in American Golf.

[Craig Sweet]

Bent grass rough? I can't think of a worse grass for rough...

Sorry Patrick, but a well maintained blue grass makes an excellent rough grass....sure it can be impossible for many members when it's allowed to grow beyond 2".....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bent grass rough? I can't think of a worse grass for rough...

Sorry Patrick, but a well maintained blue grass makes an excellent rough grass....sure it can be impossible for many members when it's allowed to grow beyond 2".....

Craig,

I can't recall seeing a golf course where the rough was 2" or less [/color]

[Craig Sweet]

Patrick...I agree with your statement regarding 2" rough...a club may say they mow it at 2" but the rough is never 2" deep...

bent grass is a knarly, stringy mess and when it gets tall it will fall flat...

[Tags:]

Tags: