Define Maintenance Meld

[A_Clay_Man]

Can one of the revered Doyens supply the "new World" with the concept's origin and definition?

Please  

[TEPaul]

I'd be more than happy to define it Adam, particularly since I'm the one who dreamed up the term in the first place (for which I've gotten about a year's worth of good natured ribbing from people, clubs, and particularly green chairmen all over the damn place)!

As time goes on, though, I believe we're all seeing just how important and central the "maintenance meld" or "ideal maintenance meld" is to how well really good architecture actually shows itself and performs!

You can get great "architectural" restoration done at a classic course, for instance (one that inherently has some really great classic architecture) but if the proper "maintenance practices" (almost individually tailored for that golf course and its inherent architectural design intent) DO NOT follow that "architectural" restoration there really isn't much reason to have done the "architectural" restoration in the first place because without the proper maintenance practices ("ideal maintenance meld") the golf course (and its architecture) is just not going to come close to performing (playability) the way its supposed to and was designed to!!

There are many many factors involved in what the "ideal maintenance meld" is for any particular golf course but the essential thing to keep in mind (in my mind anyway) is that the term itself ("maintenance meld") was originally intended to make an all important DISTINCTION in MEANING from the only other term I've ever been aware of that has always been the description for a golf course that's well maintained or maintained the way most people think it sould be maintained!

That other term is, of course, "GOOD CONDITION"!

Well, of course, as we all know the term "good condition" is unbelievably GENERIC and GENERAL and basically means to most people that a golf course, ANY golf course, is maintained in a tiddy and pristine manner albeit generally very lush and green! We know that to be true because basically we've seen in the last 40-50 years that maintenance practices to bring ANY golf course to "good conditon" has been almost exactly the same maintenance practices. And that has to stop!!

And we all know the type of maintenance practices that work best for a classicly designed golf course (much reliant on ground game architecture, for instance) should be wholly different from a modern age primarily aerial reliant golf course and it's unique architecture that may have little ground game reliant architecture inherent in its design!!

So at first the term "maintenance meld" was supposed to be a term that would make those important maintenance practice DISTINCTIONS that the term "good condition" never did and never will.

Basically the term "meld" is suppose to indicate whatever those particular maintenance practices are that "meld" or "merge" into the particular and unique, and yes, vastly different design intents of different courses and their uniquely different architecture.

It's basically a term to indicate that ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL in maintenance practices! Unfortunately the term "good conditon" was one that had come to mean that one size DOES fit all!

This term occured to me in 2000 when I saw NGLA in a "maintenance meld" that was totally ideal in every single way for that course's particular architecture--that "ideal maintenance meld" basically highlighted every single architectural feature of that course at that time. I'd never seen anything at that point like it--it was very unique and that's when I thought a distinction in terms needed to be made.

What all the particular maintenance practices ARE that are needed for a particular golf course and it's unique architecture can be talked about in detail--it's not exactly rocket science but it is a bit complex simply analyzing the jigsaw puzzle of not only what to do but how.

If you give me a week or so I though I might write an "In my Opinion" article on those particular maintenance practices that would be "ideal" for any particular type of course and its architecture. I will call the article; "What is the "ideal maintenance meld" for your golf course?"

That's "maintenance meld" or "ideal maintenance meld" and the details of what it is for any particular type of course will be forthcoming.

But "GOOD CONDITION" is not the same as "IDEAL MAINTENANCE MELD", that's the point, and that's the distinction I was originally trying to make and hopefully people all over the place are going to begin to realize that and get their own particular types of golf courses into that maintenance mode that will highlight the unique architecture of their own particular course!

But the thing to keep in mind is that those practices could be wholly different from course to course depending on what the course is and what it was designed to be!!

[Dan Kelly]

Tom I --

I was hoping to give you a little ribbing of my own, so I went to google.com and searched for "maintenance meld" -- expecting to find a reference that MUST have predated your alleged coining of the term ... a reference that I could have cited when I accused you (not in some stupid, petty and whiny way, of course, but all in good fun) of having stolen the term.

The surprise of the day: google.com cannot find a single document ... not one! ... that contains the term "maintenance meld." This may be the first term I've ever searched for that came back unfindable.

Congratulations! Judgment to Dr. Paul!

[TEPaul]

Dan:

Well, that's not good! It's my hope that in a year or two and on into the future that the likes of google.com will have references to that term and it's exact meaning.

As to what google or any other reference sourse says about the etmyology of the term and when and from whom it first came into use, I couldn't care less (but you and I will know the truth).

The point is that it will come into use. It makes an interesting and very necessary distinction--don't you think?

Matter of fact, Dan, you're just the person to submit the word and its etymology to the likes of google.com. And while you're at it you might remind them that "the Professor" never allowed "the Madman" (or anyone else) to submit a single word to the OED without first tracking the word's original etymology and when it first came into use in the English language!

[George Bahto]

Tom - you just worte the "In My Opinion" piece - great job as usual

[TEPaul]

GeorgeB:

No I didn't, not even close. The next part (the "In My Opinion" article) needs to get into EXACTLY what those "Ideal maintenance practices" are in detail and in necessary combination that make up the "ideal maintenance meld" on any particular golf course.

I have a pretty good idea of the playable concepts of it all but how exactly to do it etc, needs input from others more knowledgeable than me and should be a bit open ended.

People like us can talk about it and even get into the "political process" of how to make golfers and memberships aware of it and what it all plays like from course to course but after that it's the supers who will have to take over (obviously once they've been supported by the political process) and actually get it done!

My own course may be getting close to buying into the whole idea of the "ideal maintenance meld" for GMGC but now comes the research and work of figuring out exactly how to do it on our course. Just the subsurface of our course alone may be vastly different than a classic course like ours a few miles away and so the problems and solutions may be vastly different.

We'll figure it out and when we do and all the cost estimates and the procedures are known then we can decide to get it all done or not!

There are enough members at our place who are beginning to understand but maybe 3-4 years ago there was not one (probably including me) who thought that all courses should NOT be maintained in exactly the SAME way!

[A_Clay_Man]

Thank you oh mighty Doyen!

I hope this helps spread the word.

[Dan Kelly]

Tom I --

This cinches it:

The "In My Opinion" pieces, unlike the Discussion Group discussions, ARE found via a Google search.

Just now, for instance, I found Jeremy Glenn's on Computer Assisted Golf Course Design by searching for the phrase "it may seem brazen."

So you need to write your "In My Opinion" piece on the Ideal Maintenance Meld, and as soon as possible, to stake your claim to "maintenance meld" for all eternity.

Make sure to put the date on or in the body of that piece, and to document as neatly as possible the genesis of the term.

Otherwise, professors and madmen will, one day --  when "maintenance meld" is on everyone's tongue from Melbourne to the Hamptons -- be pulling out their hair trying to track its origin. And they might end up getting it wrong.

Scholars have been known to make errors, you know. Exercise due diligence now, or who knows? The OED may one day attribute "maintenance meld" to Patrick Mucci!

[Dr._Katz]

Mr. Paul:

An "In My Opinion" treatise on "Maintenance Meld" would be a significant contribution to classic golf architecture discussion.  Please complete and post this as soon as possible.  Immediately after that I strongly urge you to do the following:
   1.  Phone my office for another appointment.
   2.  Find a new hobby.
   3.  Get on with your life.

[TEPaul]

Katz, you, you...Oh, never mind!

By #2 and #3 I suppose you mean the hobby of writing "In My Opinion" pieces which is unusual for me and after doing that I can get back to my new/old hobby and "get on with my life" on the discussion group section of Golfclubatlas.

[Joe Hancock]

Dr. Paul Doyen,

Great concepts, that once elaborated on for us here, will be very enlightening to the rest of the golf world! In all seriousness, I can picture bringing this subject up at one of our local GCSAA board meetings, posing your concept of "maintenance meld" as an educational session at one of our meetings. It's great stuff that all superintendants would learn from. If you create the educational program, I'd be proud to be a presenter!

Joe

I know, it's not your correct name, but it sounds so good!

[TEPaul]

Joe:

I'd be happy to do it and work with you but I'm no real expert--basically to me it's sort of a commonsensical understanding of any course's architecture and analyzing the maintenance practices that highlight that architecture best.

I'd love to write this up but I would hope it would be open-ended somehow for others to make interesting and valuable contributions.

I look at it this way with say classic course architectural restoration. Restoring the course well architecturally is like restoring the classic car well and just looking at it. But following the architectural restoration with the "ideal maintenance meld" is like cranking that classic car up and going for a ride!

[Joe Hancock]

TEPaul,

I'm guessing you already know how non-commonsensical golf course maintenance has become, to wit: A US Open, I believe, walk mowing fairways! I think that the sooner golf courses adopt a reasonable level of maintenance, the sooner it becomes an affordable game again. I know, if the end user will pay for it, why nor, right? Anyway, I think I understand what your saying.

Joe

[Ed_Baker]

Tom:

"Maintenance Meld" is really important and forwarding the concept particularly stressing the "unique" aspect would benefit many clubs and take the handcuffs off the beleaguered superintendents out there!

The "keep up with the Joneses" mentality of private clubs and upscale CCFAD creates a cookie cutter approach to maintenence that is counter productive to a sound "tailored for the property" maintenence paradigm. This is fostered by the equipment companies as well, when one area club buys the "newest, light weight, full floating head laser fairway mowers," and another clubs President plays in the member-guest he runs back to his own club to tell the board he has "the secret"! "We need the new Toro full floaters and our fairway problems are over"! It couldn't possibly be that the club that has the new mowers, has a great agronomy program and a budget that the superintendent has utilized to its maximum efficency.
If there is one thing I have learned from 20 years of involvement on Green committees there are 5 absolute dynamics that dictate the health and playability of a golf course, they are, in no particular order of magnitude;the weather, the playing schedule,adequate budget,compatible superintendent,a BOG with enough balls to support the superintendent.

The weather... one "lucky growing season" will extend the supers career by 5 years. The talent of the Superintendent is universally under appreciated by the membership.When the weather is favorable, the weather gets the credit for great course conditions, when it is not, "its the supers fault." A golf course is the most unnatural area in nature.Every maintenence task performed has a quantifyable life before it must be repeated to keep Mother Nature from reclaiming the space as her own. The growth rate of the turf varies with the weather conditions, so does cutting schedules,hand maintenence at the treelines,weed and pest control applications, ad infenitum.

Adequate budget... Given the variables that the weather creates, there must be enough 'cushion' in the budget to allow for the extra labor and chemicals needed when the weather throws the super a curve ball. A good policy is to over fund the labor budget on an annual basis and any unspent funds from a particular year can be moved to capital reserves for the next. New stairs,cart path repair,boundary fences,tree removal, root pruning,irrigation upgrades, the capital list is always endless. It is senseless to create a budget that causes the Super to worry more about spreadsheets than agronomy.

Playing Schedule... If there are endless outings on Monday, a tournament every other week, and 30,000 member rounds, then the Superintendent is being asked to be a magician,not a Superintendent. The interval betwwen tournaments, number of hours available weekly without golfers for "full metal jacket" maintenence is extremely important to the overall health of the golf course and the cummulative effect is enormous.

Compatible Superintendent..... His/her personal "snapshot" of the course is compatible with the history,design intent,and condition expectation of the membership. There is no point in the superintendent having an Augusta snap shot with a fescue membership or vice-versa.Personality is also vitally important, many clubs want a "yes" man in theory,but a "take charge" guy in the field. The most succesful Superintendents are as polished in the board room as they are knowlegable in the field.They can "fit" what they know is right for the golf course to the politics dujour, they are powerful lobbyists and recognize and enlist member allies with some clout.

Ballsey BOG..... If the previously mentioned dynamics are in harmony the last element is Board support. Waffling,nonconfrontational boards,meander through their tenures creating terrible long term problems for the club. Unpopular financial decisions are inevitable and the death of many maintenence programs is the "not on my watch" mentality, creating a mountain of deferred maintainence issues that eventually cost the club more than it should and sometimes frustrating a talented and compatible Superintendent to leave. Very dangerous dynamic.

All of these elements are part and parcel of successful "maintainence meld," while commonsensical in theory, it is really quite complex in practice.

[Scott_Burroughs]

I know of a perfect example of maintenance meld gone wrong regarding your mention of how maintenance should be tailored to each course's situation.

On the Big Island of Hawaii, the Makalei Hawaii course is a couple thousand feet up the slope of Mauna Kea (Makalei was mentioned in a recent thread on Hawaii).  The top of the course is 900 feet higher than the bottom of the course!  With such elevation change, there are obviously some sloped fairways.  The problem is that the fairways were mowed almost to green speeds.  One hole near the top of the course went straight uphill so steeply with no flat areas, that any ball in the fairway rolled back indefinitely to the beginning of the fairway, 100 yards from the tee.  Luckily, I pushed my drive into the right rough, and hung on (the rough wasn't thick by any means, and still rolled back some).  I don't mind steep uphill holes, as I've played my share, but the fairways CANNOT have stimpmeter speeds!

This was also the case at Plainfield's 4th hole, where the fairway until 200 yards out is very steep, and any tee shot not longer than 200 yards rolled all the way back down the hill.   (One member of our group mishit one in the fairway and rolled back).  Not a tee shot for short hitters.

[TEPaul]

Ed:

That's a wonderful post and mostly part of the "process" or "political process" that needs to be in place probably to even get an "ideal maintenance meld" understood at all and noticed much less put properly into place.

I know something about that "process" but I don't have anywhere near the experience with it that obviously you and Pat Mucci do. Frankly, I'm not that interested in that aspect either and would prefer to just work with others and those who are to perfect the "concept" side or the detailed "playability" side of all the "ideal maintenance meld" can be for a particular course.

Scott:

That example of yours is amazing and just shows how dense some clubs can be on "maintenance meld". That particular example of yours (serious runback) is pretty shocking but I have an example that we're going to put into effect hopefully at my course that's a bit like it but in our particular case it should work great since it should never put any golfer in a one dimensional "must do" situation!

[Ken_Cotner]

Someone on this thread mentioned a third element to the equation (along with design and maintenance practices; I'm leaving out "the process") that I hadn't thought of -- soil and weather.  For purposes of this post, I would like to define the three legs of the triangle as "design"; "turf condition"; and "environment" (meaning soil and weather).

A course could work hard to match its turf condition to its design characteristics, but still struggle if the environment is not well suited to the desired condition.  For instance, a course with a lot of width and runup opportunities (and other links-like characteristics) may be in a wet, windless area which is unsuited in other ways to "F&F" turf condition.  Or a narrow, water-strewn layout with tiny, bunker-surrounded greens may need a softer, more lush condition, but be in a windy, sandy, dry environment.

I hadn't really thought about this in relation to maintenance meld, but I'm usually pretty slow!  It would be great if some superintendents could could respond to TEP's upcoming In My Opinion piece, or this thread.

KC

[Mike_Cirba]

Any discussion of "maintenance meld" needs to include Huntingdon Valley as perhaps the epitome of how classic courses should be maintained.  

In fact, any classic course thinking of "restoration", or "preservation", or just trying to improve playing characteristics of their golf course should strongly consider paying the club a visit, because it is truly the "finishing school" of what all of us are talking about in here.  

Their methods run counter to prevailing thinking, and they use about 20% of the water of a normal course.  As such, the course has an unbelievably deep root structure, which seems impervious to the type of diseases that have plagued many other courses in the area in recent years.  They also have managed to return grain to their greens, and it's a course where the fun only begins once the ball lands.

Throw in a superb William Flynn design on a rolling property, and it's about as good as it gets!