Oakmonts Greens

[Bill Brightly]

As Ryan said, they did install XGD (existing green drainage) developed by TDI.



This is an amazing process, we did four greens last year and it is an amzing process to watch. If anyone belongs to a course with old push up greens, I highly recommend looking into this. They take out 6" wide strips of sod, lay it aside carefully so each piece goes back exactly where it came from, dig straight down 18 inches, install the drain, then put it all back together! Takes about two days to do one green, but you can play he next day and there ar NO bumps or depressions.w is highly trained, and they fly them all over as a group, including the supervisor and all the laborers.



This is from TDI's  website:

John Zimmers
Oakmont Country Club
Oakmont, PA
Click here to View Reference Letter

"XGD Systems superceded my expectations as well as the Oakmont Country Club memberships".

[TEPaul]

I know how fast the greens got at Oakmont for the last Open but believe me I'm not mentioning any stimpmeter number on here except to say they were very fast. They most certainly did not slow them down from what they generally are for members' play.

[Kyle Harris]

I will never understand the concept of genetically modified ultradrawfs or the idea of attempting to breed a monoculture within a green. This goes against the very mechanisms by which the plant will survive over a very long period of time.

What will kill the poa annua plant in the heat of the summer is, well, the heat. Oakmont's poa, and this is just speculation, is probably as much the product of generational selection as it is proper environmental management by their lineage of superintendents Loefler to Zimmers.

I was once told something that should be patently obvious to anyone in the turf business. He started the conversation with a question.

"Kyle, have you ever been to the beach during the day in July?"
-"Yes."
"Have you walked on the sand bare foot?"
-"Yes."
"How does it feel?"
-"Very hot."
"....and you want to put that on your greens!?"

I'll bet that Oakmont has, for years, used a higher "meat" to sand ratio of topdressing, which would be a good first step in creating a condition by which the plant can be kept at a reasonable temperature during the summer. Conditioning a soil profile that helps wick water up to the plant on dry days (through osmosis) can also help, as the plant can survive on a syringe cycle at the right time through the hottest of days.

I do know that Huntingdon Valley still has areas of old velvet bent strains that can appear to be LDS on hot days, but its really just the red tint of the leaf.

Work with the soil, manage your thatch layer (another important part of keeping grass cool), and don't try to fit a square peg in a round hole, and you'll get a good green.

[Ryan Farrow]

I know how fast the greens got at Oakmont for the last Open but believe me I'm not mentioning any stimpmeter number on here except to say they were very fast. They most certainly did not slow them down from what they generally are for members' play.

I know there were specific target speeds so certain pins could be used which makes it kind of hard for me to believe they are any faster than member play. If they were any higher than a 13-13.5 I would be surprised. So what I'm saying is, more cow bell.

[Jim Nugent]

I've been rewriting my web site this week and I actually thought about using the phrase "intelligent design" but unfortunately it has been ruined for everyone now.  

Do all creationists say things don't evolve?  That surprises me.  They might say that species don't change due to evolution or random mutations.  A very different matter, that seems to me the crux of the issue.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I was reading a bit about Oakmont’s compelling greens and how unconventional they are with only 18 inches of 'organic material' before clay and the fact that they actively encourage a unique strain of Poa Annua to grow. So questions if anyone can answer.

How fast are they for the US Open/Members play?

Faster for Member play, slower for US Open play, go figure. The only reason to slow them down for the big boys is to open up more difficult pin positions that would not be fair when they are running at 14.5 on the stimp.

I believe that's one of those urban/golf legends and part of the lore at Oakmont.

In the times that I've played the golf course, while the greens were at a good pace, they weren't close to stimping at 14.5, and I have to question if they EVER stimped at anything close to 14.5.  

Have you read Arthur P Weber's treatise on "Green Speed Physics" ?

At 13 on the stimp, with a slope of 3 degrees, a ball will NOT stop rolling.  And that's without any wind.

At 14.5 on the stimp, the interpolated slope of 2 degrees or less will cause a ball to NOT stop rolling.

Do you think Oakmont's greens, especially #'s 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13 are less than 3 or 2 degrees in slope ?

If not, how could they roll at 14.5 ?
The ball would NEVER stop until it rolled off the green.

And, I don't believe that they slow them down for the U.S. Open.  However, Mark Studer, a former Green Chairman at Oakmont and a former participant on this site, would be better qualified to speak on the subject.

I believe that Mother Nature has a good deal of influence in dictating pace.[/color]

What cut height is used and how many times are the greens cut?

Cut height, don't know if i ever looked, or cared. On a typical day, 3-4 times in the morning, usually 3 hand mows and a triplex cut.

Ryan, where are you getting your information from ?
And, are you positive that it's accurate and irrefutable ?[/color]

Could another course ‘steal’ some of their Poa Annua and cultivate it for use on their greens?

I would think their neighbors at Oakmont East could. It would be an interesting experiment.

From my knowledge of grass would a single ‘strain’ of Poa Annua grass not be very susceptible to disease?

I don't know.

Do Oakmont’s greens play too fast for their design intent?

If anything, faster speeds strengthen the design intent.

How so ?

Could you explain your statement in the context of the 1st, 2nd, 10th, 12th and 13th greens ?[/color]

For the Architects, would you build greens along Oakmont’s template?

I don't know if there really is a template that you could place Oakmont's greens into, some greens are very subtle (visually), but extremely severe like 1 and 10, others like 9 and 18 are on the crazy side.

So how does making them faster strengthen their design intent ?[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

You post, quoted below, should be required reading for EVERY club that's thinking about atlering their greens.

You may recall that we had a discussion several years ago on the value of preserving the original or existing turf on a green renovation.

Your post, quoted below, reinforces my concept of preserving the existing putting surface turf by cutting it, rolling it up, preserving it, doing the sub-turf work and then reinstalling it.

Every Green Chairman, committee member and every Board member at club's thinking about alterations should be required to read your post.  

Would you soften your remarks where Bermuda was involved ?

It's a great post, thanks.[/color]

Poa annua is an ANNUAL plant.  It wants to die every summer from heat stress, but all those little seedheads are coming up in the spring to replace the grass that will die in the summer.  Each year of seedheads is produced by the plants that survived the stresses of the year before ... so the community is constantly becoming stronger through evolution.  (My apologies to anybody out there who's a creationist; for you guys, just consider these greens to be God's magic.)

The greens at Oakmont are a community of Poa annua plants that have evolved over 100+ years and have adapted to the unique stresses of being mowed super-tight, of the local climate, and of being watered infrequently.  They're as tough as nails.  Lots of great golf courses (Merion, Oak Hill, Pine Valley, National, Shinnecock, etc.) used to have similarly evolved plant communities on their greens, before it became common to rebuild / regrass them about 15-20 years ago.
[size=4x]
Once you rebuild the greens you are starting over with "new" poa that hasn't adapted to heat stress or drought stress ... Poa that is much more likely to die on you in a bad summer.
[/size]

[Anthony_Nysse]

What cut height is used and how many times are the greens cut?

Cut height, don't know if i ever looked, or cared. On a typical day, 3-4 times in the morning, usually 3 hand mows and a triplex cut.

Ryan, where are you getting your information from ?
And, are you positive that it's accurate and irrefutable ?[/color]

Pat,
  Ryan worked at Oakmont on the maintenance staff compliled with the report that was posted by an intern from Oakmont...how much more proof do you need? I'm sure that they were right there on the greens in the morning while it was being done? They seemingly dont have anything to gain, especially in a report that is going to read by professors? Why question either of them then?

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Colonial CC
Ft. Worth, TX

[Ryan Farrow]

Thank you Anthony.


 Pat I don't have time to really answer the last question, other than you telling me how difficult the shots from the back bunker on 2 or a miss right on 10 would fair if the greens were rolling at an 8-9 instead of 14+. As Oakmont is today, the name of the game is knowing where not to miss. Instead of the beautiful strategy the course presented in the early 1900's.  

[George Pazin]

Where the heck would anyone even find a remotely level spot for a Stimpmeter reading at Oakmont?

I'd guess - and this is a guess, not passing along any info - that the biggest difference in the greens for the Open is that they probably are a touch firmer, with comparable speed. I had a friend who worked the Open in '94 and he said each green had a crew standing by to syringe the green, they kept them right on the edge of dying.

Of course, that was pre-tree removal; it may be that the maintenance practices have changed substantially since then. Actually, I'm sure they have, I just don't know if the USGA targets have.

Am I the only one who wonders what the Open would've been like if they had gone for Shinnecock firmness?

-----

Kind of sad - and unscientific - that evolution is treated as Gospel. I'm not aware of any other science - save obviously Global Warming - that is treated as Settled Science.

[JohnV]

Where the heck would anyone even find a remotely level spot for a Stimpmeter reading at Oakmont?

Before the US Open, there were a few areas identified on the greens that were considered flat enough to stimp.  These spots were marked with 2 very small holes in the green so that they could be found and the readings taken in the same place and direction each time.  The officials were told that a ball coming to rest in one of these holes should be given relief, although I heard of no instances of it happening.

[George Pazin]

Thanks, John.

Hope you're enjoying the sun! You'll be shocked to learn that it's overcast today.

 

[JohnV]

George, you might be shocked to know that we had frost in Pacific Grove today.  I threw away my ice scraper when I left Pittsburgh.  I could have used it today.

Of course, the sun is out now and it is already up to 49  at 9:25 AM.

[Ryan Farrow]

Thanks, John.

Hope you're enjoying the sun! You'll be shocked to learn that it's overcast today.

 

Don't remind me of this, I am leaving sunny Arizona today. Luckily I got in a good round of golf just before I left. This will be my first time back in the burgh in a year.

[Patrick_Mucci]

What cut height is used and how many times are the greens cut?

Cut height, don't know if i ever looked, or cared. On a typical day, 3-4 times in the morning, usually 3 hand mows and a triplex cut.

Ryan, where are you getting your information from ?
And, are you positive that it's accurate and irrefutable ?[/color]

Ryan worked at Oakmont on the maintenance staff compliled with the report that was posted by an intern from Oakmont...how much more proof do you need?

I'm sure that they were right there on the greens in the morning while it was being done?

They seemingly dont have anything to gain, especially in a report that is going to read by professors?

Why question either of them then?


There's a scene in the movie, "My Cousin Vinny" where Joe Pesci is cross examining a witness.

Conflicting testimony from the witness leads Pesci (Vinny) to ask the witness, "Do the laws of physics cease to exist in your kitchen ?"

I would ask Ryan, you and others a similar question.

Do the Laws of Physics cease to exist at Oakmont ?

Arthur P Weber's treatise on "Green Speed Physics" coupled with the slopes of Oakmont's greens would seem to preclude any likelihood that speeds of 14.5 could be presented for play.

Introduce wind to Mr Weber's findings and it becomes more apparent that maintaining green speeds of 14.5 at Oakmont lies more within the domain of golf folklore than reality.

I would like to know, as close as possible, what the general slopes on greens # 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13 are.

I would imagine that they're in excess of a 3 foot vertical drop for every 100 linear feet.

What do you think ?[/color]

[Kyle Harris]

I don't think Ryan is saying the greens at Oakmont need to be faster than they are/were, I think he's saying they are better at faster (meaning greater than 12 I guess?) speeds.

I'd also offer that 13 feet on a stimp at Oakmont may be 12 feet elsewhere - I've seen day to day stimp readings get as high as 15 feet on certain courses.

[TEPaul]

"I'd also offer that 13 feet on a stimp at Oakmont may be 12 feet elsewhere - I've seen day to day stimp readings get as high as 15 feet on certain courses."

Kyle:

I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense unless of course the stimpmeter thinks it knows where it is.

As for you seeing day to day stimp readings as high as 15 feet I think that's a result of one or two things or perhaps both.

1. The guy doing the stimping doesn't really know how to do a proper stimp reading.

2. He felt like bullshitting you for some reason.

[Kyle Harris]

1. Is entirely possible
2. I don't bullshit myself.

 

What I'm getting at is that stimping is perhaps one of the most imprecise measurements I've ever seen. It could just come down a bunch of little errors adding up based on whomever is doing the stimping.

I'm also implying that the greens at Oakmont may not lend themselves to stimping due to slope and design. We certainly had some weird areas at Mountain Lake that just couldn't have been that fast.

[Jim Nugent]

What I'm getting at is that stimping is perhaps one of the most imprecise measurements I've ever seen. It could just come down a bunch of little errors adding up based on whomever is doing the stimping.

How much do stimp measurements vary, depending on who takes the measurement?