[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I decade ago the USGA started promoting closely cut or tight lies around greens as a desireable element. I agree when maintained correctly. My caveat is so many clubs or courses are not able to keep these areas dry and firm. When wet this is a very difficult shot and the desirability the USGA looked for goes out the window to me. As I watch so many of these shots at Augusta and played a few myself at Pinehurst last month one sees the vision. However   last week in Cabo and here at my home club or even Champions there are a large number of very wet areas which change the dynamics of the shot. Should the USGA change its position on this and promote a more playable green side area for most courses?

[Tim Nugent]

No, build them right and maintain them correctly.  Why do you adovate dumbing down the game just because a few can't get the job done?

[jeffwarne]

Tiger,
My minority view is that they should be kept LESS tight, yet firmer, so chipping is a viable option.
Many rich guy clubs keep them so tight and perfect (but often too soft)that there's no reason not to putt, and they're too tight for an amateur to attempt a chip..... becomes boring for putting to ALWAYS be the right shot.

[Adam Clayman]

Tim, In Tiger's defense, I believe he meant that the USGA should promote the proper maintaining of the surround, not getting rid of them.

[rjsimper]

No, build them right and maintain them correctly.  Why do you adovate dumbing down the game just because a few can't get the job done?

A few?

[Tim Nugent]

Adam, if that's the read then I concurr.  Having just played 10 of Scotlands finest, I got vey intimate with some hellaciously deep runnoffs.  Even putting up them was a test of nerves (#12 Loch Lomond).  Gives a whole new meaning to "miss a little, miss alot!"

[CStrong]

Tiger,

As a Superintendent with significant chipping area around my greens allow me to respond.  The problem with keeping them dry and thus firm, is that most green surrounds allow surface water to drain off greens into these areas.  Not only do they receive water form the greens surface drainage, in many cases they are also irrigated by the greens own sprinklers, not to mention whatever mother nature deposites.  Keeping these areas firm is a challange.  We try to top-dress them with sand twice a year to keep the surface firm, but it is a bit of a battle. 

Forunately I feel like we do a good job of maintaining ours; however I have been to other courses that have issue like you describe.  It really boils down to whether a course can afford the additional labor, equipment and supplies to maintain these areas properly.  This is what architects and the USGA need to discuss with clubs before making recomendations of this sort.  I hope that I have been helpful.

Chris Strong
CC of Troy

[Adam Clayman]

Josh Mahar at Wild Horse top dresses his greens (And I assume surrounds) bi-monthly. He does most of the work himself, so there's no real added cost other than materials (which he gets natively) gas, and his time. He's got it down to such a science that one could play on the just sanded greens and hardly even notice. He's also able to get'er all done before noon.
Now, Wild Horse is the epitome of a course who's major design attribute is the low mowed collars. So, it is integral to the enjoyment of the golf course and therefore justified in expense.

[Eric Morrison]

Ryan-
A few what???

[Lou_Duran]

Ryan is right, FEW are the courses I've played who manage to keep their surrounds firm enough to get the full effect and benefit of closely mown grass.   To add to Chris S.'s comments, inefficient or badly designed irrigation systems can also contribute to the problem (or so Jeff Brauer keeps telling me in regards to my former home club where he designed and built 15 new greens, but had a very limited budget that didn't allow more suitable sprinkler heads for the greens).

In addition to more greens type maintenance for the surrounds, building these areas with a sand cap and/or other materials used to build the greens themselves helps.  I saw this done at Texas Tech's Rawls course where the entries to the greens for maybe 20 or so yards were staked for a layer of sand to be applied.  Like with most things, designing quality into construction makes the most sense

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Thanks guys for that is my point. There are very few clubs which keep the green surrounds both closely cut ie tight lies and firm and dry. Therefore the USGA should only promote this with the caveat of the maintenance budget issues it creates. I love it done right but do not find that to be the case 90% of the time.

[rjsimper]

Ryan-
A few what???

Tim Nugent was talking about dumbing down courses because a few courses cant get the maintenance meld right for the short chipping areas...and I immediately wondered if I hadn't played the right courses because the vast majority struggle with this very issue.  Chris Strong points it out, and I've seen it happen with Rustic Canyon and have heard the same has become so at Wild Horse.  Tim's implication is that the norm is properly firm collars and chipping areas, and I do not believe this to be so.

[Don_Mahaffey]

This is an area where design, agronomy, construction and maintenance need to meld perfectly for the desired results to be consistent. Hell, it’s pretty damn easy to say, ‘that little depression would be cool as a chipping area”, next thing you know your boss is telling you to mow it tight and he’s not usually interested in the fact that the drainage, grass type, and irrigation doesn’t match up with what he wants. And he really isn’t interested in knowing he needs a few more mowers and needs to double his top dressing sand line item and probably buy a larger top dresser to boot. Nope, just mow it down and then fret about why it’s always wet.


If you want it to work, you have to over do the drainage because chipping areas only work if they collects balls…and water. If you have greens and surrounds with different grasses, like bent greens and Bermuda surrounds, the fun begins as obviously the bent green needs more water and somehow you have to keep it out of the chipping area…unless you’ve really beefed up the drainage. Throw in a USGA green with one of those horrible  liners and now you really have fun as the areas have different grasses and different soils.

It’s very possible to make it work, and IMO the way to do it is easy…do what we did at Wolf Point and treat the entire greens area as one…same sand (helps if you can get it onsite and aren’t tied to a “spec” sand), same grass, same irrigation, and beefed up drainage.

[jeffwarne]

I'm not trying to sound like a smart alec here but I am amazed at all the construction and maintenance  involved in such " chipping areas"

As a kid growing up on a good bermuda based course we encountered plenty of chipping situations from the fairway,hardpan or rough.
You learned to play runups when the lie and shot demands wouldn't tolerate an aerial attack.
You rarely saw a pocket and if there was fairway height grass in front of or adjacent to a green, it had been cut by a gang mower so it was no shorter grass than the fairway.
They were short grass but provided enough grass under the ball where many/most could get reasonably consistent contact.
Because the fairways weren't supertight they didn't demand as much water and were firmer.

At the muni we played our matches you often had dirt or hardpan, beaten down by carts parking virtually at the fringe.
You putted if you had to (or could) and you developed real imagination with all the various bumps , chips and pitches.

It just sounds to me like the maintenance and construction demands of these pockets is great and result in a tight (often wet)lie which most should simply putt from.

Are we overmaintaining  these areas? (all areas? )

[Matt_Cohn]

Tiger,
My minority view is that they should be kept LESS tight, yet firmer, so chipping is a viable option.
Many rich guy clubs keep them so tight and perfect (but often too soft)that there's no reason not to putt, and they're too tight for an amateur to attempt a chip..... becomes boring for putting to ALWAYS be the right shot.

Sounds like Rustic Canyon.

[CStrong]

Jeff,

Hard pan and dirt doesn't fly anymore.  These areas are expected to be prestine and the grasses should match the rest of the fairway and collar turf on the course.  This takes a significant amount of work, but done properly can produce a multitude of options and fun for the golfer.

Chris Strong
CC of Troy

[Dean Paolucci]

Collection areas are quite prevalent in the Northeast.  I agree if maintained properly they provide a unique opportunity to showcase a players varied talents.  If architecturally relevant, these collection areas are also visually interesting and create course management decision strategies.  As far as fast and firm, if they are part of an original design they tend to incorporate into the terrain more effectively therefore they naturally have thoughtful consideration for drainage.  If simply contrived by some chairman or committee they tend to be monuments not features.  All and all I am a fan.

[Tim Nugent]

Don Mahaffey, thanks for clarifying my point. Chris and Lou, thanks for highlighting the enherient delemma in these areas.  If the architect doesn't take into account the conditions and fails to properly spec the construction/drainage and irrigation, he's setting the super up for trouble. 
I remember working on construction crew on a Famous Pro designed course in AZ. The Pro/designer wanted collection areas but refused to accept that there would be a drain grate in the bottom.  He told the contractor - "that's where all the balls will collect!".  To which the contractor replied "where do you think the water will collect.  I'll be glad to put the drainage somewhere else if you can show me how to get water to drain uphill."  Point being, they are not as cheap and easy to build and maintain as some would think but if done properly, they should be able to be kept in accordance withthe design intent.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()