[Scott Weersing]

I am unsure if the speed of a green is determined by 1. how low the grass is cut, or 2. the slope of the green. I think it is a combination of the two.

I would much rather play greens with lots of slope and undulations than one that has a basic slope from back to front. So from a low maintenance standpoint, I believe a designer should create a green with lots of slope and undulations that will have some speed irregardless of maintenance. It will mean that uphill putts will be really slow and downhill putts somewhat fast.

[Greg Tallman]

The answer is most people do not NEED fast greens but they WANT fast greens as they associate such speeds with "quality" or "tournament conditions" a thought process perpetuated by the annual discussion of green speeds at Augusta and US Open venues.

You want to protect par against the pros... throw green speeds of 7.5 or so at them out of the blue and not on a regular basis.

[Sean_A]

I have long believed that green speed should be sub 10.  Anything more essentially compromises interesting design, unnecessarily creates headaches for green keepers, is a cause for slow play and costs extra money.  Its a no brainer so far as I am concerned.

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

Some putting strokes are not amenable to slow greens. I think Mr. Moore above may have such given what he wrote. Ben Hogan did not have a putting stroke amenable to slow greens. Therefore, he was very critical of green speeds across pond when he ventured there.

[henrye]

I guess I wonder what is a reasonable range for green speeds.  At one the clubs I play at, they make the greens lightning quick for the Club Championships.  Everbody talks about it, because it makes the scores go through the roof.  The rest of the year, however, the greens are are quick, but fair and healthy.

At another club I play at, the greens are generally slower and in poorer condition.  Part of the reason is the "other" club gets more play and the climate is a little harsher - think Minnesota Lakes region.  One day, I was playing with the architect (he actually designed both clubs) and he tells me that he designed the "other" course with fast greens in mind 11-12 stimp.  I thought it ridiculous given the climate and the fact that they already seemed distressed at a stimp of 10.

Another thing about green speeds.  There is a wonderful club in Toronto called Toronto Golf (a Colt design).  Some of the greens there are diabolical, yet recently (last 3 years or so) they have been quickening up the greens to match some of the new flashy clubs.  There is no way Colt designed for those speeds.  Last time I played there, I putted off the green.

I guess what I'm getting at is, it seems to me that some supers maintain greens at speeds they were never designed for, and some architects are designing fast greens that are not healthy.

[Tony Ristola]

I don't think everyone does, but the majority do.

Psychobabble moment:
It's they American Way; being able to be measurably better. The PGA Tour and Augusta set the standard. With all the tools at hand that permit it, they have to be used to match with many of these courses. If you don't you're somehow inferior.

I remember when 3/16ths was a quick surface.

[Carl Rogers]

Tom,

At Riverfront, if the green speeds are moderately fast, many greens on the course such as 5th, 9th & the 12th are borderline unplayable (or so it seems to me).  Thus I course management, in the past, has kept them fairly slow.  With new course management (this being the first full season under new management), we shall see if they speed them up ... I do not think they will.

I intend on going up to Beechtree this spring and will take mental notes comparing the two courses on this subject.

Do any GCA's here advise clients on the maximum green speeds during the project or after?

[Pete Lavallee]

Tom, you did ask why they need not like fast greens, right.

I've often wondered about this also. Seems the consensus is that fast greens are always smoother, so are in effect easier to putt. Slow greens on the other hand require much greater putting skill in my mind, just so long as they are smooth. I believe it was Peter Thompson who said "anyone can putt well on fast greens, it's the slow greens that seperate the wheat from the chaff", I tend to agree.

I just can't fathom why the USGA insists on ultra fast greens for the Open; firm I can understand, but fast just gives alot more people a chance to win IMHO.

[Phil_the_Author]

I am struck by the irony of the question when the Open at Winged Foot featured slower green speeds than expected. Despite having more positions to place holes (e.g. - back left on #10) thus bringing back shot angles and values not seen in past championships there, complaints about the green speeds abounded.

Tom, if the graetest players in the world equate fast greens with good ones and proper set-ups, why question why "people" require them?

The real question should be why do professional players demand them? The average golfer dreams and wants a course where he can do so while the professional tries and wants a course where he can do that as well...  

[Tom_Doak]

Phil:

Professional players do NOT demand really fast greens -- as far as I can recall they never have.  All they've ever asked is for the greens to be the same speed from week to week, so they don't have to spend three days of practice adjusting their stroke to the different speed.  I don't think they care if that speed is 9 or 12, as long as it's consistent.

[Jay Flemma]

Tom, I think two reasons...they see it on television and, wanting to live the high life vicariously, think their course is worthy of a major.

[Gary Daughters]

"The Unified Theory" is right.  There's nothing like watching a ball roll.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

At WF they were very specific in their complaint that the speeds were slower than they expected and that they should be faster.

I agrees with you in that they want consistancy, but again, consistancy has become faster than in years past.

[Jeff Grossman]

I think it is a product of television coverage of golf today.  Maintenance practices have increased 10 fold and everyone wants there course(if private) to match what they see on TV.  An example of this is when I was an Assitant Super at a club in Seattle, the membership wanted the greens rolling at 12-13 and also wanted us to walk mow the fairways!

However I believe that the average public player doesn't really care about the speed but cares more about the smoothness of the surfaces. 

I think that greens speed should match the type of course(private/public) and greens design.   I always find it interesting when people complain about greens speeds affect there putting, isn't the golfers responsibility to adapt to the conditions?   

[Brett Morris]

Ego and tour-envy!

I think that really sums it up nicely.

[David_Madison]

Greens that are too slow (with slow and bumpy being the worst) have cups that effectively play the smallest. Even on a putt that has the speed to go by the cup a foot or so, it's going too fast (and might be airborne) when at the cup to fall in from the sides; only a center-cut putt will drop. There's a balance, probably in the 9-10 range, when the greens are fast enough that a putt hit with the speed to go 12" - 18" past the cup will get the benefit of the entire size of the cup, but that speed isn't so fast that a decent putt won't likely get away.

[Ryan Farrow]

I think you will find a big discrepancy between public golfers and private course golfers. After playing golf in Arizona the last 4 years I want to play on fast greens but fast for me would be around a 9. I don't think the answer would be the same coming from a member at at decent club in the northeast. That mindset is just a result of what they have come to expect.

[BVince]

It is funny to see how many people on this site are using the stimpmeter measurement to compare green speeds when so many people are against the player knowing the green speed. 

Tom, my best response to your question is that faster greens tend to roll true and most people tend to make more putts.  It is easy to roll the ball 3 to 5 feet past the hole, but the come back putt tends to be easier to make. 

Bottom line - people do not need fast greens, but I (and a lot of players) desire them because its 1) easier to putt on and 2) is is fun to play on and 3) people like to brag about the conditions/speed of their greens.  It is the truth.  People value green conditioning and speed perhaps more than other aspects of the course.

I love this topic.  A related question must be considered: is it worth the maintenance cost and effort to keep fast greens in optimal conditions? 

[Michael Powers]

It has become a contest to see who can have the fastest greens and a way for morons to judge the overall condition of a course.  The thing that gets me is that it is a skill to be able to putt slow greens just as it is a skill to putt fast greens. 

[Joe Hancock]

Slower greens deems the sweet spot on the putter relevant....which makes the stroke of the putter relevant...which is a direct reflection of skill.

No wonder so many people like fast greens!....

Joe

[John Burzynski]

Given a choice (and usually I am not given a choice), I much more enjoy the challenge of a comparitively slower green with more undulations and character, a green where you have to think a bit and also can watch your ball 'move around' as it rolls over undulations.    Fast greens are overrated, and there is no worse feeling in the world than watching your ball roll ppast the hole and off the other side of the green, strictly due to absurdly fast green speeds.

[Tom_Doak]

Phil:

They wanted the greens at Winged Foot faster because the courses they'd played the three weeks prior all had faster greens.  Furthermore, the USGA had the first green at Winged Foot slower than the rest -- because it's steeper -- and there's nothing that throws off the players more than that.

They didn't ask for the greens to be faster at Winged Foot in '74 or '84 or at that PGA that Davis won, and they were probably at the same speed as the last Open ... but the rest of the world has gotten faster.  And that's the problem -- why HAS the rest of the world gotten faster greens?

It's ego, plain and simple.  Americans want MORE of everything even when it's counterproductive.

[Drew Standley]

Give me a rolled 9 any day and I'll score well.  As long as it's smooth, I don't really care how slow it is. 

-Drew

[BVince]

Really?  None of you guys like fast greens?

[Adam Clayman]

Bryon, Fast is relative and for the sake of character and creative putting, these modern day 1% graded sloped greens, suck!

The putting green is the only aspect of the game where a regular golfer can approximate the abilities of tour pros. So, they emulate them.

The other day, Corey had a mishap. Some sand got into his reels and as Pops went along cutting them, they became duller and duller. The result was that no two greens were the same speed. It made for very difficult putting because the differences were not very noticeable. So, Faster greens makes it easier. That's my conclusion. Why do people want it easier? Because they are not true sportsmen/women. Combine that with the fact that it's a guise, and all you have are egos being stroked.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()