[Matt Kardash]

Today it occured to me while playing with some people that the average person doesn't care if the fairways are 20 yards wide or 60 yards wide. Basically, all a golfer notices is how wide the hole is from one tree line to the other. All the average golfer cares about is that he is not in the trees. Therefore, a well struck drive that ends up in the rough is as good as a drive in the middle of the fairway.
To take it even further, most golfers actually feel more comfortable hitting the ball from the rough because there is more cushion.
The maintenance of a golf course plays highly into this way of thinking. Most golf clubs keep there rough fairly short, so it is not hard to negotiate. Moreoever, many, if not most golfers always move the ball with the clubhead in the rough to prop it up a little if it is sitting down. Secondly, greens are kept soft enough so that hitting out of the rough changes nothing.
Just putting that out there. And also, i'm not sure what my point is here with this thread!

[Tim Bert]

As one that tends to be just good enough to only hope to not be in the trees, I would dispute this in certain circumstances.  I DESPISE bermuda rough and will do anything to avoid it.  It grabs the club even at moderate lengths and is a real difference maker vs. the fairway.  I think it depends on the type of grass and also the maintenance.

Not that me wanting to avoid the rough does any good.  The ball goes where it goes! 

[Matt Kardash]

Basically, no golfer ever says (after they struck a good tee shot), "shit, i'm in the rough!" It  just doesn't happen, at least where i'm from. Mind you, we don't have Bermuda rough here!

[Tim Bert]

Aside from Bermuda, I think a lot depends on the length of the rough.  At the typical course that maintains their rough to pretty short lengths I agree.  At a course where the rough is maintained at a height that makes it difficult to advance the ball to the green I disagree.  I take it most of the courses you are playing have relatively light rough?

[Matt Kardash]

Aside from Bermuda, I think a lot depends on the length of the rough.  At the typical course that maintains their rough to pretty short lengths I agree.  At a course where the rough is maintained at a height that makes it difficult to advance the ball to the green I disagree.  I take it most of the courses you are playing have relatively light rough?

I've played a bunch of courses and very rarely is the rough ever an issue. The only time it ever gets long enough to become an issue is when the maintenance crew is behind on cutting the rough!

[BVince]

Matt, I agree that rough is not as big a factor as more obvious hazards (i.e. deep fairway bunkers, water hazards, ob, and trees).  I have only played two courses where the rough was so deep that it negatively influenced one's ability to score.  

I understand why the PGA Tour emphasizes severe rough to place a demand on accuracy.  The PGA players are so fit and skilled that rough must be an issue to keep the "bombers" from overpowering the golf course.

I think rough has two major areas of impact on the daily golf game.
1.  It reduces the amount of spin created at impact.  It will be interesting to see the spin rates once the USGA enforces the new grove rule and green committees react.
2.  It makes the short game more difficult because the player must overcome a variety of lies.  It is much harder to judge delicate chip shots with rough vs. closely mown chipping areas.

Tee to green, I don't see rough as a colossal factor as I do around the greens.  I tend to agree with you that the hitting area width is more important than fairway or rough.  That being said, I do prefer the short grass if I can manage...

[Sean_A]

Bryon

In theory I agree with you to a point so long as the rough is rather benign.  The part I fear is that when comms see a vast expanse of rough between the fairway and tree line that they may think "what the heck is going on here - the treeline should be much tighter to the fairway".  It isn't too often you see clubs with more than say 20 yards of rough between the fairways and treeline.  To be fair, it does look a bit odd when you do see it.  It must be a terrible temptation to plant the area and/or stick in bunkers.

Ciao

[John Sheehan]

On a poorly designed golf course I really don't care how long or how much rough there is. 

In all except a very few tournaments/venues, when the pros play, I don't care if they want to put 3-foot high rough.  They want to protect par, not encourage creative, enjoyable golf.

However, on a good design, I care very much how rough is grown, mowed and maintained.  A good design uses angles and contours to reward/punish good/bad shots.  When you grow rough from the tree lines to some arbitrary "fairway" line at Pinehurst #2, it is not pointless; it is foolishly and ignorantly counterproductive.  It crushes my poor little architecture-laden soul to see the travesty that is "rough." 

To those of you who haven't played in rough that "negatively influenced ones ability to score,"  where the heck are you playing?  You must have forearms the size of a fire hydrant.  I sprained a wrist last year on my local muni.  You should come out and play it and then tell me that rough is pointless and doesn't effect your ability to score.  It not only has a point, it can be lethal.

In case it isn't obvious:  I hate rough...  Mow it all down.  Make me happy.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Today it occured to me while playing with some people that the average person doesn't care if the fairways are 20 yards wide or 60 yards wide.


Play Bayonne or GCGC and let me know if you change your mind.

When the rough becomes a full shot penalty, or more, you and everyone else cares and complains about the rough.

Basically, all a golfer notices is how wide the hole is from one tree line to the other.

Nothing could be further from the truth

All the average golfer cares about is that he is not in the trees.

That's absurd.
The average golfer cares about being in the fairway.
This care increases exponentially as the difficulty of the rough increases.

Therefore, a well struck drive that ends up in the rough is as good as a drive in the middle of the fairway.

Whatever drugs you're on, whether self medicated or prescription, please stop taking them.

To take it even further, most golfers actually feel more comfortable hitting the ball from the rough because there is more cushion.

Come to think about it, I remember, just the other day, one of my playing partners mentioning, after they finally found their ball in 8 inch rough, how comfortable they felt lying in the rough.  After a 15 minute nap they asked the caddy to help them up.

Evidently, where you play, the rough is benign.

The maintenance of a golf course plays highly into this way of thinking. Most golf clubs keep there rough fairly short, so it is not hard to negotiate.


Not in this part of the country.
Where do you play ?

Moreoever, many, if not most golfers always move the ball with the clubhead in the rough to prop it up a little if it is sitting down.

Now, I completely understand your absurd contention.

Secondly, greens are kept soft enough so that hitting out of the rough changes nothing.

Could you tell us which courses deliberately keep their greens soft ?

Just putting that out there. And also, i'm not sure what my point is here with this thread!


I know what your point is

[Joe Hancock]

Pat,

I think the point of Matt's post is that there is a lot of golfers playing in places and in manners to which you can not relate. But, I'm sure he appreciates the useful input none the less.

Joe

[Bruce Leland]

It has been my experience that muni's, CC for a Day and Resort courses tend to keep their rough at a height of cut that isn't much of a factor in the interest of speeding up play.  Better private clubs, while still wanting to move play around the course, tend to keep the roughs up a bit and it is definitely a factor in the playability of the course at whatever level you play the game. 

[Ken Moum]

Basically, no golfer ever says (after they struck a good tee shot), "shit, i'm in the rough!" It  just doesn't happen, at least where i'm from. Mind you, we don't have Bermuda rough here!

We don't have bermuda rough here (Kansas) for the most part, either, but for most of the golf season at the courses I play you most certainly do hear comments like that.

Unless and until it gets hot and dry in July and August, the average player can barely advance a ball out of the roughs here. I finally resorted to hitting a 25* hybrid with a 3/4 swing, so that I could get a 100 yards or so out of it this summer.

During that period, my handicap climbed from 10 to 17, and the two best players at our club went up more than three strokes, from +1.6 and +1.7 to 1.8 and 1.7.

The fact that fairways have been narrowed means the first 5 yards are getting watered by fairway heads, and are no longer shaded by trees, so it's dense as chinchilla fur and grows like crazy.

Ken

[Mark Pearce]

Matt,

I think you need to play at a course with harsher rough and revisit your opinion.  At my club we have very few trees and the ones there are (and the copsed oaks we also have) tend to be a long way apart.  The rough on some holes, however, is brutal.  Losing a ball in the rough is a very real possibility on all holes and in many places it is the most likely outcome of a misplaced tee shot.  Frankly, where we have trees I'd rather be in them than the adjoining rough since the rough is less severe under the trees and pitching out of trees is a preferred option to playing three off the tee.

[Matt Kardash]

Pat,
I find it really hard to beleive how you fail to see my point. You are the one who must be on drugs if you think playing from the rough is a factor on most courses. I'm not saying some courses don't keep their rough at a height that creates a challenge, but the reality is most courses do not.
You most be dreaming in technicolour because anytime I have ever played a course where the rough was a little longer than normal all I ever hear from my playing competitors is how the rough is too long and unfair. That is exactly why clubs keep their rough so low, to avoid complaints.
Beleive it or not, the 1500 people that are on this message board see golf in a way that the vast majority of golfers do not. I don't know who you play with, but I never play with golfers that know anything about golf architecture, maintenance, or strategy.
I'm the number one advocate of fairway width and strategic golf, but this flies right over most golfers heads. I remember trying to explain to my dad how fairway width created more strategy and he honestly didn't see where I was coming from. He thinks narrow fairways show off a golfers skill more.
I live in Montreal, by the way. So apparently Montreal is the only place that keeps their rough short. Good to know.
And which courses deliberatley keep greens soft? Are you kidding me? You could drop me on almost any course in North America and I could practically back up a 3 iron on the green. Sure, go ahead, name some courses whose greens are firm, but those are the exceptions and not the rule.

[Matt Kardash]

Matt,

I think you need to play at a course with harsher rough and revisit your opinion.  At my club we have very few trees and the ones there are (and the copsed oaks we also have) tend to be a long way apart.  The rough on some holes, however, is brutal.  Losing a ball in the rough is a very real possibility on all holes and in many places it is the most likely outcome of a misplaced tee shot.  Frankly, where we have trees I'd rather be in them than the adjoining rough since the rough is less severe under the trees and pitching out of trees is a preferred option to playing three off the tee.

I'm not doubting that courses like that are out there, i have seen them with my own eyes. I'm just saying the vast majority keep their rough short. In that case anywhere between the tree line is good enough for most golfers.

[Mark Pearce]

So what you are actually saying is "short rough is pointless".  And you may have a point.  In my experience, particularly this year, however, the majority of courses in the UK have rough that isn't short and certainly isn't pointless.  I can't comment on courses around Montreal, however.

[Ken Moum]

I'm just saying the vast majority keep their rough short. In that case anywhere between the tree line is good enough for most golfers.

Even if that were true around here--it's not, bythe way--the other problem is that people do want to plant trees in all that rough, and soon you have course that's so tight no one can play it.

Ken

[Jim Franklin]

Matt -

Come to Baltimore and play a round. I don't think you will leave with that opinion. Some courses cut their rough, some don't. I am not sure where you are playing, but the places I am playing certainly have rough that you do not want to deal with.

[Tom Huckaby]

I get Matt's point most definitely.  But that's because nearly all of my home golf is played on a muni.  At said muni, it's exactly as Matt says - rough is generally pointless.  One just keeps it between the trees.

It would seem the higher-end the course, the more role rough has.

TH

[John Burzynski]

I rarely have problems with the rough on most courses around here.  An inch or two of rough (common in most areas around here) is sometimes actually preferrable to a tight fairway lie, at least for my game, unless the course is very wet.  When the rough is that short, there is rarely a chance for a flier lie, and contact seems for me to be more consistent that off of a tight fairway lie.

The nice thing about only an inch or two of rough is that is is easier to find your errant tee shot, at least as compared to 6" of rough.  A ball in the trees is another story as far as finding it, between the ricochets off of trunks and the brush around trees, it is often a lost ball.

I am sure that the roughhere is nowhere near as bad as some other courses, but it seems fair, at least for the majority of golfers.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

I think the point of Matt's post is that there is a lot of golfers playing in places and in manners to which you can not relate. But, I'm sure he appreciates the useful input none the less.

Joe,

I learned to interpolate and extrapolate a long while ago, so I can relate to every form of conditions that a golfer might encounter at public and private facilities.

Stating that golfers don't care if they're in the fairway is nonsense.

Golfers understand the difference, physically and mentally and strive for accuracy, off the tee and on the approach.

To state that there's no effective difference between the two is unrealistic from both a physical and mental perspective.

Stating that fairway width is pointless is also absurd.

[Will MacEwen]

I just got back from playing 7 rounds at four courses in Whistler, and the rough made a huge difference.  It wasn't at all uncommon for someone on the tee to groan about being in the rough.

Growing up in the east, the summer rough was often dry and wispy.  In the Northwest, I find the rough to be juicy and grabby year round, even at shortish lengths.

[jeffwarne]

Rough isn't pointless...
It keeps me from rolling into the trees

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()