[Mike_Clayton]

Brian.

Bobby Jones once said something like ' there is golf and then there is championship golf and the two don't bear much relationship to each other.'

I think you can say the same about the greens at RM.
I watched the 1972 World Cup and the 1974 Chrysler Classic. There greens were at their most freared then and the course really cemented its reputation in those events.
I saw Bob Charles knock a downhill six footer clean off the green at 6W and you know he didn't yip it.
Lee Trevino shot about 10 over par and finished 3rd in the Chrysler and the WC scores were high.
I started playing pro events there in 1981 and played the Heineken there in 2004.
The old Suttons greens were really hard and fast - I would guess in excess of 13 on the stimpmeter.
The new greens whilst a good tournament surface have unquestionably lost their fearsome look of the 70s and 80s when you were ALWAYS aware you could three putt from anywhere - even 3 feet if you hit a lip and spun it out and down a hill.
I have played a decent amount there over the years and have never seen the greens like they are during the week of a tournament. My guess is they are not within three feet of the championship speed - and that is the relationship with the Jones quote.

I played there on the weekend. The fairways were better than decent and you can't generalize about the greens because there are in such a varying state of repair - or disrepair.
For me it will be number 1 because of the number of world-class holes - a number unmatched in the country although I think Barnbougle is close and Lost Farm might be even closer.
If one course is going to knock RM from the premier place on any list it is Lost Farm.

I will leave the last question alone - but I do wonder why the left option for short hitters is gone.
As a general point about 17 I would say there is nothing you can put on the ground - mounds,bunkers etc. that will stop a strong kid with the club open and on the inside from hitting a massive block and, in the case of 17, flying it onto the road.
I think we proved that at the 2nd and 3rd at Victoria when we took out all the low growing scrub and rebunkered the holes to make them look good - and play properly -  again.
All the stuff supposed to stop balls flying over the fence is gone and no more - or less -  balls are going over the fence.

[Stephen Britton]

I have been of the opinion through the last few years that RMs greens have been overwatered and that this has been a significant factor behind the poa levels.

Mathew,

Jim managed the old Suttons and Penncross for 10 years poa free and firm/fast before they decided to re-grass. Do you honestly think that given his years of experience, support team of local Sups etc, that he has simply been over watering/fertilizing and this has caused the poa infestation?? Come on, give these guys some credit.. Remember, the poa invaded immediately after the "new suttons" were grown in, not in low spots, not in high spots,not in thin spots but even all over the greens...

better minds than mine can comment, but the more frequent use of aeration can obviously soften a green.  It also enables oxygen to get to the roots which is a good thing, especially if compaction is a concern.

James B

James,

They have been aerifying the greens the same way for over 20 years. Frequent aerification will only temporarily soften the green due to the punching. Once the holes are filled with sand and the green recovers it firms up again. If you don't aerate enough the thatch will build up and you'll have cheese cakes to putt on instead of greens.. You must aerate to ensure firm greens (and obvioulsy to get the gas exchange to roots etc...)

I have played RM when it is unbelievably firm and fast but there have always been long periods over decades when the greens were nothing like they were in tournaments.

Mike,

Let’s not forget they were re-building 6 greens in the spring and 6 in the fall beginning after the 98 Presidents Cup. Over the years many greens have been at different stages of maturity during the grow in's. Again the important word being maturity, which is why the old greens were so good.

[Stephen Britton]

Another point that should be made regarding the poa is the quality of water in recent years.

In the past Royal Melbourne would pump water from several bores to the dam on 7 west and shandy the water with purchased city/mains water. Victoria for years had been tapped into a great aquifer across the road, something the RM guys were always jealous of  . In recent years these bores have become very low and possibly even dried up now? When the bores run low the sodium bicarbonate levels increase. When you water turf with sodium levels higher than desired you raise the pH of the sand. RM has always been notorious for low pH levels in their greens. Low pH levels in your greens are an integral part of keeping poa a bay in bent grass, bent can withstand low pH quite well were as poa prefers high pH levels.

The club and Richard will be faced with the following question if they haven't already,

Go with the "new Suttons" and live with poa, try to make them really good bent/poa greens or consider re-grassing again?

[Stephen Britton]

FYI any local sandbelt Sups, greenskeepers, ex RM employees feel free to chime in anytime..

I'm all alone taking grenades in the trenches here! 

[Brian Walshe]

Stephen,

I, and I think most of the Melbourne based posters, appreciate both your insight and candour so I hope you aren't taking grenades.

RM holds a very special place in both Melbourne and Australian golf and perhaps for that reason it gets judged harder than most.  My first game their many years ago was a revelation, I had simply never seen a course that good or in such good condition.  I've been fortunate enough to play there a bit since then and I've been dismayed at the condition of the greens for the last few years.  They have simply not been to the standard I'd expect at RM and probably not to a standard that most of the better clubs routinely achieve.  Your comments about the changes caste a bit of light on why.

One thing I would be interested to hear is your opinion of the changes to 6, 7, 8, 15 and 17 East and 4 West.

[Matthew Mollica]

Stephen,

Thanks for the replies. While I didn't think that overwatering was the sole cause of the poa problems, your words indeed show that I am likely to have looked at things a little too simply. They make me understand that, and the softness, a little more.

I have tried to keep an open mind on the condition of RM through the last 10 years of change, and many intelligent chaps like yourself have lauded Jim and his abilities.

Thanks for adding such depth to this discussion; as Brian says, we appreciate it greatly. Not often someone with this level of enthusiasm and knowledge is a keystroke away, and so keen to share their knowledge.

MM

[Warwick Loton]

Green Speeds
Sometimes the green speeds are displayed on a notice-board. They were reported there as stimping between 10 and 11 (consistently) throughout December & January. Obviously there's a lot of hole-to-hole variation at the moment. The current target is 11, week-in, week-out. 

To give context to those reported readings, I haven't seen any of the greens anywhere near treacherous this summer.


Friendly Grenades
Today I found an old interview of Jim Porter - from a 2002 issue of Golf & Sports Turf Australia magazine (essential reading) - in which he said of RM's traditional greens (old Suttons Mix): “…They putted well, were dense and resisted poa invasion - all benefits that Penn Cross did not have.” The relevant inference is that poa infiltration of the greens was a problem that came with the first green resurfacing program (1988-92) ie when Penncross was introduced. Maybe the problem got a lot worse with the second resurfacing program (mainly 1999-2003) as Stephen passionately believes.

It might well be pure coincidence, but the irrigation system went in around the time that the first resurfacing program got under way.

There has definitely been a build up of minerals in the greens, as a result of applying bore water. The PH theory is interesting. The new storm-water mining arrangements might help with this one, by removing the need to apply diluted bore water to the greens.

[Kevin Pallier]

Stephen,

I, and I think most of the Melbourne based posters, appreciate both your insight and candour so I hope you aren't taking grenades.

Brian

Who says you have to come from Melbourne to appreciate the discussions ?

Stephen

As Brian correctly points out - RM does hold a special place among the top echelon of Australia golf and will always be judged accordingly. Appreciate that various changes are being made and hopefully the course will ultimately be better for it - thanks for the posts they are very insightful.

[Stephen Britton]

One thing I would be interested to hear is your opinion of the changes to 6, 7, 8, 15 and 17 East and 4 West.

My thoughts have been well documented on the changes, IMO nothing should have changed in the name of safety to houses or play. The course was there first, it raises the value of the homes, you knew the course was in your backyard when you purchased the house, if you don't like balls in your backyard or on your roof then move or get over it! Also I don't think the current changes will even soften the problem?

Doesn't it look great having that green ringed by tea trees (see Neil's last post - photo of 18 West in 1960). I understand the back of 2 West's green was like that prior to the mounds being constructed there.

I think you'll find there was a row of large Cypress trees along the back of 2 west green and 3 west tees, similar to the trees that border the property.

I like the tee tree although I would be intersted to see it taken out in places and the course opened up a little. Neil posted a photo in another RM thread taken not long after the course opened. It was taken from the clubhouse area looking across,2w,3w,5w,6w and over to 2e and Dr.Green's house.

Obviously we don't want to open up the course and expose houses although how do you think the course would look if some of these internal vistas were opened up once again?

Imagine the tee tree removed across 1w,2w,3w,4,w,5w,6w, even around the 11w,12w, 17w, area?

Neil could answer this, Do you think the tee tree has taken over a little? Do you think the course was intended to be a little more open?

[Brian Walshe]

Stephen,

I think that the changes to 4W and 17E, besides making a mess of two great holes, have actually created more safety issues than they have "fixed".  From the 17th tee you now aim more towards the road.  The 4th tee is within easy reach, and playing your 2nd shot straight at the 2nd tee is sure to make life interesting.  Oh and the long grass on the left of the drive bunkers on 4W is a great idea.  Now rather than having people walk up and hit their ball if they are left of the bunkers you'll have most of the group stomping around in the long grass looking for the ball they can't find.  4 targets rather than one and a lot longer in the target area.  It's much safer.

[Stephen Britton]

Stephen,

I think that the changes to 4W and 17E, besides making a mess of two great holes, have actually created more safety issues than they have "fixed".  From the 17th tee you now aim more towards the road.  The 4th tee is within easy reach, and playing your 2nd shot straight at the 2nd tee is sure to make life interesting.  Oh and the long grass on the left of the drive bunkers on 4W is a great idea.  Now rather than having people walk up and hit their ball if they are left of the bunkers you'll have most of the group stomping around in the long grass looking for the ball they can't find.  4 targets rather than one and a lot longer in the target area.  It's much safer.

I think most people are scratching their heads with these changes. Although, wasn't 4w changed recently to make it easier for the seniors to get over the bunkers? Or bail out to the right rather than the left?

[Mark Bourgeois]

I hadn't really thought of the impact of traffic on a golf course, beyond maintenance, until this thread.  The so-called safety issues go away if play goes down, yes?

And the playability changes on 4W probably come from this source, too. Wouldn't the aging of the population explain a lot of the rise in rounds?

(A second and somewhat related factor is the growing wealth of Melburnians!)

Mark

[Warwick Loton]

I think you'll find there was a row of large Cypress trees along the back of 2 west green and 3 west tees, similar to the trees that border the property.

Interesting. There was a single, huge tree at the left rear of that green (ie near the 3rd tee) that was removed around the end of the 1970s. Maybe that was the last survivor of the row you mention.

I like the tee tree although I would be intersted to see it taken out in places and the course opened up a little... Obviously we don't want to open up the course and expose houses although how do you think the course would look if some of these internal vistas were opened up once again?

Neil could answer this, Do you think the tee tree has taken over a little? Do you think the course was intended to be a little more open?

Extremely interesting. We all take the tea tree for granted because that's all we've ever known. Don't know if I'd like it more or less that way. Makes you think how gutsy it was for Oakmont to do that clear felling.

Neil, there's a growing chorus who would be very interested in your comments.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()