Course Conditioning - I just don't get it

[Pete Lavallee]

JC,

You my friend, are an exception to the norm. I was only trying to point out one of the main reasons this type of maintenance is resisited so strongly here in the US. As an example, 6 years ago Barona Creek Golf Club had to deal with very severe water restrictions due to drought. They decided to irrigate tees and greens only; saving water to fight a possible fire on the reservation. For those of you familiar with the course the entire detention pond on the 9th hole was drained to help the course survive. As someone who grew up on a course in Ma. with no fairway irrigation it was heaven to me. However, the course lost customers and greatly reduced the green fees to offset what most San Diegans considered substandard playing conditions. In actual fact it only acentuated the strategy of the course; forcing players to place their shots to get the ideal playing angle into the green. The bottom line was that they did the right thing during a crisis, discounted green fees to a mere $35 (they are $96 now) and the general public reacted by staying away. Luckily they make enough money in the Casino for the golf course to stay afloat, but other course who need to generate revenue to stay alive do not have this luxury.

Adam,

I agree with everything you said, I was just trying to point out why changing peoples perceptions on this issue is so difficult; especially in the USA. As someone who is married to a subject of the Queen, I have observed first hand how differently the British Empire approachs this issue. Firstly they always take the more frugal approach to everything; golf courses included. When you don't have that "I want the best because I can afford it" mentality, leaner conditioning is the norm. It also helps that there is no alternative approach to compare to; there simply aren't any overweatered courses that try to emulate Augusta. When that happens you either accept the leaner approach to golf course maintenance or switch to Lawn Bowling!

[Bradley Anderson]

Pete,

I am not aware of any of any superintendents who are "resisting" the method, principles, or values associated with fast and firm. Well there are a few I admit it, but in my experience those guys are not the norm.

The most influential members of clubs everywhere, when it comes to conditioning, are the low handicap players. Have you ever met a low handicap player who is against F&F? Come on. Who's crapping who here?

The decision makers at clubs are all for f&f. And every superintendent that I know of is trying to provide these conditions, and doing a pretty darn good job of it too.

[John Gosselin]

I am not sure where most of you play golf, but 90% of the supers I know have been striving to use less water, fert, and chemicals for at least the last 20 to 25 years. The process of educating the general golfing public has been slow to say the least. Supers are in the customer service industry and the customer drives what the end product looks like and plays like. Unfortunately, IMHO, the majority of golfer’s perception of what a well maintained golf course is seems to be good color, blemish and weed free, somewhat firm when weather dictates, and fast greens.

In the mid eighties while a student at Penn State the professors stressed less inputs and preached environmental stewardship. They understood where golf maint needed to go in the future to survive.

At your typical private club if a super begins to drive change towards a less maintained course, and the members start to chatter, would you have total confidence the GM, golf pro, and the consulting architect will back his/her efforts? My point is that many supers feel they are on island at their clubs with little forgiveness for anything less then perfect conditions on a daily basis.

[Bradley Anderson]

John,

I don't know of a single superintendent who uses the same amounts of nitrogen today as was common over 20 years ago. I think it is safe to say that virtually every super in the country is using between 25% and 50% of the nitrogen todaycompared to the past.

However we can not say that our water usage rates are 50% of what they used to be but this is primarily because we have larger systems that water larger areas. Many of the systems, out there now are triple row and some can even water the entire rough. Those systems will naturally use more water, but the amount of water being applied to the playing surfaces is indeed less - possibly even 50% less.

I had a single row system at my old club and we upgraded to triple row. Yes I used more water, but the overall effect was a firmer playing surface in the center of the hole corridor, and better uniformity and health of turf on the perimeters.

I have said this before on here. The next big issue for us to solve as an industry is we need a species of fairway turf that can handle cart traffic when it is dehydrated. For most of us, that's where the real challenge is: we can not allow the fairway turf to get too much drier or it will track from cart traffic.

[Rick Shefchik]

For the paradigm shift we're looking for, there must be a U.S. course seen by the public at least once a year on TV that plays firm, fast, and looks like a lot of fun -- while eschewing the emerald look of Augusta National. ANGC has been the acknowledged standard during our lifetime, with no rival course in the U.S. to change the public's perception of perfection.

[Scott Warren]

Is the focus on colour missing the point a little.

As far as I can see, if the focus is on producing conditions conducive to good golf, firm and fast with lots of short grass... it then shouldn't matter what colour the grass is.

Depending on what grass you're working with, I imagine you'll get a range of shades. To me, the colour doesn't really matter.

Being obsessed with brown is really no better, I don't reckon, than being obsessed with a fence-to-fence green carpet.

[Richard Choi]

There is an easy fix to this. Just abolish Masters OR move the tournament to a brown, fast, and firm course.

Let's face it, for most casual golfers Masters and its immaculate conditioning is what a golf course is supposed to look like. You are not going to change that sentimentality until you get rid of its cause.

[Anthony_Nysse]

My opinion is that the fast and firm/brown and fun course can be marketed better and, therefore,be used to attract golfers.

For instance, when I went to Sea Island a few weeks ago I played Plantation and Seaside.  Both were green and wet and slow.  Now, understand it has rained a lot in GA lately.  But through conversations with a lot of people at the resort, it is my understanding that they water their courses daily...including Seaside which has a very linksy feel to it.

I think they could market Plantation as a traditional American-style golf course and Seaside as a links course.  Put some pieces on the website about why they want to keep it brown (when weather dictates) and fast and firm (as best they can) and have golfers understand they can have a diverse golfing experience at the resort.  American style golf and links style golf (or Scottish style if you will).

I know it would work, if the owners of the courses/resorts took the time to market it better.

Marc,
  Were the golf courses overseeded? This could be a reason as to why it played slow. If they were overseeded, I'd assume that they'd overseed in the last 2 months.

[Bradley Anderson]

I've played on horrible brown turf.

Bob Williams used to say: you don't putt on color, you putt on turf.

And by the way, I've been out on Augusta when it is very green but very fast and firm too. Who says you have to have brown to have a golf course that is playing the way it is supposed to play?

The majority of events that golfers watch onTV are being played on courses that are playing very fast and firm unless if it rains.

[Mike_Trenham]

We need a measuring system that combines root depth and stimpmeter readings to know the health/playability of the turf.  Maybe it is stimpmeter reading / root depth. 

Kind of like the metric of heat and humidity added together and when it gets over a number like 180 for a number of days it is time to be very careful.

[Pete Lavallee]

Bradley,

I have lived in SD for 20 years now and have been invited to SDCC twice and played Rancho Santa Fe, at my expenese for my 50th birthday; need less to say my experience with "Clubs' is very limited. If I get to play one or two a year I consider myself very lucky. I would agree with you that private clubs are trying to get leaner and the better players there are driving that; to dispute that would be crazy. But there is a big world of public golf, the place where most people learn to play the game and that provides a very big impression.  Let's face it, if it weren't  a real problem, why would we have a thread about it?

So when I say that many courses are indeed overwatered , I'm talking about a place where there is zero rain for a 6 month period  and water is indeed a precious comodity. It would seem that these supers are responding to their client's demands; what other conclusion can I reasonably come to?

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

I believe brown is directly associated with fast and firm conditions so it's easier to use brown as a blanket statement to define or describe F&F conditions. I guess the simplest way to look at it is a F&F course doesn't necessarily need to be brown, however at times brown will be a function of F&F. Basically if you are managing resources to maximize F&F then it needs to be understood that brown has to be part of the color palette just not necessarily the main color. However if the weather is coperative, you can have f&f conditions while the turf stays green, obviously there are areas where the weather is more cooperative than others.

As was mentioned, brown turf does not always equal a great playing surface, so just managing for brown does not produce the best playing surface, you should just manage to provide the best surface and whatever weather/climate related color you end up with while doing so should be whats acceptable.

[Bradley Anderson]

Pete,

The public course superintendents that I know care as much about F&F as private club superintendents. I may say however that many of those guys don't have the resources to do as good a job at F&F as they would like to. Contrary to what many would like to believe F&F does require some committments that are costly, such as regular topdressing of greens, hand watering, aeration of fairways etc. And no matter which irrigation system you are running there has to be time allocated for servicing that system, and that can run up to 12 hours a week for even the most basic systems. Often times a wet area on a course is simply because the sprinklers are not functioning properly and there just isn't the time to service them - worn nozzles, part-circle heads that are not aimed right etc.

But getting back to your issue. I would sincerely encourage you to contact your superintendent and let him know your concerns. If he blows you off then shame on him. If he gets it, he will ask you to help him in communicating the benefits of F&F, and then you may have to go to bat for the guy, which it sounds like are willing to do. You CAN make a difference in the F&F crusade.

But I don't think it is helpful at all for the media, or for GCA, to portray one guy as a maverick superintendent who is more commited to the principles of F&F, or the environment, than the greenkeeping profession is in general. The reality is most superintendents are committed to F&F and they have been for many years now.