Sprinkler Heads on Greens

[Wayne_Kozun]

There was just an incident where a player asked for relief as a large sprinkler head (looked like about 12in/30cm in diameter) was on the 10th green in his line of play on the putting green although the player's ball was off the green.  The announcers asked why don't they cover up the sprinkler head and that is a very good question.

Why wouldn't they cut out a plug of turf to put over the sprinkler head?  Sure the turf would die after a day or so but for a major event like this you can just replace it every day.  Or does it make sense to leave it uncovered so that it is very clearly that players on the green get relief?

[Jim Sweeney]

Doubtful that one ncould create a plug that would react like the rest of the green so players would probably chip ove or around it anyway. If it were covered, it would probably still be ground under repair and if the player's ball was on the green and there was interference he would get relief anyway. Therefore, no reason to cover it.

[Wayne_Kozun]

But players not on the green that have to go over it have a problem.  Why couldn't it just be like an old pin which isn't GUR?

[John Moore II]

But players not on the green that have to go over it have a problem.  Why couldn't it just be like an old pin which isn't GUR?

I would say that, given they host this event at TOC every 5 years, they probably have a local rule or condition of competition that states a player can take relief from irrigation heads on the green if they intend to putt or chip over the head from off the green, especially if the head was as big as described. The only course I have seen with heads on the putting surface was Thanksgiving Point, but those were the little 2" diameter residential type heads which wouldn't pose much of a problem. If I was on the tournament committee at an event like this where irrigation heads on the green might be a problem, I would lobby for a local rule granting relief.

[Forrest Richardson]

I believe Toro still offers a head that has a round tray above the cap. This allows about 3 cm of turf to be set into the tray. I think it is far easier to simple give relief. After all, the greens are big!

[Wayne_Kozun]

I think it is far easier to simple give relief. After all, the greens are big!

True, but if you are just off the green you are SOL.

[Rob Swift]

A sprinkler head on a green should be avoided at all costs, but obviously with the greens at TOC being so big there is no way around it. The Toro sprinkler you are talking about Forrest would be a nightmare in practice having to replace that piece of turf every few days, the cost of this over a year would be quite high.

They are a part of a golf course and I see it as a way a golfer can use his/her imagination to get around it if they can not get relief.

[Forrest Richardson]

Nightmare?  No, that would be watery filth!     Thankfully we have changed a few things in the game.

It does strike me, though, that railway tracks, stone walls, sheds, hedges and even an opponents ball, were once an integral part of the obstacle course of golf — yet, here we are in 2010...some 400 years fast forwarded — and we are concerned with a tiny disk the size of a tortilla that sets nearly flush to the ground.

Sometimes you cannot avoid a head on a green — not if you demand a certain spacing and coverage. Over the years we have had a few heads located on greens and it was no big deal because there is relief allowed in nearly all instances.

[Tom_Doak]

Because we like to have a lot of short grass around the greens, one of my pet peeves is having so MANY sprinkler heads around the greens.  A lot of superintendents want double heads around the green -- one throwing in and one throwing out -- but you wind up with so many of them that you are always having to putt over a head.

Old Macdonald's greens are so big, though, that it was inevitable we were going to have some heads inside the greens themselves.  We tried to avoid it for a while, then couldn't, and in the end there are so many of them we lost count.  I'm okay with them if they are on a slope and not anywhere near where you might want to cut a hole ... if they wind up on your line of play, you can take relief.

[Forrest Richardson]

I agree, Tom. And, in addition to heads, we also must contend with the "need" for drain clean-outs, flush outs, value boxes, etc, etc.  Lately we have been consolidating many of these "needs" into one larger value box (8-10 in. dia.) which makes for less clutter. Thankfully there are now some really good sprinklers that can suffice singularly at the edge of greens, but these are expensive and unproven.

[Rob Swift]

Tom,

The double heads around greens these days, in my opinion are a big waste of time and money, i have been involved in a few courses that have them, and one of two things always happens

1/ One of the heads never gets used at all or
2/ The two heads are setup wrong and you get over watering of green complexes.

On top of this, nearly always during the grow-in and maintenance of the course, a superintendent always asks where are all the sprinkler heads around the fairways, obviously because they wanted the fancy double head around the greens!!

I am pretty sure we managed fine with the single heads at St Andrews Beach.

[Bruce Hospes]

When you have two distinctly different types of turf in a green and it's surrounds, back to back heads are a necessity.  I've done it without them and it's not easy to manage the moisture for both areas side by side.

[Tom_Doak]

Rob:

Thanks for the note.

I agree with Bruce to an extent ... though he doesn't know that St. Andrews Beach, your example, has bent greens and bermuda fairways.  (Actually, I guess the fescue surrounds solved that problem, which wasn't even the reason we went that way.)  I honestly think it's as much about different SOILS between the greens and the surrounds, as it is about different grass types.

But, while there is clearly sometimes a need to water the two areas differently, I am not sure that having a second head right up on the green is required.  Until about ten years ago, superintendents were happy to have heads around the green throwing back in for that purpose.  Now they want double coverage, and the irrigation designers require it ... even though the same irrigation designer INSISTS that the heads on the outside edges of the fairways water evenly throughout their coverage area.

[Bruce Hospes]

I agree it's about soils as much as turf type, but I'd still rather have heads throwing away from the green instead of at it.  I'm sure its great having greens and surrounds on the same type of soil, but that doesn't happen too often here in the southeast which in a lot of circumstances, makes the back to back heads a necessity, not a waste of money.

[Rob Swift]

Bruce,

With the two different turf types on two different soils, I can see how having the option of the double head would be of benefit to you.

But if you were going to have either the double head around the green or have the heads throwing back into the edge of the green, I think I would prefer to have that extra row out on the green surround edge throwing back to the green (if the size of the surrounds permitted it). For the reason that you cover yourself for all different wind directions.

[Bruce Hospes]

Rob,

We don't have much wind here in Alabama so I'll stick with the heads next to the green, but I can see the logic in doing it the other way if windy conditions were the norm.

[Wayne_Kozun]

The Toro sprinkler you are talking about Forrest would be a nightmare in practice having to replace that piece of turf every few days, the cost of this over a year would be quite high.

But for four days every five years I think the Links Trust/R&A/Town of St Andrews could afford it.

[Rob Swift]

Yep your obviously right Wayne, but what about for the other 360 odd days of the year, are they left with 3cm deep holes around every green, or is there some sort of other cap you can put on top of the head.

[John Moore II]

Yep your obviously right Wayne, but what about for the other 360 odd days of the year, are they left with 3cm deep holes around every green, or is there some sort of other cap you can put on top of the head.

Not really needed. Having seen them before on another course, they really would only potentially come into play on a putt, given their positioning on the greens, it is highly, highly unlikely you would have to chip across one of the heads; I strongly suspect this is the case at St. Andrews. And I don't think your playing partners would have a problem with you moving the ball if it was obvious that something was in your line; after all, if you are having a competition amongst yourselves, then it would seem to me that the USGA rules would allow you to implement certain Conditions of Competition for your individual 'event.' 

[Wayne_Kozun]

I would think that an artificial turf cap that sits flush with the turf on the green would be a decent option for players off the green that do not get relief.  To be honest given that the greens fee is £130 in the high season they could afford to do the real turf option every day.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Not really needed. Having seen them before on another course, they really would only potentially come into play on a putt, given their positioning on the greens, it is highly, highly unlikely you would have to chip across one of the heads; I strongly suspect this is the case at St. Andrews.

I would thint that it is a regular occurrence at TOC - the reason that I started this thread is that during the second round on Friday one of the players asked for relief as he wanted to putt from off of the green and his line to the hole would go right over one of these heads.  Relief was not granted. 

[Andrew Brown]

Within the Rules of Golf there is a provision to adopt a Local Rule (Appendix I, Part B, 6 Immovable Obstructions Close to Putting Green) that - as the title of the Local Rule says -  covers sprinkler heads that are located close to a putting green. This particular Local Rule is adopted at St Andrews for normal play, and I would suspect, for the Open Championship.

A sprinkler head that would be located on the putting green - a player would gain relief for this if it lay on his line of putt (which is a defined term within the Rules) under Rule 24-2a. However, the player's ball has to lie on the putting green also, for the player to gain relief in this situation. It is a situation which I have had once -  playing the Jubilee Course at St Andrews.

It sounds like the player in the situation you are commenting on had the sprinkler head on his line of play (again, a defined term that is different from line of putt), but as his ball lay off the green, that does not qualify for relief under the Rules.

Regards
Andrew

[Tags:]

Tags: