[paul cowley]

Are clubs and competitions losing their fascination with extremely high green speeds?

If so, why? Maintenance costs?...toning down the game?

Where are the clubs and competitions that are the true bastions of high speed...and their preferred top speeds?

[BCrosby]

Paul -

Not sure where your question is coming from. What makes you think people want less speed?

A story. We switched one our courses to an ultra dwarf two summers ago. We can get them as fast as we want. Even in baking summer heat. We hosted the state am last summer in July. I was out early on Saturday morning with the set-up crews. We were trying to get 12+. We did a couple of readings and got 13.6. When asked by the tournament officials what they should tell the press about speeds, we told them just to say that the greens were 12+.

Bottom line, we now worry about our greens getting too fast. Oddly enough, however, that's not because we've heard complaints from members. I sometimes wonder if they don't actually enjoy getting beaten up by fast greens. We are slowing them down because they can get out of hand so qucikly. It's a wonderful probelm to have.

Bob 

[Jason Connor]

BCrosby, that raises a good point: Are members afraid / too ashamed to say "hey super, the greens are getting too fast."

No one wants to say "I don't like that car, it's too powerful" and we all know aging members are loathe to admit when they need to move up a set of tees.

So I can imagine lots of members may be thinking "This just isn't fun anymore" but very hesitant to be the one to admit it.

[BCrosby]

Jason -

You may well be correct. Which worries us. It's part of the reason why we are trying to rein in our speeds.

Bob

[Tim Nugent]

Jason hits the nail on the head.  Members have been conditioned/brainwashed into the "faster, quicker, better" mentality.
In an effort to reallocate labor, I experimented with NOT mowing 2 days a week and just rolling instead.  I found that no one noticed.  I think golfers will notice greens that don't putt true or hold their line much easier than the difference of a couple feet.

The problem with green speeds is some idiot thought it was a good idea to figure out how to quantify them.  Once you can put a number to something, it goes from being subjective to objective, and hence, easily comparable by those without even the basicist understanding of the What's and Why's of the concept.

2 guys standing on a bridge taking a leak. #1 turns to #2 and says "Boy!, that water is cold."  #2 replies "Sure is...and deep too"

Too many Club members just want to be guy #2.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul & Bob,

I think some/many clubs develop cultures based on conditioning.

Certainly, televised PGA Tour, Opens and the Masters have influenced conditioning and speed.

Golf's an interesting game in the sense that other golfers, irrespective of their proficiency want to emulate the best golfers in the world, especially when it comes to playing the "same" course and the "same" conditions as the best players in the world.

There's also a desire to import the conditions they see on TV week in and week out.

There may be an awareness of "critical mass", the point at which conditions become unplayable or unmaintainable.
I think that's what Bob was referencing in his last paragraph.

But, nothing I've come across indicates that there's a reversal in the increased speed trend.

If anything, as Bob indicated, his club was in quest of higher speeds and achieved them by the introduction of Ultra Dwarf

[Tim Gavrich]

The day most clubs start slowing down their greens voluntarily is the day the average private club's members stop enjoying boasting that their greens are "like glass" or "the fastest in the state" or "like putting on a pool table," which is to say never.  Though that may be a touch cynical of me. 

[Sean_A]

Keeping green speeds under 10 is probably the single best thing any membership can do to preserve any architectural merit their greens may have.  When I hear 12 I see flat greens or greens which are stupidly ott.  Either way, this sort of golf shouldn't win awards or garner kudos.  It should be lambasted as a short avenue to course destruction.  Unfortunately, members want to brag and this then encourages those in power to tell little lies about the speed of the greens (sounds like wind speed inflation!).  Folks then use that false info to extrapolate about other green speeds.  Its a war out there!

Ciao

[Tim Nugent]

Sean, if the sheep only knew how much green speed infltion is out there.  When I hear anything over 11 the 1st thing that pops in my head the boys from Animal House coughing B.S.!
The ironic thing is the guy who is lauded by the members for fast greens is the same guy who's Down-the-Road faster than you can say Jackrabbit when those greens take a crap.
I am reminded of a British super who told me in the late 80's "youYanks, in your quest for uniformity, make a well man sick"  The same can be extended to quest for green speed.

[paul cowley]

Personally I haven't built a green that could be mowed to stimp over 11 without the putting surface getting silly in places....I just don't see the need for it. I enjoy internal contours and false edges and fronts where the grades can be between 3% and 6%+ too much (think Augusta National in places), and you can't connect these slopes well when the adjacent areas are extremely fast.

Methinks there is a bit of a correlation between fast stimps and competition amongst the the well heeled...it certainly can't be for the pure pleasure of watching a barely touched downhill 2 footer go screaming off the green!

[Jason Connor]

The day most clubs start slowing down their greens voluntarily is the day the average private club's members stop enjoying boasting that their greens are "like glass" or "the fastest in the state" or "like putting on a pool table," which is to say never.  Though that may be a touch cynical of me. 

Agree. And the question is what do members prefer more: bragging to their business partner who's a member down the road or playing golf on an enjoyable course with greens with delightful inner contours?

[Wade Whitehead]

If greens are fast they're 13.  If greens are slow they're 6.  Nobody even knows what these numbers mean.

I think the "average" player thinks a course is "nice" if the greens are "fast."  And no, I don't know what those words mean, either.

WW

[Patrick_Mucci]

Keeping green speeds under 10 is probably the single best thing any membership can do to preserve any architectural merit their greens may have.  When I hear 12 I see flat greens or greens which are stupidly ott.  Either way, this sort of golf shouldn't win awards or garner kudos.  It should be lambasted as a short avenue to course destruction.  Unfortunately, members want to brag and this then encourages those in power to tell little lies about the speed of the greens (sounds like wind speed inflation!).  Folks then use that false info to extrapolate about other green speeds.  Its a war out there!


Sean,

There are courses with contour/s and slope/s, especially courses with large greens, that can maintain enjoyable conditions at around 12.

Mountain Ridge is such a course.

Average green size is about 7,500-8,000 sq/ft.

The membership seems to enjoy the playing quality of the greens at that speed.
The greens also tend to be firm, as does the rest of the course, and, with rare exception, there's no fronting obstacles/hazards to preclude run-up.

Baltusrol Lower may be another course where around 12 works well.
It would be disastrous on the upper due to the slopes.

Oakmont also seems to enjoy green speeds of around 12 as does Pine Tree in Florida.

There's a delicate balance between size, contour/slope and speed and each course has to figure out how to best manage that balance.

Ciao

[JMEvensky]

I think the "average" player thinks a course is "nice" if the greens are "fast."  

I only disagree with the word average--you can substitute 99.9%.

The problem isn't with the stimpmeter,it's with publishing the results.Outside of the guys playing on television,not many players can tell the difference between 10' and 12'.

If every club just maintained their greens to 10' and posted a sign in the Pro Shop which said 12',things would be a lot better.My guess is that more than a few do this already.

[jeffwarne]

Keeping green speeds under 10 is probably the single best thing any membership can do to preserve any architectural merit their greens may have.  When I hear 12 I see flat greens or greens which are stupidly ott.  Either way, this sort of golf shouldn't win awards or garner kudos.  It should be lambasted as a short avenue to course destruction.  Unfortunately, members want to brag and this then encourages those in power to tell little lies about the speed of the greens (sounds like wind speed inflation!).  Folks then use that false info to extrapolate about other green speeds.  Its a war out there!


Sean,

There are courses with contour/s and slope/s, especially courses with large greens, that can maintain enjoyable conditions at around 12.

Mountain Ridge is such a course.

Average green size is about 7,500-8,000 sq/ft.

The membership seems to enjoy the playing quality of the greens at that speed.
The greens also tend to be firm, as does the rest of the course, and, with rare exception, there's no fronting obstacles/hazards to preclude run-up.

Baltusrol Lower may be another course where around 12 works well.
It would be disastrous on the upper due to the slopes.

Oakmont also seems to enjoy green speeds of around 12 as does Pine Tree in Florida.

There's a delicate balance between size, contour/slope and speed and each course has to figure out how to best manage that balance.

Ciao

Pat didn't you previously state how much fun you had playing in the 50's and 60's on multiple classic courses?
I'm sure those greens stimped at less than 12.
Why do you think Mountain Ridge, baltusrol, and Oakmont need to stimp higher (12) than the classic courses of your youth?

[Sean_A]

Keeping green speeds under 10 is probably the single best thing any membership can do to preserve any architectural merit their greens may have.  When I hear 12 I see flat greens or greens which are stupidly ott.  Either way, this sort of golf shouldn't win awards or garner kudos.  It should be lambasted as a short avenue to course destruction.  Unfortunately, members want to brag and this then encourages those in power to tell little lies about the speed of the greens (sounds like wind speed inflation!).  Folks then use that false info to extrapolate about other green speeds.  Its a war out there!


Sean,

There are courses with contour/s and slope/s, especially courses with large greens, that can maintain enjoyable conditions at around 12.

Mountain Ridge is such a course.

Average green size is about 7,500-8,000 sq/ft.

The membership seems to enjoy the playing quality of the greens at that speed.
The greens also tend to be firm, as does the rest of the course, and, with rare exception, there's no fronting obstacles/hazards to preclude run-up.

Baltusrol Lower may be another course where around 12 works well.
It would be disastrous on the upper due to the slopes.

Oakmont also seems to enjoy green speeds of around 12 as does Pine Tree in Florida.

There's a delicate balance between size, contour/slope and speed and each course has to figure out how to best manage that balance.

Ciao

Pat

You may be right, but I am having a hard time believing a well designed course green rolling at 9 can somehow be inferior to greens which are playable at 12.  Of course, I am taking firmness as a given desirable maintenance trait which may help explain your position (ie - a difference of opinion on what firm is or should be).  I think in terms of ideal maintenance being most easily and most often achieved on links.  It happens to be the case that many links greens could be more adventurously designed for green speeds of 9ish which are firm, but there is a fine line between adventure and insanity if the wind kicks up.  I found The Castle Course to be a bit insane in places and I doubt they were rolling as fast as 9 (though I was fed a story about 11 which of course I didn't buy for a NY second) when I was there. 

To each is own, but my ideal is to concentrate on firm greens rolling true.  I think well designed and interesting greens using this as a guide will give the golfer all he can handle on a daily basis.  I grew up on a Ross course with (still) on of the best sets of greens I have ever come across.  They were always faster than 9 on sometimes one was doomed if he went above the hole.  The problem was the greens were never firm.  They required a ton of water to remain short (shorter than they should be if you ask me).  I think taking a few notches off the stimp and added firmness would make the greens shine that much more.  Its always dumbfounded me how golfers could visit the UK and rave about the firm conditions then go home and do little max out the firmness (to what ever level can realistically be achieved given the climate etc) on their home courses.  I am under the impression things are getting better and I hope this is the case, however, as greens get drier, they don't need to be cut as short.  The firmness adds an extra layer of challenge which speed in and of itself cannot emulate.
 

Ciao   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat didn't you previously state how much fun you had playing in the 50's and 60's on multiple classic courses?
I'm sure those greens stimped at less than 12.

Far less than 12.

Why do you think Mountain Ridge, baltusrol, and Oakmont need to stimp higher (12) than the classic courses of your youth?

Jeff,

It's a matter of context.

Look at how people dressed when traveling in the 50's and 60's versus today.

For that matter look at how people dress in general.

Recently, when I was getting on a shuttle bus from the car rental return to the airport, three young women returned their car and were getting on the same shuttle bus.

They were very attractive, with great figures and fabulous legs.
Their dresses, probably knit or spandex or some material that clings, were so short that it was mind boggling.
Now I happen to like gorgeous legs, with feet on one end and P---y on the other, but, imagine if they were traveling in the 50's or 60's.
They'd be arrested for indecent exposure.

So, like hemlines, times change.

I enjoyed the longer dresses that women wore in the 50's and 60's.
I enjoyed putting on greens that were slower in the 50's and 60's, but, there's been a progression, or evolution, to shorter dresses and faster greens.

Now, I know what you're thinking.

Will this progression continue, and where will it end, on dresses and on greens.

And will we enjoy where this progression leads or long for a happier medium ? 

[Bill_McBride]

Oakmont members like to say that the USGA has to slow down the greens when the Open is played there. 

[Ed Brzezowski]

If you ever need to compare modern v old green speeds find the Pine Valley match on Shells W W of G. Gool Lord they were poping those putts. And there was little roll out, they just stopped.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ed,

If the match was filmed in June, july or especially August, those speeds don't surprise me

[paul cowley]

Oakmont members like to say that the USGA has to slow down the greens when the Open is played there. 

I'm sure that's because the members there are such good putters they don't want the pros to know that...largely so as not to embarrass them.

[Bill_McBride]

Oakmont members like to say that the USGA has to slow down the greens when the Open is played there. 

I'm sure that's because the members there are such good putters they don't want the pros to know that...largely so as not to embarrass them.

Right!   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Oakmont members like to say that the USGA has to slow down the greens when the Open is played there. 

I'm sure that's because the members there are such good putters they don't want the pros to know that...largely so as not to embarrass them.

Paul,

Are you debunking another Pennsylvania myth ?     

[paul cowley]

Nah Patrick...I would much prefer a world full of myths than one without any...y'all are safe.

[Mike Hendren]

Hopefully so.  Putts were meant to be "hit" - not "stroked."

Bogey

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()