[PCCraig]

With the recent discussion of the renovation of some greens at Merion due to increased green speeds and unputtable surfaces, it lead me to think of modern maintenance technology from another angle. Faster green speeds have made the greens at Merion and other classic golf courses far more difficult and many posters have suggested slowing them down to regain their original playing characteristics.

However, are there any classic courses that have benefited from increased green speeds? Perhaps greens that historically were cut at high mow heights? Are there greens that might have been on the flatter side 50 years ago that have "come alive" with breaks that were barely noticed before?

[Greg Holland]

Would Bethpage Black be an example?  I have not played it -- but watching the US Opens there, they continually talk about the relatively flat greens during the coverage.

[Patrick_Mucci]

With the recent discussion of the renovation of some greens at Merion due to increased green speeds and unputtable surfaces, it lead me to think of modern maintenance technology from another angle. Faster green speeds have made the greens at Merion and other classic golf courses far more difficult and many posters have suggested slowing them down to regain their original playing characteristics.

However, are there any classic courses that have benefited from increased green speeds? Perhaps greens that historically were cut at high mow heights? Are there greens that might have been on the flatter side 50 years ago that have "come alive" with breaks that were barely noticed before?

Not that I can think of.

Having played golf for about 60 years, over those 60 years, at the time I was playing, I can't remember saying, "these greens are too slow"

Contemporaneously, they were fine.

Looking back, they were slower than today's speeds, but, so what, they had contour/slope and ample character.
And, nowhere, was "goofy golf" to be found.

The natural progression of increased greens speeds spells disaster for distinctive greens and the game.

[Mark Chaplin]

TOC and Hunstanton. The "preferred" speed of links greens is 10.5 on day one of a championship fast enough to challenge without the risk of balls being blown away. Hunstanton got their greens to 11-12 but they are by and large flat surfaces.

[jeffwarne]

With the recent discussion of the renovation of some greens at Merion due to increased green speeds and unputtable surfaces, it lead me to think of modern maintenance technology from another angle. Faster green speeds have made the greens at Merion and other classic golf courses far more difficult and many posters have suggested slowing them down to regain their original playing characteristics.

However, are there any classic courses that have benefited from increased green speeds? Perhaps greens that historically were cut at high mow heights? Are there greens that might have been on the flatter side 50 years ago that have "come alive" with breaks that were barely noticed before?

Not that I can think of.

Having played golf for about 60 years, over those 60 years, at the time I was playing, I can't remember saying, "these greens are too slow"

Contemporaneously, they were fine.

Looking back, they were slower than today's speeds, but, so what, they had contour/slope and ample character.
And, nowhere, was "goofy golf" to be found.

The natural progression of increased greens speeds spells disaster for distinctive greens and the game.

Amazing how much "greencreep" there has been.

And no one can tell me it's for any other reason than to be faster than the club down the street, (EGO)

Fast is a relative term and sadly agronomy and ego has allowed relative to render many great greens and in particular many pins, obsolete

[JESII]

I cannot think of a green I would rather play at 5 or 6 feet than 11 feet...not one!

[Mark Johnson]

pinehurst

[jeffwarne]

I cannot think of a green I would rather play at 5 or 6 feet than 11 feet...not one!

Jim,
Are you including all the greens that have been modified?
#5 at Palmetto had one pin at 11-maybe, but every ball went to the same place at those speeds. It's modified with tiers now
#10 at Southampton has very few(if any) pins at 11-and even if you find a pin, you can't use so many more great places
Goat Hill-couldn't play holes 2,3,4, or 7 at 11-plays perfectly at 6.
These holes have extreme slopes that ARE the strategy of the holes,that influence where you drive it on the hole, and if run at 11, the greens would have to be modified, thus RUINING the strategies of the hole.



The problem is most greens have already been modified so 6 seems stupid slow-and it is stupid slow uphill.
Remember in the old days a green that was 6 might be amped up for a couple days to 8-making it seem crazy.
Now everbody wants tournament speed every day.

The real problem is no great pins are even considered at 11-14.
at 6 you can cut them right on the slope and have all the challenge you need.(and actually have putts you play a foot outside the hole from 6 feet)
but more importantly keep them firm and highlight the slopes when out of position.
running the greens at 6 on most modern or modified classic greens using the pins and green softness we've all been trained to see and expect would make for boring golf-agreed.

Obviously 6 is an extreme example but 8 would do no?

[Philippe Binette]

Maybe Garden City.

the low-profile, 2-3% tilt greens are considered genius now at 10+ on the stimp... I don't know what people thougth of them with speeds around 6 on the stimp.

[JESII]

Jeff,

I haven't played any of those courses you mentioned...but sure, I can think of greens that don't work at 11 feet.

Your question about 8 feet working is really the point...really firm and 8 or 9 feet is great but they didn't have that in 1925 unless the grass was mostly dead so I'll stick with my comment regarding 11 feet versus 6 feet.

Your bringing up the firmness issue/benefit is spot on and I think Don Mahaffey is running a thread that discusses various tangents of it.

[Mark Saltzman]

Maybe Garden City.

the low-profile, 2-3% tilt greens are considered genius now at 10+ on the stimp... I don't know what people thougth of them with speeds around 6 on the stimp.

Phillipe,

I was thinking of Weston (in Toronto) for the same reason... Not much internal contouring but a lot of tilt. Greens are very interesting with today's green speeds. Don't know if they would have been considered interesting in the past.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I cannot think of a green I would rather play at 5 or 6 feet than 11 feet...not one!

1     That's not the issue
2     If instead of going from 11 to 5-6 in one fell swoop, you dialed back an inch a year, I doubt you'd notice it
3     In close to 60 years of play I can't recall playing greens that stimped at 5-6.  Is that speed a figment of your imagination,
       or, have you played greens at those speeds.
4     What's wrong with severe greens at 8 or 9 ?

[JESII]

Maybe you could read all of the posts before jumping in...

How would you know what green speeds were typically 50 or 60 years ago? They were not 8 or 9 feet, I guarantee it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Maybe you could read all of the posts before jumping in...

How would you know what green speeds were typically 50 or 60 years ago? They were not 8 or 9 feet, I guarantee it.
I think I have an exponentially greater sense of green speeds 50 or 60 years ago, before you were born.
I played them.
What's your frame of reference ?

[JESII]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BevsehZ5P7o&feature=related

This would have been the fastest green in the United States on this particular day in 1958...what does the last putt look like to you? Straight down the hood of a car, he smashes it and it grinds to a halt...

[Patrick_Mucci]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BevsehZ5P7o&feature=related

This would have been the fastest green in the United States on this particular day in 1958...what does the last putt look like to you? Straight down the hood of a car, he smashes it and it grinds to a halt...

Let me see if I understand this.

You're going to use, as a universal, Bermuda greens in Georgia, on April 3-6, 1958, with temperatures of 71-72 degrees ?

Is that correct ?

Did you ever take a course in "Logic" when you were in school ?
If so, you need to repeat it.
If not, you need to audit it.

[JESII]

You left out the wind direction and strength...

[Adam Clayman]

The natural progression of increased greens speeds spells disaster for distinctive greens and the game.

This is only true because of a paradigm shift in methods, attitudes and mindsets, surrounding the sport of golf.

A sportsman adapts to the conditions. He doesn't whine about, or join the club down the street because they have faster greens.

The loss of Match Play is also integral in the demise of golf,(and severely contoured greens) and that, can only be blamed on the people who play, plus, those who are/were in a position to lead through example.

Sort of like bad parenting.

[jeffwarne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BevsehZ5P7o&feature=related

This would have been the fastest green in the United States on this particular day in 1958...what does the last putt look like to you? Straight down the hood of a car, he smashes it and it grinds to a halt...

Jim,
Wouldn't you say those greens were rolling 8?
The second guy's putt looked slippery enough.


Maybe they ramped them up in 1959 (I watched Art Walls' putt too)

I will say I watched the Masters video from 1960 and the (lack of)speeds surprised me.
they missed a bunch of short putts, which can happen when you actually have to take a backswing and strike it solid with some break.

I started going in 1975 at age 12 and the green speeds (fast)shocked me, but I'd say most of that was a function of downhill slope.

My main point is, the slower the green, the more the tolerable the slope and firmness, and the more variance in the putting speeds going different directions.
Nowadays uphill putts are fast.

[JESII]

Jeff,

I'd believe they were 8 feet at the far highest, more like 6.5 or 7. The pin looks to be more on the slope than they could possibly put it today and the last guy wacked it down the hill and it ground to a halt about a foot past. If Augusta's greens are 7 feet on Masters Sunday wouldn't you say 5 or 6 was a reasonable norm at the time across the country?

In any event, what you say about the agronomic and difficulty benefits of maintaining greens in that 8 or 9 foot range is undeniable...but...

[ChipOat]

For the most part, no.  The green complexes at most Golden Era courses were creatively severe - which was part of their well deserved reputation (think NGLA, PV, Shinnecock, Cypress, Augusta, Pasatiempo, Winged Foot and Merion among many others).

However:

Mark Johnson - You are correct about Pinehurst although, as a resort when golf was not "huge" and $300 green fees were unthnikable, those greens were kept slower because nobody cared.  Now that Pinehurst is a resort where $400 green fees are the norm on #2 because golf is "huge", the business decision has been made that you have so presciently observed.

Phillippe - I think you nailed it with Garden City although I think we must wait for Patrick to validate that assessment.

I will add Maidstone and Fishers Island to the list as virtually all of their greens are not so threatening and, for the most part, faster is more challenging but still fair.  Piping Rock also s/b included as only their Redan is scary fast.  The Creek is questionable as I can think of half a dozen greens that are now "Jesus, I could putt this thing right off the green."

Moving down a notch, both Inwood and Rockaway Hunting Club now have greens that are both very quick and very fair.

[SL_Solow]

Jim;  Brad Klein has a study of Green Speeds using the stimpmeter gor top end clubs going back to the 70's and 80's.  I will try to dig up my copy when I get home.  I recall much of the data from the Chicago area.  In the late 80's, the highest end clubs which prided themselves on conditioning had greens stimping well under 9.  While I am not as old as my friend Pat, I can remember what it was like to putt greens in the 1960's and 1970's.  they seemed fast to us, particularly when we got to the better courses.  but in retrospect, they required much more of a hit because they were slower.  I remeber when my greenskeeper was excited because he could cut our combination bent and poa greens to the shockingly low height of 5/32 of an inch.  today we are habitually at 1/10 or lower and for extended periods.  The other point to note is that even on bent grass, there was more grain, in large measure due to the types of grass and the higher mowing heights.  Downgrain downhill putts were thus much faster than those in the opposite direction causing greater variance from putt to putt and increasing demands on green reading skills.  i believe Pete Dye has commented on this aspect.

[Jim_Kennedy]

There was an article by Stan Zontek in the April 2011 USGA Green Section Record in which he said the median green speed in the mid '70s   was 6' 6" on the Stimpmeter.

That's only the median, but it does give a general indication of speeds at the time.

[BCrosby]

There was an article by Stan Zontek in the April 2011 USGA Green Section Record in which he said the median green speed in the mid '70s   was 6' 6" on the Stimpmeter.

That's only the median, but it does give a general indication of speeds at the time.

I've heard from a couple of sources that in the Q&A after a speech JN gave at the GCSA several years ago, someone asked him about the speed of the greens at Oakmont in '62. Eeryone at the time thought they were over the top fast. JN said that he'd guess they stimped at about 6.5 that year.

Bob

[JESII]

It's an interesting issue because putting on greens at 6 feet would certainly be more difficult for me than 11 feet in the same way playing off fairways an inch long is a bit tougher than whatever height they are typically cut at today...1/4inch? There's alot more left to chance, which I'm fine with, but in an either/or conversation, is more difficult necessarily better? Nope!

Jeff Warne has hit on a key, and I think Don Mahaffey (on another thread) has touched it as well...there's a general green speed which maximizes green space utilization - hole location interest (playable slope!) - and maintenance expense and I'd bet it's somewhere in the 9 foot neighborhood.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()