[Mike Nuzzo]

This is a current image of the 18th green on the lower course at Baltusrol
Members sure do like fast greens
I don't know what else there is to like

[David Bartman]

The faster the greens, the less slope that is required to produce large breaking putts.

Also the lower course is 7400 yards long from the tips, so the flatter greens are required to receive the types of long shots into the greens that the lower course presents. 

I'm sure you prefer MacKenzie greens, as do I, but often times the green speeds of today's golf has made many of those old time greens borderline unplayable and certainly not what the good Dr. had intended.  (#16 at Pasatiempo was an example )

[Jon Wiggett]

The faster the greens, the less slope that is required to produce large breaking putts.

I'm sure you prefer MacKenzie greens, as do I, but often times the green speeds of today's golf has made many of those old time greens borderline unplayable and certainly not what the good Dr. had intended.  (#16 at Pasatiempo was an example )

David,

the golf world would be a better place if people realised it was the green speeds of today that are unplayable and not those old time greens. It is funny but golf is the only sport that has this problem of disliking advancement of performance level. I mean you don't see stadiums putting uphill inclines on the 100m track to stop runners going any lower with the time.

Jon

[RDecker]

The Game's governing body's obsession with controlling/lowering scoring and it's trickle down effect at the local level is responsible for so much
of the sport's ills today.  The out of control costs of maintaining the courses is causing huge issues and green speed in particular is leading the charge in maintenance increases.

[Peter Pallotta]

Wow - great photo, Mike.  As they say, it's worth a thousand words. Strange that a game played outside, in nature, could have its fields of play get so out of whack.

Peter

[Dan Kelly]

Wow - great photo, Mike.  As they say, it's worth a thousand words. Strange that a game played outside, in nature, could have its fields of play get so out of whack.

Peter

Peter --

Care to spend some more of those thousand words to explain what you mean by "so out of whack"?

I guess I'm not seeing what I'm supposed to be seeing.

Dan

[jeffwarne]

David,

the golf world would be a better place if people realised it was the green speeds of today that are unplayable and not those old time greens.

Jon
[/quote]


+1 Jon
If officials from golf's governing bodies weren't frequently quoted citing speeds such as "14" or "15"(a speed which I think is total BS) for their championships, we wouldn't have clubs seeking higher speeds.

I don't really understand the picture though

[David Bartman]

The faster the greens, the less slope that is required to produce large breaking putts.

I'm sure you prefer MacKenzie greens, as do I, but often times the green speeds of today's golf has made many of those old time greens borderline unplayable and certainly not what the good Dr. had intended.  (#16 at Pasatiempo was an example )

David,

the golf world would be a better place if people realised it was the green speeds of today that are unplayable and not those old time greens. It is funny but golf is the only sport that has this problem of disliking advancement of performance level. I mean you don't see stadiums putting uphill inclines on the 100m track to stop runners going any lower with the time.

Jon

Jon,

I wasn't really saying that greens ought to be fast, that was the OP's opinion of the greens at Baltusrol, and I was only commenting that flatter greens can be faster than those with a lot of slope.  Do you agree that keeping some of the most sloped of older greens  at green speeds in excess of 10,11,12 on the stimpmeter , leads to greens that are sometimes unplayable and certainly not to the original designers intent.  Green speeds from the 20's to the 70's were 6.5 on stimp, in the 80's they moved to 9-10 for tournaments.  The popularity of golf on television and improved green mowers have gotten speeds up to 13!  In Europe, this hasn't happened and most courses rarely are over 10, the fescue greens don't hurt matters either.  

It would be interesting to get TD's opinion, ( it may be on a another thread, but I am a newbie) and what he tried to do with the remodel of the 16th at Pasatiempo.   The pics I have seen from the 1930's sure looked as though the slopes were shallower than when I played the course in the early 90's in the Western Intercollegiate.  I caddied their for US Women's Open qualifying in 2010 but I don't remember if TD softened the slopes on his redo.  

[Peter Pallotta]

Dan, Jeff - what I see in the photo is this:

Even though one of the essentials for a golf course (built outside, in nature) to remain playable (in the rain, which tends to fall outside) is for the greens through slopes and contours to repel and drain the rain water away, the green in this photo does the exact opposite, not repelling but instead allowing (even encouraging, it seems) the rain water to pool on that most important/crucial area of the field of play, the green. (You can play golf pretty easily off soggy fairways, but you can't really putt through standing water.)  And the water is pooling there instead of being shunted and drained away via slopes and contours -- again, a basic requirement for a game played in nature -- for the very simple (but completely out of whack) reason that flatter greens with less contour/slopes can today be mowed down to within a inch of their lives and produce the much-vaunted stimp numbers that USGA and private club types seem to have wet dreams about.  Whoever designed/re-designed this green has put an idea/ideal/fantasy of the ego (speed, more speed, that's what impresses) ahead of a practical and time tested requirement of the game. IMHO of course.

Peter   

[Cliff Hamm]

I don't quite get the point.  Take a picture after the torrential rain stops and then make your point.  That a green doesn't drain during a downpour so be it.  How does it drain afterwards?  Or perhaps Baltusrol needs a more high tech drainage system on the greens.  A picture of a green with puddles does not make me think that it is poor architecture when it is pouring.

[Ed Brzezowski]

I thought it looked like wet ice or glass, I must be extremely  stupid. I thought it was a joke.

Oh well

[Garland Bayley]

Mike,

Your picture may be lost on a group of fair-weather golfers.

I have played in conditions like that. I was able to putt without the puddles.

Would these be greens we see the staff using squeegees on after a rain to get them back in play for an ongoing tournament?

[Will Lozier]

Mike,

Can you give us some idea of the increased maintenance costs (on a yearly basis) of a club moving from say a 10 to a 12. 

Cheers

[Jason Walker]

Dan, Jeff - what I see in the photo is this:

Even though one of the essentials for a golf course (built outside, in nature) to remain playable (in the rain, which tends to fall outside) is for the greens through slopes and contours to repel and drain the rain water away, the green in this photo does the exact opposite, not repelling but instead allowing (even encouraging, it seems) the rain water to pool on that most important/crucial area of the field of play, the green. (You can play golf pretty easily off soggy fairways, but you can't really putt through standing water.)  And the water is pooling there instead of being shunted and drained away via slopes and contours -- again, a basic requirement for a game played in nature -- for the very simple (but completely out of whack) reason that flatter greens with less contour/slopes can today be mowed down to within a inch of their lives and produce the much-vaunted stimp numbers that USGA and private club types seem to have wet dreams about.  Whoever designed/re-designed this green has put an idea/ideal/fantasy of the ego (speed, more speed, that's what impresses) ahead of a practical and time tested requirement of the game. IMHO of course.

Peter    

Do any of y'all have any idea how much rain North Jersey/NYC had today?   EVERY green in the area looked like that.  A friend in Brooklyn emailed me a photo of the street he lives on and it looked like the Colorado River.

For the record, I think there's a lot to like at Baltusrol.  

[David Bartman]

Dan, Jeff - what I see in the photo is this:

Even though one of the essentials for a golf course (built outside, in nature) to remain playable (in the rain, which tends to fall outside) is for the greens through slopes and contours to repel and drain the rain water away, the green in this photo does the exact opposite, not repelling but instead allowing (even encouraging, it seems) the rain water to pool on that most important/crucial area of the field of play, the green. (You can play golf pretty easily off soggy fairways, but you can't really putt through standing water.)  And the water is pooling there instead of being shunted and drained away via slopes and contours -- again, a basic requirement for a game played in nature -- for the very simple (but completely out of whack) reason that flatter greens with less contour/slopes can today be mowed down to within a inch of their lives and produce the much-vaunted stimp numbers that USGA and private club types seem to have wet dreams about.  Whoever designed/re-designed this green has put an idea/ideal/fantasy of the ego (speed, more speed, that's what impresses) ahead of a practical and time tested requirement of the game. IMHO of course.

Peter   

Ripping Baltusrol from a picture during a downpour .... that is out of whack!!

[jeffwarne]

the big green in the background (that just touches the top of the flag) must really lack undulation

[Will Lozier]

Ripping Baltusrol from a picture during a downpour .... that is out of whack!!

I don't really think anyone is ripping Baltusrol...just using a picture (whether you get it or not) to demonstrate one of the biggest modern problems in GCA.  I never even thought that drainage (and thus playability in certain conditions) could be so affected by lack of slope/contour brought about by modern green speeds. 

[Steve Burrows]

It's probably not terribly common in that region of New Jersey, but there is a practice employed on many seaside courses whereby the drainage valves are closed and irrigation heads are turned on for hours, which allows water to pool on the surface before the valve is reopened, thus flushing salts out of the soil profile.  Do we know if Baltusrol deliberately closed their drainage valves in anticipation of the significant rain event that they received?

[Mike Nuzzo]

Fellas
Yes that is a lot of rain
And it all drained off and through in an agronomically appropriate time - I'm guess.

I was pointing out that the green is so flat that water runs off of it like a pool table.
My comment had nothing to do with the routing and the hole design - which have merit.
Or the members - there are some great ones.

What is the excess cost of maintaining at a slope of 12 vs. 10?
I don't know there are plenty of supers here to share their experiences.
But I do know that the 12s will die a lot faster in the summer and get a lot more disease in less than perfect conditions.

I will "guess" that their maintenance budget nearly doubled when they decided to hold another major.
Cheers

[Patrick_Mucci]

I don't think the heavy stuff is coming down yet !


That's an elevated green, high above the approaching fairway.

I guess some would criticize flooding conditions on greens during a stalled hurricane.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Pat
Lighten up francis
I am not talking about the drainability of the green, but the flat surface that is clearly illustrated to my eye

[Will Lozier]

People, look at the fairway...and bunker.  NO STANDING WATER.

[Will Lozier]

I guess some would criticize flooding conditions on greens during a stalled hurricane.[/b][/size][/color]

Hurricane?!  1.2 inches of rain in 48 hours?  How many meteorology degrees do you have Pat?

Cheers

[Jon Wiggett]

The faster the greens, the less slope that is required to produce large breaking putts.

I'm sure you prefer MacKenzie greens, as do I, but often times the green speeds of today's golf has made many of those old time greens borderline unplayable and certainly not what the good Dr. had intended.  (#16 at Pasatiempo was an example )

David,

the golf world would be a better place if people realised it was the green speeds of today that are unplayable and not those old time greens. It is funny but golf is the only sport that has this problem of disliking advancement of performance level. I mean you don't see stadiums putting uphill inclines on the 100m track to stop runners going any lower with the time.

Jon

Jon,

I wasn't really saying that greens ought to be fast, that was the OP's opinion of the greens at Baltusrol, and I was only commenting that flatter greens can be faster than those with a lot of slope.  Do you agree that keeping some of the most sloped of older greens  at green speeds in excess of 10,11,12 on the stimpmeter , leads to greens that are sometimes unplayable and certainly not to the original designers intent.  Green speeds from the 20's to the 70's were 6.5 on stimp, in the 80's they moved to 9-10 for tournaments.  The popularity of golf on television and improved green mowers have gotten speeds up to 13!  In Europe, this hasn't happened and most courses rarely are over 10, the fescue greens don't hurt matters either.  

It would be interesting to get TD's opinion, ( it may be on a another thread, but I am a newbie) and what he tried to do with the remodel of the 16th at Pasatiempo.   The pics I have seen from the 1930's sure looked as though the slopes were shallower than when I played the course in the early 90's in the Western Intercollegiate.  I caddied their for US Women's Open qualifying in 2010 but I don't remember if TD softened the slopes on his redo.  

 Do you agree that keeping some of the most sloped of older greens  at green speeds in excess of 10,11,12 on the stimpmeter , leads to greens that are sometimes unplayable and certainly not to the original designers intent.

David,

I was just making the point that obsession with green speeds and score are killing the game. For me the highlighted sentence is pointing the finger at the wrong thing. The green slope is playable, it is the speed that is not.

It would be better if the tour made all holes par 4s to judge where a player stood in the field. The US Open proved that protecting par is not working as the course (considered to be playing hard) was only half a shot harder than Castle Stuart per 18 holes.

Jon

[Sean_A]

I don't know, the green seems fine to me.  Is there a raised middle with two lower sections either side?  Puddles seem to suggest so.  My beef is its circular nature.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()