Playing conditions at Hidden Creek. Why don't others get it ?

[Bill Brightly]

I am really glad that a number of superintendents have joined this thread because I think there is a lot to be learned by us non-superintendents.

It is probably a little foolish to be talking about F & F in the Northeast US now because we have had near-record rains. However, as we head into August and the inevitable heat waves that will occur, I wonder what superintendents' biggest concerns will be.

Forget member complaints for the moment, I am asking about real damage to greens (assume a typical bent/poa mix found on most old push up greens), fairways, tees and roughs, with a soil  base that was fairly high in clay content.

I understand that poa greens can die in extreme heat conditions and need to be syringed during certain days. But is watering at night a conservative, preventitive step? Does that help the poa do better in the upcoming hot and humid day?

If a superintendent had a directive to make everything as fast and firm as possible, and he could forget member complaints, what are his concerns?

Is there a higher risk of disease from under watering or over watering?

If fairways turn brown in spots, is the grass in trouble or simply in a dormant-type phase?

 

[Steve_ Shaffer]

There is a solution to discoloration:

http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/blogs/deedsandweeds/2009/07/keeping-it-green.html#comments

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

First -  Let me apologize for my opening comment made in my previous post.  I should "recalibrate my words".   I made my post before I took the time to read the entire thread.  Sorry.

Second - In the future I hope that we can avoid general comments about course conditioning.  I will acknowledge that it is possible to come across the occasional over watered golf course or greens on a golf course.  When you do I ask you to think of what some of the reasons the course may be wet.  They may include:

Local thunderstorms - two weeks ago I had heavy rains during the day on a Thursday.  A course only a fewmiles to my South had none.
Fertilizer applications -  it's possible the course made a fert. app. Most products instruct .2" - .5" of rain or irrigation to move the product into the soil.
Fungicide app. -  early in July I was dealing iwth a fairy ring problem on two greens. The treatment called for a soil drench with a fungicide.
Deep infrequent watering -  Most Supers. prefer to water less often but when they do the attempt to wet the soil profile deeply.  This may require several cycle and soak waterings.  If you play the day after it will still be wet.

Insecticide app. - Applications for soil insect pests require deep watering to get the product to the problem
Fertigation / Sodium reduction - Some courses deal with poor soils.  Sodium can be a problem and one of the best ways to deal with it is drench to soil with water and Calcium.  This requires very deep watering to move the Sodium down away from grass roots.

  On any given day you can find almost any golf course in a less than desireable condition.  Most of the reasons are out of the Supers control, some are done on purpose.
 

[Adam Clayman]

That's why those who consider themselves evaluating the architecture need to see through that days maintenance presentation. Its laughable when posters can not separate the two. Laughable because golfers need to deal the hand they are dealt and not bitch about the conditions one day in the courses life. I'm sure there are days @ even the firmest courses where the super my have to flush things out. This thread does beg the question. Should future golf construction take place on anything but well draining/sandy sites?

[Lester George]

Patrick,

That is exactly the Ballyhack is playing and it is by design and maintenace practice.  I have had numerous conversations with the Super letting him know that that is the optimum playing condition and members who don't understand it need to be educated because it is not going to change. 

He came to Ballyhack for that very reason.  Without the support of the ownership group it is not possible to keep these conditions.  It is almost impossible at a private club because people trying to do the correct thing and educate the members get a major beatdown.  I have seen it a hundred times. 

Lester

[JESII]

Adam,

I anxiously await the time in my life when I can get out your way for some golf...it appears to be everything I look for. Thank you.

I think Lester's point about ownership support is the key to all of this. How, or should, golf course operators/owners/boards of directors be educated?

Sean Remmington,

I hope you see that I have faith in the Superintendents and sympathize with their, sometimes, limited ability to call the shots.

[Justin Broderson]

Does anyone have pictures of HC's current conditions?

[Adam Clayman]

How, or should, golf course operators/owners/boards of directors be educated?

Through the mistakes of others?

It is a real uphill problem, but, it would seem obvious by now, the owner operator who enters the golf business, for re-numeration (short term), is the fool who was lucky to get together with his money, in the first place.

While there is a fine line between doing things the easiest/cheapest and the best, to establish healthy golf turf, mimicking natures watering pattern seems like the easiest.

Paul Hermsmeyer recounted how he use to know when to turn the sprinklers on. It was at one specific spot on his GC (Ainsworth Ne. Muni) that all he had to do was step on it and when it showed signs of not bouncing back (That greyish sheen) he would know.

[Jeff Goldman]

Patrick,

Does Oakmont play ff?  Merion?  Do you know what their maintenance budgets are?  If they are high, is it because that's what it takes to maintain those conditions, or are they so high because of the need to maintain the greens at highest speeds while still alive?

A few years ago there was a tremendous heat wave in the NE.  I recall you saying that Merion and Pine Valley had greens under stress; I believe that PV might have closed early for the season.  Does Hidden Creek know something they don't? 

It isn't easy to convince memberships to brown out parkland courses, regardless of the fact that it is generally good for the course.  I've told this story a couple times, but during the renovation of the South Course at Olympia Fields, me and our DoG decided to take a shot at it at a grounds committee meeting.  We were regrassing  the fairways, and so had stopped maintaining them.  A few had turned decidedly brown, and the committee met on one such fairway.  I played straight man:

"Sam [Mackenzie], can you talk about conditions such as we're seeing here?

"Actually, they are very healthy for the golf course; when it rains, the bent grass will green up quickly, and the poa annua will be crowded out"

"And what about playing conditiions?'

"Well, high handicappers would benefit from the extra roll, while better players will be forced to shape shots to keep them in the fairway."

"Sam, what about disease pressure?

"Turning off the water helps keep disease down, since many diseases thrive in more moist conditions"

"So would that have an impact on the budget?"

"Absolutely!  We could cut at least 25% out of the budget"

Then this, from the member of the committee who had been bugging me most to get the water turned off "Hey, this looks like crap; a little brown is ok, but not this!" 

Swing and a miss.

[JESII]

Jeff,

It sounded like the guy was willing to give you a single but you wanted a home run...string together a few singles and you've eventually got that same one run...

[Patrick_Mucci]

There is a solution to discoloration:

http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/blogs/deedsandweeds/2009/07/keeping-it-green.html#comments

Steve, why are you implying that there's a problem with discoloration ?

I don't find discoloration to be a negative, rather, with F&F conditions, it would seem to be a positive.

[Grant Saunders]

This seems to be a bit of a recurring theme on here. Someone plays at course "A" set up in a way that appeals to them and the discussion then ensues as to why all other courses dont copy "A" in their approach.

You simply cannot compare apples to oranges.

Every course is different and has its own parameters within it operates. Course A may be completely different to course B even if they are literally next door to each other. Things like soil types, budgets, topography, staff numbers, design, climate, grass types, number of rounds per year, public or private, skill level of staff, drainage, irrigation systems, member perception, construction methods, environmental restrictions etc. The list goes on and on.

The thing that has become apparent about Hidden Creek is that it is built on sand. This is probably the biggest element in the fast and firm equation. Even then, Im sure that after 4 inches of rain the ball may not bounce quite as much. I come from an area where I have seen 600mm (Thats 2 FOOT) in a period of 48 hours and I assure you that firm is a long time coming back even on sands.

Running a course in a firm and fast manner requires pushing the boundaries of what grass is able to endure. Doing this means that you are treading a fine line. Not all golf courses are set up to do this with the appropriate staff levels needed to micro manage areas and carry out the intensive monitoring and necessary hand watering/treatment. Athletes are not in competition condition all the time as the body simply cannot cope with it and grass is no different. It is possible to push it to the edge for certain lengths of time (ie a tournament) but it then requires a period of recuperation. The harder it is pushed, the longer the rest needed.

I am in no way saying that firm and fast is a bad thing, and I personally feel that many courses are in fact over watered and overfed. I am simply pointing out, as have the superintendent's that have weighed in, that not all things are equal. There is way more to this than simply shutting off the water.

[Kenny Baer]

I don't think having a FF course has anything to do with the supers and everything to do with the members.  The average golfer  doesn't know better.  They need to be educated, but how? (I for one would love to know); I play with guys all the time that complain when a little brown shows up.  Just today a gentleman who I was playing with (a great player; 70 yrs old and he is close to scratch) said that our course was in better shape then he had ever seen it....the ball was almost plugging in the fairways. 

I understand that sandy soil has an effect but also the right type of grass has an effect.  I don't believe you could EVER convince a membership that dried browned out fairways are good; it is a losing battle; but you can have a grass that stays green and also plays fast.  In the SE the new zoysia grasses play that way.   In the NE some bent grasses play that way.  In the SE bermuda fairways can not be fast as long as they are green; at least from my expierence.  For you supers....is this true?   Can bermuda play hard and fast and maintain it's green?

[Will MacEwen]

There is a solution to discoloration:

http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/blogs/deedsandweeds/2009/07/keeping-it-green.html#comments

Steve, why are you implying that there's a problem with discoloration ?

I don't find discoloration to be a negative, rather, with F&F conditions, it would seem to be a positive.

I would think you could "sneak" firm and fast past lots of people as long as it looked green.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Hermann,

Your replies # 45 and # 47 are in direct conflict with one another.

Sean Remington,

I was quite clear with respect to "A" if not "THE" critical factor ....... Mother Nature.
Obviously, She must be accounted for.

With respect to clubs with clay based soils that play F&F, isn't Warwick Hills proving that this week ?

Mt Ridge is another course that plays F&F under normal conditions.

AND, if Mark Fine's premise is correct, so do most Muni's.

If they can do it, why can't private clubs do it ?

It's got nothing to do with budgets, it's got to do with the culture of the club and/or the will of the membership.

Lester George,

I agree, the driving influence must come from those governing the club.

Roger Hansen gets it.

While Pine Valley is on sand based soil, Hidden Creek seems to play much, much firmer and faster.

I don't think Roger Hansen is consumed by or driven to achieve "the green look" as so many other courses are.
And, I might include Pine Valley in that "other" category.

TV has had a terrible influence on conditioning golf courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Does Oakmont play ff?  Merion? 

Based on the times I've played them over the years, I'd have to say "no", not to the degree that Hidden Creek does.

Do you know what their maintenance budgets are? 


Substantial.
The former Green Chairman at Oakmont is a former contributor to this site.

If they are high, is it because that's what it takes to maintain those conditions, or are they so high because of the need to maintain the greens at highest speeds while still alive?

My guess is that it's the latter, coupled with the quest for pristine conditioning.

A few years ago there was a tremendous heat wave in the NE. 
I recall you saying that Merion and Pine Valley had greens under stress; I believe that PV might have closed early for the season. 
Does Hidden Creek know something they don't?

ABSOLUTELY.

Hidden Creek has ONE MAN IN CHARGE who GETS IT.

The problem with MOST clubs is that everyone thinks they're an owner with a vote.
But, you can't please everyone, so club leadership's tend to seek compromise rather than do what may be deemed unpopular.
 

It isn't easy to convince memberships to brown out parkland courses, regardless of the fact that it is generally good for the course. 
I've told this story a couple times, but during the renovation of the South Course at Olympia Fields, me and our DoG decided to take a shot at it at a grounds committee meeting.  We were regrassing  the fairways, and so had stopped maintaining them.  A few had turned decidedly brown, and the committee met on one such fairway.  I played straight man:

"Sam [Mackenzie], can you talk about conditions such as we're seeing here?

"Actually, they are very healthy for the golf course; when it rains, the bent grass will green up quickly, and the poa annua will be crowded out"

"And what about playing conditiions?'

"Well, high handicappers would benefit from the extra roll, while better players will be forced to shape shots to keep them in the fairway."

"Sam, what about disease pressure?

"Turning off the water helps keep disease down, since many diseases thrive in more moist conditions"

"So would that have an impact on the budget?"

"Absolutely!  We could cut at least 25% out of the budget"

Then this, from the member of the committee who had been bugging me most to get the water turned off "Hey, this looks like crap; a little brown is ok, but not this!" 


Jeff,  you failed to continue with important counterpoints.
The game of golf is conducted on a field of play, and the CONDITION of that field, NOT THE LOOK OF THAT field is the more important of the two.

That same guy probably loves the look of the courses in the UK and the bounce of the ball at the British Open.

His primary frame of reference is probably derived from watching PGA Tour golf on TV every weekend.

That's the problem, "The Masters syndrome" combined with weekly telecasts of the PGA Tour.

IF, for two months, every PGA Tour course was brownish/yellowish/greenish, with the announcers proclaiming that these are the BEST conditions for golf, you can bet that the Green Committtee, BOD/G and the Superintendent would get substantively increased requests to replicate those conditions.

TV is the enemy of F&F conditions.

[Patrick_Mucci]

This seems to be a bit of a recurring theme on here. Someone plays at course "A" set up in a way that appeals to them and the discussion then ensues as to why all other courses dont copy "A" in their approach.

Grant, I've been around golf and golf courses long enough to understand the distinctions between soil, climate and membership differences

You simply cannot compare apples to oranges.

I'm not comparing apples to oranges, I'm comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

Every course is different and has its own parameters within it operates. Course A may be completely different to course B even if they are literally next door to each other. Things like soil types, budgets, topography, staff numbers, design, climate, grass types, number of rounds per year, public or private, skill level of staff, drainage, irrigation systems, member perception, construction methods, environmental restrictions etc. The list goes on and on.

The REAL factors are the culture of the club and/or the will of the membership, not some of the items on the list you cited.

The thing that has become apparent about Hidden Creek is that it is built on sand. This is probably the biggest element in the fast and firm equation. Even then, Im sure that after 4 inches of rain the ball may not bounce quite as much. I come from an area where I have seen 600mm (Thats 2 FOOT) in a period of 48 hours and I assure you that firm is a long time coming back even on sands.

You can always cite and extreme example as a defensive ploy.  I cited the impact of Mother Nature
The biggest element in the F&F equation at Hidden Creek is NOT the sand, it's ROGER HANSEN.

You're probably too young to remember when clubs didn't have automated irrigation systems.
During the summer, they ALL played F&F.

Has anyone been to Newport ?
Maidstone ?
Other clubs without automated irrigation systems for the fairways ?

In typical summers those courses play F&F.

Clay based courses also played F&F.

The fairways and roughs would be Tannish/brownish and they played "hot"

Running a course in a firm and fast manner requires pushing the boundaries of what grass is able to endure.
Doing this means that you are treading a fine line.
Not all golf courses are set up to do this with the appropriate staff levels needed to micro manage areas and carry out the intensive monitoring and necessary hand watering/treatment.


You're getting defensive again.

Before automated irrigation almost every course pushed the boundaries of what the grass was able to endure, except that the grass was hardier because the grass was routinely deprived of water, which made the grass healthier, with deeper roots.

Today, with lush green grass, turning off the water puts the grass at risk.
It's not an overnight conversion.
It's got to be done over time.
But, it can only be done if the culture of the club and the will of the membership dictates the transition.

Athletes are not in competition condition all the time as the body simply cannot cope with it and grass is no different.
It is possible to push it to the edge for certain lengths of time (ie a tournament) but it then requires a period of recuperation. The harder it is pushed, the longer the rest needed.

Nonsense.
Grass is hardier than you think.
It grows out of concrete and macadam.
Grass has been so pampered, it's like a child shielded from germs for 5 years.
Now it's at risk when exposed to the elements, like droughts.

I am in no way saying that firm and fast is a bad thing, and I personally feel that many courses are in fact over watered and overfed.
I am simply pointing out, as have the superintendent's that have weighed in, that not all things are equal.
There is way more to this than simply shutting off the water.


What would  happen if there was a severe drought and the regulatory authorities ruled that a club could only water its tees and greens ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

I don't think having a FF course has anything to do with the supers and everything to do with the members.

Kenny, that's sort of what I've been alluding to, with a caveat for Mother Nature.  

The average golfer  doesn't know better.  They need to be educated, but how? (I for one would love to know); I play with guys all the time that complain when a little brown shows up.  

TV is the culprit.
Until the courses and the announcers start going brownish/yellowish/greenish, only a few clubs with enlightened leadership will strive for F&F.

Just today a gentleman who I was playing with (a great player; 70 yrs old and he is close to scratch) said that our course was in better shape then he had ever seen it....the ball was almost plugging in the fairways.  

That's because he's been corrupted by the dark side of the "force"  TV

I understand that sandy soil has an effect but also the right type of grass has an effect.  
I don't believe you could EVER convince a membership that dried browned out fairways are good; it is a losing battle; but you can have a grass that stays green and also plays fast.  

In the SE the new zoysia grasses play that way.  
In the NE some bent grasses play that way.  

In the SE bermuda fairways can not be fast as long as they are green; at least from my expierence.  

Kenny, what's really interesting is that all of these golfing snowbirds from the North were used to brown conditions when they went to play golf in Florida in the winter.  The Bermuda used to go dormant in the winter and not just turn brown, but PURPLE.

Most F&F Florida courses are NOT lush green, but, brownish/yellowish/greenish.

Seminole gets it.
Their fairways are tight and B/Y/G.
Pine Tree gets it.
Unfortunately, not too many clubs do, especially courses affiliated with residential development.
Green sells houses, B/Y/G doesn't.

For you supers....is this true?  
Can bermuda play hard and fast and maintain it's green?

Newer strains are getting closer, but, why the need for lush green coloration ?
Isn't it more important to get roll ?

Remember, NOTHING rolls like a BALL.

Clubs in South Florida should examine the playing conditions at Seminole and Pine Tree and try to emulate those conditions.

[Grant Saunders]

This seems to be a bit of a recurring theme on here. Someone plays at course "A" set up in a way that appeals to them and the discussion then ensues as to why all other courses dont copy "A" in their approach.

Grant, I've been around golf and golf courses long enough to understand the distinctions between soil, climate and membership differences

Patrick, I too have been around golf courses for a long time. Perhaps not as long as you, but more than sufficient length to justify my comments and back them up.

You simply cannot compare apples to oranges.

I'm not comparing apples to oranges, I'm comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

If by inferring that because a golf course has greens, tees and fairways it is comparable to another course because it has greens, tees and fairways.

Every course is different and has its own parameters within it operates. Course A may be completely different to course B even if they are literally next door to each other. Things like soil types, budgets, topography, staff numbers, design, climate, grass types, number of rounds per year, public or private, skill level of staff, drainage, irrigation systems, member perception, construction methods, environmental restrictions etc. The list goes on and on.

The REAL factors are the culture of the club and/or the will of the membership, not some of the items on the list you cited.

Everyone of those factors is something that must be taken into account when managing a golf course. To ignore any of them is to set yourself up for failure. All the culture and will of a membership cannot change the type of soil, rearrange the topography or alter the weather patterns.

The thing that has become apparent about Hidden Creek is that it is built on sand. This is probably the biggest element in the fast and firm equation. Even then, Im sure that after 4 inches of rain the ball may not bounce quite as much. I come from an area where I have seen 600mm (Thats 2 FOOT) in a period of 48 hours and I assure you that firm is a long time coming back even on sands.

You can always cite and extreme example as a defensive ploy.  I cited the impact of Mother Nature
The biggest element in the F&F equation at Hidden Creek is NOT the sand, it's ROGER HANSEN.

Yes, that is an extreme example. However receiving 150mm of rain in a 24 hour period is relatively common in that area. Summer and winter. Im sure Roger Hanson is a great super, however it is much easier to produce great conditions if the physical elements are in your favour.

You're probably too young to remember when clubs didn't have automated irrigation systems.
During the summer, they ALL played F&F.

Has anyone been to Newport ?
Maidstone ?
Other clubs without automated irrigation systems for the fairways ?

In typical summers those courses play F&F.

Clay based courses also played F&F.

The fairways and roughs would be Tannish/brownish and they played "hot"

Here in New Zealand, fairway irrigation is considered a luxury. I would estimate that maybe 5% of our golf courses have it so I am well aware of what golf courses are like without it. Yes they burn off in summer and play vastly different dependent on the season. But, most of these courses also become wet and virtually unplayable in the winter due to THE CLAY SOILS THEY ARE BUILT ON. Im sure even Roger Hanson would have difficulty providing firm and fast then ESPECIALLY with the budgets courses operate on here.

Running a course in a firm and fast manner requires pushing the boundaries of what grass is able to endure.
Doing this means that you are treading a fine line.
Not all golf courses are set up to do this with the appropriate staff levels needed to micro manage areas and carry out the intensive monitoring and necessary hand watering/treatment.


You're getting defensive again.

Before automated irrigation almost every course pushed the boundaries of what the grass was able to endure, except that the grass was hardier because the grass was routinely deprived of water, which made the grass healthier, with deeper roots.

Today, with lush green grass, turning off the water puts the grass at risk.
It's not an overnight conversion.
It's got to be done over time.
But, it can only be done if the culture of the club and the will of the membership dictates the transition.

Like I have pointed out, will alone cannot overcome the physical factors.

Athletes are not in competition condition all the time as the body simply cannot cope with it and grass is no different.
It is possible to push it to the edge for certain lengths of time (ie a tournament) but it then requires a period of recuperation. The harder it is pushed, the longer the rest needed.

Nonsense.
Grass is hardier than you think.
It grows out of concrete and macadam.
Grass has been so pampered, it's like a child shielded from germs for 5 years.
Now it's at risk when exposed to the elements, like droughts.

As a greenkeeper for the last 15 years, I am fully aware how hardy grass is. Yes, it can grow out of concrete and I have seen this myself. However, that grass is not being subjected to the same treatment that the grass we play golf on does. It is not being cut up to 7 days a week at heights of less than 4mm with hundreds of kilograms of mowing equipment. It is not being trampled by up to 150 golfers per day. It is not being scrutinised and judged by every person that encounters it. Like I said, grass can tolerate extremes for certain time periods but it must be rested appropriately.

I am in no way saying that firm and fast is a bad thing, and I personally feel that many courses are in fact over watered and overfed.
I am simply pointing out, as have the superintendent's that have weighed in, that not all things are equal.
There is way more to this than simply shutting off the water.


What would  happen if there was a severe drought and the regulatory authorities ruled that a club could only water its tees and
greens ?


Choosing a course of action and having your hand forced are completely different.

I am not disagreeing with you that many courses could benefit from less water. I am just trying to highlight that there are many factors that vary from course to course that influence what can be realistically achieved.

"His primary frame of reference is probably derived from watching PGA Tour golf on TV every weekend. - Patrick Mucci"

You may want to rethink Warwick Hills as an example. You are basing your views on a course that has been prepared for a tournament and it will be in that particular condition for only a short time. They are able to achieve this through a massive increase of resources and support of many people.

There is no malice intended with my posts I just feel very strongly there are a lot of "weekend greenkeepers" on board here. I applaud people like JSpayne for trying to educate and give a glimpse into the world of greenkeeping. People still do not fully appreciate the skills and knowledge of those that look after courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

David Terry, public golf official  in Salt Lake City, on managing  golfers' expectations in Utah's arid climate had the following to say.

"Golf on TV doesn't do us any favors. [courses are] mowed to an eigth of an inch and the fairways are perfect and that is what golfers  have come to expect, but,  you can't expect wall-to-wall green when you are paying $ 24 [in green fees]"

Droughts, the cost of water and/or enlightenment are the only three ways that the influence of TV will be overcome if the trend toward F&F conditions are to prevail.

[Patrick_Mucci]

You simply cannot compare apples to oranges.

I'm not comparing apples to oranges, I'm comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

If by inferring that because a golf course has greens, tees and fairways it is comparable to another course because it has greens, tees and fairways.

I never implied that, that's what YOU infered.

Every course is different and has its own parameters within it operates. Course A may be completely different to course B even if they are literally next door to each other. Things like soil types, budgets, topography, staff numbers, design, climate, grass types, number of rounds per year, public or private, skill level of staff, drainage, irrigation systems, member perception, construction methods, environmental restrictions etc. The list goes on and on.

The REAL factors are the culture of the club and/or the will of the membership, not some of the items on the list you cited.

Everyone of those factors is something that must be taken into account when managing a golf course.
To ignore any of them is to set yourself up for failure.
All the culture and will of a membership cannot change the type of soil, rearrange the topography or alter the weather patterns.

That's not true, other than Mother Nature, a club's culture and the will of the membership can produce optimal F&F conditions given the circumstances.

You've chosen to view the issue as a micro issue whereas I'm viewing it as a Macro issue.

You're on the defensive side of the topic, whereas I'm on the offensive side of the topic.

The thing that has become apparent about Hidden Creek is that it is built on sand. This is probably the biggest element in the fast and firm equation. Even then, Im sure that after 4 inches of rain the ball may not bounce quite as much. I come from an area where I have seen 600mm (Thats 2 FOOT) in a period of 48 hours and I assure you that firm is a long time coming back even on sands.

You can always cite and extreme example as a defensive ploy.  I cited the impact of Mother Nature
The biggest element in the F&F equation at Hidden Creek is NOT the sand, it's ROGER HANSEN.

Yes, that is an extreme example. However receiving 150mm of rain in a 24 hour period is relatively common in that area.
Summer and winter.

What part of my caveat regarding Mother Nature did you miss ?

Im sure Roger Hanson is a great super, however it is much easier to produce great conditions if the physical elements are in your favour.


Roger Hansen is a terrible super.
Agronomy is not his strength.
Understanding ideal playing conditions IS one of his strengths

You're probably too young to remember when clubs didn't have automated irrigation systems.
During the summer, they ALL played F&F.

Has anyone been to Newport ?
Maidstone ?
Other clubs without automated irrigation systems for the fairways ?

In typical summers those courses play F&F.

Clay based courses also played F&F.

The fairways and roughs would be Tannish/brownish and they played "hot"

Here in New Zealand, fairway irrigation is considered a luxury. I would estimate that maybe 5% of our golf courses have it so I am well aware of what golf courses are like without it. Yes they burn off in summer and play vastly different dependent on the season. But, most of these courses also become wet and virtually unplayable in the winter due to THE CLAY SOILS THEY ARE BUILT ON. Im sure even Roger Hanson would have difficulty providing firm and fast then ESPECIALLY with the budgets courses operate on here.

If Roger Hansen had a course in your area, my guess is that his course would be at the top of the charts regarding playability.

Running a course in a firm and fast manner requires pushing the boundaries of what grass is able to endure.
Doing this means that you are treading a fine line.
Not all golf courses are set up to do this with the appropriate staff levels needed to micro manage areas and carry out the intensive monitoring and necessary hand watering/treatment.


You're getting defensive again.

Before automated irrigation almost every course pushed the boundaries of what the grass was able to endure, except that the grass was hardier because the grass was routinely deprived of water, which made the grass healthier, with deeper roots.

Today, with lush green grass, turning off the water puts the grass at risk.
It's not an overnight conversion.
It's got to be done over time.
But, it can only be done if the culture of the club and the will of the membership dictates the transition.

Like I have pointed out, will alone cannot overcome the physical factors.

But, will can produce the optimal conditions given the hand you're dealt.

Athletes are not in competition condition all the time as the body simply cannot cope with it and grass is no different.
It is possible to push it to the edge for certain lengths of time (ie a tournament) but it then requires a period of recuperation. The harder it is pushed, the longer the rest needed.

Nonsense.
Grass is hardier than you think.
It grows out of concrete and macadam.
Grass has been so pampered, it's like a child shielded from germs for 5 years.
Now it's at risk when exposed to the elements, like droughts.

As a greenkeeper for the last 15 years, I am fully aware how hardy grass is.
Yes, it can grow out of concrete and I have seen this myself.
However, that grass is not being subjected to the same treatment that the grass we play golf on does.
It is not being cut up to 7 days a week at heights of less than 4mm with hundreds of kilograms of mowing equipment.

Wait a second.  What grass is being cut between 1/6 and 1/7 of an inch, every day ?
You just got finished telling us how it rained two feet in 48 hours and now you're trying to tell me that when the rain stopped, you cut the greens to 1/6 to 1/7 of an inch.  I'm not buying your story, it's not passing the "smell test" or the common sense test.
You also told us that deluges are common, if not constant, in your part of the world, and now you're telling us that those greens are cut to 1/6 to 1/7 of an inch, EVERY DAY ?  ?  ?  By riding mowers ?  ?  ?

It is not being trampled by up to 150 golfers per day.

150 golfers a day is minimal traffic.

It is not being scrutinised and judged by every person that encounters it.


I think this is the heart of the/your problem

There is NO question that superintendents have an excessive amount of uninformed critics.
Unfortunately, that comes with the job since your product is so visable to the end user.
While no one knows the sure fire formula for success, surely the formula for failure is trying to please everyone.

It's a difficult job and
Mother Nature will trump the best of intentions, but, that doesn't mean that you can't strive for F&F if that's the culture of the club or the will of the membership.

The difficult part ISN'T in striving for F&F once you get the directive, the difficult part is GETTING the DIRECTIVE

Like I said, grass can tolerate extremes for certain time periods but it must be rested appropriately.

I am in no way saying that firm and fast is a bad thing, and I personally feel that many courses are in fact over watered and overfed.
I am simply pointing out, as have the superintendent's that have weighed in, that not all things are equal.

I think the majority of participants on this site understand that

However, you can't deny that the application of excessive water makes for great camoflage and calms the natives.

The goal should be enhanced playing conditions/surfaces, within the realm of the culture of the club and the will of the membership.

There is way more to this than simply shutting off the water.


What would  happen if there was a severe drought and the regulatory authorities ruled that a club could only water its tees and
greens ?


Choosing a course of action and having your hand forced are completely different.


If you understand "cause and effect", and the effect is the same, than the cause doesn't matter.
My point was that water restrictions would produce F&F WITHOUT jeopardizing the super's position.
If, instead of a regulatory authority, the club gave the mandate, the eventual result would be about the same.

Or, stated another way, where there's a will, there's a way.


I am not disagreeing with you that many courses could benefit from less water.
I am just trying to highlight that there are many factors that vary from course to course that influence what can be realistically achieved.


I think most understand that.

"His primary frame of reference is probably derived from watching PGA Tour golf on TV every weekend. - Patrick Mucci"

You may want to rethink Warwick Hills as an example.
You are basing your views on a course that has been prepared for a tournament and it will be in that particular condition for only a short time.


IF that's true, it's only because the culture of the club and the will of the membership don't want to retain those playing conditions.

They are able to achieve this through a massive increase of resources and support of many people.

I'd ONLY agree with that on the transition period and GROOMING factors.
There is NO need to have a massive increase in resources and the support of many people once the transition period is complete, especially when your maintainance needs are diminishing.

There is no malice intended with my posts I just feel very strongly there are a lot of "weekend greenkeepers" on board here.
I applaud people like JSpayne for trying to educate and give a glimpse into the world of greenkeeping.
People still do not fully appreciate the skills and knowledge of those that look after courses.[/color]

Ditto, and agreed.

[Mike Feeney]

2015 Senior Amateur Awarded to Hidden Creek

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/2015+USGA+Senior+Amateur+awarded+Hidden+Creek/8023162/story.html