[David Davis]

If courses like Oakmont, Royal Melbourne and Kingston Heath often have the greens running between 13 - 15 on the stimpmeter what is the fastest possible stimp speed? Clearly somewhere between the ball just stopping dead and the ball never stopping until it hits a surface causing friction.

What's the fastest green speed ever recorded? I guess around 15.

I'd have to say I like fast greens, a lot. Oakmont was interesting from the perspective that the greens were so large and also fast. Really fun putting there but I caught it on a slow day. 13.5+ according to the powers that be. Kingston Heath many years ago during the draught was the only time I've stood actually scared over putts regardless of the length. Hilly marble is what I had in my head. I'll never forget my first putt on the first green after a nice approach to 4 ft. I just touched it and it rolled a good 8 ft past.

I wonder does it actually make you a better putter if you are always playing on these greens? I'd imagine that if you all of a sudden had to play on greens that were running like 8 or 9 you would be absolutely clueless on how to take that big of a swing and keep the ball on line.

In Europe I think on average our green speeds are slow, especially in the winter months. Maybe 7-8, my home club a little faster on average. It seems like if that's what you are use to it's really easy to make the transition to much faster greens in the US which seem to always be in great shape and hold their lines. Is the reverse true? What's the ideal speed to practice at if there is such a thing?

[Adrian_Stiff]

I was told that at 13.5, a ball will not stop rolling at 1% grade. I have not seen greens past 11 and, I know ours get stupid at 10. I would imagine at in excess of 13.5 all 18 greens would need to be near flat. I have heard people say you cant have 14 because the ball just runs to the lowest spot, equally I have heard some claim 14. A true stimp reading is on the flat. You could probably have a 11 stimp that read 10 one way and 20 at the opposite.

Somewhere there must be some solid stats.

[Jon Wiggett]

A true stimp reading is on the flat. You could probably have a 11 stimp that read 10 one way and 20 at the opposite.

Which is why you take a reading in both directions and use the average but then you knew that me thinks.

[Adrian_Stiff]

John I am making the point that with greens running at an 11 stimp. A ball could roll 10 feet uphill, yet down the same way it could read 20, it is still on an 11 stimp.

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

Once your above 12 does it really matter?   

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

The fastest I've seen in person was 16ft for a European Tour event. The balls were within a few inches on each roll, so it was an accurate roll.

This video on Youtube could very well be the record as they state but I'm not to sure about the accuracy of the reading as the balls turn somewhat - especially on their first roll. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AYOzpGbyJI

The issue is it is very difficult to stimp a green as the speeds increase unless the surface is very flat; every little nuance is picked up and it is very hard to get a straight roll.

To accurately stimp a green it is recommended that the balls roll with a foot of each other in both directions to eliminate a 20' downhill, 10' uphill equaling a 15' stimp.

[Adrian_Stiff]

A putt that rolls 20 feet in one direction and 10 feet in another direction, can only have its STIMP READING determined by finding a green that is flat enough that both readings in each and opposite direction are virtually the same (within an inch I would say). There must be some formula that says:

An 11 Stimp that reads 10 in one direction and 20 in another = ? degree grade

I would imagine at a 12 plus Stimp the roll could get up to 60 in one direction and probably still 10 in the other.

There must also be some sort of formula at which point a ball could horseshoe 360 and come back past you.

[David Davis]

of course there is a formula, there is one for everything:

One problem is finding a near level surface as required in the USGA handbook. Many greens cannot be correctly measured as you cannot find an area where the measured distance or green speed in opposing directions is less than a foot, particularly when they are very fast requiring a very long level surface. A formula, based on the work of Isaac Newton, as derived and extensively tested by A. Douglas Brede, solves that problem. The formula is:



(where S↑ is speed up the slope and S↓ is speed down the slope) eliminates the effect of the slope and provides a true green speed even on severely sloped greens.[7

As with all formulas it's about who's willing to go out and prove it and travel around doing it everywhere.

However, this was not my intention of the thread as I can't see in the formula (maybe I"m not smart enough) what the maximum value is that we could ascertain as the fastest possible stimp.

Also Oakmont, Augusta, Royal Melbourne and Kingston Heath have anything but flat putting surfaces in my opinion.

[jeffwarne]

Well Mike Davis has promised 14.5 and 15 stimps for 2 of the last 3 Opens (not Merion which proved to be the most difficult putting), so I'm sure somebody told him it was possible and desireable. (of course the greens didn't approach those speeds)

Re:Oakmont at 13.5 and being told they're usually faster.
Ever been anywhere with fast greens where they didn't tell you they're Usually faster?

[David Davis]

Re:Oakmont at 13.5 and being told they're usually faster.
Ever been anywhere with fast greens where they didn't tell you they're Usually faster?

Uh, good point. That is one of the key phrases, too funny.

That and "usually the course plays tougher." I like to use that one all the time, especially on the GCA crowd as I know how they love tough courses.

Not to mention the dreaded,"I usually play much better!". BTW Jeff, now that I know you are a golf pro and not a GM I'm raising the number of shots I need from you. 

[Adrian_Stiff]

In that case I would probably say the fastest you can have a green is 14.

Everything else faster is localised some not a true read, that could then go to infinity.

On a complete flat surface a ball coming out of the stimpmeter onto glass, marble or a surface with zero resistance could give you the absolute maximum.

[Jon Wiggett]

In that case I would probably say the fastest you can have a green is 14.

Everything else faster is localised some not a true read, that could then go to infinity.

On a complete flat surface a ball coming out of the stimpmeter onto glass, marble or a surface with zero resistance could give you the absolute maximum.

I think that the crazy golf I played at Blackpool as a kid stimped at 14

[Matt Wharton]

Gentlemen,

http://www.usga.org/news/2013/January/USGA-Introduces-Updated-Stimpmeter/

I cannot comment on the fastest ever recorded but the fastest I ever recorded at Carolina was 13 feet 2 inches at the 2011 Carolina Invitational (early November).  When my greens roll 9.5 the members think they are 10.  When they roll 10 they think they are 10.5 and when they roll 10.5 they think they are 11 +.  When I do permit my greens to get above 11 the membership swear they are 13!  Exponential growth after a certain point.  The average golfer really doesn't know.  Contours and slopes are huge factors!  Also, I do not make my stimp meter readings readily available simply because golfers want to compare them with the course or courses down the street but the readings really do not translate except for flat putts.    

[Matt Wharton]

Sorry!  Forgot to mention with the stimpmeter.  The USGA recommends when using the 1x notch (traditional, preferred method) that measured ball roll in both directions not be greater than 18 inches apart.  If so, the reading is questionable and you should try again in another portion of the green.  When using the new 2x notch that distance becomes 9 inches.  Thus the example earlier of 10 ft. in one direction and 20 ft. in the opposite is not a real world scenario.

Hope this helps!

[Anthony_Nysse]

McArthur prepared a green for the touring pro, before Augusta that stimped 17.5 and posted a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hoG7_ukb1w

We stimped 14.5" for the PB Country AM in 2011.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/sports/golf/jared-meyers-mike-weeks-share-palm-beach-county--1/nLwYw/

[Craig Sweet]

Personally, I think a much better test of one's putting ability is being able to read the break in a putt. Even though speed is a factor in determining how much a putt will break, excessive speed typically means flatter pin placement areas and less break.  I would rather putt...day in and day out...on slower  (9-10 stamp) greens with more challenging movement to the putt than flat, and fast.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Arthur Webber provided a study reflecting degrees of slope and the stimp speed for that slope where the ball won't stop rolling.

Perhaps someone can post it here.

[Ed Homsey]

Thanks to Mr. Wharton for bringing some reality to the discussion of green speeds.  It's my observation that a discussion of green speeds often reaches mythical proportions when the concept of "stimp speed" enters the picture.  Many who engage in such discussions have little, or no idea of what a stimpmeter is, or the prime purpose of stimping a green, or the proper procedure for stimping a green.  As someone pointed out, consistently pushing greens to their upper limits often results in green surfaces being flattened and made less interesting.  Give me a green with smooth, undulating surfaces and reasonable quickness (stimping between 9.5 and 10.5) for an enjoyable, interesting, and sufficiently challenging round of golf.

[David Davis]

Thanks to Mr. Wharton for bringing some reality to the discussion of green speeds.  It's my observation that a discussion of green speeds often reaches mythical proportions when the concept of "stimp speed" enters the picture.  Many who engage in such discussions have little, or no idea of what a stimpmeter is, or the prime purpose of stimping a green, or the proper procedure for stimping a green.  As someone pointed out, consistently pushing greens to their upper limits often results in green surfaces being flattened and made less interesting.  Give me a green with smooth, undulating surfaces and reasonable quickness (stimping between 9.5 and 10.5) for an enjoyable, interesting, and sufficiently challenging round of golf.

Ed,

In general I would have to agree with your assessment however what still is surprising is that the industry still puts courses that have extremely fast green speeds and arguably not too flat greens in the top courses in the world, they strive for these quick greens and are very proud of having them. I've already mentioned a few of these courses. I would agree that for the average golfer 9-10 is fun and playable, in fact probably 8-9 depending on the course. On a links course it's rare that it really gets above 10. Muirfield was an exception this year but usually the goal is 10. 10, and that's for the pros. Amateurs just don't need that arguably.

I'd say personally putting is my favorite aspect of the game and I love fast greens and experience less enjoyment when greens get down below 9. That being said if they are smooth and hold the line reasonably well then fine.

We keep ours between 9 and 10.5-11 which is exceptional for a links course IMO however we have colonial bent which I believe is uncommon for links courses which normally have fescu if I'm not mistaken.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,

This is Webber's, it's from the USGA. I added the extra lines so 13+ could be seen.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Here's the full article.

http://gsr.lib.msu.edu/1990s/1997/970312.pdf

The 'fastest' stimp reading can only be found using level ground and a known height of cut. The lowest cut I've ever heard of is 0.100, but if someone knows one lower, then that number should be used to figure the theoretical maximum stimp reading.
All other readings are 'corrupted' by slope and different cutting heights.  

Where's George Pazin when you need him?      

[Anthony_Nysse]

Here's the full article.

http://gsr.lib.msu.edu/1990s/1997/970312.pdf

The 'fastest' stimp reading can only be found using level ground and a known height of cut. The lowest cut I've ever heard of is 0.100, but if someone knows one lower, then that number should be used to figure the theoretical maximum stimp reading.

Its quite common to mow below .100" We've touched .070 for day, but .080-.085 more common than you think. SO MANY variables associated with that-grooved roller, fixed head, 14 blade reel, bench HOC vs prism HOC.

[Jim_Kennedy]

So let's say 0.070 is the reasonably lowest number for a green, one that will be able to survive after going that low.  

That mowing height, coupled with a 0 sloped green, would produce the 'perfect' stimp reading.  A higher or lower number is only possible by adding slope to the equation.

Wonder what that number is?

[jeffwarne]

Re:Oakmont at 13.5 and being told they're usually faster.
Ever been anywhere with fast greens where they didn't tell you they're Usually faster?

Uh, good point. That is one of the key phrases, too funny.

That and "usually the course plays tougher." I like to use that one all the time, especially on the GCA crowd as I know how they love tough courses.

Not to mention the dreaded,"I usually play much better!". BTW Jeff, now that I know you are a golf pro and not a GM I'm raising the number of shots I need from you. 

You played 18 holes with me, got, no settled for, 8 shots---- drummed me, and thought I was a GM.

..........and now you want MORE shots?
you're already a crook, traveling with that reverse vanity well managed handicap from your brutal course.

[David Davis]

Re:Oakmont at 13.5 and being told they're usually faster.
Ever been anywhere with fast greens where they didn't tell you they're Usually faster?

Uh, good point. That is one of the key phrases, too funny.

That and "usually the course plays tougher." I like to use that one all the time, especially on the GCA crowd as I know how they love tough courses.

Not to mention the dreaded,"I usually play much better!". BTW Jeff, now that I know you are a golf pro and not a GM I'm raising the number of shots I need from you. 
[/quote]

You played 18 holes with me, got, no settled for, 8 shots---- drummed me, and thought I was a GM.

..........and now you want MORE shots?
you're already a crook, traveling with that reverse vanity well managed handicap from your brutal course.
[/quote]

Ah, I got lucky because the rain and wind picked up, you probably remember my smile when that happened. Then I said welcome to my world Mr. Warne. I seem to play my best when it gets really miserable. You're a great player and an even better presser, next time with sun and no wind you shall have your revenge.

Back on topic, what was the stimp that day? 8 perhaps? Anything else would of blown away. Great course though.



Ok so who's going to plug the numbers in based on the grass height minimum and give us a max stimp reading?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()