Are closely mown areas adjacent to greens

[A.G._Crockett]

Mucci,

You make some well considered ans worthy points.

The one area I will however take issue is with the assertion that recovery from short grass is beyond the average player. I see golfers of all shapes, ages, genders and sizes recover perfectly well from short grass. Not sure the same could be said to longer stuff. Considering this point, my mind wandered to thinking about the two ladies well into their 80's that I played through the other day. There is no way on Earth those old girls could possibly lob wedge anything towards a pin but were clearly more than happy bumping the ball around the course without ever getting the ball more than a few feet off the ground. Your assertion, I suspect, is more a reflection of how far removed the game has become from its natural playing conditions, i.e. players struggling with short grass not because it's particularly difficult but because it's alien to them. 

Paul,
I think it may come down to what one means by "recovery" and what and why you are recovering from in the first place.  There's a lot of gray area in between a Philly Mick flop shot and being able to putt from 50', right?  It's not either/or.

Pat's point is that these areas often take the ball farther from the hole than light rough would allow; the fact that an 80 yr. old lady can now use a putter from 50' instead of bumping a wedge from 20' only gives the illusion of options and the ability to recover. 

And when the high handicapper DOES get the ball on the green from 50' with their putter or hybrid, they may still be farther from the hole than they would have been in the fringe.

Recovery means how soon the golfer can get the ball in the hole, rather than just what club(s) can be used for the next shot and whether or not the next shot is on green or not.  And just as the length of the entire hole is the single biggest factor in the difficulty of the hole, so is distance from the hole the single biggest factor in getting the ball in the hole around the green.  If closely mown areas take the high handicappers ball farther away, their scores will go up regardless of what club they hit next.

[Brent Hutto]

And let's don't forget the ever popular combination of a really low-cut "chipping area" that runs 50 feet from the green and then directly into a couple inches of rough. So instead of a lob wedge gouge from five yards off the green it's a lob wedge gouge from 20 yards that often comes up short and runs all the way back down into the rough.

[Paul Gray]

I'm reminded of this old ditty:

A bad putt is better than a bad chip.

[Brent Hutto]

But the question Patrick and A.G. are asking is whether a bad 30-yard putt is better than a bad 10-yard chip.

I think as long as you have the clubhead speed to get a lob wedge through the grass and onto the ball, the usual collar of rough starting just off the green does tend to keep slightly errant shots within, say, ten feet or so of the putting surface. Just chop down onto the back of the ball (with sufficient clubhead speed) and you'll gouge it out. Even if you only advance it 10, 20, 30 feet you'll have a putt for your next shot.

By comparison putting across 50 feet or so of possibly bumpy, wet or grainy fringe grass then up a steep hill to reach the green isn't the simplest thing in the world (ask anyone but Martin Kaymer how that worked out for them on the grainy Bermuda at the US Open). If the putt were from ten feet off the green it's much easier than a gouge out of rough from the same spot. But many courses have fall-offs where those putts are going to be far longer than ten feet or even ten yards.

[Jason Topp]

Does anyone else find the hybrid shot more effective on bermuda than it is on northern grasses?  Lou Duran showed me how to hit the shot in Dallas last year and I have found it very useful on bermuda but nearly useless on faster running grass.  I don't have enough control over distance on northern grasses and choose to chip.  On bermuda, the shot fits my eye much better and I seem to do ok with it.  I can't really think of a logical explanation for the difference. 

[Brent Hutto]

I quit doing the fairway wood/hybrid chip thing when I played with Jeff Warne at Palmetto years ago. He pointed out that my distance control with my (mallet) putter on those shots was far, far better than my distance control with a metalwood. Longer shaft, awkward lie angle, not a shot I practice much. Just too risky.

So I pretty much either putt the heck out of it with a putter or go ahead and hit some kind of pitch/chiip/bump-and-run with a wedge or short iron. And all my play is on Bermuda.

[Paul Gray]

Brent,

I go back to what I said about people being used to certain shots. Sorry to repeat myself but I am a links golfer that grew up playing links golf and therefore, despite having played a lot of different golf since, my golf DNA if what it is. I am shockingly bad from soggy, thick rough around the green. I have precious little grasp of how the ball is going to react from that stuff. Conversely, I can flick a ball in the air off of a piece of rock hard pan in a way which you would quite possibly assume just wasn't possible.

[Mark Fedeli]

Brent,

I go back to what I said about people being used to certain shots. Sorry to repeat myself but I am a links golfer that grew up playing links golf and therefore, despite having played a lot of different golf since, my golf DNA if what it is. I am shockingly bad from soggy, thick rough around the green. I have precious little grasp of how the ball is going to react from that stuff. Conversely, I can flick a ball in the air off of a piece of rock hard pan in a way which you would quite possibly assume just wasn't possible.

Question for you, Paul. My initial thought about this was that the vast majority of golfers, regardless of skill level, would prefer a 5 foot chip out of thick rough instead a 50 foot putt up a steep hill. And I say this as someone who tries to putt from anywhere he can, and loves to do so. In the case of that example, would you still prefer the putt? And, if not, would you consider yourself the minority or majority in the UK?

To add a personal example. If only the back of the 4th green at BPB had rough instead of a closely mown and steep fall off, my handicap would no doubt improve (though, the hole would certainly suffer).

[Paul Gray]

Mark,

With numbers as extreme as you suggested I'd take the chip. If however we we talking a 10 foot chip or a 20 foot putt, I'll take the putt ever time.

And believe me, I am in the minority in Britain simply because the majority in Britain play in conditions more similar to what you are used to than the links and heathlands widely associated with British golf. Actually, climate being what it is, spongy long grass in America is probably preferable to the UK. There is nothing more ridiculous to my mind than an artificial sudo-international target set up on a boggy mud field in February in Britain. Nonetheless, it's a prevailing trend which has been with us since the 80's. We even hold Ryder Cups on it. 

[A.G._Crockett]

Does anyone else find the hybrid shot more effective on bermuda than it is on northern grasses?  Lou Duran showed me how to hit the shot in Dallas last year and I have found it very useful on bermuda but nearly useless on faster running grass.  I don't have enough control over distance on northern grasses and choose to chip.  On bermuda, the shot fits my eye much better and I seem to do ok with it.  I can't really think of a logical explanation for the difference. 

Jason,
I wrote this a few posts back, but I really like the hybrid chip on DORMANT bermuda during the winter months.  I barely use it at all with the grass is green and growing; 7 iron or something like that works a lot better.  I feel like you just almost have to carry the ball to the green when bermuda is really popping unless the grass is really shaved AND you are going down grain.

[Brent Hutto]

Yeah, this time of year on our Bermuda one bounce in the fringe/apron grass is practical but multiple bounces or rolling it there's just so little margin between skittering along the surface of the grass and bouncing/rolling "hot" versus settling into the grain and stopping quickly. Best to either wedge it onto the green or in a pinch kill it by hitting the fringe once and then onto the putting surface.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mucci,

You make some well considered ans worthy points.

The one area I will however take issue is with the assertion that recovery from short grass is beyond the average player.
I see golfers of all shapes, ages, genders and sizes recover perfectly well from short grass.

I think the difference of opinion centers around "elevation".
From flat areas surrounding the greens I might agree that the average to poor player has a fighting chance.
But, it's those tightly mown areas that fall away from elevated greens, tightly mown areas that take a ball that just runs off the green and deposits it 10, 20, 30 and 40 feet away from the green.
Now the golfer is faced with a steep upward slope.
If the golfer has "short sided" his miss, then he's got his hands full.

In the last two weeks I"ve watch PGA Tour Pros attempt to both putt and chip the ball up the incline, only to have it come back to a spot not far from it's original position.

If a PGA Tour Pro has difficulty with that shot, what does it say about the average or poor golfers chances of recovery. 

Not sure the same could be said to longer stuff.


I think I'd prefer a full or forceful swing to an extremely delicate touch, especially because most golfers have practiced that full swing, while few have practiced that delicate touch up a steep incline of tightly mown grass/fairway

Considering this point, my mind wandered to thinking about the two ladies well into their 80's that I played through the other day. There is no way on Earth those old girls could possibly lob wedge anything towards a pin but were clearly more than happy bumping the ball around the course without ever getting the ball more than a few feet off the ground.


30 minutes with me and I'd have them hitting that Lob Wedge stiff from around the green.
I can see them putting or chipping a dozen times before they get the feel of the incline and it's influence on the ball.

Your assertion, I suspect, is more a reflection of how far removed the game has become from its natural playing conditions, i.e. players struggling with short grass not because it's particularly difficult but because it's alien to them.

Not at all.
It's a reflection of the greater variety of shots presented at different courses.
When's the last time you saw a 30 yard drop shot par 3 on a links course ?
Just because that hole exists at other courses doesn't mean that the game has become far removed from it's natural playing conditions,
in fact, it's just the opposite, it's how the game has adjusted to the variety in the natural playing conditions.

Take the photo of the thumbprint/Horseshoe green that someone posted.
Now pretend that that steep bank and the area 30 feet from the bottom of that steep bank was all tightly mown grass.
Think of how hard that shot is, how difficult it is to gauge.

Would you rather play that shot from tightly mown grass, or rough ? 

[David Bartman]

a trend that's become overused to the point that many of them are improperly used ?

Are some of them next to impossible to recover from, for the average golfer ?

We are about to start to undertake a remodel of my home club here in Los Angeles, Brentwood CC.  The new layout has many new closely mown areas.  It will be interesting to see if 1.  those areas play easier or more difficult for the average golfer and 2. being that we are sticking with Kikuyu grass, if we can keep them firm and fast enough to even play the variety of shots that a closely mown area should provide.  

(I was hoping to get before and after photos of the entire project)

David,

Doesn't Kikuyu limit club selection and play ? (options)

To all,

There are options in theory and options in practice and I'd rather confine the discussion to options in practice, truely viable options.

I tend to think so, Riviera does a good job of keeping its closely mown area firm enough to allow a variety of shots.  Time will tell as to how well Brentwood can do it given that it isn't on the same sandy soil that Riviera is on?

I hope it turns to play firmer than the velcro-like kikuyu at La Cumbre, what a mess that is.  No ground game options at all. 

My guess it will be somewhere in between the extremely sticky and thatch laden kikuyu @ La Cumbre and Riv.  TBD if the inbetween will provide the reasonable ability to hit ground game shots. 

[Paul Gray]

Pat,

You wrote that you'd rather have the more powerful shot from the rough because, in part, it's exactly the sort of shot players have more experience of. That was exactly my point earlier about the running shot simply being hard because people were less used to it.

Now, you mention slope and, certainly, you have a very good point about that. But go back and look at my previous post about the 5th green at Hayling. Oh, and as is so often true of photos, it's a lot steeper than it looks. So imagine you're down the side of one of those slopes and, playing to that ROCK HARD green which is only 12 yards wide, you either have a high option from thick long grass or a shot from short stuff. I am telling you now that you don't want to try to control that shot from thick stuff. Gentle, delicate weighting is the shot needed. There is no way of stopping the ball out of that bunker, let alone from thick rough. Of course, it is fair to note that long grass would hold the ball up more so, had you only have the missed the green by a foot or two, you might be better off if thick grass were there to hold your ball up. But miss by more and be in thick stuff and you're in a whole world of trouble. Don't misunderstand me, it's a bloody tough shot any which way and I've made a mess of it in all conditions with all clubs!

And Pat, those ladies ain't gonna be using a lob wedge on the course at the moment. They don't have the hand speed needed with the ground as it currently is to work it. THEY'D JUST CHUNK IT. Winter, fine. Summer, no. Jesus Pat, they can't get driver airborne! Or 3 wood or 5 wood or 7 wood or 9 wood for that matter. Seriously though, if they weren't playing on sand they would have long ago concluded that their golf days were behind them. You had to see them! But they were having a nice time, so good on them.

But I'm now going to go back to your very original point and suggest that, whilst the short stuff isn't being overdone, it is perhaps being over cut. Any hacker needs a little grass under the ball in order to be confident. And that's it.

[Sean_A]

Paul makes a very good case.  Each situation is different and everybody cannot be accommodated all the time.  I see short grass play all the time and better players tend not to use putters while lesser players (me) look for ways to putt the putter in my hand because they know that generally its a safer play...if the grass is kept short.  If the grass is not very close to fairway height and there is elevation involved, a big percentage of the putter hounds (me) will switch to a different club.  Often it isn't a flop club, but a bump and run club...meaning bang the ball into the hill and have it pop up.  This is not an easy shot, but many feel that attempting to flop a shot uphill onto hard greens and often with liittle surface to work with is the most dangerous play in terms of earning a kiss on the card.  

I for one would be hugely disappointed to encounter a course that plays firm and not have short grass around greens.  I am especially disappointed when I encounter courses (typical American parkland) which have 2-4 inch rough 5-10 feet from green surfaces, often the rough cuts off entry into bunkers.  To me, this is a heinous set-up.  I agree that sometimes its easier to hit from this rough, especially if one isn't short-sided, but the question of easy or hard is a red herring.  I am looking for interest in the game and playing from greenside rough generally doesn't interest me.  For me, golf is much about contours and slopes so courses should be set-up to make golfers cope with contours.  In general, rough reduces those opportunities.  I understand we all have different ideas about golf and thats fine because there are plenty of different places to play the game.  It works out pretty well.

Ciao

[Brent Hutto]

I am especially disappointed when I encounter courses (typical American parkland) which have 2-4 inch rough 5-10 feet from green surfaces, often the rough cuts off entry into bunkers.  To me, this is a heinous set-up.  I agree that sometimes its easier to hit from this rough, especially if one isn't short-sided, but the question of easy or hard is a red herring.  I am looking for interest in the game and playing from greenside rough generally doesn't interest me.  For me, golf is much about contours and courses should be set-up to make golfers cope with contours.  In general, rough reduces those opportunities.

That's the setup I find "overused" at the places I frequent. Patrick's experience may be that the extensive "chipping area" thing is becoming a cliche wherever it is that he plays but for my part, if every course with the " 2-4 inch rough 5-10 feet from green surfaces" were to mow it down to fairway height it would not be overused but rather welcome.

[Thomas Dai]

Anyone notice the little hollow to the left (as it's played) of the 11th green at Hoylake in The Open on the TV today?

The hollow itself, which seems to be only about 2 ft deep, is closely mown. The 2ft high bank between it and the green however, has grass growing on it that looks like it's about 1-2 inches long.

Sergio was in this hollow. Even if he'd wanted to, the grassed bank would have stopped him from putting or bumping the ball onto the green, so he had to wedge it - I believe he holed the shot (I briefly left the room but heard the crowd shout from the TV!).

It got me thinking about the use of the low band of wooden sleepers, there seemingly deliberately to prevent run-up recovery shots, from just off the 14th green at Rye.

atb

[Michael Felton]

Anyone notice the little hollow to the left (as it's played) of the 11th green at Hoylake in The Open on the TV today?

The hollow itself, which seems to be only about 2 ft deep, is closely mown. The 2ft high bank between it and the green however, has grass growing on it that looks like it's about 1-2 inches long.

Sergio was in this hollow. Even if he'd wanted to, the grassed bank would have stopped him from putting or bumping the ball onto the green, so he had to wedge it - I believe he holed the shot (I briefly left the room but heard the crowd shout from the TV!).

It got me thinking about the use of the low band of wooden sleepers, there seemingly deliberately to prevent run-up recovery shots, from just off the 14th green at Rye.

atb

I noticed that. The commentators said that it used to be a bunker. I wouldn't approve of that everywhere, but in an occasional spot I don't think it's bad that a course force someone to use a lofted club from a tight lie. You could still bump it, but it would be a lottery what happened to the ball. Especially so in a spot that was a bunker. You can't putt from those (at least not most of the bunkers at Hoylake).

Sergio did hole the shot yes.

[Bill_McBride]

Anyone notice the little hollow to the left (as it's played) of the 11th green at Hoylake in The Open on the TV today?

The hollow itself, which seems to be only about 2 ft deep, is closely mown. The 2ft high bank between it and the green however, has grass growing on it that looks like it's about 1-2 inches long.

Sergio was in this hollow. Even if he'd wanted to, the grassed bank would have stopped him from putting or bumping the ball onto the green, so he had to wedge it - I believe he holed the shot (I briefly left the room but heard the crowd shout from the TV!).

It got me thinking about the use of the low band of wooden sleepers, there seemingly deliberately to prevent run-up recovery shots, from just off the 14th green at Rye.

atb

And 2 at Rye, those wee "eyebrows."

[JimB]

David Bartman, considering you were the medalist at the Mid-Am qualifier at The Valley Club yesterday, what did you think of the tightly mown areas there? Or did you hit so many greens it was a non issue?  

[Bill_McBride]

David. Bartman, considering you were the medalist at the Mid-Am qualifier at The Valley Club yesterday, what did you think of the tightly mown areas there? Or did you hit so many greens it was a non issue? 

Jim, I see the par was 71.  Which of 1 and 10 was labeled a par 4?

[JimB]

David. Bartman, considering you were the medalist at the Mid-Am qualifier at The Valley Club yesterday, what did you think of the tightly mown areas there? Or did you hit so many greens it was a non issue? 

Jim, I see the par was 71.  Which of 1 and 10 was labeled a par 4?

The first.

[David Bartman]

David Bartman, considering you were the medalist at the Mid-Am qualifier at The Valley Club yesterday, what did you think of the tightly mown areas there? Or did you hit so many greens it was a non issue?  

I liked the tightly mown areas that have been added.  I think they make the golf course a bit easier for the best golfers, but certainly add a play-ability and shot options to all players.  They were maintained in a fashion that allowed for a different types of shots, which I think should be the goal of those areas.

I spent some time during my practice round seeing what shots worked best from them, but you are correct, in my qualifying round I hit 14 greens, 1 fringe, 2 closely mown areas and 1 bunker.  So I didn't have many opportunities, I did putt both times from the closely mown areas, right of 12 over the bunker and left of 13, both times I was less than 30 feet from the hole.