Don
Why dont we see any colonial bents used as the predominant species for greens in the US?
Very good drought tolerance and disease resistance compared to creeping bent. It doesnt produce the fastest speeds but with a move to bold contours this could actually be a positive.
Careful water and fertility management can be extremely successful at minimising poa infiltration.
I know you addressed this question to Don, but if I may interject.
First of all, with green speed paramount to golfers’ perceptions of what makes greens good, it's more difficult to attain fast surfaces with colonial.
Colonial is used for greens in the U.K. and New Zealand, where it's suited to the climate, and almost nowhere else. I think that most of the U.S. is too hot in the summer to favor it.
Dr. Frank Beard in his authoritative "Turfgrass Science and Culture" lists colonial as less heat, drought, wear, and disease tolerant than creeping. Granted, that text is dated (1973), but more recent (2011) trials at Rutgers University in New Jersey demonstrated that overall turf quality of colonial was inferior to both creeping and velvet bentgrasses.
http://turf.rutgers.edu/research/reports/2011/1.pdfFinally, there is simply no greenkeeping experience in the U.S. with colonial bentgrass greens; people don’t know how to manage it. There is no desire to experiment with the unknown (as what happened at Chambers Bay) when the research suggests it is inferior to the available, proven species and methods.
Much the same is true for continental Europe as well, although with influence from nearby British greenkeepers colonial is making some inroads. For example, Morfontaine has been interseeding colonial into the greens (but to what advantage eludes me).