Did climate -- and not soil -- determine the foundations of gca?

[Peter Pallotta]

I think it's accurate to say that much of GB&I enjoys milder weather than the northeast U.S. & Canada. The summers in Edinburgh or Dublin or Bristol or Cardiff are not as hot & humid as those in New York, Toronto, Montreal or Detroit, and the winters there bring neither the intense cold nor the constant snowfalls we get here. In short: the GB&I climate is conducive to year round play to an extent/degree not possible in the northeast US (save perhaps -- and this is significant -- at a coastal links like NGLA).     

For decades we've recognized how the quality and nature of the original land/soil for golf -- i.e. the links land -- helped to shape the game's fields of play and the game itself, and how it defined our understanding of and appreciation for  top-flight golf course architecture.  But I wonder: what role did milder weather -- year round golfing weather -- play in how the early great courses were designed/conceived?

Given that the great early architects in GB&I knew that their courses would be used year-round, and would be "in play" during four seasons' worth of weather and wind, did this inform their fundamental thoughts/philosophy about quality gca, as well as their practical and on the ground design decisions?

Was CBM able to pay such fine homage to the classic GB&I design principles at NGLA in large part because of the climate there at least as much as because of the land/soil?

Conversely, with a very few exceptions like NGLA, did the golden age of golf course architecture in America veer away from the GB&I model almost right from the start -- and produce golf courses that were unlike those of their across-the-Atlantic predecessors -- not so much because the soil was different but because the climate was?

And IF so, some further questions:

Did the so-called "Dark Age" of American golf architecture express an implicit recognition of this fact, and thus produce golf courses that were intended to be played only 6 months a year?  Do courses from the 1980s that seem today bloated and over-done reflect a misguided attempt to appear to be year-round venues when in fact they aren't?

Did the renaissance of American design, at places like Bandon, come about at least in part because the climate, like that in GB&I, is conducive to year-round play?   
 
Peter

[Mark Bourgeois]

Climate produced glaciation and retreat as well as golf-friendly geologic formations. So I would say, yes, climate, in its impact on topography, geography, geology and soil, determined the foundations of gca.

Maybe not the answer you're looking for!

[JESII]

You know, it's funny.


The course I grew up playing, just outside of Philadelphia, is soil based and is decidedly not envious of the courses locally that have converted to sand based for a very specific reason...the climate doesn't cooperate with it.


I'd be way outside my level of expertise to comment, but my understanding of the theory is that, with 90*+ heat and high humidity, sand heats up several degrees more than soil. If this is your top couple inches, you can essentially boil the grass/roots, or at a minimum require significant hand syringing to manage the surface temperature.


The course was designed by William Flynn and is blessed with very good surface drainage...which is certainly a huge advantage.




 

[Greg Chambers]

Just for the record, sand is soil.

[JESII]

What would be the right term for me to use? The soil isn't clay, I don't think...is it a more organic enriched material than sand?

[SL_Solow]

Jim, if you are correct, wouldn't USGA and California method greens have particular problems as they are sand based?  Why the need for top dressing?

[Peter Pallotta]

Jim, Shel - from The Lurker (which I edited slightly, in case some of the content was meant for private reading only):

"It became evident to some early golfers, designers, greenkeepers etc, who were all obviously pretty clever, observant and even scientifically minded, that it was not just the topography and coastal sandy soil structure of the early linksland sites that were God given, but it was actually the unique natural grasses that prospered thereon that were probably God's greatest gift to golf.

The fact is, in and on what were the original "swards" (early natural linksland fairways) of linksland sites only two natural grasses could survive thereon (and apparently had been prospering thereon for millennia). Those two strains were agrostis (bent) and festuca (fescue), still today two of the primary grasses used for golf and ideal for golf.

But why were those the only two naturally occurring strains on early linksland swards that could survive and prosper? It was because they were the only two that could survive and prosper in highly acidic soil (therefore they had little to no natural competition).

The nuts and bolts of agronomy and botany has always scared me, but it seems the original ("natural") swards (fairways) were somewhat concave in shape which thereby collected alluvial deposits out of the common river(s) that dumped into the linksland, but mostly those areas were where birds commonly nested and probably most significantly, where they shitted (apparently creating much greater soil acidity).

This is a great subject, and it is important today with some recent initiatives of particularly the USGA known as "Maintenance Down the Middle." It can be done quite successfully in places like Pinehurst (Pinehurst #2 in the 2014 US Open) but not necessarily on sites that are far more clay/loam and consequently far less acidic.

[The question is] how exactly that particular maintenance practice could be translated and transferred onto golf courses with entirely different soil structure such as thick and harder clay/loam sites; of course, climate is part of this as neither bent or fescue has ever done particularly well in extreme heat (particularly sub-top turf soil heat)."

And from me, another question: we know that many of the top rated golf courses in the world are built on sand; but with only a few exceptions (eg Sand Hills), I thnk most of those top rated, sand-based courses also happen to be in climates that allow for year round play. Is that a coincidence? 

Peter

[Tom_Doak]

It's not just climate and soil, but celestial mechanics.  The fact that the UK has long summer days gave people enough daylight to play a game after their workday was done. 


The funny part is, if they'd invented a game that took four hours, they never could have made it work.

[Greg Chambers]

What would be the right term for me to use? The soil isn't clay, I don't think...is it a more organic enriched material than sand?

It could be any number of types of soil...I'm just sayin that sand is soil 

[Bradley Anderson]

I would say that it was both the soil and the climate.

The links land was unstable for building structures and poorly suited for the growing of crops. This made it ideal for public pasture.

The best golfing conditions were in the winter months when the grass stopped growing. The grazing of sheep continued late into the fall and right up till the time that it stopped growing. So you had a fairly prolonged period of time when the links presented themselves as an ideal playing field that required no special maintenance.

The winter weather had a lot to do with the playability of the grass, before the development of mowers. I suspect that's why in those very early drawings and paintings of golf, everyone is dressed in warm clothing. It was originally more of a winter sport.

[Sean_A]

Pietro


It is no accident that the cool climate grasses of GB&I allow for the best golf soil and grass, nor year round playing conditions. The grasses are exist because of the climate, but each element is equally important.


The hotter climate approximations of cool season soil/grasses can hang for probably half the year, but not in the extreme heat or cold...something has to give. 


The unbelievable combination of features present to give us cool season grasses makes it incredible that UK clubs were willing to sacrfice that for US style hit n' stick golf.  To be honest, I doubt most GB&I courses will ever properly recover from the abuses of over/wrong feed and watering systems of the 70s & 80s and even continuing today.  Even after everything we know about lean and mean we still....


Once poa gets a foothold on a course it is impossible to keep at bay.  How many clubs are finding this out right now? Look at Ballybunion with its new greens...but the rough is full of crappy grass and its just a matter of time before....


Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks Sean, all.

A cold weather game originally, and later one that fit a working man/woman's summer schedule. A pleasant two and a half hour pastime for the mild winters and for long, cool summer evenings. Nothing precious or aspirational about it.  A simple game: to sooth the mind and exercise the body and to refresh the soul.

Wide fairways and open-fronted greens as befitting this democratic past-time, playable and enjoyable for all; but with deep bunkers meant not to flatter the rich man's ego or excuse the fool's wayward tendencies but to lead instead inexorably to perdition.

The whole field of play maintained with sanity and frugality, with a knowing and grateful nod to the bounty of Nature: its rain and sun and healthy swards of turf; and the architecture and design in absolute accord with the land that was given -- as if trying or even asking for anything more would be the very height/depth of pride, hubris and vanity.

The architect serving the game and its players with earnest simplicity; and the clubhouses with fireplaces and comfy armchairs, and food and good conversation with the claret.  And outside on the ground, not even the thought of artificial inputs or pesticides or drainage. The grass grew all by itself, just like it was meant to do. 

Hmm. I think Melvyn Morrow was right after all.  We might've gained a great deal in a hundred and fifty years, but what we've lost won't ever be coming back.

On the other hand, maybe a false nostalgia is getting the better of me. But now I do find myself thinking that, indeed, climate/weather has fundamentally shaped golf course architecture (not just the game) -- and that the game and for my tastes the architecture goes wrong when it refuses to accept the context that climate places on it in any given place.   

Peter

[Greg Chambers]

Peter,


You just recognized the difference between designing the golf course in the office, and designing the golf course in the dirt.

[Peter Pallotta]

Greg - you reminded me of a short video someone linked on here a while back. It was JC Urbina (I think) simply sitting on the ground, playing with some dirt -- using his hands and a pile of sand to demonstrate a green shape/contour he was experimenting with. I was absolutely delighted by it, and a couple of posters took a couple of gentle pokes at me for being so impressed. Back then I couldn't explain why I was so delighted, but I think now I can: i.e. whenever an endeavour and its practitioners lose that kind of playful simplicity and a child-like wonder at the qualities of Nature, it and they (and us) lose something of great value.

When we stop playing  -- and do we ever pay as much attention, are we ever as present as when we are playing a game we love? -- we start believing that we can do (and fix) everything; and sure enough we soon start finding (and even looking for) ever new things to do and to fix  -- only to find later that all of it has to be done and fixed all over again... which is maybe what deep down we wanted all along. 

In gca these days, that business/process is called "renovations"..... In the 40s, 50s and 60s, they used to plant trees, instead (which seemed like a good thing to do, and a simple fix)....and then later they started building golf courses in deserts, where no grass ever grew on its own....and started lengthening every hole and narrowing every fairway...and more recently they started taking down all the trees they planted 50 years ago.....

There's always so much to do, isn't there?

Peter 

[Sean_A]

But now I do find myself thinking that, indeed, climate/weather has fundamentally shaped golf course architecture (not just the game) -- and that the game and for my tastes the architecture goes wrong when it refuses to accept that climate places on it in any given place.   

Pietro

I couldn't agree more.  However, this early Oxbridge lot are the ones who simultaneously "discovered" the value of cool season grasses by identifying the heathland belt, codified architecture by identifying the enduring features of strategic archietcure, but also hastily discarded some of the noble and adventurous elements of yesteryear which we fawn over these days.  That said, at least some of the time the Oxbridge lot had the good sense to leave history in place and we therefore have some iconic holes remaining which point toward the origins of architecture.  Unfortunately, due to the zeal of the Oxbridge lot, the idea of continuing to build blind shots, cross bunkers etc was removed from the designer palate.  This sort of thinking turned into the concept of "fairness" which has resulted in disastrous consequences for odd duck holes.

I think this recent renaissance in design since ~Sand Hills has brought back the idea that its okay to hit over a hill or a bunker....even if the focus has been a bit misguided in the idea that all must look as if nature nature provided the hazards.  I also think the idea of grasses and soil has made a resurgence in that if possible, it is ideal to use cool season grasses or the best alternative option.  It is no longer an automatic given that courses should be watered to all boundaries and that bent is the go to grass.  Things happen in cycles, its just a shame that it took 50 years for us to realize we were on the wrong end of the cycle.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Golf predominently a winter GB&I game? Frozen Dutch canals maybe but further north and east in GB?


Less daylight, wet and windy, maybe not too much white stuff but frozen ground in the mornings. No Goretex and no waterproof shoes and the like a century or so ago, not even a few decades ago. There's a poster herein who uses the Billy Connelly line that there are two seasons in Scotland - July and winter! He's not that far out. Rose tinted spectacles?


Atb

[Ronald Montesano]

But now I do find myself thinking that, indeed, climate/weather has fundamentally shaped golf course architecture (not just the game) -- and that the game and for my tastes the architecture goes wrong when it refuses to accept that climate places on it in any given place.   

Pietro

I couldn't agree more.  However, this early Oxbridge lot are the ones who simultaneously "discovered" the value of cool season grasses by identifying the heathland belt, codified architecture by identifying the enduring features of strategic archietcure, but also hastily discarded some of the noble and adventurous elements of yesteryear which we fawn over these days.  That said, at least some of the time the Oxbridge lot had the good sense to leave history in place and we therefore have some iconic holes remaining which point toward the origins of architecture.  Unfortunately, due to the zeal of the Oxbridge lot, the idea of continuing to build blind shots, cross bunkers etc was removed from the designer palate.  This sort of thinking turned into the concept of "fairness" which has resulted in disastrous consequences for odd duck holes.

I think this recent renaissance in design since ~Sand Hills has brought back the idea that its okay to hit over a hill or a bunker....even if the focus has been a bit misguided in the idea that all must look as if nature nature provided the hazards.  I also think the idea of grasses and soil has made a resurgence in that if possible, it is ideal to use cool season grasses or the best alternative option.  It is no longer an automatic given that courses should be watered to all boundaries and that bent is the go to grass.  Things happen in cycles, its just a shame that it took 50 years for us to realize we were on the wrong end of the cycle.

Ciao

Odd that this citation eliminated the two words the contect from the sentence refuses to accept the context that ...

The word context is so critical to what Peter promotes in his suppositions and theories. I don't think that SA intended to delete them, but I'm baffled by how two words from the midst of a quote would disappear.

[Ronald Montesano]

The unbelievable combination of features present to give us cool season grasses makes it incredible that UK clubs were willing to sacrfice that for US style hit n' stick golf.  To be honest, I doubt most GB&I courses will ever properly recover from the abuses of over/wrong feed and watering systems of the 70s & 80s and even continuing today.  Even after everything we know about lean and mean we still....

This observation is poignant. Was this shift in practice standardized across municipal, resort and private courses in GBI? I hope that the reality is not as dire as observed above.

[Blake Conant]

What would be the right term for me to use? The soil isn't clay, I don't think...is it a more organic enriched material than sand?

3 basic soil types from which all others derive: sand, silt, and clay.  peat is darker with lots of organic, but acidic. Loam is a mix of the original 3 plus humus. Loam provides the best growing environment for most plants and likely what you've got on your golf course.

[Sean_A]

The unbelievable combination of features present to give us cool season grasses makes it incredible that UK clubs were willing to sacrfice that for US style hit n' stick golf.  To be honest, I doubt most GB&I courses will ever properly recover from the abuses of over/wrong feed and watering systems of the 70s & 80s and even continuing today.  Even after everything we know about lean and mean we still....

This observation is poignant. Was this shift in practice standardized across municipal, resort and private courses in GBI? I hope that the reality is not as dire as observed above.

Ronald

Its all relative. If things don't change in a hurry, the next generation will lose that experience of how a true links/heathland should look and play.  There has been an inexorable amount of compromise my entire golfing life.  Yes, for many of the best clubs the pendulum is swinging back toward a version of pre-auto water days, but without a doubt the ideal meld changes over time.  Indeed, the idea of a meld is somewhat contrary to what I am talking about because we should be far more in the hands of Mother Nature with the proviso of trying (I stress trying) to outsmart MN where drainage is concerned.  These days, we are far too clever for our own good.

This sounds like a harsh indictment of greenkeeping, but I really don't see a positive future for properly sustainable golf maintenance at costs which don't continue to rise and ultimately drive away the great unwashed.

Ciao     

[Ally Mcintosh]

The unbelievable combination of features present to give us cool season grasses makes it incredible that UK clubs were willing to sacrfice that for US style hit n' stick golf.  To be honest, I doubt most GB&I courses will ever properly recover from the abuses of over/wrong feed and watering systems of the 70s & 80s and even continuing today.  Even after everything we know about lean and mean we still....

This observation is poignant. Was this shift in practice standardized across municipal, resort and private courses in GBI? I hope that the reality is not as dire as observed above.

Ronald

Its all relative. If things don't change in a hurry, the next generation will lose that experience of how a true links/heathland should look and play.  There has been an inexorable amount of compromise my entire golfing life.  Yes, for many of the best clubs the pendulum is swinging back toward a version of pre-auto water days, but without a doubt the ideal meld changes over time.  Indeed, the idea of a meld is somewhat contrary to what I am talking about because we should be far more in the hands of Mother Nature with the proviso of trying (I stress trying) to outsmart MN where drainage is concerned.  These days, we are far too clever for our own good.

This sounds like a harsh indictment of greenkeeping, but I really don't see a positive future for properly sustainable golf maintenance at costs which don't continue to rise and ultimately drive away the great unwashed.

Ciao   

Whilst I know and agree with the point you are making, Sean, I think it's worth pointing out a reverse that is occurring in one particular area:

Undoubtedly there are considerably more experts across GB&I these days who understand and are committed to promoting fine grasses on our links courses.

The trend of planting rye from 15 years ago has gladly died a death. Fescue is now seen as the grass of choice by almost all involved.

Of course, that doesn't stop certain elements from wanting their course to look green, part of the reason rye was used in the first place. So there is still a disconnect there. And that can lead to overwatering.

[Kyle Harris]

What would be the right term for me to use? The soil isn't clay, I don't think...is it a more organic enriched material than sand?

Your home course is built on a clay loam.

Soil particles (in order from smallest to largest): Clay, Silt, Sand

Sand, for what it is worth, is much easier to cool/dry than heavier soils. Either way, the idea is to take what you have in the ground, make it drain and don't compact it. The USGA Construction method is meant to prevent compaction.

[Sean_A]

The unbelievable combination of features present to give us cool season grasses makes it incredible that UK clubs were willing to sacrfice that for US style hit n' stick golf.  To be honest, I doubt most GB&I courses will ever properly recover from the abuses of over/wrong feed and watering systems of the 70s & 80s and even continuing today.  Even after everything we know about lean and mean we still....

This observation is poignant. Was this shift in practice standardized across municipal, resort and private courses in GBI? I hope that the reality is not as dire as observed above.

Ronald

Its all relative. If things don't change in a hurry, the next generation will lose that experience of how a true links/heathland should look and play.  There has been an inexorable amount of compromise my entire golfing life.  Yes, for many of the best clubs the pendulum is swinging back toward a version of pre-auto water days, but without a doubt the ideal meld changes over time.  Indeed, the idea of a meld is somewhat contrary to what I am talking about because we should be far more in the hands of Mother Nature with the proviso of trying (I stress trying) to outsmart MN where drainage is concerned.  These days, we are far too clever for our own good.

This sounds like a harsh indictment of greenkeeping, but I really don't see a positive future for properly sustainable golf maintenance at costs which don't continue to rise and ultimately drive away the great unwashed.

Ciao   

Whilst I know and agree with the point you are making, Sean, I think it's worth pointing out a reverse that is occurring in one particular area:

Undoubtedly there are considerably more experts across GB&I these days who understand and are committed to promoting fine grasses on our links courses.

The trend of planting rye from 15 years ago has gladly died a death. Fescue is now seen as the grass of choice by almost all involved.

Of course, that doesn't stop certain elements from wanting their course to look green, part of the reason rye was used in the first place. So there is still a disconnect there. And that can lead to overwatering.

Ally


I agree, but the pandora's box was opened and by the time people figured out what the consequences were, untold damage was done to both courses and opinions of how courses should look and play.  With the best will and knowledge in the world, I don't ever see a full recovery from this.  Ironically, the clubs which have loads of dosh have the best chance, but only by driving costs up with the hope that in the long term costs will go down with better grass and suitable maintenance.  I hope many more clubs grab the baton, but I am sorry to say that the first hurdle is being brutal to competing and prohibitive vegetation.  Until we can golfers to see that trees and encroaching rough can be a serious detriment to proper, healthy grass we are only spinning our wheels.  Still, we must try because any improvement is better than none.


Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

I'd be happy to hear from anybody who knows NGLA better than I as to how the course plays in the winter months.  I grew up within 50-100 miles of Southampton and do not remember much winter golf then, based on climate.  I do know that the course, when identified, routed and built, did not have a classically linkish soil, and that significant expenses were undertaken in order to make the soil appropriate for proper golf.

[Thomas Dai]

As pressure (no pun intended) on water availability for other uses increases perhaps the amount of water given over for golf will decline and doesn't poa need water whereas fescue is fine without much? Fingers crossed for the future within GB&I at least.


Atb