[Ben Hollerbach]

It has often been said about many classic courses that the greens were designed for a slower speed and the modern green speeds paired with the originally larger green features can make them overly difficult to play. Often during the restoration of these courses the greens are made less sever in an attempt to make them play more like they did originally, regardless of green speed.


If you are undertaking a restoration of a classic course that already has fairly calm and subtle greens, what factors would come into play when deciding what work is needed to them?


Would there ever be a time when the greens would be redesigned with much more pronounced sloping and undulation than were originally there?

[Sean_A]

Would there ever be a time when the greens would be redesigned with much more pronounced sloping and undulation than were originally there?

Ben


Why wouldn't there be times when more pronounced slope/contour is added to greens?  There are plenty of course which are fine as is, but would be better with more interesting greens. In the UK the problem isn't nearly as pronounced as in the US because greens are kept slower.  But there must be courses in the US where this would apply.  The question remains is there are profit to be made from putting a shovel into the ground?  Just because courses can better with more interesting greens doesn't mean it is a profitable undertaking or that the archie will get it right when profit isn't the motive.


Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

A related question might be -
if you have a course with some, but not all, smallish size classic era greens with significant internal movement, what changes (if any) could be introduced such that a good number of pin placements are still available with modern fast green speeds?
Atb

[John Connolly]

Fantastic question. My guess is the the "principle factor" is the membership's or management team's understanding of what it would entail. Is reworking the greens, either through new grass or new builds, worth changing their character? As I've come to understand this issue from our architect, you cannot expect the new "ferrari grasses" to work well with old greens, built with heavy tilts and slopes (even if there is no big mounding or internal contouring), without minimizing those cants. Everyone wants speed - and everyone wants contouring. Tricky to have both.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ben,

I think it would be rare to add contours to greens.  The most likely scenario would be a Maxwell course where the greens had been redone to flatter at some other point, and they ended up restored to some semblance of the original design.

Otherwise, in a restoration, why would you increase contours? Seems just as insincere as reducing them from the original architects goal, no?

Not quite related, but doing a master plan now at a club with 12-13 green speeds, and 1960's era greens.  They are on the edge of fair, especially 4 or 5 of the most sloped greens.  Club has elected to keep them as is.  If some disaster strikes and they absolutely need to be rebuilt, then they may be softened a smidge.

We used the old Masters guide of taking two readings - one along the flow, one perpendicular.  They use a max of 5.5 for both readings (in percent of slope) to determine a pin.  Do some math, and you see that comes out to be a max slope of 3.9% or so. 

In any case, in the locations members deemed borderline but useable, each came very close to 5.5 - 5.6.  It's a nice guide to what works today if you are trying to soften just small areas of greens in a rebuild, perhaps adding or subtracting 2" of mix.  All of the pins they wouldn't use came out much higher, like 6-8 combined readings.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Why wouldn't there be times when more pronounced slope/contour is added to greens? 

Sean,


Two big ones for me is when the topography flowing into the green and the proposed green enhancement would be in juxtaposition to one another and when the slope of the original greens are already on the edge of playable for the speed desired by the membership.


If a hole is built in an area of gentle rolling pasture with an overall constant slope, a fairway cut over this land that runs into a green complex with significant mounding and pronounced changing slope would greatly clash with one another and look very artificial. It would look like the architect carelessly ignored the existing topography and took little effort to blend their work with the natural work that preceded them.


In a mountainous and greatly rolling area, green site selection is often limited to the flatter areas on the property. While visually they may appear flat, their slope might be rather substantial. In trying to "blend" the seemingly flat greens into the slope surrounding the already ample contours are taken beyond the point of playable. In this case is it fare to move away from the desired green speed of the club, to a reduced speed to ensure the playability of the new greens are preserved.

[Sean_A]

Ben


I admit that I am not overly bothered by seemingly cross-purpose shaping so long as it doesn't create too many impossible positions or cause drainage issues.  The natural look is not something I seek out in design, though I detest it when folks get the natural look wrong and it just looks like a manicured garden...and this is very common. 


Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()