Maintenance as an element of design and architect visits after grow-in

[Thomas Dai]

Actually I don't really disagree. Guess I should probably have written '(sic)' after 'nice' in my earlier post.
atb

[Mark_Fine]

Sean,
I think we are saying the same thing.  My point about animal maintenance in the early days of golf was that sometimes the golfer encountered closely eaten grass “fairway” and not so closely and or higher and non-uniform turf “rough”.  That is essentially how the two terms came to be.  As said before I don’t mind rough being rough (unpredictable).  I wouldn’t, however, say the same for fairways.  I like them to be more consistent. Might sound obvious but I would say the same for greens.  I don’t think golfers would enjoy different heights of grass scattered about the green.  It makes sense for fairways and greens to be kept at uniform heights.  But rough doesn’t need to be uniform and consistent everywhere it is located. 


Ribbon striped fairways I have never liked, especially narrow ribbon fairways the are separated from their flanking hazards by rough.  One of the worst fairway looks for example is Bethpage Black.  You have these narrow ribbon fairways disconnected from the hazards and heavy rough between.  Sure makes the course hard but it looks silly in appearance.  I like fairway bunkers for example to be in/and or connected to the fairway.  If they are not I call them rough bunkers.  Rough in front of bunkers simply lowers the hazard value of the bunker by stopping balls from running into it.  These are some of the things we talk about when doing a maintenance plan for a restoration or renovation. 

[Tom_Doak]

 I am starting to become convinced the pinch cut lines short of greens we see so often on midwestern and eastern parkland courses is because people like the cut lines for some reason... even when the architecture is compromised for the look. People also seem to like striped fairways. One would think the fall back position of presenting a course is to avoid highlighting cut lines. When I see a lot of cut I think of gardens rather than golf courses.

Yes and yes.


The narrow "neck" approach to greens is something that superintendents seem to do instinctively.  I remember asking my associate Tom Mead whether they taught that in turf school, because so many superintendents would do it automatically if we didn't paint the lines for them.  To me, narrowing the approach smothers all of the bounces, stopping a shot from leaking away from the green and also stopping a smart player from using a slope above green level to assist him.


As for stripe mowing, don't get me started.  I hate it, but I've been unable to stop a few clients from doing it.  It is a huge "look at me" distraction from the beauty surrounding the hole.  I had not realized until I went back to the UK a couple of times in the 90's that the look I prefer is actually the grazed look [no obvious mowing lines at all].

[Mike Bodo]

Let me posit this question to all you archies. If you had your druthers would there be a "first cut" of rough on any course? When I caddied in the 80's I don't recall this being a "thing". I'm going off strictly off memory, but I don't recall Oakland Hills having a first cut of rough along the fairways at the '85 open. When did that become 'en vogue' and why? BTW, count me in the minority, but aesthetically speaking I generally like the visual presented by a first-cut of rough.    However, I know that it comes at a price, as we had to buy a special mower when I was a member at Western Golf and Country Club to have a first-cut of rough on our fairways and the mower wasn't cheap, nor the added time and costs to have an employee or two maintain it. I suspect when budgets get cut, however, maintaining a first-cut of rough becomes a secondary consideration.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Count me as one who likes there to be variation in the rough. It looks pretty to have the rough maintained like a front yard but I like it when it is not uniform. By that I mean some places that are clumpy, some place where it is hard pan, and some plae of two or three inch grass. It is pretty boring if every shot out of the rough is the same.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Not cutting the fw gap between greenside bunkers is also a bugaboo of mine.  I even have a warning against it in my "standard" verbiage of my master plan report, it happens so often.  Of course, I customize the generalized points for each course, and recently, had to mention that it hadn't been a problem at this course, but I mention it just in case some future superintendent thinks it is a good way to save money.  Basically, if you want to cut fw mowing to save expense - which I understand, and is a component of many master plans these days - cutting by not cutting perhaps the most important 50 feet of fw on almost any given hole is surely not the place to do it.  Actually, one of the benefits of the new wave of shorter forward tees is that it allows fw to be cut much futher from the main tees, without shorter hitters straining just to reach it.


Tommy,  Mike Hurdzan once went on a soapbox to have the roughs renamed to the "smooths."  And there were a lot of old jokes about rough, as in "I spend so much time there, I think I'll buy a condo!" and similar. 


Does anyone remember the term "4 iron rough"?  As in, a 4 iron was the longest club you could hit out.  When I started in 1977, and worked many clubs around Chicago, I recall a discussion with a super even back then that the trend was to easier roughs and that phrase had been in disuse for a while.  He wasn't happy about it, because roughs took more and more attention.  If he's not retired, I'll bet the sand bunker perfection trend would really drive him nuts!

[Tom_Doak]

Let me posit this question to all you archies. If you had your druthers would there be a "first cut" of rough on any course? When I caddied in the 80's I don't recall this being a "thing". I'm going off strictly off memory, but I don't recall Oakland Hills having a first cut of rough along the fairways at the '85 open. When did that become 'en vogue' and why? BTW, count me in the minority, but aesthetically speaking I generally like the visual presented by a first-cut of rough.    However, I know that it comes at a price, as we had to buy a special mower when I was a member at Western Golf and Country Club to have a first-cut of rough on our fairways and the mower wasn't cheap, nor the added time and costs to have an employee or two maintain it. I suspect when budgets get cut, however, maintaining a first-cut of rough becomes a secondary consideration.

A first cut out of how many?


We have tried at a couple of clubs having no "intermediate" rough at all between fairway height and native rough.  It really doesn't work well.  Greenkeepers complain that there is no place to turn around the fairway mowers when they are cross-cutting, and that first couple of feet of "native" is bound to be extra thick from irrigation overspray, unless they are letting the edges of the fairway get toasty brown.


Likewise, around the greens, it's hard to have deep rough right up against a narrow collar, because the greens mower has to have room to make his U-turns.  Anything over about two inches right there is going to get pretty messy.  Now, if all the rough is two inches, no problem, but if you're insisting on having four-inch rough near the greens, then some sort of intermediate cut [or a wider collar] is probably necessary.

[Mike Bodo]

Likewise, around the greens, it's hard to have deep rough right up against a narrow collar, because the greens mower has to have room to make his U-turns.  Anything over about two inches right there is going to get pretty messy.  Now, if all the rough is two inches, no problem, but if you're insisting on having four-inch rough near the greens, then some sort of intermediate cut [or a wider collar] is probably necessary.

When Shinnecock last hosted the U.S. Open weren't there like three or four collars of rough around some of the greens - all at varying heights? I think I recall a thread here where someone posted an image of a golfer playing a chip off of one of the greens at Shinnecock during the Open in which there were arrows pointing to the different collars of rough around the green complex. I believe with the putting surface included there were five in total, which a number of us found absurd at the time. I suspect that was done specifically for the open, as I can't see that being maintained consistently for member play given the cost? However, with the amount of money Shinnecock has to throw around I could be wrong.

[Thomas Dai]

There was I believe a photo of the US Open last year at PB and I think it highlighted 5 different cut heights! I've tried to find the photo via the search engine but to no avail.
atb

[Mike Bodo]

There was I believe a photo of the US Open last year at PB and I think it highlighted 5 different cut heights! I've tried to find the photo via the search engine but to no avail.
atb

I think you may be right, Thomas. It may have been last year's U.S. Open at Pebble that image was posted from. Sucks working from memory sometimes. LOL!

[Kyle Harris]

Equal results for equal input is the definition of fair.


When rough is uniform you have the above situation.


Therefore uniformly maintained grass of any length is all fairway.


Rough should be... rough. I wrote about this all a few years ago:


*shameless plug alert*

https://kylewharris.com/2015/04/10/five-golf-maintenance-practices-i-abhor-and-why-you-should-too/

[Tom_Doak]

Mike B:


Yes, the USGA has taken graduated rough to the extreme in its championship preparation, all in the name of Fairness.  Unfortunately some clubs, watching this, follow suit, but they usually stop once they figure out how much it costs to have four machines mowing rough at different heights.

[Edward Glidewell]

Last year we reached out to all of our older courses to offer a free day of consulting from one of my associates.  We have found the most pressing problems to be tree growth and changes to mowing lines -- at several courses the greens have shrunk significantly and fairways, too.

Is this why your associate was at the Legends in Myrtle Beach? Or is there the possibility of some renovation work there?

[SL_Solow]

I have been fighting this battle at my club for years and I expect it will be continued when we resume as we have a new irrigation system.  I am getting old as I was the greens chair when the prior system was installed.  One faction wants uniform thick rough.  Others want it cut down to more manageable heights.  None seem to appreciate randomness.  Last season our Super, with a little help, convinced the club to do away with a first cut.  Saved money, looked great actually widened the fairways by a little bit.  Lasted about a month and the clamoring for the old look with a first cut prevailed.

[Tom_Doak]

Last year we reached out to all of our older courses to offer a free day of consulting from one of my associates.  We have found the most pressing problems to be tree growth and changes to mowing lines -- at several courses the greens have shrunk significantly and fairways, too.

Is this why your associate was at the Legends in Myrtle Beach? Or is there the possibility of some renovation work there?

Yes.  I don't think they're in the market for a big renovation as they are still pouring 60,000+ rounds a year through there.  But Brian might have convinced them to remove the front bunker at the 6th and put back the original mound, which I had intended to be like the one on the 4th hole at The Old Course.  Instead, the original superintendent decided he couldn't mow it tight, and stuck a couple of clumps of lovegrass on it 😮

[Mark_Fine]

I personally don't like graduated rough.  I do, however, like the look of a fairway without a first cut.  We tried it at my home club but the membership didn't care for it and they have added it back.  What I don't care for however is a bent grass fairway the butts right up to high rough (3" or 4” for example).  You can see why many golfers don't like that as it leads to more balls than you think caught up again the edge.  It is the same with closely mown areas (short grass) around greens.  When I put those in, I try to make sure the short grass goes beyond the toe of the slope so every ball that rolls off into one of these areas doesn’t always roll into the rough or up against it. It has nothing to do with "fairness", it has to do with design intent  


On a related note to Tommy’s topic about how an architect wants things maintained after grow-in; I heard something about Streamsong already regrassing their greens on two of the courses with some new Bermuda grass called “Mach 1”     I will let others who know more comment but wonder what this move will trigger/signal to other courses?  Isn’t the place only five or six years old?

[corey miller]

I have always assumed on Eastern Parkland courses the the "first-cut" developed when the difference between the fairway height and the rough height became too great. 


That is, add in the "first-cut" because it would not only stop balls from the high punitive rough, be playable (many prefer the first cut) and it got rid of the "unfair" occurrence of a ball up against the high grass.  Do clubs really need a "first-cut" if the rough itself is at an appropriate playable length?


At my home club, which is highly undulating and where the ball should actually roll (less rough), we took out the "first-cut" of rough presumably to make the course more "classic" looking and now there are some that want higher rough.  My guess is that in a year they will want a return of the "first-cut"


Geez...I really wish that all this "rough talk" were not so taboo!!!

[Sean_A]

Corey

It did occur to me that the age of graduated rough came as fairways became shorter. That still doesn't explain the pinch cut lines. This way of cutting fairways is so prevalent on parkland courses that it actually looks weird to take cut lines outside of bunkers near greens. I spose often times there aren't natural looking areas to to stop fairways. Then of course, trees started to invade these areas as well leaving even less choices to end fairways well.

It was interesting to watch the Pebble Shells Wonderful...Fairways looked really good when there wasn't such a difference to the rough. But the pinched lines near greens was still going on.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Let me posit this question to all you archies. If you had your druthers would there be a "first cut" of rough on any course? When I caddied in the 80's I don't recall this being a "thing". I'm going off strictly off memory, but I don't recall Oakland Hills having a first cut of rough along the fairways at the '85 open. When did that become 'en vogue' and why? BTW, count me in the minority, but aesthetically speaking I generally like the visual presented by a first-cut of rough.    However, I know that it comes at a price, as we had to buy a special mower when I was a member at Western Golf and Country Club to have a first-cut of rough on our fairways and the mower wasn't cheap, nor the added time and costs to have an employee or two maintain it. I suspect when budgets get cut, however, maintaining a first-cut of rough becomes a secondary consideration.

Had to laugh at this ? because I just recommended my first one the other day.  But the real reason was that I am proposing narrowing fairways for them to save money, and didn't want to bring the rough all the way in to maintain playability.  But the real reason was that I wanted a 6-10 foot wide sod line to establish the bent fairways, and maybe, just maybe that sod and a lot of mulch will keep the bent fairway seed from washing into the outer rough and giving a patchwork quilt look, as they had before.  The agronomist we brought in recommended it first.

[Brian Ross]

What did all the Golden Age books say about rough?  Not much.  MacKenzie said that at the great schools of golf, like St. Andrews and Hoylake, it was hard to determine the line between fairway and rough.  I don't remember Thomas or Simpson saying anything about it at all.

A little late to the party, but Tom is right that the golden age GCAs had little to say about rough as a design element. Here are a few quotes on rough that I have found, though:

"I have already said that long grass is of little interest as a hazard. On the other hand, undulating ground consisting of hillocks and hollows is of enormous interest."
Alister MacKenzie – The Spirit of St. Andrews

"Narrow fairways bordered by long grass make bad golfers. They do so by destroying the harmony and continuity of the game and in causing a stilted and a cramped style, destroying all freedom of play."
Alister MacKenzie – The Spirit of St. Andrews

"Rough grass is of no value for protecting danger points; it has no effect on keeping people straight, but merely prolongs the length of time players are in the danger zone."
Alister MacKenzie – The Spirit of St. Andrews

"The confinement of width of play by the rough precludes to a great extent the creating of future threats. And even where they exist, the player whose ball has found the rough has not a lie to make a direct attack upon them. He must contend himself with a negative shot. Therefore the penal idea that makes a virtue of rough with its penal bunkers, robs nature, the opponent, of deploying herself strategically. And that simply means intelligently."
Max Behr

"The lost ball feature of rough is an ever-present evil."
George Thomas

[Edward Glidewell]

Yes.  I don't think they're in the market for a big renovation as they are still pouring 60,000+ rounds a year through there.  But Brian might have convinced them to remove the front bunker at the 6th and put back the original mound, which I had intended to be like the one on the 4th hole at The Old Course.  Instead, the original superintendent decided he couldn't mow it tight, and stuck a couple of clumps of lovegrass on it 😮

My family has a beach house at Ocean Isle Beach in NC, so I've played a lot of the courses up and down the coast in that area. I have not played any of the Legends courses, but I've been wanting to head down there and play Heathland since you designed it. Maybe I should wait and see if they follow his suggestions first.


I'm not surprised that they don't want to do any major work, though. I don't think any of the courses in that area have done much of anything outside of changing the greens to Bermuda or rebuilding bunkers this century (at least that I can remember). It probably doesn't make financial sense for them to do so -- seems like they're all either busy enough that they wouldn't want to lose the revenue from having to miss a season/they don't see the need to make changes, or they aren't doing well and can't afford to spend the money necessary to do a renovation.

[Thomas Dai]

I seem to recall a time when a tractor pulling a gangmower would cut pretty much everywhere (apart from the greens and narrow fringes, which were hand mown) to the same height except where the terrain was too steep or there were trees/scrub/ditches etc. If only ..
atb


PS - Those who've played sheep grazed courses might be inclined to suggest that the optimum height of cut for fairways is the height sheep nibble grass too! I for one don't recall playing a sheep grazed course with anything other than good fairways. And with sheep there are no contrived mowing lines and weird mowing patterns!