Jim Arthur and golf agronomy

[Thomas Dai]

Folks might (or might not) like to read this piece the link to which was sent to me recently about Jim Arthur - agronomist and author of the famous book 'Practical Greenkeeping'.
https://www.bigga.org.uk/news-listing/the-outspoken-agronomist-who-saved-links-golf.html
atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Enjoyed it.  Makes the distinction of Americans wanting it green to show status, right from the beginning, apparently.  That may be why it's so hard to turn around. The average members emotional attachment to status far outweighs their desire to play golf in the best fashion possible.

[Thomas Dai]

Nice piece here that's worth a read - https://www.greenkeepingeu.com/jim-arthurs-five-principles-of-conservation-greenkeeping/
atb

[James Boon]

Thanks, will read these articles later and just wanted to suggest anyone interest gets hold of a copy of Jim Arthur's book Practical Greenkeeping, but they are going for £100 plus on Amazon!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Practical-Greenkeeping-Jim-Arthur/dp/0907583121

Its been a while since I read it cover to cover and I said I'd probably only have the time to reread it if I ever got on the greens committee at my club (but then I also said I'd only do that if things started going in the wrong direction, which thankfully with Gordon Irvine consulting the club they arent) but I do dip into it from time to time.

Cheers,

James

[John Emerson]

Enjoyed it.  Makes the distinction of Americans wanting it green to show status, right from the beginning, apparently.  That may be why it's so hard to turn around. The average members emotional attachment to status far outweighs their desire to play golf in the best fashion possible.

Agreed. But, I believe that golf in the USA and golf in the Uk are not even remotely related and they should not be compared.

[Kyle Cruickshank]

Thanks, will read these articles later and just wanted to suggest anyone interest gets hold of a copy of Jim Arthur's book Practical Greenkeeping, but they are going for £100 plus on Amazon!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Practical-Greenkeeping-Jim-Arthur/dp/0907583121

Its been a while since I read it cover to cover and I said I'd probably only have the time to reread it if I ever got on the greens committee at my club (but then I also said I'd only do that if things started going in the wrong direction, which thankfully with Gordon Irvine consulting the club they arent) but I do dip into it from time to time.
https://shop.randa.org/practical-greenkeeping-third-edition-2


can get a copy from the R&A shop for £30
Cheers,

James

[Adrian_Stiff]

Enjoyed it.  Makes the distinction of Americans wanting it green to show status, right from the beginning, apparently.  That may be why it's so hard to turn around. The average members emotional attachment to status far outweighs their desire to play golf in the best fashion possible.

Agreed. But, I believe that golf in the USA and golf in the Uk are not even remotely related and they should not be compared.

I think you are 100% correct, you just can't compare the methods of maintaining the different grasses and climates. Jim Arthur first visited the USA GCSAA in 1987 on the same trip as I did. It was in Phoenix. He spoke in one of the sessions. I did have a tape of the seminar but it will be in some box somewhere but I clearly remember a Canadian Superintendent wiping the floor with him in the Q & A. The Canadian was spot on, Jim had only ever seen 4 US golf courses and was ranting about how bad US maintenance was citing stuff that he clearly had no knowledge on. Jim Arthurs practical greenkeeping won't work in most US states in fact it does not really work anywhere in my opinion where you have high volumes of play. We always said the book should be called 'Impractical Greenkeeping' but the real truth was a 180 degrees to Jim's way which would work perfectly if was 1948 and on a remote course with sheep no budget and golfers happy to putt on greens stimping at 5. I went to America thinking I knew everything about greenkeeping and the yanks were just feed it and weep merchants because thats what Jim fed us. It was on that first meet at TPC Scotsdale I realised I knew shit and a lot less than the Americans. From then I started learning.
In my opinion the book should be thrown away, perhaps in a place where you can just about find it. I much prefered Martyn Jones as an advisor as he was practical.

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Enjoyed it.  Makes the distinction of Americans wanting it green to show status, right from the beginning, apparently.  That may be why it's so hard to turn around. The average members emotional attachment to status far outweighs their desire to play golf in the best fashion possible.

Agreed. But, I believe that golf in the USA and golf in the Uk are not even remotely related and they should not be compared.

I think you are 100% correct, you just can't compare the methods of maintaining the different grasses and climates. Jim Arthur first visited the USA GCSAA in 1987 on the same trip as I did. It was in Phoenix. He spoke in one of the sessions. I did have a tape of the seminar but it will be in some box somewhere but I clearly remember a Canadian Superintendent wiping the floor with him in the Q & A. The Canadian was spot on, Jim had only ever seen 4 US golf courses and was ranting about how bad US maintenance was citing stuff that he clearly had no knowledge on. Jim Arthurs practical greenkeeping won't work in most US states in fact it does not really work anywhere in my opinion where you have high volumes of play. We always said the book should be called 'Impractical Greenkeeping' but the real truth was a 180 degrees to Jim's way which would work perfectly if was 1948 and on a remote course with sheep no budget and golfers happy to putt on greens stimping at 5. I went to America thinking I knew everything about greenkeeping and the yanks were just feed it and weep merchants because thats what Jim fed us. It was on that first meet at TPC Scotsdale I realised I knew shit and a lot less than the Americans. From then I started learning.
In my opinion the book should be thrown away, perhaps in a place where you can just about find it. I much prefered Martyn Jones as an advisor as he was practical.

I always dismissed the book based on what I thought it was about- ie an old school way to grow turf - but I bought it when studying for my MG exam as I knew that testing would also be covering the more traditional practices.


To my surprise, I was actually doing a lot of what was in the book. In some ways I can see how it would be torn apart from a US perspective and to be fair that's where I originally took it from. The opinion of the book in the US is sort of the reverse of Jim Arthurs opinion of the US and that the UK was somehow backwards. While I definitely agree that there is a huge gap between the US and UK standards (required from the golfer) and therefore budgets, there is still a lot that can be learned from both sides.


There are a lot solid practices in the book that can be applied anywhere, however I say it with caution as they cannot just be implemented quickly, especially as in the US the turf is heavily managed, so some of these practices would come as a shock to it. The big issue is in the US there are the huge variation of the weather/climate across the country, whereas the UK has pretty much perfect grass growing weather all year. The basics apply everywhere - aeration, proper watering, topdressing, proper fertilization and actually growing the correct turf for the environment (although the latter there is difficult in the US due to the variation in climate).


IMO there is a lot of validity to whats in the book a lot of the it can translate to the US but in an adapted form. I think as we go forward with less labor, environmental & water issues/restrictions etc that we will see more adoption of some of these ideas in the US as once the basics are right, it makes growing the turf a lot easier.

[Max Prokopy]

Thank you for the link.  It's hard to imagine a comparison between the two continents.  Here in the northeast the grasses, soils, humus, mycellium, etc., but navigate 0 - 100 Fahrenheit.  That's a lot different than the UK, especially considering that the eastern US rainfall is so concentrated in the hottest months. 

[archie_struthers]

 




When Alan Fitz speaks , listen. 


One thing you know about this world of agronomy is it's constantly changing and one of the more difficult things in the world to master. He speaks to a little modulation in criticism of Arthur, which I think is wise. Consider the man was born in 1920. Certainly there are truth's from different eras' that still have great value.


I've long been a proponent that water , and the sparing use of it has contributed to some of the great turf growers of all time. But it's just not that simple. Kudo's to all our supers out there who work long hours to deliver golf to us all.


By the way Alan learned from a guy who certainly could be argued as the "goat" when it comes to the art. Dick Bator

[David_Tepper]

And it should be remembered that this is not just US vs. GB&I maintenance practices. Golf is played around the world in a wide variety of climates and on many different grasses covering different types of soil. One size does not fit all.

It also should be remembered that the vast majority of golf played in the U.S. is not played at lush, well manicured country clubs, but rather on public courses that are in many cases under-funded and in marginal condition. Likewise, the majority of golf in GB&I is not played on firm links turf, but rather on inland courses that are often soft and water-logged.   

[Stephen Britton]

For anyone wanting the 3rd edition.
https://shop.randa.org/practical-greenkeeping-third-edition-2

[Chris Tritabaugh]

I own a copy of Jim Arthur's book and find it fascinating every time I pick it up. I haven't picked it up in a long time, maybe 10 years or so and at the moment, I'm not even sure where it sits.


During my time as a golf course superintendent, I've been surprised and disappointed by how willing colleagues are to deride writings like Practical Greenkeeping for being, well, non-practical. This is something I've experienced with my own writings on turf management; colleagues saying, "well, that's great, but it doesn't work here." Of course this is true, but it doesn't mean the person doing the writing is wrong. The reader does bear some responsibility to cull out what is and what isn't relevant to one's particular situation. Alan's experience with the book is to me, a perfect example of how to consume any piece of information. What is relevant? What isn't? How can I learn from this?


As Alan stated earlier, there is much within Arthur's book that can be relevant to managing turf anywhere. I'm not sure it is the responsibility of the author to offer a caveat to each piece of information. Rather it is the reader who maintains responsibility for deciding what is and what is not relevant to them and their situation.