Why have mowing lines evolved …

[Thomas Dai]

Why do so many fairway mowing lines converge and bottle-neck at the front of greens?

atb

[Sean_A]

Why do so many fairway mowing lines converge and bottle-neck at the front of greens?

atb

I have been asking this question since about 1995. The only answer I ever received is because folks like the way it looks. My whole life the look of a skinny fairway between fronting greenside bunkers on an uphill hole has been THE US parkland look...especially Midwest and Northeast. That said, I have seen the odd fairway mowed around bunkers and it does look odd, probably because it's so unusual. Usually this look works well if the fairway is cut for quite some distance around the green. If the fairway is cut a few yards around the bunkers to match the cut around the green it looks a highly artificial cut line which doesn't match the grade of the terrain.

Ciao

[Ben Hollerbach]

Even on courses with wide, expansive fairways, its not uncommon to see features such as bunkers and mounding that create a more natural bottleneck to the entrance of the green. It would seem that overtime the grass lines were brought in to mimic the presence of these features, creating a similar challenge to a running ball trying to reach the green, without the feature needing to be present.

At the same time, as the game evolved to be more aerial focused, the bottleneck acted as a buffer for poorly hit aerial shots. A player expecting to fly the ball all the way to the green would be unlikely to find a miss hit shot landing short and bouncing up onto the green.

As bunker shapes and mowing lines became simplified during the post-war era, the bottleneck presented both a visual separation between the fairway and the green complex, while also acting as a type of hazard within a more aerial focused game.

[Tim Martin]

Even on courses with wide, expansive fairways, its not uncommon to see features such as bunkers and mounding that create a more natural bottleneck to the entrance of the green. It would seem that overtime the grass lines were brought in to mimic the presence of these features, creating a similar challenge to a running ball trying to reach the green, without the feature needing to be present.

At the same time, as the game evolved to be more aerial focused, the bottleneck acted as a buffer for poorly hit aerial shots. A player expecting to fly the ball all the way to the green would be unlikely to find a miss hit shot landing short and bouncing up onto the green.

As bunker shapes and mowing lines became simplified during the post-war era, the bottleneck presented both a visual separation between the fairway and the green complex, while also acting as a type of hazard within a more aerial focused game.

Ben-I think that’s spot on analysis with reference to the “aerial” game. It drives me crazy on the longer holes where I believe the original mow lines were intended to allow the player to bounce the ball into the greens through short grass with a fairway wood or low lofted iron(brassie, spoon, baffy or cleek). Obviously my reference is to golden age courses.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Ben-I think that’s spot on analysis with reference to the “aerial” game. It drives me crazy on the longer holes where I believe the original mow lines were intended to allow the player to bounce the ball into the greens through short grass with a fairway wood or low lofted iron(brassie, spoon, baffy or cleek). Obviously my reference is to golden age courses.

Pure speculation, but I would believe the creation of these bottleneck openings were in response to players already shifting to more aerial play. As the equipment made lofting the ball in the air easier and fairway irrigation became more common, players naturally stopped running the ball along the ground as much and the bottle neck became a maintenance choice that followed.

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks for these thoughts.
I was wondering to what extent the difference in turning circle from fairway gang mowers to ride-on fairway mowers was involved?
Atb

[Sean_A]

Even on courses with wide, expansive fairways, its not uncommon to see features such as bunkers and mounding that create a more natural bottleneck to the entrance of the green. It would seem that overtime the grass lines were brought in to mimic the presence of these features, creating a similar challenge to a running ball trying to reach the green, without the feature needing to be present.

At the same time, as the game evolved to be more aerial focused, the bottleneck acted as a buffer for poorly hit aerial shots. A player expecting to fly the ball all the way to the green would be unlikely to find a miss hit shot landing short and bouncing up onto the green.

As bunker shapes and mowing lines became simplified during the post-war era, the bottleneck presented both a visual separation between the fairway and the green complex, while also acting as a type of hazard within a more aerial focused game.

But the aerial game is not effected by fairway lines. The line could be inside the bunkers and a ring around the green or outside the bunkers and near the base of the rise. I think the cutlines are more about an aesthetic choice and/or a choice of penal/strategy philosophy.

Until recent years I think it had become more about tradition/that's the way it has always been. We are now seeing that philosophy change, although Oak Hill is very much traditional.

Ciao

[Charlie Ray]

Have you guys ever mowed grass? 


Mowing lines move because a human being is operating the mower. 



Everyone on this board enjoys Golf Architecture.  We ponder and discuss why things are the way they are.  But 95% of the guys mowing don't.  If fairways are cut 60-150 times a year do you realize how a small discrepancy/mistake/rounding a corner, etc. continues to 'grow.'  Anyone familiar with how the 'mowing lines' are communicated?  Is there a final 'plan' given to the superintendent by the architect with mowing lines... or is it 'organic'

[Tim Martin]

Have you guys ever mowed grass? 


Mowing lines move because a human being is operating the mower. 



Everyone on this board enjoys Golf Architecture.  We ponder and discuss why things are the way they are.  But 95% of the guys mowing don't.  If fairways are cut 60-150 times a year do you realize how a small discrepancy/mistake/rounding a corner, etc. continues to 'grow.'  Anyone familiar with how the 'mowing lines' are communicated?  Is there a final 'plan' given to the superintendent by the architect with mowing lines... or is it 'organic'

Charlie-My guess would be that the suggested mowing lines are passed on to the super/owner by the architect and established during the grow in. They certainly could be subject to change going forward.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

My whole life the look of a skinny fairway between fronting greenside bunkers on an uphill hole has been THE US parkland look...especially Midwest and Northeast.

The unfortunate thing is… the "unbalanced" holes with maybe a fairway-height area to one side and a bunker to the other side are often the more interesting holes to play, and the ones that force weirder decisions from players.


One of the best things one of the courses I grew up playing was to eliminate one hazard on one side on many of their holes, enhancing the "unbalanced-ness".

[Matt Schoolfield]

I always assumed it was mostly the fact that American parkland typical features elevated greens for drainage purposes, and that mowing the slopes only makes sense in the front, creating the bottleneck shape.

[Tom_Doak]

I asked the superintendent at Crystal Downs about this in the 1980's, when all the approaches were a narrow neck.  It had been done as part of a plan to reduce the acreage of fairway turf [because spraying bent grass fairways for disease costs $$$].  But he was also genuinely unaware that it might have been different back in the day . . . it was just a fashion that he'd seen on championship courses on TV, so he did it the same way, to look more "formal".  A lot of changes happen in that way.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I'm sure it varies a lot.  It probably depends on turf types and a few other things, but I have seen supers who mow the approach and collar (not the fringe) with the same riding mower and the narrow neck represents that mower going in, circling the green, and going out.  The mower is 5 foot wide, so if the neck in 9-10 feet wide, this might be it.


Which I guess is better than those superintendents who simply turn the fw mover short of the fronting bunkers and leave rough up to the green.  I hope I am not insulting superintendents here, but I only ran across a few who would know or care enough about design to figure taking out the fw approach is really affecting the design.

[Ben Hollerbach]

But the aerial game is not effected by fairway lines.

Sure it is, the tighter the bottle neck the more the aerial game matters.  If a player has a limited opportunity to run the ball onto the green, a higher priority is placed on their ability to fly the ball and stop it on the green.

[Tom_Doak]

Which I guess is better than those superintendents who simply turn the fw mover short of the fronting bunkers and leave rough up to the green.  I hope I am not insulting superintendents here, but I only ran across a few who would know or care enough about design to figure taking out the fw approach is really affecting the design.

Really?  I think it's much different for the newer generation of greenskeepers.  Most of them have taken at least a beginner class in golf course architecture at university, and/or the one at the GCSAA show, that Geoff Cornish and Mike Hurdzan used to teach.  [Who does that now?]


Of course, a lot of that is pretty basic architecture, but there are also a ton of podcasts and other resources for learning more, compared to ten or twenty years ago.  I am amazed at how many comments I get about the Fried Egg podcasts I do . . . I have no idea how many people actually listen to them, but it must be quite a few.

[Sean_A]

But the aerial game is not effected by fairway lines.

Sure it is, the tighter the bottle neck the more the aerial game matters.  If a player has a limited opportunity to run the ball onto the green, a higher priority is placed on their ability to fly the ball and stop it on the green.

Not really. The issue for bouncing in shots are the bunkers. The fairway cutline is very much a secondary issue.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Have you guys ever mowed grass? 
Mowing lines move because a human being is operating the mower. 
Everyone on this board enjoys Golf Architecture.  We ponder and discuss why things are the way they are.  But 95% of the guys mowing don't.  If fairways are cut 60-150 times a year do you realize how a small discrepancy/mistake/rounding a corner, etc. continues to 'grow.'  Anyone familiar with how the 'mowing lines' are communicated?  Is there a final 'plan' given to the superintendent by the architect with mowing lines... or is it 'organic'

Plus ease of use and lines of least resistance given the machinery the mower-man is driving and all that. Modern ride-on mowers spin on a dime and so can cut intricately in confined areas whereas yee olden day tractor towed gang mowers have a much greater turning circle and don’t like operating in confined spaces (nor being reversed!!).
Similar to how green fringes have evolved in many places to be a wider distance away from bunker edges based on the width of cut of a modern era ride-on mower whereas when they were cut with hand-mowers the gapping was different.
Atb