GCISINC - GWSuperNEWS and a good idea we should follow

[Jim Thompson]

Just got my e-update for Golfweek SuperNEWS and saw this clip  - http://supernewsonline.com/index.asp?clip=7.  I know we've talked about this study before, but the GCISINC seems like it could be one of the best ideas for compiling data and educating players ever.  We are going to participate at AC and I encourage those of you out there who can influence the decision to do the same.

Cheers!

JT

[Craig Sweet]

Jim, I agree...it sounds like an excellent way to approach this...however, I wonder how important this issue is on a public course that see's a lot of rounds? Is there a sense that "you get what you pay for" and "the greens are what they are, considering all the play"?

[Craig Sweet]

Jim..sorry...I hit send before finishing the post.

I can appreciate a super getting bombarded by the membership and the greens committee about green speed....but isn't this just more work and a big waste of money and time for a lot of supers?  

I would bet that on a day in and day out basis green speed does not vary that much.  Of course there are factors man made, and mother nature made, that can speed up or slow down green speed daily, but in general, the greens are going to run about he same from day to day....

This sounds to me to be more of a political weapon for the super than a maintinance tool....

[RJ_Daley]

I think it is not a waste of time, and such data can only help to determine several things.  The ideal or acceptable speed for the individual course and collective membership.  Also, the ideal cutting height and seasonal adjustments and other cultrual practices for the super. It is good to know when things are too fast, and not acceptable as well.  I think Crystal Downs has seen green speeds too fast for greens like 10 and 11.

I'm not sure if I understood Mr. Morris right.  Did they ask the members on a daily basis to inform them merely if they liked that days green speed?  Or, did they ask multiple questions like, was the green speed and consistency of a true roll enjoyable?  And, did they find the speeds seemed consistent from green to green.  Would they like to see the greens slower, faster, or status quo?

I think you'd have to match that secret graph to a few criteria as mentioned above.  You might get different correlations.  11 greens may appear too bumpy, too fast for the contours, etc., and elicit negative responses.  Days of 8.5 greens may settle into a status quo that builds a consensus for enjoyment for matching contours, true rolls, and healthy turf that becomes the standard, even though they originally thought they'd want it faster.  Then, I think preferances would emerge from course to course, based on area of the country, turf species, and culture including private or public.

Maybe the increased amount of info is daunting, and maybe a long time super knows most of this, although the indicatin in the video was than supers expressed no idea where their users were at on these matters.

[Craig Sweet]

RJ, I agree...but I was wondering how concerned about green speed are those golfers that play $25 muni's all the time?

And given the limited budgets most muni supers have is this a waste of time?  Like I said, I doubt their greens speed change a whole lot during the peak season....thus the golfer gets what he gets...

As for the survey's...my read was the super stimps several greens twice a day...they then do a blind survey of the golfers and ask them how they like the greens that day...looking at the responses, and the day/time of response the super can plot out green speed and golfer reaction....when CD did this, 80% had favorable responses on days when the green speed was between 9.5 and 10.5....

[Jim Thompson]

Its really kind of funny, when I saw the clip the first thing I dismissed was the whole membership survey part.  Probably because I am the green committee.  I thought the GCISINC was the meat and potatoes of the clip.  The good idea part.  I think operators would benefit from having some place to store data relative to maintenance practice and consistency not only form week to week but from super to super, eliminating the guess work for the next guy seems like a good idea to me.  Dr. Nikolai has written a number of pieces you can look up via google and once you get past the whole survey part there are some great ideas under the surface.  I think you'd be impressed with some of the ideas.  I guess I thought more folks were up to speed on the entire project.  Imagine the benefits from a turf research aspect relative to different types of turf.  Imagine not having to guess what to do with your first crop of L-93, T-1, A-4, G-2 or whatever.  I think everyone in turf would benefit from that knowledge.

Cheers!

JT

[Craig Sweet]

Not long ago I was doing some calibration with my super...it was the first time I had done this on such a large scale (100gals. vs. 1gal or 5gals...)so he worked through the whole calculation stuff with me before mixing...

When we finished doing the math and figuring what we needed he pulled a folder from his desk drawer....and laid out the info from the previous 3 years...all figured out on a sheet of the same unlined white paper we were using...we were right on the money when we compared this year to previous years...

The point being, I think most supers have a system for recordkeeping for those maintinance issues that matter....

Jim, we have a small crew consisting of the Super, his assistant and the mechanic, and 7 or 8 seasonal employees...the Super does course set up everyday like the rest of us. He might pick up the trash on the course one day and mow greens the next, just like the rest of us...if a piece of equipment breaks he is often working on it with the mechanic...somedays he IS the mechanic. If the dishwasher breaks in the snack bar he fixes it...

As we lower the height of cut on the greens in the spring, he will stimp them shortly after each adjustment....during the Montana Open he will stimp them each day because "pro's" want to know how fast the greens are...other than that from past experience he knows they are running 9.5-10 day in and day out.

Will keeping detailed records on green speed make his job any easier? No...  

Will it change how fast our greens play? No....

BUT....like I said, under different circumstances knowing green speed and maintaining records could be a valuable political tool for the super...

Given enough money and man power that super might use that knowledge to his advantage in maintaining his course...certain cultural practices will yield different results, and the data might be easier tracked using this software...but I question how many supers need to do this and for how long?