[Sean_A]

I have heard some folks say that new technology has enhanced some architectural features.  Are false fronts enhanced by faster greens and higher spinning balls?  I would have thought that many false fronts wouldn't be so treacherous when greens are rolling at 6, but very much so on greens rolling at 9.5.  Of course there are probably loads of greens that have had their fronts lifted a bit to counteract overly fast greens.  

What do you folks think?  Has technology made false fronts more exciting?  What are some examples of false fronts that don't matter much if they greens aren't rolling at modern speeds?  Have false fronts been created unintentionally due to technology?

Ciao

Sean

[TEPaul]

"Has technology made false fronts more exciting?  What are some examples of false fronts that don't matter much if they greens aren't rolling at modern speeds?  Have false fronts been created unintentionally due to technology?"

Sean:

Definitely but not intentionally. At my course, GMGC in Philly, at least four greens now have functioning false fronts or false fronts that function more effectively than they used to due to green expansions and slightly faster green speeds.

Personally I think they are an excellent feature strategically and they enhance the basic theme of the course which is the prevalence of uphill approaches and the need to take more club to be sure the ball gets on the green, and now on these four or so greens past the false fronts.

The other original purpose of false fronts I believe was to simply show the approaching golfer from below the width of the green fronts. Otherwise he would not be as sure of the dimensions of the green and green front while approaching it from below.

One factor that actually works to somewhat minimize the effect of balls rolling back off false fronts is firmer green surfaces. Greens that are soft increase the roll-off effect of false fronts.

Interestingly, we also have two greens that due to our green expansions and slightly higher green speed strategically counter-act two false fronts. They are what I call "kick-ups" on the rear of greens where balls that are slightly long will roll up and roll back down the green. The kick-ups are also green space and can be used for some neat added shot options for recovery shots from the sides of those greens.

[Adam Clayman]

Not only green surfaces, the approach apron needs to be firm.
Since most of these types of greens drain to the front, the apron is often too soft to use other than aerial options. Which IMO, sucketh.

[Ed_Baker]

Adam, An excellent point about the drainage and I too agree that soft approaches sucketh!!

A few years ago the Bayhill PGA tournament had the soft approach, firm green conditions and the pros weren't happy, that condition is about the worst "maintenance meld" that can exist, IMHO. But your very astute observation about the effect of the drainage on those types of greens hopefully will illustrate to many players just how difficult it is to produce the ideal maintenance meld and just how fragile the balance between good and poor playability is, A 20 minute tropical downpour can change firm and fast to What the f..., in a heartbeat.

I think technology has narrowed the curve between optimal,acceptable, poor, and silly playing conditions, because the older courses with the really contoured greens,false fronts, ect. are running on the ragged edge speed wise too much of the time so that weather events even small ones like a drop in humidity radically effect playability almost immediatly.

[tlavin]

A firm false front is a delightful way to defend a short hole, particularly a short par 4.  The 16th at Olympia Fields South is a 350 yard hole with a false front that probably amounts to 35% of the putting surface.  Some complain that good shots get penalized when they spin off the green and that it is too risky to go at the flagstick because coming back from behind the green is too perilous, but the false front provides the only meaningful defense to par on this otherwise simple hole.  On our master plan to rebuild the South Course, the green will be untouched, to the best of my understanding, despite those who think it's too punitive.  To me, it's what makes the hole interesting and challenging.

[T.J. Sturges]

Sean,

My feeling is that if a green needs to stimp at 9 or higher to have balls roll off it's false front, then it's probably not a false front.  Gravity is gravity and if it's indeed a false front, then the ball will roll off (unless it's maintained at rough height).  

After playing golf for 40 years, I've heard just about every "golf saying" there is....but a couple that still make me grin when I hear them (which can be uttered when tackling a false front).

1.  "nothing rolls like a ball"   (first heard this one when I was a teenager and putted from above the hole on a fast green with a false front...the ball stopped some 15 yards off the green...my fellow competitor laid that one on me, which didn't seem funny until the next day).

2.  "Good morning Mr. Ross"   (heard quite a bit at my home club of Broadmoor during morning rounds...as mis-struck shots roll off edges of the putting greens, false fronts included).

TS

[Brent Hutto]

2.  "Good morning Mr. Ross"   (heard quite a bit at my home club of Broadmoor during morning rounds...as mis-struck shots roll off edges of the putting greens, false fronts included).

Pine Needles was the first Donald Ross course I ever played. It was also my buddy Dave's first time and he must have had a dozen balls roll off greens and into bunkers over 36 holes that day, including at least one bunker shot that landed in the middle of a green and took about ten minutes to trickle across and into the bunker on the other side.

Over dinner that night he was complaining about the ghost of Donald Ross having nothing better to do than follow him around all day pushing balls into bunkers.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()