News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Peter Galea

  • Karma: +0/-0
"Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« on: August 19, 2002, 05:10:41 PM »
After promising to post this several months ago, I finally found it. From the September 2, 1994 edition of Golf World:

Our Watered Down Game
by Brad Faxon

Golf in America is too green.
I'm serious. What America needs is a good old-fashioned water shortage. Green is pretty. It's beautiful. It's pleasing to look at. But it doesn't make golf courses play the way they should-the way they were meant to play.

Green means lush. Green equals soft. And soft isn't good. Over-watered golf courses have become standard in America. The word "roll" isn't even in am American players vacabulary anymore. I think that's unfortunate. The scope of the problem, however goes way beyond the setup of PGA Tour courses.

America's obsession with green has changed golf. The way American courses are maintained has changed the way equipment is made, the way courses are designed and the way people swing.

Look at the courses. All of a sudden we're playing courses where you've got to hit the ball up in the air and stop it. Architecture went from Tillinghast, Mackenzie and Ross to Nicklaus and Dye. The game went from horizontal to vertical.

Look in your bag. Perimeter-weighted clubs make the ball go higher.(The better to play those new courses.) Square grooves make the ball spin and stop quicker out of the rough. And then there's the lob wedge. (The better to escape Pete Dye death-bunkers.) The old Brits never had an L-wedge. They never needed one off those tight lies.

Look at the swings. We went from swings like Ben Hogan and Byron Nelson to more upright swings like Tom Watson and Jack Nicklaus, guys who hit the ball real high. The current popular swing has becom more upright.

Go back in the history of golf in Scotland. Courses were just laid out on the ground somewhere near the coast. They had no irrigation. They relied totally on the weather. Golf was played along the ground. The elements made conditions tough. And you had a sand-based soil that was easy to keep firm. Ther were a lot of tight, hard fairway lies and you had to bump the ball along the ground and allow for roll.

I'm not blaming American superintendents. If there's a brown spot on a country club these days, the greens comittee calls an emergency meeting. I think the club members see the Bob Hope Classic or the the Masters on television and say, "That's what we ought to have."

So their courses look great but they don't play the way they should. I grew up on a classic old Donald Ross course, Rhode Island CC. The first hole is a short par 4, open in front of the green. When I started out as a caddie, the members would hit a 5- or 6-iron, land it 10 or 15 yards short of the green and let it bounce onto the putting surface. That's how you played. You used the contours and allowed for them.

When I went back to play there during college, maintenance had changed the course. I hit 5-irons out of the rough that backed up. Balls stuck on the greens. The course was so much softer and easier. People at the club said, "Brad, this is the best this course has ever been." I said, "No, this is the 'greenest' it's ever been." And they didn't know what I  was talking about.

Green is OK if it's firm. That isn't usually the case in the U.S., where over-watering reigns. Warwick Hills, home of the Buick Open is one of the longest courses we play and always gives up some fo the lowest scores. I played there Monday after the tournament and talked to the head pro. He told me the superintendent is scared to death the tour will starve his course and he won't be able to keep it green after the tournament. So he drenches it for two weeks before, but we've had rain this year, our drives plugged and we played preferred lies the first few rounds.

You want to know why foreign players are dominating professional golf? Because they play firm courses in the wind and still play bump-and-run shots and have a lot of imagination. American players have had those shots taken from them. The courses are too lush.

Remember what Jose Maria Olzabal did at the final hole of the Masters? He pulled his iron shot and ran it down the slope. He was past the hump in the middle of the green. He played what I think was the shot of the tournament, a bum-and-run down the hill, and saved par. It was an incredible shot.

If that had been the Buick Open, say, he would've just pulled out a sand wedge, flipped it up and stuck it next to the flagstick. Where's the challenge in that?
The United States GA has the right idea. When it was deciding whether to go back to Newport CC, a true links, for the 100th anniversary of the U.S. Amateur, the club's membership was in favor of the idea and said, "Don't worry, we'll make sure we get a sprinkler system in by 1995." The USGA told them, "If you put in a sprinkler system, we're not going to hold the event there."

That's the way golf was meant to be. Now, what do you say we turn off the sprinklers and play some 'real' golf?
  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"chief sherpa"

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2002, 05:24:34 PM »
Pete,

Interesting reading, but is there a chance in this green golf world we live in that the trends of maintenance can be reversed? Maybe at small, golf-only private clubs, but not where the masses play. The course needs a lot of water just to survive the onslaught of beer laden carts hauling around a bunch of lazy people(for the most part) who think they're golfing.

Joe
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

angie

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2002, 06:13:49 PM »
Joe, and Pete -- I disagree that beer has a deleterious impact on golf course grass!  
But seriously, I know what you're talking about -- the numbers of players, whether in golf carts, or pulling trolleys, definitely appear to have a bad impact on today's modern overwatered courses.  But I expect that grass today could be engineered for fairways to withstand more "pounding" and less water.
Something else I notice to have changed, aside from the lushness, is the absolute flatness of fairways.  I don't mean slope or lack of slope, but more what I'd call indentations -- just uneveness of the ground.  I used to play a course that was, in part, interesting because the fairways were NOT as flat and forgiving as the mat at the driving range.  You might be faced with yardage that would dictate a fairway wood, but end up using a midiron just to handle the sort of "furrow" your ball was in.  I'm not talking anything deep that should be ground under repair, just something natural -- and not without merit.
Well, I'm not expressing myself very astutely here -- someone else may know what I'm trying to say and may have an opinion pro or con!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #3 on: August 20, 2002, 09:41:06 AM »
I had to travel to New Zealand to get a real idea of the battle we fight.  Murawai Beach Golf Course west Of Auckland is on a stunning piece of land.  The wind just howls.  The Bunkers are filled with black volcanic sand.  We could start a whole architectural discussion about what has happened to the golf course and why but of interest to this thread is this part of the tale.

Murawai had no irrigation for most of its life.  Wind literally blew some holes on the front side away.  But the back side had several stunning holes and the wind required players to play along the ground. The turf was healthy enough to hold the sandy soil in place.

 Several years ago tour operators asked the course to increae it's cart fleet to accomadate U.S. and Japanese tourists.  Within months the delicate turf was gone.  The wind began to erode the architectural features and this humble classic would change forever.  

The front nine is now completely new and fully irrigated.  The back has been substantially redesigned (to the clubs credit they tried to save some of the truly stunning holes) and irrigation has been installed.  

The discussion of golf architecture in the new millenium cannot be separated from irrigation or carts.  I don't know about the beer drinking!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:
« Reply #4 on: August 20, 2002, 11:19:25 AM »
Pete-
Thanks for digging up this article. It really hits the nail on the head! It is unfortunate that little has changed since Brad Faxon wrote this article 8 years ago. The vast majority of golf courses in the US are still over-watered, too soft and too green.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

brad miller

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2002, 03:51:16 AM »
Ran, this is well worth adding to the IMO section.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2002, 06:23:19 AM »
I have a couple of questions:
1. With current equipment, would returning to dry, hard, fast conditions be possible, even if memberships would accept that "look"?  Take current carry distances, and tack on additional roll to current conditions, and you are talking about really, really short courses.  Lots of places have been experiencing this situation this summer due to drought.  My home course has had to virtually eliminate fairway watering to save available water for greens and tees.  The result is that the course has played shorter and easier than ever before.  While that course is relatively new, I experienced the same thing on a much older course in NC this summer that had no sprinkler system in the fairways.  

2. Do we accept the premise that the game is more difficult the "traditional" way of horizontal strategy and technique?  It seems to me that getting the ball airborne is, for most golfers, much more difficult than running it along the ground.  That's why chipping is generally more easily mastered than "flop" shots, and putting is easier than chipping.  The margin of error is simply greater if you don't have to fly the ball, isn't it?

3. I do agree that the L wedge is a product of turf improvement and current architecture, but I would imagine that golfers of years past would loved to have had the club anyway.  Even so, the L wedge could still be classified, I think, as a "players" club rather than a game improvement club.

4. The biggest benefit to less watering is not the quality or nature of the golf played.  It is financial.  It is cheaper to build and maintain courses that require less watering and therefore less mowing.  There are some courses being built now in the Pine Valley mold on which the percentage of acres that must be watered and mown is much, much lower than has been the case for the past few decades.  However, those courses must still be played primarily through the air, and tend to be difficult for the average high handicapper.  An example that jumps to mind quickly would be the Norman course at Barefoot landing at Myrtle Beach.  They advertise an extremely small acreage of maintained turf--wish I could recall the number.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

brad_miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2002, 07:24:51 AM »
If a course is truely F&F through the green it doesn't make it easier unless there are fairways without contour, or worse yet ones that have containment mounding thus keeping the ball in play, sure some shots will get roll, but many more will roll to places that may not make the golfer happy. How about playing  a green side recovery shot to hard firm greens, don't think that is easier. Firm conditions also offer optional ways to play shots thus making the game more interesting for all levels of golfer.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2002, 08:33:59 AM »
Your points are well-taken and I agree with you, especially about F&F conditions giving more options and making the game more enjoyable, as well as the difficulty of greenside recovery on firm, fast greens.  I do think though, that making the adjustment to F&F conditions on a course is relatively possible for most players--instead of hitting a 5 iron on a par five to clear the dogleg because the five is running into the rough or woods or hazard, you hit a seven and it runs to the desired area.  Easier shot because its less club and the golfer makes a better swing.  We have been experiencing this very situation in the SE this summer.
I think for most players the firmness of the green is a much, much harder adjustment;  much more thought has to go into club selection and trajectory to keep balls from running to back or off the green.  Interestingly, supers in this area (Atlanta) have been watering greens much more selectively in the past couple of years, especially in May and June, to get good root systems for the bent grass in July and Aug.  This does make the greens, of course, much firmer, but they are also of necessity significantly slower than in yrs. past.  On the whole, though, it is much better golf than just throwing the ball in the air and watching it plug!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2002, 08:55:19 AM »
Mark Huxford, Sorry to hear about Paraparam.  the day my wife and I played there it was rock hard and screaming fast.  my wife was stunned at how different the game could be.  She hit the ball further and found some trouble because of it.  I might also add that she may talk more about her day at Paraparaumu more than any other round she has ever played.  That feeling of speed is simply one we don't experience in the states much.

We installed new irrigation at my home club 2 years ago.  We installed the system with the hope that we would be able to keep the turf alive while keeping it firm.  The Super is barraged by complaints when a few brown spots appear and the result is a course that plays longer, slower more difficult for higher handicaps (mostly due to lush thick rough).  I will admit that it is very nice to look at but somewhat routine to play as the ball always stays where hit.  The beauty of a course like Paraparam or Murawai or the Scottish links is the element of uncertainty lost under irrigation.

Go tell those new owners at Paraparaumu to turn the damned water down?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Bob_Gold

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2002, 09:41:54 AM »
Very interesting.  Like Faxon, I grew up on an old Ross course in New England.  The Orchards was similar to what he described at Rhode Island.  On many holes you ran the ball up to the green not just because you could, but because you had to.  Many of the greens just wouldn't hold anything higher than a 6 iron.  As I remember, they watered them quite a bit but the theory was that they were just old and that made them hard.  So you adjusted your game.  The course was fairly green as I remember it.  Around 1986 they got a new Super and he tried to bring back some of the old look.  He let many of the Rough areas go "wild" and the tan color of that rough contrasted beautifuly with the green areas of play.  
     I live in California now and the majority of the courses I play are of the "watered down" variety.  I enjoy playing these courses as well.  I admit that I did change equipment.  I used to play Haig blades and now I play Ping knock offs.  The blades were harder to hit but they did seem to work better with the harder courses.  If you didn't hit it 100% pure chances are the ball might roll up to the green anyway.  Not on the watered down courses.  In my opinion there's a place for both kind of courses.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #11 on: August 21, 2002, 12:55:43 PM »
I agree there's a place for both types of courses. A question that still lingers in my mind is one concerning F&F conditions. Does F&F mean that the grass has to be super short too? Even if there is grass on firm, dry-ish ground the ball will still kick and roll, either continuing down the fairway, or into a well placed bunker, or wherever. I had a thought about the length/ F&F issue before, and I'm thinking that F&F can co-exist with higher fairway cuts than we currently see, especially at the higher end of the golf course spectrum.

Just an idea,

Joe
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Bruceski

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #12 on: August 21, 2002, 06:04:07 PM »
Hux,

You think they'll raise membership fees up from $25 per year?  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mark_Huxford

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #13 on: August 21, 2002, 06:45:55 PM »

It's all relative Bruceski.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #14 on: August 21, 2002, 08:16:03 PM »
What would be the comparative maintenance budget be between a firm and a watered course. Could you bring costs down 25% with less water, less mowing, changes in application rates for fertilizer, fungicides, etc.?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2002, 09:35:23 AM »
Hux,
I was there in December of 2000.  I think! ;).  Yes the Poa had infested the greens but I found the turf on the fairways to be quite acceptable.  As long as players walk it seems fine!  The single row quick coupler irrigation system was obviously an antique.  Doesn't give a lot of control but doesn't promote nightly overwatering either.  I am no superintendent but it seemed at the time that regrassing the putting surfaces was all that was required.  

I am sorry to hear that the Tiger fiasco caused so many lingering problems.  If this forum is any indication, New Zealand seems to be the new darling of international travel..

Lose the cup, stop inviting Tiger over, find me a humble little spot to spend some time and hopefully NZ goes back to being off the beaten track!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike Clayton

Re: "Our Watered Down Game" - Brad Faxon
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2002, 06:22:35 PM »
Claude Crockford who managed Royal Melbourne perfectly for 40 years once told Ben Crenshaw
'the problem with you people in America is that you spend all your time trying to grow the grass.We spend all our time trying to stop it growing'
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back