Rough Lines as Architecture Not Maintenance

[Phil Benedict]

I used to think that the line separating fairway from rough was a maintenance decision.  You could always widen the fairways by changing the mowing pattern.

However, sites hosting majors frequently plant bluegrass where the fairway is intended to end and rough begin.  You can maintain the bluegrass at varying heights but it's intended to always be rough.  Whether an actual architect suggested the line of demarcation is irrelevent:  it's a permanent feature (like a bunker) and therefore architecture rather than maintenance.

[Tom_Doak]

Phil:

Well, part of my job description on a new course is to flag every grassing line on the golf course ... we have to do that so the irrigation guys can do their job and so the superintendent will know which grass to plant where.  (Occasionally, with fescue or bermudagrass, both the fairways and rough are the same grass and you can leave the mowing lines until later, but usually not.)

So, I say that mowing lines are architecture -- they're just the part of the architecture most easily changed by the superintendent, deliberately or by accident.

[Chuck Brown]

Phil, as I am sure Tom will attest, the mowing/maintenance effect most often seen is shrinkage of greens due to inattentive greens mowing.  Crews are usually scared of "scalping" any grass, and therefore cheat inside of the prior mowing lines.  I had to be corrected on that myself when I was in college and running a greens mower.  By a GCSAA President, no less.

[Peter Pallotta]

I've heard tell about how director John Ford - who, even though he was John Ford, didn't edit or have final cut on his pictures -- used to make sure that the picture he wanted to see was the one that got released.  He'd set up the shot (and he did this on any type shot, close-up or two-shot or establishing shot, it didn't matter) and let the scene and the camera start rolling, but when he had the segment of the scene he wanted in the can, he'd just put his hand over the camera lens and block everything out. And then he'd set up the next shot and do the same, and so on. In short, John Ford was editing the picture in his head and in the camera, and not giving the actual editor any chance at all to make a different picture out of the material; Ford provided him with material (and only enough material) such  that the film could only be edited one way...Ford's way.

Any equivalent technique in golf course architecture?

Peter   

[JMEvensky]

It isn't just clubs hosting major tournaments.

My course was originally wall-to-wall common bermuda.To save on the maintenance budget in the mid-80's,fairway lines were narrowed.In ~1996,we re-grassed the fairways with zoysia using the narrower lines.Now,we have "rough bunkers" and any plan to widen the fairways will require a lot more zoysia.

So,at least in our case,it was maintenance(at least the cost thereof) trumping architecture.

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:

As JM describes above, if the architect specs different grasses for the fairway and the rough, it's a lot harder to change the lines afterwards ... it requires new sod and possibly different irrigation spacing.

However, trying to pre-empt changes of that type also limits the designer's ability to make similar changes after the course opens.  One of the advantages of fescue fairways is that you can narrow them and widen them back out easily ... one of the disadvantages is, so can anybody else!

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Tom.

Interesting - it seems like, all things considered, fescue fairways would be the ideal choice...yes, they can be narrowed by just about anyone in charge, but (since no one has spent a ton of money doing that) a little persuasion by the architect or a change in club leadership can get them right back. (The analogy I used wasn't so good, since John Ford couldn't even consider making changes after his film was released). 

There is also something appealing easy and natural about that. I don't even like imagining irrigation lines hidden under my feet...


Peter