“In the afternoon poa annua can get bumpy “. True?

[Alex Miller]

I think we can all agree that P. annua greens produce a nice playing surface for golf. The downfall is the cost to produce that surface.  Poa requires exponentially more inputs (water, fertilizer, PGR's etc etc etc) to maintain acceptability than any other turfgrass species. If you include how the planet average daily temps are climbing, P. annua only seems to be a viable option in a few areas of North America and quite often a poor choice given the options of improved genetics. It makes me sad and bit crazy to hear about clubs doing these complete greens renovations and actually picking up the P. annua sod and putting it back down on new rootzone. I do not understand this line of thinking. As everyone is aware, I am big on long-term viability and sustainability of the game. P. annua is not part of that equation, unless monumental breeding efforts are put forth...which they currently are not...and for good reason.

Sadly this is true. I grew up playing on Poa (Annua) at some cooler coastal courses in SoCal. It really is a wonderful playing surface for golf. It no doubt can get bumpy late in the day, but it is also not for the weak-minded golfer. I credit some of my good putting skills to dusk 9's at Los Verdes after a full tee sheet. If you can make putts there you can make them anywhere.


Brentwood, Hillcrest, LACC, Rolling Hills, and other LA clubs have moved to bent grass greens for the reason John states. And there is a not-so-secret conversation happening now as to whether Wilshire will do the same. While they're magnificent greens and have been maintained well, it's clear that hotter summers have required more intensive maintenance and costs than they used to. From November to May they are just about perfect: firm, fast, flawless. In the summer they require more water and can play soft, though still true and challenging.


I'm torn - it'd be a shame to resurface 100 year old greens that are obviously still very good, but the drawbacks are obvious. I think poa is part of the character of these greens and how to navigate around them and I'm not sure bent would provide the same challenge or interest. We'll see how it goes and I'm happy to update here when I know more, but the writing may be on the wall if 2 clubs west (more coastal) than Wilshire have moved to bent, the case for continuing with Poa is not as strong as my bias wants it to be.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I think we can all agree that P. annua greens produce a nice playing surface for golf. The downfall is the cost to produce that surface.  Poa requires exponentially more inputs (water, fertilizer, PGR's etc etc etc) to maintain acceptability than any other turfgrass species. If you include how the planet average daily temps are climbing, P. annua only seems to be a viable option in a few areas of North America and quite often a poor choice given the options of improved genetics. It makes me sad and bit crazy to hear about clubs doing these complete greens renovations and actually picking up the P. annua sod and putting it back down on new rootzone. I do not understand this line of thinking. As everyone is aware, I am big on long-term viability and sustainability of the game. P. annua is not part of that equation, unless monumental breeding efforts are put forth...which they currently are not...and for good reason.

So what should a course like, say… Oakmont do?

[John Emerson]

I think we can all agree that P. annua greens produce a nice playing surface for golf. The downfall is the cost to produce that surface.  Poa requires exponentially more inputs (water, fertilizer, PGR's etc etc etc) to maintain acceptability than any other turfgrass species. If you include how the planet average daily temps are climbing, P. annua only seems to be a viable option in a few areas of North America and quite often a poor choice given the options of improved genetics. It makes me sad and bit crazy to hear about clubs doing these complete greens renovations and actually picking up the P. annua sod and putting it back down on new rootzone. I do not understand this line of thinking. As everyone is aware, I am big on long-term viability and sustainability of the game. P. annua is not part of that equation, unless monumental breeding efforts are put forth...which they currently are not...and for good reason.

So what should a course like, say… Oakmont do?

Get with the program and switch to and embrace sustainability. Just because one can, doesn't mean one should.

[Wayne_Kozun]

I think we can all agree that P. annua greens produce a nice playing surface for golf. The downfall is the cost to produce that surface.  Poa requires exponentially more inputs (water, fertilizer, PGR's etc etc etc) to maintain acceptability than any other turfgrass species. If you include how the planet average daily temps are climbing, P. annua only seems to be a viable option in a few areas of North America and quite often a poor choice given the options of improved genetics. It makes me sad and bit crazy to hear about clubs doing these complete greens renovations and actually picking up the P. annua sod and putting it back down on new rootzone. I do not understand this line of thinking. As everyone is aware, I am big on long-term viability and sustainability of the game. P. annua is not part of that equation, unless monumental breeding efforts are put forth...which they currently are not...and for good reason.

There can be other issues with P. annua in areas with cold climates as it dies after a few weeks under ice.  About a decade ago in the Toronto area we had ice in February or so that didn't melt.  That year almost all of the older clubs had a ton of problems with their greens as they were a mixture of bent and poa.  Newer courses tended to not have as much poa so they were in better shape.  My club had several temporary greens for the start of the season and it was well into August until the greens were in decent shape.  St. Georges decided to just accelerate a plan to rip up and redo their greens.