GolfClubAtlas standards and operations

[Troy Alderson]

Golf Nuts,

Why don't we start a standards and operations manual for our ideal golf course?  I am talking about setting, design, turf types, maintenance program, etc.

I would start with a land form that has a golf course layout naturally with a free draining soil, a design that fits in with the surroundings to appear absent from the untrained eye, a design that does not require high maintenance programs, design of greens and fairways, low maintenance turf types, and a maintenance program that promotes longevity of the golf course.

What are the details that would make this golf course the greatest in the world?

Troy

[wsmorrison]

A quality standards of golf course maintenance put together by Scott Anderson (Huntingdon Valley) is in the Feature Interview section.  If you haven't read it, it is a worthwhile read.  These are the maintenance practices for a course you describe as ideal.

[Mark_Fine]

Troy,
Well we would have to eliminate a Pine Valley like set up because there are far too many trees and forced carries.  The Old Course at St. Andrews has an excess of blind shots and the greens are rediculously huge (too much maintenance time) not to mention all the safety issues with the parallel fairways and cross overs.  Also, who knows what mixes of grasses and turf types they are using.  I'm not sure the Superintendent even knows.  That standard would never do.  Oakmont's soil is all clay so we couldn't build a good golf course in that kind of location.  Sand Hills is in the middle of know where (not a good place to attract a lot of golfers).  Pinehurst #2 is bacically dead flat, land not conducive to design great golf holes.  Pacific Dunes is too windy.  The fairways at The Plantation course are too wide and the course is spread out of too many acres to be a decent model.  

This could prove to be a tough exercise  

[John Gosselin]

What makes golf so great is the uniqueness of all it's playing fields. Just like paintings or sculptures each course is a different work of art. Through mother nature and site specific maintenance practices and maintenance philosophies they are even more unique. There should be no standard or ideal.

To many people look at architecture with engineering eyes and say you must have this or that to be a good golf course. To many people think golf course maintenance is an exact science and you can develop one standard for all.

Not everyone likes their steak medium rare.

[TEPaul]

"Too many people think golf course maintenance is an exact science and you can develop one standard for all."

JohnG;

No shit. That, frankly, is most of the bane on golf courses in America in the last fifty years, in my opinion---eg a one size fits all maintenance mentality and process.

In my opinion, the best way to go with maintenance on any golf course is for the club to define as comprehensively and as specifically as they possibly can what they are looking for in "playability" and then getting together with the maintenance dept and have them explain the feasibility of what it will take maintenance-wise to get somewhere near that "playability" goal as often as is feasible.

The next step is for golf clubs to realize a lot better what the real "razor's edge" is and where it lies at any particular time.

That part just takes a new and improved communication process (both ways) between the club and maintenance.

If a golf club does not have the sense and the guts to let maintenance pull the plug on their golf schedule (whatever that tournament or outing may be) for whatever legitimate reason, the club and the golf course is probably hoeing down a pretty dangerous row that they willl truly regret at some point.

[Troy Alderson]

Alright Nuts, what I am looking for is the general idea of what we like in a golf course.  I realize that a golf course must fit in with its surroundings, allowing the land to layout the golf course naturally.  But, should a type of land form lend itself to a particular type of golf course design (parkland, links, heathland, moorland, high desert, lakeside).

What about turf types, should a particular golf course land form lend itself to certain grasses, fescues on linksland or sandy sites, bentgrasses at wetter sites, bermuda or paspalum in the south.

I may be looking for something that is already known by me and others.  I am just looking to document this as a training aid for the general golfing public and unknowing members that do not know what golf should be all about.

How do we inform golfers of how golf courses should be maintained and played?  I believe that a "standards and operations" is the way to go, much like what Scott Anderson has developed.  But is there a more general document that can help golf clubs develop there own version, a help aid?

Troy

[Craig Sweet]

What I like, and what I get, can be two entirely different things, and that is what makes golf enjoyable for me.

Today, after a lot of rain and some very cold weather, our course was a bit slow. I had to play a different game from tee through green than I did 10 day's ago when we had a week of 90+ weather....I loved it! Viva la differance!!!

[Craig Sweet]

Troy, if you want golf courses "set up" in some cookie cutter fashion, I suggest you join the PGA Tour....

[Troy Alderson]

None of you guys are understanding what I am trying to get across.

Craig, I DO NOT WANT COOKIE CUTTER, I want what each of us likes in a golf course.  I want a natural setting, low maintenance, firm and dry, greens with character, and real hazards.  I do not like what America has done to the game and golf course architecture.

I am looking for a compilation of our minds to help the game grow with golf courses that reflect Bandon, HVCC, TOC, and others.  I am looking for a general guide line for clubs to look at.  Each club would then tweek the "standards and operations" to fit their needs and the setting.  Is it possible to create such a document for the masses?

Troy

[Craig Sweet]

Tony...

I feel that is impossible. As someone stated earlier, supers will do whatever they have to do to appease their members or to keep the turf alive.

You can set up a course to play a certain way, but unless you have a budget of a certain size, you may not be able to maintain those conditions over time. I will bet that most golf course superintendents opperate with a budget that is less than adequate to do what you suggets. Like I said, the PGA Tour comes close to consistant standards on a weekly basis, but even then they have plenty of variables.

Secondly, not everyone has the same idea of "ideal maintinance meld" as the people that frequent this web site. For many green and beautiful is the only acceptable standard.

Lastly, geography, soils, vegitation, climate, etc....etc...etc...are going to determine so much of what you are asking for. Those conditions are not consistant....

[Craig Sweet]

By the way, Tony, if you do not like what America has done to the game and golf course architecture, simply do not play American courses. Especially those you do not like.

I can assure you, MOST golfers either accept what they have or move on. A case in point is where I live....we have an old established  country club with mature trees, tight fairways and green, lush conditions, but super fast greens....we have a fake "links" style course that is built on clay and plays firm and fast when it isn't soggy from recent rains...we have a long, wide open muni....we have a hillside course that rambles through a housing development with beautiful views of the mountains and valley...and we have a new course that will raise the standards for maintinence, playability, challenge, etc....

Choice is the name of the game...variety is the name of the game....some people like fake links, other can't afford country club prices....some want to play out their back door....

[Troy Alderson]

Craig,

So are you telling me that you do not mind the overwatering, overfertilizing, and overdoing the maintenance.  The industry is slowing changing in America, mostly because drought and water shortages.  As you can see, this thread is going nowhere with the my idea so this is my last post with it.  I suppose I just need to try and come up with something myself and share it with the members.

I like the variety in courses too, but I still believe that the majority of the members on this site want the same thing; firm and dry, greens with character, and great settings.

FYI, my name is TROY.  

R/S,
Troy