[PThomas]

On the "First time you played Pebble " thread Jeff mentioned how scruffy PB looked during the Snead- Nicklaus SHell match of 1963, which got me thinking:

when did conditionin get so much better?  did it happen gradually over time or over only a few years? did certain technological devices cause quantum leaps in conditiong?

we read the stories about how Oakmont stimped at like 7 for the 62 Open; did green speeds increase over time or suddenly?

some of more experienced GCAers might be quite well qualified to discuss, thank you in advance

[Steve Okula]

I've played golf since the '60s, and worked in maitenance since the '70s, and I've seen a gradual change over the years. It would need a book to tell of all the details, but there were things like improved equipment, hydraulic mowers to take the place of ground and belt driven ones, improved verticutting and aerating units, more sophsitacted sprayers, etc. The introduction of the string trimmer led to a paradigm shift in manicuring.

A large part has been played by new varieties of turfgrass, especially for greens like the bentgrasses and "superdwarf" bermudagrasses.

Chemistry has progressed by leaps and bounds, there are many times the products available today than there was in the '70s, especially in the U.S. Since the '90s growth regulators, unknown for turf in the '70s, have played a huge role in course management.
The general plant and soil science is always progressing, too.

But mostly, I think improved conditions were driven by market competition, each club trying to one-up the other, spending more money on everything, including labor, and simply paying more attention to detail. For example, 40 years ago roughs almost didn't count, and nowadays they are usually watered, fertilized, and sprayed like everything else. Bunker edges have gone from being ignored to becoming a focal point, and, like I said, string trimmers and flymos have done wonders for manicuring. 

[jeffwarne]

On the "First time you played Pebble " thread Jeff mentioned how scruffy PB looked during the Snead- Nicklaus SHell match of 1963, which got me thinking:

when did conditionin get so much better?  did it happen gradually over time or over only a few years? did certain technological devices cause quantum leaps in conditiong?

we read the stories about how Oakmont stimped at like 7 for the 62 Open; did green speeds increase over time or suddenly?

some of more experienced GCAers might be quite well qualified to discuss, thank you in advance

Paul,
Ar they better?... or just different?
Those pictures of pebble posted from that match look awesome.

[Gary Slatter]

Steve and Jeff, great comments. 
I've been wondering if we really have improved conditions?  greener and faster but softer and prettier, TV golf ?

could more people enjoy golf if the courses had 1970 conditions?   Personally I like it both ways, some courses in the UK are still in the 70s and great experiences.  Perhaps the depression will get us back to something in between.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Fairways because much better when Paul Latshaw had his mechanic retrofit a triplex with 2 more cutting unit, thus creating the first 5 plex, lightweight fairway unit. Prior to that, courses were still mowing with tractors and pull behind gang units.

[jeffwarne]

Steve and Jeff, great comments. 
I've been wondering if we really have improved conditions?  greener and faster but softer and prettier, TV golf ?

could more people enjoy golf if the courses had 1970 conditions?   Personally I like it both ways, some courses in the UK are still in the 70s and great experiences.  Perhaps the depression will get us back to something in between.

Gary,
exactly. I'm aware grasses and weather(for turf) are a bit more welcoming in the UK/ireland, but there are way fewer men on the crews.
You go out early at most US courses and there are crews everywhere, overseas you typically see a dew line(and yes even worm casts) when you putt if you play early on most of the courses off the beaten path-a might see a greens staff member somewhere along the back nine.
I much prefer it being an outdoor sport, as opposed to the near perfect conditions golfer here expect/demand.
But then "perfect" may be the wrong word as I usually feel the conditions are "perfect" in the UK by their scruffiness.

[Gary Slatter]

Steve and Jeff, great comments. 
I've been wondering if we really have improved conditions?  greener and faster but softer and prettier, TV golf ?

could more people enjoy golf if the courses had 1970 conditions?   Personally I like it both ways, some courses in the UK are still in the 70s and great experiences.  Perhaps the depression will get us back to something in between.

Gary,
exactly. I'm aware grasses and weather(for turf) are a bit more welcoming in the UK/ireland, but there are way fewer men on the crews.
You go out early at most US courses and there are crews everywhere, overseas you typically see a dew line(and yes even worm casts) when you putt if you play early on most of the courses off the beaten path-a might see a greens staff member somewhere along the back nine.
I much prefer it being an outdoor sport, as opposed to the near perfect conditions golfer here expect/demand.
But then "perfect" may be the wrong word as I usually feel the conditions are "perfect" in the UK by their scruffiness.

there are now a wide variety of "perfect" conditions.  What is perfect for Augusta National is not perfect for a lot of other courses.  What is perfect for the Scottish Senior Open wouldn't work for the Florida Senior Open.  So many grasses, great mowing machines, growth regulators, agronomists, computers - as the game has evolved so has maintenance procedures.       

Time to pull it all back?     Not in my opinion - let every club have its own "perfect conditions"  and every hacker have the latest toy driver.  There are new courses to be challenged and old courses to be relished, to each his own.  The race to keep up with the Jones' (ANGC) is open to any club with the budget required to keep their members happy (and spending).  What Melvyn likes might not be everyone' cup of tea, but as long as Melvyn likes it, can find it, great.

[John Gosselin]

[Ar they better?... or just different?
Those pictures of pebble posted from that match look awesome.
[/quote]

.
Without a doubt……much better.

I would not want to go back to 70's and even the early 80's type conditioning here in Philadelphia. Courses were predominantly Annual Bluegrass on greens, tees, and fairways. Poor playing conditions in the spring, decent early summer, terrible late summer and decent again in the fall were the norm.

The advances in the equipment and the newer varieties of turf grasses to choose from have been the two biggest game changers IMHO.

One other area that has lead to better golf courses is the pay scale for supers. As clubs and companies began to recognize the important role the super plays in the success of a facility they began to pay better salaries to retain their current super or attract someone else. With better paying jobs the overall industry began to attract better more, educated people.

All has been very good for golf. Are there examples of excess? Yes, but there has always been.


We should also recognize how much more environmentally friendly golf courses are now, than any time in the history of golf in the US.
















In

[Steve Okula]

The idea that conditions were better in the old days, and that previous generations of supers had some kind of folksy, mythical knowledge that we've forgotten about, is the stuff of pure fantasy.

In the '60s, Poa was everywhere, greens were slow, bumpy, grainy, thatchy, and inconsistent. Fairways were burned out and weed infested every summer, even while they were being mowed at 1". Roughs wer ignored, except for the occasional mowing. Bunkers and greens surrounds were left to their own devices. In the south, fairways were often coarse common bermuda, and a lot of places still putted on sand greens.

It's always fun though, to wax nostalgic about a time and place that never existed.

[Steve Okula]

Fairways because much better when Paul Latshaw had his mechanic retrofit a triplex with 2 more cutting unit, thus creating the first 5 plex, lightweight fairway unit. Prior to that, courses were still mowing with tractors and pull behind gang units.

With all due reespect to Mr. Latshaw, it may be a little too generous to credit him with single-handedly revolutionizing fairway mowers.

I statred when everyone had tractor drawn pull behind fairway gang mowers. These gave way to models like thge Toro Parkmaster and the Jacobsen F-10, which were specially designed tractors that had the reels mounted under the carriage, so they could be raised for transport and lowered for mowing. With the first models, you had to raise the reel units by hand, and later ones were fitted with hydraulic rams, but the reels were still ground driven. 

The next step up were the little, belt-driven triplex mowers, like the old National mower ("The finest anchor in the golf business.", as the joke went?) Jake, Toro, and Ransomes produced similar machines, whose model designations I can no longer recall. The belt drive was an improvement over ground driven reels because it increases the frequency of clip, and more cuts per linear foot meant a more upright and denser sward. 

Hydraulically driven greens triplexes have been around since the late '60s. We will never know who first had the idea to take one out on a fairway. Maybe it was Mr. Latshaw, but it could have been any one of about 3000 other guys, too. But these machines eventually evolved into the lightweight five and seven gang units we use today. Of course, the hydraulics meant that you could achieve a fantastic rate of clip, and the results were a dramatic improvement in the denstiy of fairway turf.

[jeffwarne]

The idea that conditions were better in the old days, and that previous generations of supers had some kind of folksy, mythical knowledge that we've forgotten about, is the stuff of pure fantasy.

In the '60s, Poa was everywhere, greens were slow, bumpy, grainy, thatchy, and inconsistent. Fairways were burned out and weed infested every summer, even while they were being mowed at 1". Roughs wer ignored, except for the occasional mowing. Bunkers and greens surrounds were left to their own devices. In the south, fairways were often coarse common bermuda, and a lot of places still putted on sand greens.

It's always fun though, to wax nostalgic about a time and place that never existed.

Steve,
Can't speak for the 60's but I sure enjoyed my golf in the 70's. Loved the old rye on dormant  bermuda.
No one's saying greens were faster or less bumpy then or that the folksy supers were better.(although I've seen plenty of course lose their greens recently due to efforts to maintain realistic green speeds)
Does a 21 handicap need greens cut and bunkers raked daily?
As far as ignored rough, isn't that why they call it rough?

I work at one of the best maintained courses in the country, yet when I go to the local unirrigated muni with a staff of one, I make plenty of putts on slower equally interesting greens because they haven't had the major slopes designed out of them. When it's hot the fairways go dormant and they often do lose some grass which is reseeded in the fall. weeds are welcome in the meantime.
As a golf pro, I'd also argue courses don't need 4 golf pros and hordes of outside greeters and staff-or mandatory caddies, clubhouses etc.
It's not just maintenance that has gotten too big for the game.

I simply preferto play courses where maintenance (and other amenities) is minimal, design is interesting and am prepared to accept(embrace) what some would call tradeoffs.
Sadly, clubs have embraced a culture where it's always about one upping their neighbors in terms of faster greens, smoother bunkers, bigger locker rooms etc.
Of course I respect the incrdible expertise and work ethic put in by the Supers and their employees at courses where the conditions are pristine, I just have an equal respect for the super who alternates mowing or wicking the moisture off his greens every other day and mows the fairways weekly on a gang mower.

To each his own.

[Jason Topp]

I have heard several members at my club comment that "our greens used to be so fast - you never wanted to be above the hole."

I asked our superintendant of 40 years about that perception because he stimps the greens (and wisely does not reveal the results).  He indicated that our greens have been at the same speed for a long time.  Perception has changed because other courses have sped their greens up so much.

[Anthony_Nysse]

I think that Education has enhanced Superintendent's knowledge, as well. During the days of "Caddyshack," being a Golf Course Superintendent wasnt viewed as a career. When I was going to work with my dad is when I could see that there was a profession and a career in the golf business, and this was the aerly 1990's.  More turf schools were available and more kids, who just worked on the course mowing grass, saw an opportunity to work outside and golf. Superintendents became mentors and created a tree of their own.

[Steve Okula]

I think that Education has enhanced Superintendent's knowledge, as well. During the days of "Caddyshack," being a Golf Course Superintendent wasnt viewed as a career. When I was going to work with my dad is when I could see that there was a profession and a career in the golf business, and this was the aerly 1990's.  More turf schools were available and more kids, who just worked on the course mowing grass, saw an opportunity to work outside and golf. Superintendents became mentors and created a tree of their own.

But Anthony, "Caddyshack" came out five years after I graduated from the turf program at the University of Maryland. At that time, Penn State, UMass, Purdue, Lake City, Rutgers, and I don't know how many other schools were offering turf management curriculums for the career minded.

I'm sure the level of turf, education is more sophisticated today, as it is with a lot of curriculums, but my first job was with a super who went to turf school at UMass in the '50s. So the idea of an educated super is nothing new.

[TEPaul]

This is a good question and perhaps something like architecture itself the question and the answers could probably be categorized into two or three or even four separate and distinctly different eras in the entire history of man-made golf architecture and man-applied maintenance which is now arguably about 150 to 160 years old, at least with architecture and probably somewhat shorter with maintenance as most of us perceive it today.

Probably the era when conditioning became so much better was the first era when they actually began dedicatedly planting golf courses with grass dedicated to golf and then began to maintain it with some kind of mechanization. (Here's a bit of interesting trivia for you in this regard----did you know that it appears Old Tom Morris was distinctly against the idea of mowing grass on golf courses with lawn mowers? His concern or refrain was essentially---"If you start doing that where are you going to stop?" ).

I suspect very few of us today could even conceive of what golf and courses were like before those two things began to happen which arguably began just before and around the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Those transitions were probably as stark and dramatic as the differences between the 3-4 different eras of the types of golf balls (feathery, gutta, Haskell and the beginnings of the new age balls) that generally paralleled those same 3-4 eras in conditioning golf courses.

This entire subject first hit me like a ton of bricks when I was speaking with (arguing with actually) Joe Dey about an issue of a real full-blown formal Rule change in golf over twenty years ago when he said: "Mr. Paul, I don't think you have any idea how rudimentary golf once was." I think he had a very good point about that.  

[Ian Larson]

Has the modern superintendents salary hike lead to a direct improvement of course conditioning? Reading through club history books, old greens records and any similar historical documentation....I have the impression that there was no lack of passionate and talented guys who dedicated themselves to their job and always learning how to make the best with what they had. Would it also be safe to say that supers decades ago were just as comfortable, if not more, staying at the same club indefinetely? Reading about all of the superintendents in the major city hubs back in the early part of the century it's harder for me to wrap my head around a bigger paycheck in the modern supers pocket has a direct correlation to improved course conditions. I think the bigger paycheck has helped grow the profession exponentially with the amount of people in it, but I think that improved technology and the modern super embracing the technology and running with it is the crux of improved conditions.

   

[Anthony_Nysse]

I think that Education has enhanced Superintendent's knowledge, as well. During the days of "Caddyshack," being a Golf Course Superintendent wasnt viewed as a career. When I was going to work with my dad is when I could see that there was a profession and a career in the golf business, and this was the aerly 1990's.  More turf schools were available and more kids, who just worked on the course mowing grass, saw an opportunity to work outside and golf. Superintendents became mentors and created a tree of their own.

But Anthony, "Caddyshack" came out five years after I graduated from the turf program at the University of Maryland. At that time, Penn State, UMass, Purdue, Lake City, Rutgers, and I don't know how many other schools were offering turf management curriculums for the career minded.

I'm sure the level of turf, education is more sophisticated today, as it is with a lot of curriculums, but my first job was with a super who went to turf school at UMass in the '50s. So the idea of an educated super is nothing new.

Steve-The awareness that there are actually TURFGRASS schools didn't really come into play til after Caddyshack. Still to this day, a lot of people dont know you can actually go to school to be a Golf Course Superintendent.

[Steve Okula]

I think that Education has enhanced Superintendent's knowledge, as well. During the days of "Caddyshack," being a Golf Course Superintendent wasnt viewed as a career. When I was going to work with my dad is when I could see that there was a profession and a career in the golf business, and this was the aerly 1990's.  More turf schools were available and more kids, who just worked on the course mowing grass, saw an opportunity to work outside and golf. Superintendents became mentors and created a tree of their own.

But Anthony, "Caddyshack" came out five years after I graduated from the turf program at the University of Maryland. At that time, Penn State, UMass, Purdue, Lake City, Rutgers, and I don't know how many other schools were offering turf management curriculums for the career minded.

I'm sure the level of turf, education is more sophisticated today, as it is with a lot of curriculums, but my first job was with a super who went to turf school at UMass in the '50s. So the idea of an educated super is nothing new.

Steve-The awareness that there are actually TURFGRASS schools didn't really come into play til after Caddyshack. Still to this day, a lot of people dont know you can actually go to school to be a Golf Course Superintendent.

Anthony, you're obviously too young to have any memory of the '70s, and I am jealous of that, but "Caddyshack" did for the turfgrass profession whet the movie "Police Academy" did for law enforcement. I agree a lot of people don't know about our profession, but then again, a lot of people never saw "Caddyshack", so don't put too much weight on it.

[PThomas]

On the "First time you played Pebble " thread Jeff mentioned how scruffy PB looked during the Snead- Nicklaus SHell match of 1963, which got me thinking:

when did conditionin get so much better?  did it happen gradually over time or over only a few years? did certain technological devices cause quantum leaps in conditiong?

we read the stories about how Oakmont stimped at like 7 for the 62 Open; did green speeds increase over time or suddenly?

some of more experienced GCAers might be quite well qualified to discuss, thank you in advance

Paul,
Ar they better?... or just different?
Those pictures of pebble posted from that match look awesome.

good point Jeff, I should have been clearer...the smoother greens and some other things are good, of course..but a more wild look i generally prefer...and things like maintaining the rough drive me nuts!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()