Ryan,

Great question.

The superintendent plays a very, very important role in maintaining the architectural integrity of a golf course. In fact, the superintendent is the key player.

Long after the architect leaves, it's up to the superintendent to maintain correct mowing lines, keep trees and other vegetation in check, cultivate complimentary turf conditions, enhance the proper aesthetic, etc.

I think golf architecture should be taught in more detail at turf schools for this very reason.

I have a lot of respect for superintendents who take the time to study golf course design in general, and more important, learn the architecture of the course they're keeping.    

Scott,

It is amazing how quickly mowing patterns can change, isn't it. On a new course we did, during the late stages of grow-in, fairway lines were changing on a weekly basis without sharp attention to detail.

Whereas most people running the mowers would err on the inside of the estabished mow lines (which, of course, leads to shrinkage), would you guys, as superintendents, encourage your green mowers in particular to err on the outside of that line? Just curious,    

The idea is to hit the mowing line exactly, neither inside nor outside.

Too often, it is the GCS who pays for the mistakes of the architect, enlarging tees, cutting trees, and especially improving drainage.

Yes, I know, it seems so far-fetched, but some architects actually do make mistakes, (though I haven't seen any by the gentlemen posting here).

I would agree that having a superintendent on board is essential in knowing the nuts and bolts of the infrastructure of the golf course.  I would also agree that the superintendent can be a benefit in establishing as to what degree a design element can achive before it becomes a maintenance problem.  However, it is my experience that most golf course superintendents do not have much expertise in design and construction unless they have been through the process more than once.  One way of having the architect set strict mowing lines is to use different types of turf for greens/tees, fairways and roughs.

Unfortunatey, the level of interest in architecture shown by the supers that participate on this site is not the norm. Many supers have been brought up in the green and perfect camp. They don't know any different. That is not to say that only supers who participate on this site are in awares, but it certainly isn't the norm, either.

Joe

Joe, I'm not sure I understand or agree with your comment...

"Many supers have been brought up in the green and perfect camp."

I think supers give the members what they want. As was pointed out in another post, on green speed, the super works for the guy that signs his check.

There is nothing wrong with perfect. There is sometimes nothing wrong with green...having said that, I think most supers, and most agronomist, would tell you we are not doing the turf any good with the constant lowering of mowing heights...a little more "shaggy" might not be a bad thing.

Pat

That is a great point about the Superintedents Role in the course.  I too feel in my time I have modified holes due to my job and the wear and tear of Mother Nature.  Some I think were great improvements, and some looking back may have not been.  I guess I was just thinking about how often I hear of courses that are "untouched".  It seems as you mentioned there is no such thing as an untouched course.

Joe, my point is, I think supers do know the difference but what they know is often at odds with what they are told to produce.

I am sure there are many examples where a super, the members, and the intent of the architect are all on the same page, but not always. When the greens committee or the general manager wants a certain course condition that is at odds with the design or the agronomy, what's a super to do? Walk away?

Ed

I believe couch is Australian for Bermuda.  In 1999, my club replaced softgrass fairways (bents and poa generally) with Santa Anna, a fine-leaf couch that is a hybrid of South African couch.  We also have about 5 holes with windsor-green (planted in 1993), another fine leaf hybrid

We have oversown some rye/fescue mix onto outer edges that will be outside the fairway edge, as a trial.  Preventing the spread of these into adjacent fairways is an issue we are aware of but have not yet had to face.  Similalrly, the use of yearly couch/bermuda fairway treatments to prevent new soft-grasses (poa annua in particular) from establishing in the couch/bermuda, without eliminating these other 'partner grasses' in the adjacent edge of the fairway.

It may be that these oversewn areas lose the couch/bermuda component over time.  We hope that the fescue/rye mix will be as drought tolerant as the couch/bermuda but provide the demarcation and also the ability to grow into deeper rough (we prefer the fescue/rye as a two-inch rough to couch/bermuda).

For us, the climate issues require drought tolerant solutions (the winter rains slowed in early august 2004, with some rain in early November.  The last time we had a half inch of rain was early February.  The first month of winter is only a few days away and the autumn rains still have not come).  We also need to be able to cope with cool, wet winters on heavy clay soils (winter maxiumums of about 50 degrees farenheit with about 4 to 5 inches of rain a month).  So, winter playability/drainage of fairways and summer survival/irrigation of roughs are an interesting challenge.