Is bigger better in terms of greens? How much is added to cost of overhead and maintenance by large greens? I know that a green has to be large enough to accommodate traffic - but is there a lot of overkill in newer developments?

Do you find that you prefer larger greens?

Adam,

Personally, I like to see greens vary in size, shape, orientation and contour - variety is king.

Larger greens are certainly more condusive to the creation of "greens within a green" design concept, because each "green" requires a decent amount of area to offer multiple pin positions. Further, they offer more variety in terms of club selection. My home course features a green nearly 60 yards deep, which personally demands anything from a PW to 5-iron approach, depending on the pin position.

As far as costs are concerned, building larger greens is not very cost-prohibitive. Labour costs will remain approximately the same, and the extra costs are tied to added materials, which in the overall scheme of a golf course construction project would be deemed rather minor. Long term, I think the most relevant cost to big greens would be the additional man-hours in the maintenance budget. The extent of which would best be answered by a superintendent, not me.

TK

Our 14th green at Pensacola CC was the smallest on the PGA Tour for years, until 1982 when the Pensacola Open moved away because of the tight grounds.  Maybe 1800 SF, the green falls off abruptly in the back.  The 2nd green at Presidio in SF reminded me of that green.

A large deep bunker guarded the left side, and a fall off on the right penalized slightly off line shots.  The green was only 20' across the front and 60' deep.

Oh yes, this is at the far end of a 560 yard par 5.  During Q School the last few years, the young bucks actually learned our usual approach shot, which was a knockdown aimed for the front of the green.  Lofted approaches to the rear pins routinely bounced over, leaving difficult pitches.

Pat Mucci is right, wear was heavy, our 30,000 rounds a year saved it from being torn up.

I'm using the past tense here because the green has been torn up.  Jerry Pate is planning to build a similar green, only 2700 square feet.  Still small but 50% larger!

****
I personally prefer smaller greens.  Three putts from 60' are not unusual.  At PCC, if you hit a green, you had a makeable birdie putt!

Patrick,

The projected traffic has to be the starting point when determining the size of greens.  Other design ideas come after that.

My home course, 27 holes, had 50 000 rounds in just about five months the active season lasts up here in Northern Finland.  The course is fully packed from morning till late evening (midnight sun golf) from June to mid August.

When course was designed in late 80's no-one could predict the amount of play we are now having.  The worst situation is on tees that are way too small.  Also some greens should be bigger.  When new 9 holes were designed both the tees and greens were designed much bigger to give some rest for the grass to survive the stress.

Jari

Ihave 18 itty-bitty greens, largest is 6k sf. I have 1300 members, we go off both nines at 7 am, the greens are fine, the walkups are dead, though.

Regards

Steve