[Paul_Turner]

and can anyone tell?  (changed a few years ago).

[Jon Wiggett]

Paul, when did they change? I last played in October 2004 and having played the course over a 100 times between 1985 and 2000 I didn't notice any change in the contours nor in the way they played. If they have changed them then they have done an astonishing job of retaining the original features.

[Paul_Turner]

John

I can't work out the exactly from this article, but it has to be in the last 15 years.  Probably a bit longer than I implied above.

http://www.bigga.org.uk/greenkeeper/viewstory.php?id=596

So I guess nobody here noticed and nobody can tell.  They must have done a good job.  I thought low profile greens like Alwoodley's were nearly impossible to replicate with USGA spec?

No comment from all the Mackenzie nuts here??  (Compare the repsonse with ANGC!)

[Bill_McBride]

Paul, I played a very fun round there in July 2005 and have no idea if those smooth and interesting greens were USGA spec or not.

[James Bennett]

I played in May 2006, and couldn't tell/didn't look.  

Given the surface on the practice green, I'd say that its quite a while since major work was undertaken on that green (a bit more sponge like in surface).

James B

[Jon Wiggett]

Interresting article Paul that seems to confirm the USGA specs. I have to say the Alwoodley crew did an amazing job you really can't tell.

[TEPaul]

" I thought low profile greens like Alwoodley's were nearly impossible to replicate with USGA spec?"

Paul:

Why do you think low profile greens are hard to repliecate with USGA specs?

What's pretty hard to do with USGA specs is greens that have all kinds of contours in them because those contours should be matched in the layering below which is the trademark of USGA spec greens. That's not impossible to do it's just a whole lot of work.

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

I thought it was near impossible to copy that type of green because the coutours are small and intricate and you cannot follow these with all the layers involved.

Also I was under the impression that a USGA green has to be raised above its surrounds (even if only slightly...no punchbowls etc)?

[Jon Wiggett]

Paul, the tag USGA specs is misused and misquoted probably more than anything else in the golf course construction industry. When you hear talk of a perched green it is usually a perched water table that is meant. A lot of builds that claim to be USGA spec mean just the root zone.
 

[Mark_Rowlinson]

The general concensus is that, before their re-laying, the greens were soggy.  They are now consistently good for whatever time of year.  Most members would say that the greens are now more interesting in contour and that they have developed in interest as the years since their relaying has passed.  There is absolutely no backlash saying, 'Give us back our greens.'  They might have a view about the current amendments to the bunkering....

[Mark_Rowlinson]

It was planned to replace them over three years, six each year, starting in September 1996, but the weather that autumn was so good and the contractors (Palmers) so efficient that fourteen greens were completed before the first frosts.  They were brought into play in May 1997.  The other four greens were completed in time for their scheduled opening in May the following year.  It took the greens some time to settle, but they are now well established, consistent and can be prepared for tournament play at speeds measuring 11 or 12 on the Stimpmeter, ‘rather too fast for most of the Alwoodley members!’

[Steve Curry]

Paul,

I concur with Jon.  And would add that they really require near by releif for drainage.

Steve

[James Bennett]

It was planned to replace them over three years, six each year, starting in September 1996, but the weather that autumn was so good and the contractors (Palmers) so efficient that fourteen greens were completed before the first frosts.  They were brought into play in May 1997.  The other four greens were completed in time for their scheduled opening in May the following year.  It took the greens some time to settle, but they are now well established, consistent and can be prepared for tournament play at speeds measuring 11 or 12 on the Stimpmeter, ‘rather too fast for most of the Alwoodley members!’

Mark

I read the article with interest that Paul posted.  Was the practice green rebuilt as well?  It appeared slower and spongier, so my 'guess' is no.  If so, the rebuilt greens are a good improvement, and the build imperceptable to the unsuspecting eye today.

James B

[Mark_Rowlinson]

James, I have a meeting with them on Tuesday, I'll check.

For those interested in buying the book, it won't be published in huge numbers, probably 750, but it is intended that copies should be available in the USA and other countries in which there is an interest in MacKenzie.  We devote half the book to the course.  I don't go into enormous detail about MacKenzie himself, for which I refer readers Tom Doak's excellent book, but the develoment of the course from the very beginning to today is covered in some detail.  At Tuesday's meeting I'll find out how the club intends to market the book outside the club and let you know.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

James,  You are absolutely right.  They moved the practice putting green slightly when they built the new clubhouse, but they did not rebuild it to USGA specifications.  Yes, it is slower than the greens on the course.  Interestingly the original turf was replaced on the greens and practice putting green, so the fact that the greens on the course are faster says something about what is underneath them.  They made topographical surveys of each green before they were converted and the contours were said to be unchanged.  However, they have developed over time and they are now considered to have more deceptive contours than of old.  Unfortunately during the dry summer grass on the high spots on the 18th green dried out too much and there appear to be dead patches which will have to be replaced.

I think Nick Leefe, who was Chairman of the Green at Alwoodley until quite recently, will be at Buda Cup.  Certainly, all the work that has gone in to improving the course condition over recent years is paying off.  This summer it was absolutely gorgeous and the field for the Tillman Trophy (high class amateurs including Walker Cuppers) did not tear it apart.  The winning four-round total was 282, two under par (par, of course, being 71).

[James Bennett]

Thanks Mark and Paul Turner - It has been an interesting thread.

I think I understood the practice green, because I had to wait till 4pm to play (the after 4pm rate).  It is a pleasant spot to spend 30 minutes.

James B

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()