A rough question

[Marc Haring]

I played a course yesterday, a newish course, which has quite a reputation and was designed by a man of repute.
It was my third visit, the previous two being a couple of years back. This time there was a distinct difference,
indeed the entire character had been altered dramatically.
Whereas before there was space, now there is penal rough of an unforgiving nature.

Please don’t get the wrong impression as the course was a delight to play.
Visually it is stunning, conditioning was the best I have seen in 35 years of playing and the place oozes class.
But the four of us found it tough going. We are a scratch, two fours and a six handicap but were collectively looking
for 14 balls in the rough with 5 never being found. Despite trying to speed things up, it still would have added a good
40 minutes to the round.

We spoke to the superintendent on the way round, a delightful and clearly knowledgeable man,
and he explained how his members were complaining bitterly about his introduced rough.
The question is, is he right to have introduced it, or have the strategic intentions of the architect been a
little too compromised?

To aid any discussion, here are 2 pics. The first is of the first hole, the second of the 4th hole.
Both are about 380 yards. The 4th hole shows bunkers left and right, both of which can be carried.
The far bunkers could be reached with a long drive. In both instances the bunkers are a much-preferred
location to the severely punishing rough.

#1


#4.
 

[Mark_Rowlinson]

They let the rough grow deep at Wilmslow over the last few summers and the members complained bitterly.  Apparently it was done to allow certain grasses to smother unwanted ones, to improve the quality of the rough from the pasture grasses which had previously prevailed.  Certainly, it is always in tip-top condition.

At my home course at Conwy the rough is allowed to grow deep in preparation for championships and from late May to the end of July it can be a real ball-swallower.  Add to that the impenetrability of the gorse on the back nine and a high proportion of 'no returns' are a feature of club competitions, while visiting parties despair of finishing 18 holes at all.

[Marc Haring]

So the question is, is this trend of more and more rough good for the overall enjoyment of the game?
I can understand it if preparing a course for a major event but for the general day to
day use? I am not so sure.
For example (and I would need the archies to confirm this) the left hand ‘fairway’ bunker in the second picture;
do you think it was originally so placed to invite a
heroic effort from the tee as it is the direct line to the green? Has that option now been removed and replaced with a
compulsory nervy poke to the right of it in a desperate bid to remain in play?

By the way Mark, I assume you recognise the course? It is in your excellent list of the
best British courses of the last 50 years and you would remember it as an exclusive
members club that has no ambitions of hosting major events.
No names please.

[ForkaB]

So the question is, is this trend of more and more rough good for the overall enjoyment of the game?

My, answer, Marc is an emphatic NO! for the obvious reasons most of which you have highlghted, namely:

1.  Slows up play considerably
2.  Substitutes boring and unenjoyable shots (hack out from thick rough) for interesting and enjoyable shots (high risk/high reward shots from light rough and wrong angle).
3.  Unnatural and unattractive (to me--I don't like "eye candy") maintenance practices (contouring)
4.  Puts fairway bunkers inside the rough line (see your 2 pictures for examples)
5.  Discourages new/poorer players from the game (difficulty and cost/hassle of losing golf balls).

PS--did the super at that course tell you why he did what he did?  Was it his idea or that of his onwer/green committee?

[Marc Haring]

Richard. Thanks for your answers.  

I can’t say for sure whose decision it was to grow in the rough but he stated that
the holes were ‘made’ by the rough.
Formerly they were birdie opportunities but still holes that required a great deal of thought based on weather conditions,
skill levels, whether you had experienced a dodgy curry recently, you know, the usual stuff.
There was a real nice mix of holes, some short and naturally tight others with a lot
of room but long. Now they are all as tight as the proverbial.

I do think though that this is just a sign of the times.
I don't know what it is like up your part of the world
but they're all doing it down here!!!  

[Tom_Doak]

Marc:  Be sure to tell us eventually which course this is.  I really liked what I saw in the first picture -- the siting of the green and the background for it.

I have very rarely seen a course where the members asked for more and thicker rough.  Usually it is the case that someone in management [green committee, owner, professional, but rarely the superintendent by himself] becomes convinced that the course is not popular or not well respected because it is "too easy," and more rough is their answer.

Take heart that everything which is being done is reversible, and there is no construction going on.  It shouldn't take long for them to realize their error as the members continue to complain.

[JakaB]

Marc,

Are you whining about the high brown heather type rough or the green stuff that is along the fairway.....don't you think that if you hit the ball outside the lines of the fairway bunkers you might just deserve a penalty or a tough shot.....you say you can fly the fairway bunkers and then complain about losing balls.....me thinks you might need to hit a three wood and keep it in play.    

[Marc Haring]

"Marc:  Be sure to tell us eventually which course this is.  I really liked what I saw in the first picture --
the sighting of the green and the background for it."

Tom.
I sure will. I was just a little concerned as to whether it was
fair to criticise anyone unduly because I don’t know who made the decisions.
Perhaps it should be a guess the architect question?
He is known to you all.

The course is terrific, no question. Interesting swales, bunkering, greens complexes and great routing IMHO.

In fact, here are some other pictures.

Another view of #1 with #18 to the right.


Great short hole with a wicked green and many interesting pin locations. The front bunker is way short of the green, creating distance deception.


Natural lake. Lay up short of the brook that runs diagonally across the fairway or rip it down the right to get close to the green.


Final short hole, picture taken a couple of years ago. Again, the lake was there well before the course.

 

[Marc Haring]

John B.
You’re dead right, I should expect a penalty and maybe I should hit my three wood.
Problem is, I have to programme in an embarassment factor and whimping out with a
three wood normally means that I am still in the long rough searching
but am twenty yards further back!

Actually I shot 1 under on the back nine to take the money after shooting 6 over on the front.
I had to bring in my usual game plan in such situations. Hit it as hard as I can and
keep my eyes tight shut.  

[Dan Bock]

Wedging out of long rough to me presents only a single option much like bunkers where the ball buries every time.  Why can't the greens be firm enough and greens interesting enough that from reasonable length rough I cannot control the ball and keep it in position (which it sounds like the course in question does have).  The other options presented by this are to run the ball up or play short and on and on.  Very long rough does present 2 options I guess - reload or find it and hope to wedge it out.  Seems to me that more interesting green complexes and firm conditions can help to do away with the need to defend with unplayable rough too near the playing field.