[TEPaul]

In the last week or so I've been going out and testing the greens on my course with their new increased green speed for pinnable positions and perhaps determining that some of the pinnable spots on our old rotation aren't working well anymore and need some adjusting. I've been doing this at some other courses like Fox Chapel before play in the State Amateur and Pittsburgh Field Club before the State Open. All these greens are fast probably about 11 or more on the stimp.

I just throw a tee or even my car keys down on various parts of the greens and putt to all kinds of points from all the other parts of the green just to see what happens and how.

I've never done this before, certainly nowhere near this comprehensively and it might be about the most interesting and fun thing imaginable and in my opinion the absolute best way to get to know all about a putting green. To comprehensively test the pinnablility of a whole green that's somewhat complex might take me about a half hour.

Has anyone ever done this kind of thing before on their course that comprehensively with that purpose in mind?

[Jlyon]

I've done this at the Kingsley Club on a few of the more difficult greens but not comprehensively.  I have uncovered a few unusual ways to lag putt to very risky pin placements.  For those that have played Kingsley, you will understand that a boomerang shot off the green can yield a very favorable result versus the traditional direct route.   Our greens usually run 9+ but on the recent championship weekend Dan Lucas had them near 11.  The higher handicappers (including me) were eaten alive.  Dan tested all of the positions for fairness but some tested the limits (Dan, I'll be ready next year).  What I have found equally enjoyable (and helpful in uncovering new putting options) is to chip/putt to various points from just off the green.  I agree that about 1/2 hour per green is great fun and when used in my foursome creates lots of “local knowledge” complaints.  

Based on my experience, it takes some fairly wild greens to keep your interest in this kind of exercise.  

[Jeff_Mingay]

John,

I can't even imagine the 9th green at 11 feet?!?! Yikes!

Is there a hole location available at that speed, Dan? [I know you're looking in!]

[Jlyon]

Two of the 3 tiers on boomerang par three 9th were used in the three day tourney. The high center tier was not used but it could have been.  In my groupings, the second (and shortest) hole turned out to cause more big scores than the 9th and this is one of our flatter greens.

[Jeff_Mingay]

I believe it, John. The second's a tough hole too. I presume the prevailing, right-to-left crosswind was a factor? It's very difficult to hit that narrow green when the prevailing wind's blowing hard, man.

Then, trying to recover from those deep greenside bunkers, with the wind still a factor... wow!

[Jlyon]

Jeff, wind was not a real factor on any of the days.  No more than 10mph.   However, even with this relatively flat green (sloped gently from left to right), the front pin placement on #2 could not be directly attacked from pin high misses (neither right or left side).  The speed of the greens would not allow it.  Those that took their punishment and played away from the front pin usually escaped with a bogey.  Those that were too aggressive and tried to get up and down suffered  a much worse fate.

[RSLivingston_III]

I talked with Dan about it last weekend at Kingsley and he said they were between 11.5 and 12 for the Club Championship, and that they are normally around 10/10.5. What was really interesting, after the Club Championship he took a poll of the guys and all the participants wanted to have the greens that fast for the future club events. Everyone had a blast with the greens that fast. It did add an extra 30-60 minutes to most of the groups rounds.
#2, #7 and #8 were pieces of work on the various days of the event.

[TEPaul]

"Based on my experience, it takes some fairly wild greens to keep your interest in this kind of exercise."

John Lyon:

I guess that's most of my point here. Most think it takes a wild green to interest golfers this way but I believe I've just discovered that there is a green speed at any particular course where all the little nuances of a green's slopes and contours just COMES ALIVE!

At my course that point is now undeniably in the 10-11 differential. Previously we never ran a speed differential like that---probably never much exceeding 9-9.5. But between about 10-11 the interest and possibilities just start to explode on you!! There are so many different things that are possible to do---and I know the greens on my course like the back of my hand and all these years some of the things I'm seeing now just weren't possible.

On some of the putts on some of the greens I'm now finding have 2 or more distinct OPTIONS! In other words, you can go one way or the other for the same basic effect. You can also now play putts way above pins onto "kick-ups" and such and try to sink them coming backwards. Is that sort of thing necessary? Of course not but it's now possible and it's a ball both for one's imagination and just to try for sport and fun!! Some of the subtle bowls on a few of the greens are now just amazing to play---so many thngs are now possible within them and coming into them from without.

I'm about to recommend to my club that this differential is the "reasonable maximum" never to be exceeded but that we should strive to keep it here as often as possible and not go below it.

Below 10 and the greens sort of "go to sleep" in the context of this fascinating "playability" and above 11 they go right over the top in "playablitiy". For slopes and contours like my course has (and so many of the old courses have greens like mine) this differential between 10-11 just may be the "magic numbers"!  

[TEPaul]

Ralph Livingston:

I've been researching this type of thing on a number of courses all year now and my feeling is the exponential differences in "playablitiy" between a real 10 and a real 11 and then a real 10 compared to a real 12 on the types of grades (slopes and contours) we may be talking about here is perhaps 500% to 1000% (where logically someone might assume its only around 10% to 20%!!).

In other words, to transition the ball from a particular spot to a pin (very sloped and contoured) may require 5 times more break at 11 than 10 (and certainly 9) and up to 10 times more break at 12 than at 10. This is obviously to attempt to bring the ball to rest around the pin. The phenonenon, I think, at these differentials gets into what I call "ball creep" (something that really doesn't exist at stimp speeds below about 9 to 9.5!). The real world fact is in this differential the lack of friction that results really becomes apparent and things extrapolate exponentially!

[ForkaB]

Tom

This is interesting and brings back fond memories of our recent experiments in Philadelphia.  I think that the premise (that faster greens offer more angles of approach) is true, but I do wonder........

....do not fast greens reward one's ability to read putts, whilst slow greens reward the quality of one's putting stroke?  If this is so (and I think it is) should we necessarily champion a maintenance practice (faster greens) which favors brain over brawn?

[Tom_Doak]

If it's also true that it takes 30-60 minutes longer for people to play when the greens are really tuned up, is THAT a good thing?

[BCrosby]

TEP -

Your Nobel prize quality research makes my case for slower green speeds.

Above certain stimp readings, the difficulties posed by green contours increase putting difficulty geometrically. It is not merely an arithmetic increase. The same slope on a green putting at 11 is not 10% harder than it is at 9; it is 100% harder. Or something like that.

In technical terms that means that putting on a green faster than a 9 that has any real contour is frigging crazy. At least for normal play.

Bob

[JohnV]

Tom P, I have never had the luxury of taking that much time trying out all of a green, but I always enjoy doing hole locations more than any other part of my job (at least when I'm not rushing to dodge members playing the course.)

While I agree that increasing speed can increase the enjoyment and add lots of subtleties to putting, there does come a point where it detracts.

I know what you mean about the "ball creep" (I call it the "trickle" factor).  Any time someone tells me their greens are 10 or higher and I don't see that, I know they don't understand green speeds.

Tom D, I doubt that the 30 to 60 minutes is due strictly to hole locations and green speed.  Just having it be an important tournament will slow down the average golfer even if the holes and speed were the same as the last time he played.

[Ed_Baker]

Tom,

Great thread, shortly after we completed the major elements of the restoration project at my club, I spent most of that season doing almost exactly what you have been doing. The results of that "research" were a bit sobering because it clearly drove home the point that 7 of our greens literally only had two to three playable pin posistions with speeds above 9.5. The "reclaimation" of our original greens footprints over the next 6 seasons have mitigated that situation by producing on average another 4 pin posistions on the problematic greens.

The irony of all this is the fact that the members SCREAM when the greens are actually at the correct speed for our contours (around 9), so we play tournaments with really ridiculous speeds.

 We have had disease and thatch problems this year and the greens have been slow all year until this last week when we had our 4 day member-member. To a man, everybody in the field gleefully 3 and 4 putted but were ecstatic that we "finally" have our greens back.

I can't for the life of me figure out this zeal for speed when the contours are clearly too severe to produce reasonable results. When the weight of the golf ball after literally two to three full rotations carries it off the green and down the false fronts in to the fairway, I call that goofy golf and clearly over the top for the design.

I never thought I would be a proponent of slower greens, but I am, and to your point ours go from playable to unplayable within a 1 to 1.5 Ft. difference on the stimp. Talk about the slippery slope.

[RSLivingston_III]

The extra time to play rounds is indeed, not a good thing but TEPaul is correct in the extra options the green speeds presented. I needed an extra 5 minutes just to un-pucker my butt before the next tee shot, after standing over some of those putts.
The extra time thing was discussed and the "ultra" fast green speeds at Kingsley were going to be limited to member events, Club Championship and Member/Member. If a guest wants to see them they better come and play in the off hours of these events. Hopefully Dan will get on and further clarify.
Tom, I agree the extra speed enhanced the experiance exponentially. There were probably a couple of dozen pin positions that everyone here would love to try.
Also, the chipping/pitching was enhanced to the same degree. So many options were added, and it's not like you don't already have a few at that course.

[A.G._Crockett]

This is a variation of the question I asked a couple of weeks ago about how one would go about choosing pin locations for a multi-day tournament, given that you are going to have several locations on each green.  It is fascinating reading to see what some of you have to say on the subject(s).

TEPaul,
"I'm about to recommend to my club that this differential is the "reasonable maximum" never to be exceeded but that we should strive to keep it here as often as possible and not go below it."
You lost me here.  What does this mean?  Also, what are you going to do with this information when you finish it?  (These may be the same questions.)

[RSLivingston_III]

I WAS a big advocate of slower green speeds until the Club Championship experiance. Now I have a better understanding of why the Oakmont members want to maintain their speeds, and the Crystal Downs members, too. I remember thinking that CD was almost goofy golf when I played it at some of the higher speeds. But now realize, if I had a dozen rounds under my belt to develop some local knowledge, it would be great fun.
Are high green speeds a "members only" thing?

[A.G._Crockett]

I WAS a big advocate of slower green speeds until the Club Championship experiance. Now I have a better understanding of why the Oakmont members want to maintain their speeds, and the Crystal Downs members, too. I remember thinking that CD was almost goofy golf when I played it at some of the higher speeds. But now realize, if I had a dozen rounds under my belt to develop some local knowledge, it would be great fun.
Are high green speeds a "members only" thing?

I would think not.  I would tend to believe that the higher speeds would be appreciated by "better" players.  It is a more demanding and exacting way to play.  

[W.H. Cosgrove]

I've made many of these comments before, but I don't think we can repeat them enough.  

We have actually slowed our greens (10-10.5)at my home club.  Raising mowing heights has allowed us to improve pace of play, use pin placements previously available only in winter months and, anecdotally, our membership has actually increased.  

The Superintendent sleeps better and member complaints have died to almost nothing.  We have made every attempt to improve the quality of the putting surface.  Top dressing more often has improved the smoothness of the greens and although I have evidence of this, I believe we have reduced the amount of water required to keep the poa surfaces healthy.  As a result they are truer and firmer.  This addresses the complaints I get as Green Committee chair, which after some analysis were not about green speed but rather how bumpy the greens were as a result of their softness.  

I also believe that the resulting health of the green allows us to raise speeds within a matter of weeks should we host a USGA qualifier or State Open as we have in the past.  

Now if TE Paul would stop leaving those keys all over the place !!!

[RSLivingston_III]

Since the invention of the stimpmeter in the 1930's, has the speed of the greens been artifically raised because of the increased distance if the ball???

[tlavin]

If it's also true that it takes 30-60 minutes longer for people to play when the greens are really tuned up, is THAT a good thing?

I agree with the sentiment of your post, Master Doak.  Green speeds above 10.5 wreak havoc with pace and enjoyment of play at any golf course.  It is one thing to set up a golf course for a professional tournament at speeds greater than eleven feet, but quite another to subject typical club members to such speedy greens.  The extra half hour or more is definitely attributable to the green speed; all you have to do is remember where the wait was the longest.  Surely it was the green with the most diabolical hole location.

Give me healthy greens at ten feet with challenging hole locations and that's all I would ever need.  I'll save the macho stuff for the 19th hole.  I'm a plus 4 thereabouts.

[gookin]

The major challenge I see provided by green speeds of 11 or more is the need to hit precise approach shots.  A shot hit to the green that is positioned improperly relative to the pin location should not rewarded equally to one that is hit in the proper position.  Without green speeds of 11 or more, this is rarely the case.  So I would argue that much more than good green reading skills are being rewarded with fast greens.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Mr Gookin, I would contend that the proper placement of the approach shot is more dependent on firmness than speed.  Any green running at or over 10 will wreck havoc when the approach is left above the hole.  To leave the ball where yo want it on a firm green is truly the mark of a shotmaker!

[TEPaul]

W.H and David Gookin:

I just wrote a two page review and proposal regarding the green speed of my course. In that report I mentioned the issue of green surface "firmness" is directly related to the issue of green speed but that the issue of "firmness" is another subject for another time. But by saying that in my report I most certainly did not mean the two aren't directly related because they most definitely are!!

[A_Clay_Man]

If the experience is amplified 500-1000 percent, what's an extra hour?

The important part of TP's final analysis is the part about keeping the greens as close to the desireable speed, as often and as long as possible. (Supers need respond to how functional that is) Because it always seemed so strange to have the green speeds slow for the entire year ,only to  have them "come alive" for the club championship.

Pebble is the perfect cunundrum. Those greens suck slow (as do most poa greens) and they keep them slow for the majority of the revenue stream. But when they do get them fast, alive doesn't do them justice.

Of course the 14th is the epitome of where the maximum reasonableness creates the loudest cries.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()