Why can't they get back to the basics ?

[rgkeller]

It is the fact that superintendents ignore the mowing patterns that gives rise to the problems of shrinking greens and tees in the first place.

Stopping the shrinkage is a simple issue.

Restoring the greens and tees is, I agree, a more complex problem.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Like trees growing, greens shrinking is an almost imperceptable process and problem, that in the course of just a few years can alter the configuration of the green and the play of the hole.

What surprises me is not the 6 inch incursion of the rough or fringe, but several feet of lost footpads in a given area.

Perhaps that area requires special attention while mowing, or doesn't fit well in a cycled mowing approach, but, at some point in time, when it's obvious to all but the blind, that condition must be recognized and remediated.

That single revelation should also send the signal that perhaps other greens have suffered the same fate, and a global program should be undertaken to restore the intended lines.

I tend to agree with rkeller, the Superintendent is the keeper of the castle, and as such, is charged with the responsibility of "properly" maintaining the golf course, and this includes preserving the design integrity of the tees, greens and fairways.

I don't think green shrinkage is a budget factor, rather a habit that maintainance staff inadvertantly fall in to in their daily functions.

All too often, the easy way, rather then the proper way, is the path chosen.

But, the ultimate responsibility lies with the "keeper of the castle".

[TEPaul]

"It is the fact that superintendents ignore the mowing patterns that gives rise to the problems of shrinking greens and tees in the first place."

rg:

Maybe you haven't noticed but that was a problem that happened a whole lot more than it does now.

"Stopping the shrinkage is a simple issue."

It is a simple issue but it was an issue that very few clubs---eg memberships, supers etc seemed to have noticed in the last 50-60 years. Again, maybe you haven't noticed but that's all beginning to change now. The entire idea of really restoring classic courses, of which expanding the green surfaces back to their original sizes, is something that's basically only been going on in the last 10 or so years.

"Restoring the greens and tees is, I agree, a more complex problem."

I wouldn't exactly call it a complex problem but it is something that takes a bit of time, money and effort. You don't exactly just begin to mow it back out because it's generally not the same type of grass---if you do an original green space expansion you pretty much take off what's there and reseed the expansion areas. In most cases it takes a year or two so the transition is no longer noticeable.

But if you feel like just blaming someone today or from the past, be my guest. My experience is doing that just pisses people off and isn't very productive.
 
 

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Regarding your post #26----that kind of thing happened all the time in the past but that's been changing dramatically in the last ten years and the momentum to restore original green space to old greens has pretty much hit a critical mass now, it's happening all over the place---I see it all the time these days in these restorations. If you don't believe me I'd be happy to point them out.

On almost all these old courses the peripheries of original green space has been lost over a period of many decades, not just a few years---and it's really not up to the supers to restore entire lost green space. That needs to start with a master plan and a restoration effort. It's not just a simple matter of going out there tomorrow with a green mower and mowing back out to orginal green space. If any member of a club actually believes that they have a lot to learn.

I'd be willing to bet that the primary reason recapturing original green space began to happen in the last ten or so years with the new movement to restore old courses through master plans is due to the dedicated research use amongst the older clubs and the architects who restore them of old aerials. I'll never forget the first time I actually looked at and then began to study an old aerial of my course. The multiple things I noticed from the old aerial were just amazing and I'd played that course for 20 years. The very first things I noticed were how few trees there were, how wide the fairways were and how big the greens were! Once a club with an older course starts to really use, study and analyze old aerials it seems like almost an automatic progression that a movement starts to restore some of what was lost over time.

The interesting thing is some of those old aerials have been hanging on the walls of many clubs for years and a lot of people have looked at them but apparently until about 10 or so years ago they never really did look at them with a purpose---which it takes, in my opinion, to really notice and understand the differences between modern times and the old days.

[RJ_Daley]

Along the lines of what Don Mahaffey said:  I attended one of the Seth Raynor Society gatherings and a number of the participants were supers from SR courses.  If you have a classic course whose archie has a society (Tillie, SR or Ross), it seems to me that the club ought to pay for the super to be a member.  The club ought to buy a library for the super containing some of the old and new books that delve into the old master archies lives and works, and the modern commentators of GCA that study and observe GCA from a classic preservationist perspective.  

I think that supers of some of the sub-categories of golf course styles and maintenance melds ought to form their own networks of mini-associations.  Like, Fescue managers, or golden era courses, or prairie or dunesland managers, etc.  Clubs should budget more for the supers to get away now and then and have mini gatherings of supers with like interests.

[A_Clay_Man]

From what i gather, it isn't, or wasn't the supers ignoring that caused the shrinkage, it was, (is) the difficulty in manipulating the actual mower.

I've never pushed one, but a recent account by a former course employee said they were very heavy and hard to get the edges just right.

Anyone confirm?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam Clayman,

I'd strongly disagree if a club has continued to use walking mowers.  The issue becomes a little more complicated when Tri-plexes or riding mowers are put into use.

Ask your friend, how were the greens mowed when the golf course opened ?   What's changed ?
Habit and benign neglect, not weight, difficulty or money are mostly responsible for green shrinkage.

TEPaul,

I'd disagree with you.

This is a simple process, one that the superintendent can initiate and complete over a few years or less.

Paralysis through analysis has frozen and caused the abandonment of too many worthwhile projects over the years.

On this one, I'm with NIKE, "Just do it".

[A_Clay_Man]

Pat- I just assumed that modern equiptment wouldn't have caused the pervasive losses of greenspace, in the past.

But, I often see many mis-cuts, with the modern stuff or whatever they are using. I think it comes down to the care taken on every pass by that individual employee.

One of the Boys on the peninsula use to take pride in his ability to make an old hole disappear, after cutting the new one. He'd said when he finish weaving the turf, he'd take a few steps away then look back, if he could still see the weave, he'd fix it until it was seemless.

 I assume that kind of diligence and care, is rare.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam Clayman,

It is rare.

Remember, in many cases, minimum wage, transient workers carry out maintainance functions, and it's difficult to imbue them with artisan values.

The budget or money issue does exist, and I intentionally glossed over it to avoid complicating the initial issue.

In many cases, the decision to go to riding mowers is a money issue.  (time and labor)  But, there can be tradeoffs, like scalping, turning, access and egress, compaction, quality and speed.

Strangely enough, many of the golf courses that have suffered green shrinkage use walking mowers, hence, I view the issue more in the context that rgkeller does.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,
I'd disagree with you.
This is a simple process, one that the superintendent can initiate and complete over a few years or less."

Pat:

You really aren't disagreeing with me--you're disagreeing with what most all superintendents do and pretty much have to do. You think it's just a simple process for a super to gradually mow lost green space back out to what it once was without even informing those he works for? I wish it were so but it just ain't. What you should do is simply go out there and talk to some of them. As I said the only super I'm aware of who ever tried anything like that in any significant way was Mike Rewinski. He did it really gradually over time claiming that it was so gradual no member he was aware of even noticed he'd done anything.

[TEPaul]

Pat Mucci said;

"Strangely enough, many of the golf courses that have suffered green shrinkage use walking mowers, hence, I view the issue more in the context that rgkeller does."

All this probably only goes to show how varied things can be from course to course and super to super. I've asked numerous supers what they feel about green space shrinkage over time and the vast majority have said that those mowing greens simply err on the inside so as never to scalp a collar---for which some supers say the mower operator would get shot. But the other day while on the 16th green at Manufacturers I started talking to super Scott May about this problem and phenomenon and he said he actually instructs and encourages his green mow operators to cut into the collar slightly and he walked me around the edge of that 16th green and showed me precisely where that'd happened to his satisfaction and where it hadn't. But to date Scott May is the only super I've ever heard say that. Most all the rest said the opposite.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Each green on each course has it's unique qualities and process it must go through to recapture the green to the intended foot pad, but, in many instances, it is merely embarking upon a gradual reclamation effort over a few years, vis a vis, mowing.

In other situations, it involves more in the discovery process and the reclamation process.  TLC !

I've seen great results, achieved strictly through mowing.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Every green is different of course and it's all a matter of extent and degree that you're dealing with. A lot of it does have to do with strains of grass obviously. Greens like mine couldn't mow back to our original peripheries when we went to A-4. You have to gass, remove and reseed in that case. On one of our greens (back left of #17) we reclaimed almost 30 FEET of lost green space by reclaiming an enormous back left green space flareout!!

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Every green is different of course and it's all a matter of extent and degree that you're dealing with. A lot of it does have to do with strains of grass obviously. Greens like mine couldn't mow back to our original peripheries when we went to A-4. You have to gass, remove and reseed in that case. On one of our greens (back left of #17) we reclaimed almost 30 FEET of lost green space by reclaiming an enormous back left green space flareout!!

The question has to be asked, when your club chose to regrass your greens, didn't part of the process include the reclamation to the foot pads ?  If not, why not.
It should have been a one process project.

In many cases, clubs have not introduced new grasses, and in those cases, mowing combined with TLC is usually all that is necessary to reclaiim the greens over the years.

It's reallly quite simple[/color]

[Tripp_Davis]

In large measure, the "blame" is to be placed on an overall lack of understanding or appreciation of the importance of the original design intent.  Only recently have many clubs reconnected with thier heritage and begun to explore what may have been lost over time.  This is not the superintendents fault in most cases.

Another culprit is the advent of using riding mowers to mow greens.  With many of the original interesting shapes and locations of the edge of greens, they could not be mowed with riding mowers and again there was not an appreciation of what shrinking the greens meant.  

As far as recaputuring the "lost" edges and shapes of the greens (resulting in lost strategic variety and interest), it depends on the grass types and the condition of the grass in the lost areas of the greens.  In areas where the greens and collars are bent grass or bent/poa, and grown mostly on native soil, enlaring the green can be done with out a great deal of trouble, assuming the thatch in the lost areas are not so dense that it cannot be removed in a season.  Chuck Martineau at Whippoorwill in Armonk, New York has done a great deal of recapturing the original green sizes with aerifying, topdressing and veriticutting.  We are going to do this over the next year at Engineers on Long Island to enlarge greens there to their orignal size.  In some cases, you use grass from the putting green or a nursery mown at green height to enlarge the green when the thatch in the collar is too dense (like we are doing at Fresh Meadow this fall).

However, if you are at a course where Bermuda surrounds the green surface, especially if a sand/mix cavity was constructed and Bent is the greens surface, it is more difficult to recapture lost area.  If the surface of the green is also Bermuda and the "intruding" collar is still of the same variety, it is possible to recapture by removing thatch and moving the cut line out.  

When we are involved in a renovation of greens to simply change the grass type, we always look to recapture the orginal size of the green.  

As far as the general problem of greens receeding, with our new courses we regularly visit to inspect to make sure mowing lines are being adhered to.      

[Tags:]

Tags: