[ChipOat]

After Stupid Trees, my other pet peeve about many otherwise stellar courses is that the green speeds are now much faster than they were ever designed to be.  Why?  For the same reason a dog licks his testicles - because he can.

In the current issue (1/26) of Golf World, there is a quote from "Rick Spear, the superintendent at Piping Rock GC (sic) in Locust Valley, N.Y., who says that too many courses have become victims of 'Augusta Syndrome,' an infatuation with having super quick putting surfaces a la Augusta National GC."

IMO, almost all marvelous golf courses of the Golden Era now have certain greens thereon (or many greens on a few of them) that are just silly-fast for the contours; windmills and clown's noses stuff.  Designed in the 1920's for Stimping below 8 and now being maintained at 10-12 for everyday play.  Sidehill and downhill putts are ridiculous.  I'm not a great putter, but my benchmark on this is the really good putters I've seen who can't stop a 20 foot sidehiller within 10 feet of the hole.

I've done this thread before but now I've got support from an expert (and not just because he agrees with me).  The conversion of ANGC greens from Rye to Bent (1978-ish, I think?) seems to have started all this.

[Kyle Harris]

Chip,

A few points of order:

Weren't the original Augusta greens Bermuda grass of some variety and not Rye?

Has the source cited ever putted the greens at Augusta? How much distance is between the myth of perception and truth?

[ChipOat]

Kyle,

I don't believe the ANGC greens that were converted to Bent were Bermuda - although I might be mistaken.

However, the pre-conversion greens were less deathly (I putted on them) and I have spoken with at least 6 excellent players and/or members that have confirmed the new greens to be far, far faster since the change.

[Mike_Young]

The ANGC greens were bermuda but were overseeded with rye grass.....

[John Burzynski]

After Stupid Trees, my other pet peeve about many otherwise stellar courses is that the green speeds are now much faster than they were ever designed to be.  Why?  For the same reason a dog licks his testicles - because he can.

In the current issue (1/26) of Golf World, there is a quote from "Rick Spear, the superintendent at Piping Rock GC (sic) in Locust Valley, N.Y., who says that too many courses have become victims of 'Augusta Syndrome,' an infatuation with having super quick putting surfaces a la Augusta National GC."

IMO, almost all marvelous golf courses of the Golden Era now have certain greens thereon (or many greens on a few of them) that are just silly-fast for the contours; windmills and clown's noses stuff.  Designed in the 1920's for Stimping below 8 and now being maintained at 10-12 for everyday play.  Sidehill and downhill putts are ridiculous.  I'm not a great putter, but my benchmark on this is the really good putters I've seen who can't stop a 20 foot sidehiller within 10 feet of the hole.

I've done this thread before but now I've got support from an expert (and not just because he agrees with me).  The conversion of ANGC greens from Rye to Bent (1978-ish, I think?) seems to have started all this.

I can't argue with your premise much at all.  Augusta and color TV have probably done as much damage as anything else has to golf course maintenance standards and agronomy.   Some of the older courses have undulations and green designs that just don't work with the much faster green speeds of today, they become almost impossible putting surfaces.

On a related note, I just think it is funny that someday someone somewhere will Google that old joke 'why does a dog lick his testicles" and they will find a posting on green speeds!

[Kyle Harris]

When did Augusta install automatic irrigation?

[PCCraig]

While I agree that many golden age clubs' greens are too fast for the contour, one could argue that the faster green speeds would enhance the average clubs semi-flat boring greens into something somewhat interesting with speed.

Just a thought...

[Patrick_Mucci]

While I agree that many golden age clubs' greens are too fast for the contour, one could argue that the faster green speeds would enhance the average clubs semi-flat boring greens into something somewhat interesting with speed.

Just a thought...

And, a bad one at that.

Most "golden age" and early golf courses had anything but semi-flat boring greens..  They usually had contour and/or slope

Which courses were you refering to that had semi-flat, boring greens ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chipoat,

I think you have to examine the trend in green speeds at the time ANGC converted away from Bermuda.

Was the USGA and PGA attempting to increase green speeds for their championships prior to, concurrent with or subsequent to the change at ANGC ?

[ChipOat]

Pat,

Yes, they were.  So, perhaps The Masters isn't 100% responsible.  But that's only a tangential add-on to my gripe - which is the green speeds, themselves.

[PCCraig]

Pat-

Not that bad of a thought. Not every course had super interesting and contoured greens like NGLA or TCC. What I am talking about are the mid-to-low range neighborhood country clubs all over the country. I can name dozens of north shore Chicago clubs that at slow green speeds would make every putt dead straight.

[Adam Clayman]

Chip,
 I'd agree the change to bent grass put the speed race into hyper drive, but I don't know if it started there.

For those that remember, was there a pride (bragging rights) pre-Augusta's bent grass greens, within the private club culture for who had the fastest greens?

One argument I made the other night (to a lawyer) who was bemoaning the need for so much undulation on some modern greens (bayside) was...  With the new I&B, the greens are apparently the last and only place left to test expert players. Having the combo of too much speed, with too much slope, places an emphasis on perfect placement on approach. If the player is out of position, increasing the difficulty, there seems to be an expectation that a reasonable two putt is "fair". Personally, I don't agree with that expectation and have seen plenty of situations where 3 putting could be considered well played.

Did the expectation of no 3 putts, start at ANGC?

[David Sneddon]

After Stupid Trees, my other pet peeve about many otherwise stellar courses is that the green speeds are now much faster than they were ever designed to be.  Why?  For the same reason a dog licks his testicles - because he can.

I played the 1924 Perry Maxwell course in Tulsa last Friday, Cherokee Hills.  Tripp Davis did a re-do several years ago, which I believe involved a re-routing of the course to complement the attached Casino.

I played it for the first time the first week of January.  I don't know if they had just aquired a new greens roller (one of those double roller/sit sideways jobs).  The greens are very well contoured, and they were rolling the h#ll out of them that day - probably stimping in the area of 12+. An extremely unpleasant experience, the balls were running right off the green, greens were almost un-puttable.

Last Friday, when I played it was much the same, some greens had been rolled to extremely fast speeds and others hadn't been touched. 

My only consolation was that it was snowing back home and at least I was out playing golf.

[Rory Connaughton]

Chip:

  Where does Oakmont fit into the equation?  As I understand it, the Fownes were dedicated to lightning fast greens from the start or close to it.  Did their devotion to speed and Oakmont's place as the frequent site of USGA championships get the ball rolling or was it really ANGC?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()