[jeffwarne]

would still have their jobs if they presented their course for the Club Championship in the condition Peble was in today?
Watching no player for the last three hours make a putt over 3 feet was..........well...indescribeable.

equally indescribeable was watching the best players in the world miss multiple putts inside three feet.

Congrats to McDowell who played great-I was scared for him that he might suffer the plinko effect on his final two putt attempt

[Mac Plumart]

I for one am real interested to hear what the superintendants have to say about Pebble's playing conditions.

[noonan]

What a goat ranch. The USGA is obviously obsessed with par being the winning score.

Any normal individual could tell those greens were horrid.

Tiger was right - AWFUL!

[Greg Chambers]

It's superintendent, not "superintendant"

[Brian Laurent]

I think course set-up and championship pressure had more to do with it than conditions.  Overall, I thought the course was presented extremely well.

[jeffwarne]

I think course set-up and championship pressure had more to do with it than conditions.  Overall, I thought the course was presented extremely well.

Brian,
So as the ball rolled out and lost speed and wobbled left, right, left and right in a ten inch area, that was Open pressure?
I didn't know Titleists got nervous.

and the question is would the Super survive, not what we think of the conditions

[K. Krahenbuhl]

I think course set-up and championship pressure had more to do with it than conditions.  Overall, I thought the course was presented extremely well.

Brian,
So as the ball rolled out and lsot speed and wobbled left, right, left and right in a ten inch area, that was Open pressure?
I didn't know Titleists got nervous

Not to mention all of seven players hit 17 in regulation.

[Don_Mahaffey]

It would be duck and cover. Firm and fast, OK to live another day. Firm, fast and bumpy, members grumpy.

[Brian Laurent]

Apparently I wasn't paying attention to the coverage...I didn't see any putts that had a legit chance of going in be knocked off line.

[Anthony_Nysse]

I dont thing that I would WANT to present a course in that manner....

[jeffwarne]

Apparently I wasn't paying attention to the coverage...I didn't see any putts that had a legit chance of going in be knocked off line.

How about the ones that started immediately off line from 2-3 feet which were putted out of a poa crater (or were the craters bent)
or did the entire field forget how to putt.
Forget how they putted for a moment, how about the splotchy multicolored motley appearance.
Again, not your opinion(or mine), but how would members react to those greens at the Club Championship (or Member-Guest)

[Ben Sims]

I played golf with my commander today and we had this conversation.  He basically knows nothing about any of this, but he knows I have an interest in it and want to get my masters from Penn State in turf.  I told him that anyone with a an inkling of an idea about grass, knows that keeping any strain of grass at the speed presented at major championships is very difficult.  I explained to him that any green speed in the 12 or over region is takes a very experienced super and that individual has to have an extremely detailed and proven system to maintain turf at that stress for any amount of time.  He seemed to understand these things after I took a hole or so explaining.

What he didn't understand, is why EVERY course that the USGA has their championship on is maintained in this way.  Why a course like Pebble Beach needed to be a slog to identify a champion.  I then delved into a diatribe about how some courses and their staff seem adept at creating and maintaining a beast.  I told him about John Zimmers and Oakmont, and what little I knew of Henry Fownes and his son William.  I told him about Shinnecock on '04.

After all of that explaining and self-investigation of my own thoughts on Pebble's presentation this tournament, I've come to this conclusion.  I think Mike Davis and the USGA got exactly what they wanted.  Pebble played the part of unshaven brute to a "T" today.  Yesterday, it played the hard to get hottie--hence the lower scores. 

The bigger question in my mind, is should our national championship be setup in the same way, year after year.  Can't we have a winner at Oakmont at +5 one year and -8 at Pebble the next?  Should the USGA force agronomy to the brink for the sake of par?  It just seems like the actual golf course is the last consideration in these affairs and instead it's, "how penal can we make this golf course."

[jeffwarne]

I played golf with my commander today and we had this conversation.  He basically knows nothing about any of this, but he knows I have an interest in it and want to get my masters from Penn State in turf.  I told him that anyone with a an inkling of an idea about grass, knows that keeping any strain of grass at the speed presented at major championships is very difficult.  I explained to him that any green speed in the 12 or over region is takes a very experienced super and that individual has to have an extremely detailed and proven system to maintain turf at that stress for any amount of time.  He seemed to understand these things after I took a hole or so explaining.

What he didn't understand, is why EVERY course that the USGA has their championship on is maintained in this way.  Why a course like Pebble Beach needed to be a slog to identify a champion.  I then delved into a diatribe about how some courses and their staff seem adept at creating and maintaining a beast.  I told him about John Zimmers and Oakmont, and what little I knew of Henry Fownes and his son William.  I told him about Shinnecock on '04.

After all of that explaining and self-investigation of my own thoughts on Pebble's presentation this tournament, I've come to this conclusion.  I think Mike Davis and the USGA got exactly what they wanted.  Pebble played the part of unshaven brute to a "T" today.  Yesterday, it played the hard to get hottie--hence the lower scores. 

The bigger question in my mind, is should our national championship be setup in the same way, year after year.  Can't we have a winner at Oakmont at +5 one year and -8 at Pebble the next?  Should the USGA force agronomy to the brink for the sake of par?  It just seems like the actual golf course is the last consideration in these affairs and instead it's, "how penal can we make this golf course."

Oakmont slows their greens down for the Open.
Pebble increases their speed dramatically.
Some turf is better than others for that.
At a lower speed, with same firmness, this would've been a great tournament.
There's  more skill in making an eight footer(at a manageable speed(say 10) given their bumpiness) than their is is making sure you don't three-putt(which you must do on a bumpy green stimping 13.

[Donnie Beck]

A Club Championship is a far cry from the Us Open. I think the USGA has done an outstanding job with course setup but do question if the greens need to get dried to the point that they are losing turgor pressure. I personally think if they misted the greens at the conclusion of each round it would not affect the firmness but may stop some of the pitting we saw at Pebble.

[PGertner]

To me, it was typical US Open setup, not unlike how Pebble was set up in 1992 or 2000.  My members would have loved the greenspeeds, despite the six hour round they would have played, but the penal rough, firmness around the greens and tall grass bunker faces would have upset a few of them, especially after the beers and Johnny Walker Black was served.  

My job would be safe....no issues there for me.  

Congrats to Graeme McDowell.  Played great golf, and a class act!!

Patrick Gertner
Potowomut Golf Club
East Greenwich, RI

[jeffwarne]

A Club Championship is a far cry from the Us Open. I think the USGA has done an outstanding job with course setup but do question if the greens need to get dried to the point that they are losing turgor pressure. I personally think if they misted the greens at the conclusion of each round it would not affect the firmness but may stop some of the pitting we saw at Pebble.

Donnie,
Thanks.
Can you explain turgor pressure? pitting?

BTW, I'm not knocking the Super at Pebble, just questioning the USGA's need for so much speed on greens not smooth enough to handle it -(i.e. the entire field was afraid to leave a putt of any length)which have wonderful slope.

[Donnie Beck]

Oakmont slows their greens down for the Open.
Pebble increases their speed dramatically.
Some turf is better than others for that.
At a lower speed, with same firmness, this would've been a great tournament.
There's  more skill in making an eight footer(at a manageable speed(say 10) given their bumpiness) than their is is making sure you don't three-putt(which you must do on a bumpy green stimping 13.

Jeff,

Green speed has nothing to do with the bumpiness. The greens were bumpy because the plants were dried to the point that the cells were colapsing casuing pitting of the greens.  Allowing greens to dry to this point actually slows the speed of the greens when the ball bounces in and out of the pits. I feel if they applied a very little.. I mean little water between rounds they could keep the firmness required and would actually increase green speeds.

[Ryan DeMay]

Jeff,

Turgor pressure is the hydraulic pressure of water within the plant that hold its main structures (shoots and leafblades) upright.  The pitting to which Donnie was referring to is the Poa wilting due to a lack of turgor pressure.  This can typically be resolved with a light syringing or misting to which Donnie referred.  

I think the one point that was illustrated during the Open was the disparity in water management strategies for the different grass types on greens.  It has been discussed on several threads here the merits of bentgrass versus Poa and this weekend was an example of how under championship conditions it can be difficult to maintain the desired consistency on putting surfaces with weaker and stronger types in the same sward.  I know it was talked about ad nauseam in the thread regarding Tiger's comments but, the Poa will be there for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps rather than regrassing all greens, it would be best to culture the sward that is currently there to the type of firm and fast conditions they were going after this year.  Over time one would hope that the weaker plants will be eliminated and stronger grasses will prosper under the proper conditions, leading to a more consistent surface under championship conditions. That is not to say that Dalhamer (PB Superintendent) and co. don't have it dialed in however, perhaps in 2019 similar conditions won't seem as over the top.

Hopefully, what will come of this is finding the right maintenance meld (to borrow a term from TE Paul) across the sliding scale of firm and fast to fit each venue.

[jeffwarne]

Oakmont slows their greens down for the Open.
Pebble increases their speed dramatically.
Some turf is better than others for that.
At a lower speed, with same firmness, this would've been a great tournament.
There's  more skill in making an eight footer(at a manageable speed(say 10) given their bumpiness) than their is is making sure you don't three-putt(which you must do on a bumpy green stimping 13.

Jeff,

Green speed has nothing to do with the bumpiness. The greens were bumpy because the plants were dried to the point that the cells were colapsing casuing pitting of the greens.  Allowing greens to dry to this point actually slows the speed of the greens when the ball bounces in and out of the pits. I feel if they applied a very little.. I mean little water between rounds they could keep the firmness required and would actually increase green speeds.

Thanks Donnie,
I wasn't implying speed causes bumpiness.
I was impying that, given Pebble's history of bumpy greens, that perhaps they should maintain a higher cut (or whatever) to slow the greens to a pace (say 10ish)where players could hit putts more firmly without fear of another 4-5 footer.
At such a speed they could also cut holes in more sloped positions, thus maintaining interest and strategy of being below the hole

[RJ_Daley]

It seems to me that they have an old sward of poa and with the amount of play PB gets, even if they had a frequent program of greens turf stripping, and replanting a bent cultivar, the poa would be back by the time the rootsystem matured enough to not have all sorts of other agronomic problems - say a three to five year stand maturing of greens turf. 

So, what do you think it will be like at Chambers Bay in 5 years?  That greens turf sward has reportedly had trouble establishing itself.  By the time they get the US OPen, I'd have to bet that the greens there will be mottled with a high percent of poa.  And, what purity will that fescue in FWs or surrounds of greens have by then?

I don't know about Donnie's comment that light watering and/or syringing would keep the poa plant healthy enough not to collapse on the plant cellular structure and prevent the phenomenon of pitting or unevenness, and how that plays into the rapid amount of growth the plants reportedly do in one day out there in that climate.

But, I don't think that the collaboration of the USGA guys set-up wizards and the turf staff is one of ignorance.  I'm sure they know all the things that get suggested here.  But, they have their ways... 

[Gary Slatter]

I thought the funniest "ad" was for the USGA Greens Section !

[TEPaul]

"Green speed has nothing to do with the bumpiness. The greens were bumpy because the plants were dried to the point that the cells were colapsing casuing pitting of the greens.  Allowing greens to dry to this point actually slows the speed of the greens when the ball bounces in and out of the pits. I feel if they applied a very little.. I mean little water between rounds they could keep the firmness required and would actually increase green speeds."


Donnie:

Thanks for that explanation of bumpiness and pitting and such. Maybe they could've corrected that to some degree as you suggest. However, the very last thing they needed on those greens this week, particularly yesterday, was more speed. The speed they had was very close to over the top on a few greens with their architectural and strategic ramifications and particular pins such as #10 and #14, #16 and #17.

[Brian Laurent]

Jeff...do you think that the look of the greens was magnified given our perspective from the TV towers?  I've played a lot of poa greens and don't recall ever being shocked or disgusted by their appearance.  

Also, the fear of a four or five foot come back putt isn't due to the bumps, but the severity of the pin placements.  A putt hit at the appropriate line and speed from four feet will not be effected enough by the poa to cause a miss.  These guys are the best players in the world, they know how to adjust their game to the conditions.  Trying to die your putts into the hole was just not the play this week.

Back to your original point...taking my opinion out of it, it just takes one po'd green committee member to not like the conditions and that's it!

[Wayne_Kozun]

Now for my pet peeve...

How do you get the pronunciation "po anna" from the Latin words "poa annua"?  It is five syllables, not three.

[Bill_McBride]

Now for my pet peeve...

How do you get the pronunciation "po anna" from the Latin words "poa annua"?  It is five syllables, not three.

It's colloquial, like saying "ya'll" instead of "you all."

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()