Green Speed

[Harris Nepon]

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2011/3/14/do-we-need-larger-cups-or-slower-greens.html

What is your guys thoughts on green speeds?

In the article above it mentions fast greens being harder and causing long rounds. I personally find fast greens easier to putt on as they are usually more true and smooth allowing the ball to hold it's line.

Slow greens may help compensate for a bad putter limiting the misses? Sorry, don't have an argument for slow bumpy greens, my putting gets really bad on bad greens.

What do you think?

[Sean_A]

Harris

I have long said there is little reason for greens to head for double digits and thats what I am still saying.  I think 9ish is good compromise for maintenance purposes, cost, creative green design, chipping and speed of play. 

Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

Faster greens = Slower play. I agree with Mr Arble 9 is the number for normal play.

[Mark Saltzman]

The article says every group played in under 4 hrs and most in 3.25 hours?  I am amazed that so much time was saved.  I didn't realize the amount of time spent on the greens.

I wonder if the fact that everyone thought this was just a 'fun' caused faster play (ie taking less time to prepare for all shots)?

There must not have been many beginners in this event.  I can't believe a group of beginners could play that fast, big hole or not.  In my experience, beginners/very high handicappers are often fast on the green.  Unfortunately, this is because they are ready to 'give up' on the hole and after one or two putts are ready to pick up.

Anyways, good the event was a success and sounds like a lot of fun.  I wonder how many hole-outs/chip-ins there were?

(And sorry this post had nothing to do with green speed)

[Don_Mahaffey]

Over the top fast greens slow down play. To me over the top means the speed doesn't match the contour for the average player.
And its not just putting. Where I see a lot of time spent on overly fast greens is shots around the greens. High handicappers are not hitting many greens, throw in chipping to sloped greens that are running 10+ and you get a lot of back and forth....

[Kyle Harris]

The article says every group played in under 4 hrs and most in 3.25 hours?  I am amazed that so much time was saved.  I didn't realize the amount of time spent on the greens.

Is this number significantly different than a round at Pine Needles under normal circumstances?

[Jeff_Brauer]

I had never heard of 15" cups before. I had heard expanding cups to like 6" and figured within a few years, we would all be back to missing putts just low side.......

Funny to read the comments.  Some of the "purists" here might argue it cheapens the game, as if the manly challenge is more a component than just having fun.  More birdies, faster play sounds like it was fun for those guys.  I might try it if I owned a multi course facility just to see which was more popular.

Another off beat thought.  We have sometimes discussed bringing back the old fashioned notion of differing green speeds for more challenge.  What is there was a mixture of cup sizes, either announced or unannounced on the scorecard?  How would that affect your strategy in playing for the tucked pin or towards the middle of the green?

BTW, if on another thread, great economic times are the underpinning of building great courses, I gather that bad economic times are the underpinning of experiments to shake it all up and see how we can remake the game.

[Mark Saltzman]

The article says every group played in under 4 hrs and most in 3.25 hours?  I am amazed that so much time was saved.  I didn't realize the amount of time spent on the greens.

Is this number significantly different than a round at Pine Needles under normal circumstances?

Kyle,

that's a very good question.  I can tell you when I played there a couple of years ago, we played on a fairly full course and it was slow.  I honestly can't remember how long it took, but no way it was under 4 hours. Of course, that is just one round so I have no idea what is 'normal' for PN.

Mark