News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Most of the greens I really like are push-up or some modification of push-up greens.   It seems to me that USGA construction method greens lack the subtelty that I believe is a requirement for greatness. 

I am sure, however, that contrary examples exist.  What are the best examples of USGA contruction method greens out there? 

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Augusta
LA North
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Do we really count greens that were cored out and replicated, as opposed to built from scratch?  That's a whole different process, really.  But if you're counting those, the best we've worked on are probably at The Valley Club.

Of our own original courses, I think Rock Creek is probably the best set of USGA greens we've built.  Others include Apache Stronghold, Cape Kidnappers, Common Ground, Stonewall (both courses), Stone Eagle, Tumble Creek, and The Rawls Course.  There are some really good greens among those, but not many people would rank them up there with Ballyneal or Pacific Dunes or Old Mac, or even High Pointe.

Patrick_Mucci

Do we really count greens that were cored out and replicated, as opposed to built from scratch?  That's a whole different process, really.  But if you're counting those, the best we've worked on are probably at The Valley Club.

Tom,

In what year did the Valley Club convert to USGA greens ?


Of our own original courses, I think Rock Creek is probably the best set of USGA greens we've built.  Others include Apache Stronghold, Cape Kidnappers, Common Ground, Stonewall (both courses), Stone Eagle, Tumble Creek, and The Rawls Course.  There are some really good greens among those, but not many people would rank them up there with Ballyneal or Pacific Dunes or Old Mac, or even High Pointe.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Patrick:

Jim Urbina rebuilt the greens at The Valley Club to USGA specs about five years ago.  We changed the greens significantly on holes 11, 15 and 18 to put them back somewhat closer to the original design, as those three had been modified a few years after the course opened.

Jim Nugent

Can anyone explain what USGA greens are, and the reason for building them?

Jonathan Davison

  • Karma: +0/-0
The Castle Course has USGA greens.

Patrick_Mucci

Can anyone explain what USGA greens are, and the reason for building them?

Jim,

Percolation

They're layered with different materials,

The USGA website might have detailed info on them


« Last Edit: May 06, 2012, 07:29:22 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Most of the greens I really like are push-up or some modification of push-up greens.   It seems to me that USGA construction method greens lack the subtelty that I believe is a requirement for greatness. 

I am sure, however, that contrary examples exist.  What are the best examples of USGA contruction method greens out there? 

Jason

you should see the work that Mike Clayton/Michael Cocking did at Healesville, just out of Melbourne.

I couldn't believe that these greens were USGA spec, even though I had been told so.  I am sure there is a healesville picture thread on here somewhere.

James B
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0

Patrick_Mucci

Jason,

Adios in Coconut Creek, Florida might have a very unusual, very pronounced set of USGA greens.

They have tiers, contours and slope in abundance.

The 2nd and 3rd greens are unlike almost anything you'll find in South Florida.
Same for # 13 and # 18.

It's a most unusual set of greens.

There's not a flat green amongst all 18

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
In theory there might be some interesting USGA greens but I'm not sure there are any that were actually built to USGA specifications.  The intent might have been there but the feasibility of obtaining such would be miniscule.    Why?  Because the last place one can make a correction is in the top of the gravel layer and I ave seen too many where guys float greens and end up with areas that had too much or too little of the actual root zone.  I'm not saying they will not work that way but they do not meet the spec of the USGA green.  I think the specified margin for error is .5 inches.
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
In theory there might be some interesting USGA greens but I'm not sure there are any that were actually built to USGA specifications.  The intent might have been there but the feasibility of obtaining such would be miniscule.    Why?  Because the last place one can make a correction is in the top of the gravel layer and I ave seen too many where guys float greens and end up with areas that had too much or too little of the actual root zone.  I'm not saying they will not work that way but they do not meet the spec of the USGA green.  I think the specified margin for error is .5 inches.

Mike:

I can assure you that several of the projects I listed above are within the tolerance.  It's a pain in the ass, but it can be done.  What you lose is the ability to make adjustments at the edges in the finishing process to tie in the green with the surroundings ... with a push-up green you can just move the edge of the green in or out to make a little more room for a hole location, but with the USGA green you have to live with what you decided when you shaped the subgrade.

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tom,

I did not get the chance to play them but it looked to me like the greens at Country Club of Detroit were going to be great USGA greens. Did coring out the approach along with the green give you more room to adjust grades?

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
In theory there might be some interesting USGA greens but I'm not sure there are any that were actually built to USGA specifications.  The intent might have been there but the feasibility of obtaining such would be miniscule.    Why?  Because the last place one can make a correction is in the top of the gravel layer and I ave seen too many where guys float greens and end up with areas that had too much or too little of the actual root zone.  I'm not saying they will not work that way but they do not meet the spec of the USGA green.  I think the specified margin for error is .5 inches.

Mike:

I can assure you that several of the projects I listed above are within the tolerance.  It's a pain in the ass, but it can be done.  What you lose is the ability to make adjustments at the edges in the finishing process to tie in the green with the surroundings ... with a push-up green you can just move the edge of the green in or out to make a little more room for a hole location, but with the USGA green you have to live with what you decided when you shaped the subgrade.

TD,
OK..maybe if your own guys did it but I don't think you will find a set done by a GC that doesn't have a high or low area....and agree re the tie-ins...
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Can anyone explain what USGA greens are, and the reason for building them?

Anyone? Still looking for an answer. My local 9-hole muni has USGA greens, according to the head pro, and a few are somewhat interesting in terms of shape and contour.

What, specifically, makes a USGA green a USGA green, and how does it differ from other types of greens?

Jason Thurman

  • Karma: +1/-0
Phil: This link explains some of it. http://www.usga.org/course_care/articles/construction/greens/The-History-of-USGA-Greens/

It's really just a layering process/protocol that makes USGA greens, and it's all about drainage. I get the impression that the majority of courses anymore have USGA greens if they dont have either old-school push-up greens (Lawsonia) or a natural and sandy site with good draining soil. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I assume you're referencing Monona. I spent a few years living in Madison and thought it had the most interesting set of greens of the Madison munis by far. That doesn't exactly mean a lot, but it's a fun place for a quick 9.
"There will always be haters. That’s just the way it is. Hating dudes marry hating women and have hating ass kids." - Evan Turner

Some of y'all have never been called out in bold green font and it really shows.

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jason:

Thanks for the link! I live about 5 minutes from Monona GC -- probably have played more rounds there than any other course --not that that's saying alot about the course. But the greens have always drained well there, and a few have some pretty interesting contouring to them.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2012, 10:31:30 AM by Phil McDade »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Mike:

We do the final float of ALL of our own greens [including remodels], and we probe them relentlessly to make sure we've got them right.  [I wish our roles were reversed here, as I'm sure you would have come up with a terrific analogy for how much probing the boys do; I wasn't even going to try to compete with the master there.  ;) ]


Phil:

The USGA Green Construction method was developed in the 1960's.  Basically, it is a system where the green is built in three parallel layers

1)  a subgrade of native soil with herringbone drainage cut into it,

2)  a 4-inch layer of fine pea gravel, and

3)  a 12-inch layer of specially approved sand/peat greens mix.

The whole premise of the system is that the layers create a perched water table, where the water held in the greens mix layer does not flush down into the drainage until it is saturated.  I have never been entirely sure WHY you would want to do that, and I've always suspected the real reason they came up with the system had more to do with enabling construction without compaction and establishing a standard for the greens mix itself.  But, the perched water table will only work if the layers are all at a precise uniform depth, and even then there is some question whether the hydraulics really work as they are supposed to work theoretically, when you are dealing with a heavily contoured surface instead of three flat layers in a box.

A "California green" doesn't have the layer of pea gravel to perch the water table, and is generally 100% sand instead of a sand/peat mix.

A "push-up green" is generally built with native soils or with sand piled up on top of the native grade, rather than dug down into a subgrade.

Jaeger Kovich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Here is a hand drawn spec i did a few months ago... hopefully a nice visual aid (sorry about the metric measurements, it was an international project... reference Tom's units for US if you like)





... pvc drainage pipe is a bit over the top... normally standard 4 inch black corrugated perf pipe is used

David_Elvins

  • Karma: +0/-0
But, the perched water table will only work if the layers are all at a precise uniform depth, and even then there is some question whether the hydraulics really work as they are supposed to work theoretically, when you are dealing with a heavily contoured surface instead of three flat layers in a box.

Tom (or anyone else),

Have you ever experimented or seen anyone experiment with variable layer thicknesses, or variable layer properties on heavily contoured greens?  Lets say you have a mound in the middle of a green, could you make the peat sand layer thinner or increase the peat content in the sand mix in this area to try to retain water that would drain away from the high point within the sand peat layer? 

Ask not what GolfClubAtlas can do for you; ask what you can do for GolfClubAtlas.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
But, the perched water table will only work if the layers are all at a precise uniform depth, and even then there is some question whether the hydraulics really work as they are supposed to work theoretically, when you are dealing with a heavily contoured surface instead of three flat layers in a box.

Tom (or anyone else),

Have you ever experimented or seen anyone experiment with variable layer thicknesses, or variable layer properties on heavily contoured greens?  Lets say you have a mound in the middle of a green, could you make the peat sand layer thinner or increase the peat content in the sand mix in this area to try to retain water that would drain away from the high point within the sand peat layer? 


David:

I'm sure that some superintendents experiment with more or less organic material by incorporating it after the green is built.  But, an architect trying those sorts of things would be asking for trouble.

Patrick_Mucci

Jaeger,

The diagram you posted reflects the modern version of USGA greens.

The USGA green in the 90's and earlier had a four to six (4-6) inch layer or choker of sand between the stone and the seed mix.

Dane Hawker

  • Karma: +0/-0
I work on a course that has a mixture of greens including pushups(1950's), USGA(2000's) and California greens(1980's). The best greens on the course are the California greens built in the 80s.

I would be interesting to see a side by side comparison of two new greens. One USGA green, and one California green at 200mm depth sand. I really wonder if we need to go the great expense of the USGA model?


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
David,

It's well known that water drains faster in deeper sand layers.  When I have sand tested, and it drains too fast for USGA spec, I have reduced the seed bed layer from 12" to no less than 10".  I have never increased the depth, but in remodels have used the 2" tolerance to raise swales and lower humps to flatten the surface.

Dane,

I have done CA greens a lot.  Superintendents report they love them, especially those with poor water quality.  While dry to start, over the years, they come into spec while USGA greens tend to slow down the drainage a bit more than desireable in certain conditions.  In USGA testing, they say the drainage is still more even in a USGA green, and that they tend to last a bit longer.  With the cost of gravel going up and up, a good case can be made not to spend a few thousand $$$ per green, especially when supers like them.

In the end, I look for the retained moisture and perk rates to be right.  I guess I don't really care to add peat to a USGA green if it already has the right properties, and/or add a gravel layer if my clients are more concerned with the up front cost when the long term savings of spending more money is nebulous.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back