[Patrick_Mucci]

removal of rough from the perimeter of the green, allowing marginal shots to roll off the green into adjacent bunkers, chipping areas or greenside rough.

While the elimination and maintenance presents a bit of a challenge, it's a worthwhile challenge.

I've noticed a number of clubs cutting back on the rough surrounding the putting surface to allow the contour of the land to redirect the ball.

Somehow, I feel that this was the original intent, one that got lost in the name of "fairness"

Now that many clubs have reclaimed their lost putting surfaces, what clubs are starting to reclaim the perimeters ?

[Greg Tallman]

removal of rough from the perimeter of the green, allowing marginal shots to roll off the green into adjacent bunkers, chipping areas or greenside rough.

While the elimination and maintenance presents a bit of a challenge, it's a worthwhile challenge.

I've noticed a number of clubs cutting back on the rough surrounding the putting surface to allow the contour of the land to redirect the ball.

Somehow, I feel that this was the original intent, one that got lost in the name of "fairness"

Now that many clubs have reclaimed their lost putting surfaces, what clubs are starting to reclaim the perimeters ?

Original intent or not we have vastly expanded short grass throughout the course, starting at the green complexes.

[Patrick_Mucci]

removal of rough from the perimeter of the green, allowing marginal shots to roll off the green into adjacent bunkers, chipping areas or greenside rough.

While the elimination and maintenance presents a bit of a challenge, it's a worthwhile challenge.

I've noticed a number of clubs cutting back on the rough surrounding the putting surface to allow the contour of the land to redirect the ball.

Somehow, I feel that this was the original intent, one that got lost in the name of "fairness"

Now that many clubs have reclaimed their lost putting surfaces, what clubs are starting to reclaim the perimeters ?

Original intent or not we have vastly expanded short grass throughout the course, starting at the green complexes.

Greg,

Since when is mowing the putting surfaces back to the original foot pad expanding short grass throughout the course ?

[Steve Lang]

  lots of fun when the perimeter runs 8-10...  but many don't like it simply because it can destroy medal scores..

[Jason Topp]

My course has a ton of this and it makes for very interesting play.  I have been working on the hybrid chip the last month and the jury is still out.

[Dan Kelly]

Agreed. Our course has lots of this, too.

Now, if I could get them to cut down the rough around the bunkers....

[Patrick_Mucci]

lots of fun when the perimeter runs 8-10...  but many don't like it simply because it can destroy medal scores..

Steve,

Hasn't medal play been responsible for removing or dumbing down so many features on golf courses ?

[Scott Warren]

Pat,

Trend?

There are many places where what you describe is and always has been just the way things are done. It never goes out of style.

Come visit Australia or Britain some time!

[Thomas Dai]

removal of rough from the perimeter of the green, allowing marginal shots to roll off the green into adjacent bunkers, chipping areas or greenside rough.

One of the better trends to have developed over the last few years on inland/parkland courses. It's one of the reasons why links/heathland golf has always been such fun to many, although sometimes so madly infuriating. Just about any green you miss at, for example, the likes of TOC or Royal Dornoch presents this kind of challenge. Remove collars of rough from around fairway bunkers as well. More firm and fast, less watering, less rough.
All the best

[Colin Macqueen]

Pat,
A trend whereby there is "…..removal of rough from the perimeter of the green"?
Albeit I have visited few enough courses around the world I am in lockstep with Scott Warren here.  I have never felt that anywhere on the Australian, British, or American courses for that matter, that I have played was there an encroachment of rough upon the putting green surrounds.  Pray tell me which American courses are suffering this indignity so that I can make sure to avoid them!!

Cheers Colin

[Sean_A]

Pat,
A trend whereby there is "…..removal of rough from the perimeter of the green"?
Albeit I have visited few enough courses around the world I am in lockstep with Scott Warren here.  I have never felt that anywhere on the Australian, British, or American courses for that matter, that I have played was there an encroachment of rough upon the putting green surrounds.  Pray tell me which American courses are suffering this indignity so that I can make sure to avoid them!!

Cheers Colin

It is very common to see rough tail on the inside of green-side bunkers then to form a ringed wall 2 inches high.  I have asked many times why this is the preferred cutting practice for so many clubs.  I think the stock answer is that is the expected look.  

Below are examples which aren't that bad because at least the flow into the green is fairly wide.




More of the type which people are likely hammering on.


Ciao

[Scott Warren]

Brian, Sean, Thomas,

It is a shock when you see it in the US. And it must be labour-intensive to mix and match between so many very different and distinct mowing heights around the greens when there's green cut, collar cut, fairway cut and rough cut.

Oakmont is the one that hangs in my memory from the pics in Ran's course review:

[Patrick_Mucci]

Scott Warren,

What happened between 3:37 and 5:32 ?

Did Sean's photos cause an epiphany ?

It's been a common practice to see rough within the green footpad acting as a safety net of sorts, preventing balls from rolling down into bunkers or off the green.

I've always wondered if the Tri-plex was responsible or if it was the quest for "fairness"

[Mark Pearce]

Pat,

As you have pointed out before, in your book I'm a moron.  Perhaps as a result, you're going to need to explain where there is any inconsistency between Scott's two posts.  One where he says that rough around greens doesn't tend to be a problem in Australia and the UK and another where he shows some pictures of the problem at Oakmont.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

I would agree with you that rough holds balls near the green, different than the old Scottish courses, and that it was largely done specifically for that purpose to speed play, and keep maintenance costs down.  It might also have been to keep the course tougher, as per the US Open mentality from 1951 on.

Then, in the '92 Open at Pebble, the USGA experimented with it for the first time (from memory, others can correct) and it slowly caught on from there.  It might be a concession to both fun golf and older golfers, giving the finesse guys (who by and large are compensating for lost distance with more guile around the greens).  So, even though it started out as an idea for variety in US Open set ups, this one might actually make sense for the everyday course, too.

As always, lots of stuff goes on at any point in history, and I might be missing things, but that is my general take on the situation.

[Nigel Islam]

Pat, I couldn't agree more about this issue. One reason why I love watching tournaments in Australia. They seem to have it set up just perfect for my likings.

[Tom_Doak]

Pat,

I would agree with you that rough holds balls near the green, different than the old Scottish courses, and that it was largely done specifically for that purpose to speed play, and keep maintenance costs down.  It might also have been to keep the course tougher, as per the US Open mentality from 1951 on.

I think the real culprit was all the irrigation and fertilizer that was applied to golf courses from 1951 on.  Before that, the rough on the bunker faces probably wasn't all that rough for most of the summer, and the golf ball rolled down into the hazards more easily.  But all of the irrigation meant it all had to be cut much more often, and that's where they made a concession to maintenance costs.

[Dan_Callahan]

One of the great skills in golf is being able to get up and down from a thick lie around the greens. I watched players struggle with this (and some excel at it) at the US AM at TCC a few months ago. Being able to swing hard, hit a soft shot and control the rollout is very impressive. It is also a great skill to be able to get up and down from tight lies around the greens (at Pinehurst, for example). I don't think this is an either/or maintenance issue. There is room in the game for both styles.

[Grant Saunders]

Pat,

I would agree with you that rough holds balls near the green, different than the old Scottish courses, and that it was largely done specifically for that purpose to speed play, and keep maintenance costs down.  It might also have been to keep the course tougher, as per the US Open mentality from 1951 on.

I think the real culprit was all the irrigation and fertilizer that was applied to golf courses from 1951 on.  Before that, the rough on the bunker faces probably wasn't all that rough for most of the summer, and the golf ball rolled down into the hazards more easily.  But all of the irrigation meant it all had to be cut much more often, and that's where they made a concession to maintenance costs.

Also too part of the shift may have come about as the rotary mower became a reality. They weren’t really available until the 30’s in their early forms and it was probably 20 or so years until they had refined them enough to be used in a golf course application. Reel mowers (which have been around much longer) really aren’t much use for cutting grass at higher heights.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

As you have pointed out before, in your book I'm a moron.

Yes, and you never fail to disappoint 

Perhaps as a result, you're going to need to explain where there is any inconsistency between Scott's two posts.  

No need to explain, just go back and reread them.
Unfortunately, you're combining two seperate thoughts, as expressed in two distinct sentences, into one thought/sentence.

As I said, you never fail to disappoint.

One where he says that rough around greens doesn't tend to be a problem in Australia and the UK and another where he shows some pictures of the problem at Oakmont.  

Go back and reread Scott's two replies

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Don't you think that the advent and popularity of the tri-plex played a roll in this ?

[Dan Kelly]

Tom Doak,

Don't you think that the advent and popularity of the tri-plex played a roll in this ?

No pun intended...

[Sean_A]

Below is an example of the problem in England.  Blackwell is a very good design completely compromised by cut lines (and trees).  The problem is especially apparent in winter when the grass stays claggy because the sun doesn't hit the grass for long periods of time.  The last time there everybody in our party was much discouraged by the course presentation. The depth of the rough doesn't look too bad, but pay attention to the golfer on the right, his left shoe is out of sight. 


Ciao

[Mark Chaplin]

Dan - isn't it a far greater skill and more fun to have numerous options presented to you? On a links there can be ten ways of playing the same shot. Greens choked with rough present one option with a lofted club.

Strange how most of us "morons" play around the world experiencing golf in all its various guises.

[Sean_A]

Chappers - I am not sure why Mucci takes exception to Scott's idea that no such trend exists in the UK or Oz, but one never knows with Mucci.  To be honest, I wish a trend did exist for England's parkland courses.  

Here are a few classic examples at Ridgewood




Below is the grand daddy of them all - bunkers pinching the front entrance with rough on the inside leaving enough space for maybe four golfers to walk through the neck.  This look is associated with championship US courses across the country.  On these tours, barely a person mentions the cut lines.  


Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()