[Thomas Dai]

Looking at the thick collar in the photos reminds me of the lovely touch shot that Nick Price played at the the 72nd hole of the PGA at Bellerive where he played the deliberate bladed-wedge shot up to very close to the pin to secure his 1st Major.

When I was a lad I played on a course with no fringes, just fairway-to-green. The grass type, it was in the Far East, was soo thick and heavy that there was a local rule that if your ball was sitting against the transition point of fairway-green you could move the ball one putter head length in any direction but not nearer to the hole. This local rule was in force at several clubs, not just one, and worked well.

atb

[Brian Chapin]

John - for most of the greens expansions we used grass from our tees that were being rebuilt.  It was convenient because the work was being done at the same time, so we only had to move the sod once.  We started lowering the heights on those tees several months before we flipped the sod to the expansions and were pretty successful.  Those areas blended really well.

The collars we really just mowed down.  This is our 4th season now since we had collars and the only time you can tell where they used to be is in the early spring when the poa is still looking a bit pukey. 

Later on in the project we used some nursery sod that we had grown because we were running short on the tee sod. Unfortunately, it had a much higher concentration of bentgrass and those areas don't match as well. I am considering switching them out eventually.

I 100% agree with what Randy said and in fact I'd argue that the shot is more complicated when there is a collar because you have to judge the speed over 2 cuts of grass rather than just the one.  Also, IMO the shot against edge of the rough isn't any more common when you don't have a collar (fringe) cut, but as we all know... sometimes people want to blame someone else for their bad shot, and not having a collar in that situation is a convenient culprit.

In the end, change is difficult, and sometimes members just want things to stay the same.  At Paramount we really tried to embrace history and the idea that less is more when it comes to lines, distractions and "fluff".  My recommendation is to trust what Jim wants to do, and look for creative ways to make it work.

We found that lowering the height of our rough to 1.5" around the greens was the best solution, and after about a year even the members who were initially against it ended up in favor of the change.

 

[Scott Warren]

We are in the middle of a course restoration which involves green expansion. The greens are being developed to have no fringe, apron or collar. I have never played on greens with no variable height turf between the putting surface and adjacent rough. Is this a style anyone is familiar with? I'm assuming it is considered "old school" but I reallly don't know other courses that have this look. Greenside rough is projected to be about 2 inches. Thoughts?

You lost me at "greenside rough".

[John Connolly]

We have no fringe or collar. Its putting surface adjacent to 2 inch rough.

[Sean_A]

I am struggling to figure out how courses play better with no collar or is this purely a money saving deal?  Can someone explain this to me?  I know most of the time, I would much rather see collars/fringes pushed way beyind the green before any real rough comes into play.  I wonder if this fringe idea is connected with the odd practice of ringing greens with rough and taking grass lines to the inside of bunkers - like we see a ton on the midwest and east coast courses.  I am still unsure as to why these practices are so popular.  Anybody have a clue?

Ciao   

[Sean_A]

Not quite fringeless, but the fringes / approaches at Walton heath are only very marginally higher than green height - they also bleed into the tees very nicely. It is a really good look visually - super pristine - but presumably is also there to encourage the ground game as you don't get that jolting difference in speed between greens and fringes like you do at some places where ground game shots aren't really feasible. I think it's such a good idea that it should practically be standard practice. But maybe there's a reason why it isn't?

Sheehy

At WH that isn't rough, its basically fairway height pushing around greens and feeding to the next tee - it looks fantastic around 4 leading to 5.  I don't know what that sort of thing costs, but that is something I would like to see more courses do.  Eventually, as you say, the fairway area will play nearly like the green thus in effect creating a much bigger green without the maintenance expense of a green.  Its ironic that many greens have this low cut space, but some fairways are quite congested with rough and heather.  I wonder if the Greenkeeper is going to widen some fairways and cut back some heather/rough?

Ciao

[John Connolly]

John - for most of the greens expansions we used grass from our tees that were being rebuilt.  It was convenient because the work was being done at the same time, so we only had to move the sod once.  We started lowering the heights on those tees several months before we flipped the sod to the expansions and were pretty successful.  Those areas blended really well.

The collars we really just mowed down.  This is our 4th season now since we had collars and the only time you can tell where they used to be is in the early spring when the poa is still looking a bit pukey. 

Later on in the project we used some nursery sod that we had grown because we were running short on the tee sod. Unfortunately, it had a much higher concentration of bentgrass and those areas don't match as well. I am considering switching them out eventually.

I 100% agree with what Randy said and in fact I'd argue that the shot is more complicated when there is a collar because you have to judge the speed over 2 cuts of grass rather than just the one.  Also, IMO the shot against edge of the rough isn't any more common when you don't have a collar (fringe) cut, but as we all know... sometimes people want to blame someone else for their bad shot, and not having a collar in that situation is a convenient culprit.

In the end, change is difficult, and sometimes members just want things to stay the same.  At Paramount we really tried to embrace history and the idea that less is more when it comes to lines, distractions and "fluff".  My recommendation is to trust what Jim wants to do, and look for creative ways to make it work.

We found that lowering the height of our rough to 1.5" around the greens was the best solution, and after about a year even the members who were initially against it ended up in favor of the change.

 

Brian,
Thanks for your thoughtful response.

Fringeless/collarless greens have been described as "old school" by some. Is this merely an assumption or is this known? Are TOC and others with some serious vintage known for this. Is there descriptive or photographic evidence from way back when? How about a good close up pic now of the TOC with such a configuration?

[Jason Topp]

John - Although I think they have some sort of collar, the greens at Minneapolis GC play a lot like collarless greens ringed by rough.  At least shortly after the work was completed I really disliked it.  With rolled, fast greens and thick juicy rough surrounding those greens, I have a lot of balls up against the rough or in it.  A chip shot was like a US Open green side gouge and I never did figure out how to hit the one leaning against the rough.  I tried a 3 wood, a bellied sand wedge and a putter.  None of those approaches worked very well for me. 

I much prefer the short grass surrounds even though I agree that they are more difficult.

[Matt Schiffer]

As mentioned earlier by Bob Harris, the Philly Cricket Club Wissahickon Course is going fringeless.  According to both Keith Foster and Dan Meersman, this will restore the greens to the sizes and dimensions that Tillinghast originally intended and, most importantly, will bring back original pin positions that are much closer to the hazards than would be possible if there were a fringe cut.

[Brent Hutto]

As mentioned earlier by Bob Harris, the Philly Cricket Club Wissahickon Course is going fringeless.  According to both Keith Foster and Dan Meersman, this will restore the greens to the sizes and dimensions that Tillinghast originally intended and, most importantly, will bring back original pin positions that are much closer to the hazards than would be possible if there were a fringe cut.

I'm not clear on this. Are you saying it's OK to cut the hole 20 feet from a hazard if all 20 feet is putting green but would not be OK if it were 15 feet of putting green and 5 feet of fringe?

[Matt Schiffer]

Here's the restored 6th green.  Supers can chime in here but I don't believe that holes are typically cut closer than 3 paces (?) from the edge of the green.  This is whether the green is surrounded by fringe cut or rough.

[John Connolly]

Matt-

awesome pics. i can only hope ours turn out as nice. i appreciate the concept of more pin locations - i hadn't considered that as an upside to what may otherwise be considered a controversial modification to our greens. time will tell - but there's no denying, at least in my mind, that it's a cool look.

[Mark McKeever]

John, you will probably hear a few playing reviews starting next week from the Cricket crew.

Mark

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()