The course that matters most for green speed is the neighboring club ... everyone tries to be a bit faster than the neighbor. Which is a shame, because everyone would have more fun if the greens at neighboring courses were all the same speed.
I'm going to disagree to a point on that one.
Golf courses should not be all the same, the same as greens should not be all the same speed.
There should be long courses and short courses, tight and wide.
fast greens and slow greens etc..
In my fantasy world a club would have greenspeeds that under ideal conditions matched the contours and allowed/encouraged firmness, thus creating the importance of angles.
Let's say altering any green contours
::)was off the table.
Three hypothetical clubs with greens prepared as fast as possible for them to be "playable"
Club A, designed in the dark ages of 2013 would have an average stimp of 12 amped to 13.5 for big events when conditions allowed.
Club B, designed in 1925 would have an average stimp of 9 amped to 10.5 for big events when conditions allowed.
Club C, designed in 2016 would have an average stimp of 9.5, amped to 11 for big events when conditions allowed.
Clubs B and C would look down their noses at the dark ages club when they found out that Club A had to run their flattish, tiered greens at 13 to provide any interest, and the assumption would be that they provided a less interesting surface and puzzle to be solved due to the relative lack of contour and smaller variance between uphill strokes and downhill strokes.
and they would snootily smirk that Club A had never had an interesting pin in its entire history.
