[Dave McCollum]

Watching a bit of the Dunhill on TOC and was struck how the rough was so playable.  Of course the pros don’t miss by much, but they showed a few amateur shots from the rough and the recoveries seemed quite doable.  This was my experience there as well.  Yet, there has been discussion here of other links where the rough is a lost ball or unplayable.  Places like, say, Portrush, indeed most places I played in Ireland.  I was wondering why more courses don’t make the rough more playable where one can at least find it.  Is it the grass, the budget, the rain or lack of, being a very busy public venue, a different setup philosophy, or a combination of these things and others?  It seems a very desirable design feature and, as we all know, there is plenty of trouble at TOC without overly punishing rough that functions as holes surrounded by water, particularly with the wind.

[Rory Connaughton]

At the Irish coursed where large scale dunes are a feature, I have to think it is a function of topography and, in the northwest, budget.

[Thomas Dai]

Just a few (of many?) possibilities -


Terrain - too steep to mow with a ride-on machine and too much labour needed to strim etc
Footfall - less trampling down of rough by feet.
Climate - west is wetter than east
Wind - moves the longer grass around (surprisingly some links courses are more effected by wind than others)
Mowing lines - not what they could/should be
Combination of above and others


Atb

[Dave McCollum]

My only trip to Ireland was in October after a long wet summer.  It pretty much rained a little every day, sometimes a lot, and the wind was constant.  The slightest miscalculation, missing a fairway by a foot, generally meant lost ball.  Loved the golf courses and was playing the best golf of my life (still a hack, but with a high single digit cap).  Understand that the beach grass (marram?) is needed to stabilize the dunes and that it is probably very expensive to remove and replace it with a border of less penal rough.  Don't know about maintenance costs.  Reason for my question.             

[Jon Wiggett]

I would suggest that TOC is mower friendly on the whole. also has large greens crew and as Thomas says sees a lot of foot traffic across the whole course. Add to this a fairly dry east coast climate it is not unusual that the long stuff is not so severe. As for alot of the other links it is a cost point I would suggest with the only cheap solution being to graze it with sheep which is an option that many even on here seem to balk at for some reason.


Jon

[Tom_Doak]

As Thomas and Jon suggest, for starters, St. Andrews gets 1/2 to 1/4 the annual rainfall of the west of Ireland.  They also have lots more green fee $$ to spend on maintaining their roughs if they want to.


The steepness of the dunes is an impediment at some courses [Trump International, Enniscrone, Ballybunion near the clubhouse] but not so much at others [I'm looking at you, Portrush].  The main reason missing from Thomas Dai's excellent list is that some clubs/courses seem to desire thick rough to make their course tougher, because they think it moves them up the rankings on the basis of "challenge."

[James Boon]

The Dunhill is also played at a time of the year when the fescue has died back, so what might have been pretty brutal rough May through July, isn't too bad mid October. I played Carnosutie a couple of weeks ago and there rough wasn't bad at all and I remember thinking how much easier it must be for the pros? But playing at this time of year when the rough is down and with the pro celebrity format it keeps things moving! 

Cheers,

James

[Richard Fisher]

One issue that not all US-based GCA followers may appreciate is the extent to which 'control of links rough' is not necessarily under the control of the host club. Several classic British links are on 'Sites of Special Scientific Interest', or similar designation, and subject to strict environmental control, which includes firm protocols on cutting (or rather not cutting) the rough. At Harlech, which I know best, Natural Resources Wales enforce a very firm policy, which in practice permits any kind of rough cutting or treating no more than two or three times per annum, with consequences (as this year) which can be distinctly malign for course playability, and contribute to making what has always been some of the roughest rough in the UK even rougher. Too many visitors have lost too many balls this past summer, but establishing a proper dialogue  with the relevant public bodies to remedy the situation is far from straightforward...

[Niall C]

Richard

That's interesting about Harlech, however do a significant number of clubs really have that level of control enforced upon them ? I tend to doubt it. I assume you are referring to the strip 10 or 15 yards wide of the fairway and not the stuff beyond.

Niall

[Thomas Dai]

I've heard of maintenance restrictions for skylarks (inland at Stinchcombe Hill) and corncrakes (Askernish). What other birds, animals, reptiles etc effect annual maintenance restrictions? Just curious.
Atb

[Niall C]

The main reason missing from Thomas Dai's excellent list is that some clubs/courses seem to desire thick rough to make their course tougher, because they think it moves them up the rankings on the basis of "challenge."

Tom

I don't doubt that may be the case at some clubs but I think if anything the trend is going the other way. When the majority of members probably miss the fairway more than they hit it that's perhaps not surprising. Those clubs that do have a fairly penal set up are probably under either some kind of restriction as Richard suggests, or perhaps don't have the budget/manpower to do the work.

Niall

[Sean_A]

I think there is a bit of a divide between have and have not clubs.  For the have nots the #1 reason why there is awful rough on links is clubs don't want to spend the money/don't have the money to do a better job controlling the rough.  Some of these clubs get away with the minimal approach because they also have a minimal approach to water/feed.  However, for most big gun links clubs, the #1 reason clubs want nasty rough is because it makes the courses harder.  I find this approach confounding given the not up to the task skill level and added time to play, but people are weird. 


Ciao

[Niall C]

Sean

When you talk about "clubs" wanting nasty rough, what or who exactly are you referring to ?

Niall

[Sean_A]

Niall


A lot of top tier well known links clubs.  They obviously have money and yet...My club is awful for this, but also Ballybunion, Portrush, Muirfield, Renaissance, Silloth, Littlestone, Deal, Wallasey, Elie, St Enodoc, North Berwick has joined the ranks, I would even argue TOC has joined the ranks untio they sort out 16 & 17.  The list is endless especially if we consider that fairways in these windly locations should rarely be less than 40 yards wide with low rough margins for another 10 yards or so.  I know you disagree, but my experience tells me otherwise.  I see how play is slowed by so much ball searching. 


I agree some clubs have issues with animals, flora etc that are protected etc, but my bet is not that many in the big scheme of things. At my club we have this issue on a few holes, but on others we could easily cut back tons of rough to create added fairway, but don't. 


Ciao


Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

Sean,


Sometimes you say the oddest things.  What on earth leads you to believe that, taking just one example from that apparently random list, The Golf House Club is deliberately encouraging thick rough?  I've been playing there 15 years, 8 as a member, and I have never seen any evidence whatsoever of this.  Like all links courses that I'm aware of the state of the rough in any given year has far more to do with the weather than any planning by any committee.  I certainly haven't seen any evidence of narrowing of playing corridors.  To be honest, it's very difficult to lose a ball at Elie.  Maybe left of the 9th fairway.  Possibly a really, really poor approach on 2.  A really, really horrid block or slice on 4.  Generally it has to be a really poor shot to lose a ball.  And there is always a safe side.  You can miss as far right as you like on the drive on 9, for instance.

[Sean_A]

Mark

If a club doesn't cut rough down, can that be called intentionally growing rough?  I think yes.  You outlined a few areas where rough could be thinned/reduced.  I could shout out more problem areas, but I think we are on the same page.  The difference is you think the page can be skipped and I don't think so.  I come from the angle that rough very rarely makes a course better and harsh rough on a windy site with fairways not sufficiently wide never make a course better.  I know you disagree as to how wide is sufficiently wide and thats ok.  I freely admit to not having any heeman notions about the game because golf is really just a game for me. I don't think I will ever be of a standard which is good and I know I hate searching for balls and hacking out of rough when I am less than 25 yards wide of the centre of the fairway.  To me, this is a far inferior form of the game.  We will never agree on this and thats fine. 

Ciao 

[Thomas Dai]

Make use of a few sheep and some tethered goats. Doesn't even have to be all the time, just when circumstances are appropriate........a few weeks on site then few weeks off. Will it happen though?
Atb

[Niall C]

Sean

I think you are right in that we have different views on what constitutes wide/narrow.

What I was really getting to however with my question was not so much what clubs, but who in the clubs is advocating narrow fairways. I've been a member at a number of clubs, one of which you listed, and I've known committee men, captains and past captains at each and never have I heard it said that the course was being deliberately set up to make it harder. Yes, they may lengthen holes and add bunkers but that's not a set up issue.

In terms of set up I suspect in most places it's never really discussed and the greenkeeper just goes on his merry way doing what he has always done. Occasionally clubs will undertake a major clearing out exercise, which Silloth did when I was a member, and that Gailes did last year, where whole swathes of gorse was chopped out and heather severely trimmed and such like, but often that is to peripheral areas and the general mowing lines remain the same.

Niall

[Tom_Doak]

What I was really getting to however with my question was not so much what clubs, but who in the clubs is advocating narrow fairways. I've been a member at a number of clubs, one of which you listed, and I've known committee men, captains and past captains at each and never have I heard it said that the course was being deliberately set up to make it harder. Yes, they may lengthen holes and add bunkers but that's not a set up issue.

Niall:


If that's true, then that's one way we've never put our finger on about how golf in America is different than golf in the UK.  At American clubs where I consult, it's like pulling teeth to suggest they mow the rough shorter.  Committees, in general, are very concerned with protecting the challenging reputation of their courses.


Certainly that's the case for my client at The Renaissance Club, as well.  But it's hard to believe they're the only ones from Sean's list that promote long rough for that reason.

[Dave McCollum]

James—the one time I played golf in SA was in May and the rough (not including the gorse) allowed recoveries.  In fact, I took 4 dozen golf balls plus the handful in my golf bag for play all over Scotland, because I’d never played links golf.  At the end of the trip, I sold 47 new balls (at a 75% discount) to a delighted golfer.  In Ireland, I didn’t take as many and ran out of bullets.

We play a different style of golf.  A brief visit to Bandon on a very foggy day was my only exposure to fescue.  I do believe the grass type has a lot to do with it.  When we grow out rough and turn down the water with our Blue Grass rough, we grow weeds.  We cut our roughs at 2 inches.  I think it is more interesting than long rough because one can find the ball and be tempted to try a more aggressive shot than the lie allows.

Thanks to all for your perspective.

[Colin Shellard]

This is quite an interesting discussion. I don't actually believe most highly regarded members courses actually want links rough where you can't find your shoes - certainly the desire at Royal Aberdeen is to have more of the wispy fescue variety of grass and less of the thick couch (sp) grass at the base. RA have bought a particular machine - a terra rake - that attempts to strip out this thicker rough and thatch, and have been applying selective chemical treatment to try and achieve this over the last few years. In the main they are succeeding, but the wet summers we have had recently are not helping matters. The TerraRake can be seen in the below links.


http://royalaberdeengolfclub.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/rough-thinning.html
http://royalaberdeengolfclub.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-max=2016-05-05T04:25:00-07:00&max-results=7




We are quite lucky that we are in a financial position to be able to do this work, there is no doubt that it is labor intensive and costly.

[Dave McCollum]

RA is a beautiful golf course and the one I chose for my first experience of links golf in Scotland.  Didn't lose a ball thanks to superb rough management because the wind was blowing up to 40 mph.  Or as it was described "a bit o breeze." 

[Niall C]

Tom

Have you had the conversation with any of the clubs your consulting with over here ? I know you mentioned the Renaissance club but with due respect to them, they are a million miles away from the average club over here in terms of budget alone. Plus they are US owned which may or may not account for their long grass mindset.

Niall

[Sean_A]

Sean

I think you are right in that we have different views on what constitutes wide/narrow.

What I was really getting to however with my question was not so much what clubs, but who in the clubs is advocating narrow fairways. I've been a member at a number of clubs, one of which you listed, and I've known committee men, captains and past captains at each and never have I heard it said that the course was being deliberately set up to make it harder. Yes, they may lengthen holes and add bunkers but that's not a set up issue.

In terms of set up I suspect in most places it's never really discussed and the greenkeeper just goes on his merry way doing what he has always done. Occasionally clubs will undertake a major clearing out exercise, which Silloth did when I was a member, and that Gailes did last year, where whole swathes of gorse was chopped out and heather severely trimmed and such like, but often that is to peripheral areas and the general mowing lines remain the same.

Niall

Niall


If memberships are allowing greenkeepers to do their thing, then they are for whatever the greenkeepers do. You can't on the one hand sign the cheques then on the other hand say you aren't responsible.  Besides, I do hear we need to make courses tougher comments a lot.  In fact, folks bannering for 30 yard fairways are in effect advocating for tougher courses.  What gets my goat is these same people then complain about slow play.  Its as if they expect perfection from a wild range of handicap golfers.  Its a system designed to slow play down, yet folks can see the obvious connection.


Ciao

[Mark Chaplin]

If you take a look at James Bledge's course managers blog at Deal he explained why he couldn't cut the rough until 1st September basically skylarks can breed until late summer and their numbers have dropped by 75% nationally. They are a ground nesting bird, using the thick rough to hide the nest.

This is an excellent Course Managers blog and anyone interested in the links would benefit by following it.

https://royalcinqueports.wordpress.com/

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()