Why did courses begin to mow tees lower than .5 inches?

[Mike_Young]

Was it because they could?  Was it to sell more surrounding houses? Or was it to help the super get his next job?  Lots of reasons but don't you think it contributes to the excessive cost we see today without lending any improvement to the game?  A lot of $$$ can be saved on tee maintenance without most knowing it.  JMO

[jeffwarne]

From what I've been told around here...
it's so you have...."options"   


at least you don't have to pitch off 'em...

[Jon Wiggett]

I would suggest it was mostly so they could procrastinate that their tees were as good as greens. People were so impressed that nobody thought to ask what the point was from a playing point of view.

[Pete_Pittock]

So golfers they can practice putt while waiting for slow groups to clear out?

[Ian Mackenzie]

My big guess: televised golf and expectations created by tour players that cascaded down to green committees at private clubs and then morphed from there.

[Tom_Doak]

I remember Double Eagle (c. 1992) making a point of showing golf writers that you could practice your putting on the tees.  And the greens were almost that flat, too!

[Mike_Young]

I remember Double Eagle (c. 1992) making a point of showing golf writers that you could practice your putting on the tees.  And the greens were almost that flat, too!
[/quote


When Double Eagle opened it was considered by many to be the maintenance standard..

I remember being in the maintenance building at ANGC in the mid eighties and Paul Latshaw had just become the super and he was showing how he had converted a toro triplex greensmower at oakmont to a fiveplex  so that he could mow fairways.  That was considered cutting edge and the next thing I knew he was mowing approaches with walkers at Congressional. 

[Greg Chambers]

Considering that the mower that mows the collars also mows the tees at most low budget courses, the tee height probably followed the desired collar height...but if you’d like to try to spin it as some big conspiracy, go right ahead.

[Jon Wiggett]

Considering that the mower that mows the collars also mows the tees at most low budget courses, the tee height probably followed the desired collar height...but if you’d like to try to spin it as some big conspiracy, go right ahead.

True Greg but then why mow collars below fairway height especially if you are low budget? And why cut fairways below 5/8"?

[Mike_Young]

Considering that the mower that mows the collars also mows the tees at most low budget courses, the tee height probably followed the desired collar height...but if you’d like to try to spin it as some big conspiracy, go right ahead.

Greg,
I never mentioned budget. 

[Greg Chambers]

Considering that the mower that mows the collars also mows the tees at most low budget courses, the tee height probably followed the desired collar height...but if you’d like to try to spin it as some big conspiracy, go right ahead.

Greg,
I never mentioned budget.

Ok, then I’ll expand it out to...every golf course I’ve ever worked on, the same mower that mows the collars/approaches, has also mowed the tees.  What are you looking for here?  It seems a function of convenience and/or budget that the tees are mowed at .5”.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm curious.


How time consuming or how much effort does it take to adjust the mower height on the ones used for greens and collars.  Never used one of them, just wondering...

[Jon Wiggett]

Kalen,


it depends on the difference in height, the units and number of units. For instance, my JD fairway mower which has five units takes about 15 minutes if I am altering the front and back rollers. If it is a hand mower then it is a matter of 1 minute. Greg is correct that many low budget clubs do use the same mower to cut the collar and tee but this has nothing to do with the HOC in the end. The OP was to do with a low cut of the tee but if a club was looking to save money then a higher cut would mean a lower frequency of cut and so save money. There is no reason other than vanity for tees to be cut lower than the fairway nor is there a need of the collar to be lower either.


Jon

[Kalen Braley]

Thanks John,


So it would be 36 adjustments per trip out if the Collar and Tees were different heights.  And in peak growing season i'm guessing they would do this every day?

[Anthony_Nysse]

Kalen,


it depends on the difference in height, the units and number of units. For instance, my JD fairway mower which has five units takes about 15 minutes if I am altering the front and back rollers. If it is a hand mower then it is a matter of 1 minute. Greg is correct that many low budget clubs do use the same mower to cut the collar and tee but this has nothing to do with the HOC in the end. The OP was to do with a low cut of the tee but if a club was looking to save money then a higher cut would mean a lower frequency of cut and so save money. There is no reason other than vanity for tees to be cut lower than the fairway nor is there a need of the collar to be lower either.


Jon

No reason? How about a different turf type? How about the ability to use a riding mower vs a walker? I’ve managed Tifeagle and paspalum tees. Tifeagle was maintained at .150-.185. Paspalum at .300”. Fwys much higher, especially in the winter months.

[Jon Wiggett]

Thanks John,


So it would be 36 adjustments per trip out if the Collar and Tees were different heights.  And in peak growing season i'm guessing they would do this every day?

Kalen,


you would only need to adjust once a hole so about eighteen times if cutting at different heights (collar-tee/tee-collar/collar-tee/etc.) Also, depending on the course design there might be occasions when several greens are close together and collars would be cut followed by tees so change over would be less. On a classical out and back could also be all the collars going out followed by the tees coming back so just once. But why change?

[Jon Wiggett]

Kalen,


it depends on the difference in height, the units and number of units. For instance, my JD fairway mower which has five units takes about 15 minutes if I am altering the front and back rollers. If it is a hand mower then it is a matter of 1 minute. Greg is correct that many low budget clubs do use the same mower to cut the collar and tee but this has nothing to do with the HOC in the end. The OP was to do with a low cut of the tee but if a club was looking to save money then a higher cut would mean a lower frequency of cut and so save money. There is no reason other than vanity for tees to be cut lower than the fairway nor is there a need of the collar to be lower either.


Jon

No reason? How about a different turf type? How about the ability to use a riding mower vs a walker? I’ve managed Tifeagle and paspalum tees. Tifeagle was maintained at .150-.185. Paspalum at .300”. Fwys much higher, especially in the winter months.

I maybe should have defined my comments as cool season only. Having said that Anthony why would you cut collars, fairways and tees at different heights? I cannot see a must reason. As to ability to be able to use hand mowers also please define what you mean.

[Anthony_Nysse]

 I've been working on golf courses since 1993. Every place I have been mows their collars/tees at different height than the fairway. Usually collars/tees are same height for some of the reasons stated above.
  I think mowing collars/approaches a little tighter allows a better opportunity to put and bump/run a shot and now one wants a long collar next to a green being mowed under 1/10"
A must reason for mowing at different heights is as I stated above-different turf. When we maintained tifeagle approaches/collars & tees at Pine Tree, we never cut above .200" because, well...it never really grew any higher. Fairways were maintenance at .400-.550" depending on time of year.
We have paspalum tees here, so they are mowed with a walkers that do not mow any other turf type, so it's easy to adjust heights and not effect anything else.
I think fairway height, has to be higher because fairways are generally are not maintain as intensely as collars & tees. Fairways are being driven on by carts & larger machines, most are not handwatered, therefore a higher height of cut reduces stress.

 

[Jon Wiggett]

  [font=]I've been working on golf courses since 1993.[/font] (1985) Every place I have been mows their collars/tees at different height than the fairway. Which is a statement of what you have experienced but not an explanation of why. I do actually suspect it is as your answer says a case of it is done that way because it is always done that way. Usually collars/tees are same height for some of the reasons stated above.  I guess you don't … no lets not go there.
[font=]  I think mowing collars/approaches a little tighter allows a better opportunity to put and bump/run a shot and now one wants a long collar next to a green being mowed under 1/10"[/font]I disagree, at fairway height if the ground is firm then bump and run is just as possible.
[font=]  A must reason for mowing at different heights is as I stated above-different turf. When we maintained tifeagle approaches/collars & tees at Pine Tree, we never cut above .200" because, well...it never really grew any higher.[/font] Really, didn't grow any higher. Then why not use it on the whole course and just mow the greens as the rest of the course would not be higher than .2"? You just saved the golf industry millions. Fairways were maintenance at .400-.550" depending on time of year.
[font=]  We have paspalum tees here, so they are mowed with a walkers that do not mow any other turf type, so it's easy to adjust heights and not effect anything else. [/font]
[font=]  I think fairway height, has to be higher because fairways are generally are not maintain as intensely as collars & tees. Fairways are being driven on by carts & larger machines, most are not handwatered, therefore a higher height of cut reduces stress. [/font]I would suggest it is the HOC that dictates the frequency of maintenance not the specific use of the surface. Ergo, because fairways are cut at .4" they require less maintenance. Therefore, if collars and tees were cut at the same .4" they would also require less maintenance.

Your answers appear to be a description of what usual practice not why that is so. I firmly believe that much of the reason for multiple HOC are purely aesthetic and have no practical reason. I would still be interested as to your 'How about the ability to use a riding mower vs a walker' quote and what you meant by this'.

[jeffwarne]

 
[font=]  I think mowing collars/approaches a little tighter allows a better opportunity to put and bump/run a shot and now one wants a long collar next to a green being mowed under 1/10"[/font]

I disagree, at fairway height if the ground is firm then bump and run is just as possible.

Gospel.
Modern agronomy, especially at the high end facilities, has mastered the fast (In "firm and fast") via cutting height, often at the expense of firm-
because of the lack of turf height, hitting the center of the club becomes so difficult and contact so unpredictable that even the bump and run is rarely used, in favor of putt and bumble with a putter, hybrid or FW metal-


thus limiting creativity and fun for all but the absolute highest of skill levels, who simply use their lob wedge anyway-and aren't at your course(unless you're a member at Medalist or Whisper Rock) , but rather out playing for millions.

[Mike_Young]

Let's just cut to the chase.  Grass height is the opposite of weiner measuring for the top courses.  It's all about saying "mine is shorter than yours".  Somehow it has been associated with high end maintenance standard.  As Jeff says , it's all putting or hybrid putting around so many greens now that the thought process of pitching?, chipping? putting?  is gone.

[Anthony_Nysse]

  A must reason for mowing at different heights is as I stated above-different turf. When we maintained tifeagle approaches/collars & tees at Pine Tree, we never cut above .200" because, well...it never really grew any higher. Really, didn't grow any higher. Then why not use it on the whole course and just mow the greens as the rest of the course would not be higher than .2"? You just saved the golf industry millions. Fairways were maintenance at .400-.550" depending on time of year.


I think you're showing a lot of ignorance to think that you can blanket an entire course, wall to wall with Tifeagle. It makes me question your knowledge of turfgrasses in general.


We have tifeagle greens. Any Superintendent (and many on this site) will tell you the amount of labor that it takes to maintain an ultradwaft. The topdressing, veritcutting, aerification, brushing, handwatering, rolling, moisture management, fungicides & foliar feeding it takes for 3-4 acres of putting surfaces. This is all without running carts on it.
  We maintained 11 acres of tifeagle at Pine Tree (greens, tees & approaches) I cannot imagine the cost to maintain 100acres of it. Save the golf industry money? 100% opposite of that. It would be the worse sustainable surface we have seen yet. Worse that having bentgrass fairways in a southern climate. Worse than overseeding bermudagrass and sodding it back every season. It wouldn't even be close.
Just one example-$350/$400 an acre to  prevent bermudagrass decline. Now spray that several times on 100 acres. You see my point. That does not include all the other disease that ultradwarfs are susceptible to.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Let's just cut to the chase.  Grass height is the opposite of weiner measuring for the top courses.  It's all about saying "mine is shorter than yours".  Somehow it has been associated with high end maintenance standard.  As Jeff says , it's all putting or hybrid putting around so many greens now that the thought process of pitching?, chipping? putting?  is gone.

We mow ours at .300", Mike. Flat approaches into flat greens. Would love for you to see how many players are NOT chipping, but bumping and putting.

[Kalen Braley]

Thanks John,


So it would be 36 adjustments per trip out if the Collar and Tees were different heights.  And in peak growing season i'm guessing they would do this every day?

Kalen,


you would only need to adjust once a hole so about eighteen times if cutting at different heights (collar-tee/tee-collar/collar-tee/etc.) Also, depending on the course design there might be occasions when several greens are close together and collars would be cut followed by tees so change over would be less. On a classical out and back could also be all the collars going out followed by the tees coming back so just once. But why change?

John,

Not to quibble, but my math works out to 36.  You have to make the adjustment to do the collar, but then you have to adjust it back on the next tee.  So that's 2 adjustments per hole, unless you're going to make two laps around the course...but then you would only need 2 adjustments 

[Anthony_Nysse]

Thanks John,


So it would be 36 adjustments per trip out if the Collar and Tees were different heights.  And in peak growing season i'm guessing they would do this every day?

Kalen,


you would only need to adjust once a hole so about eighteen times if cutting at different heights (collar-tee/tee-collar/collar-tee/etc.) Also, depending on the course design there might be occasions when several greens are close together and collars would be cut followed by tees so change over would be less. On a classical out and back could also be all the collars going out followed by the tees coming back so just once. But why change?

John,

Not to quibble, but my math works out to 36.  You have to make the adjustment to do the collar, but then you have to adjust it back on the next tee.  So that's 2 adjustments per hole, unless you're going to make two laps around the course...but then you would only need 2 adjustments 

Youd more than likely mow the collar one day, mow the tees the next. Therefore you wouldn't have to change every hole.