Shorter grass good. Longer grass bad.

[Thomas Dai]

“There should be a complete absence of the annoyance and irritation caused by the necessity of looking for lost balls.”
Thoughts?

Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Back in the 1920', gang mowers could be set at two heights - 1" for fw and 4" (maybe more) for rough.  That influenced a lot of design, starting with 180 foot wide playing corridors because that is what a single row sprinkler could water back then (and the edges not very well at that.)


With improved rough grasses and mowers, fairways can be mowed at <0.5" and rough can be mowed at 1.5-3".  For most courses, keeping rough at 1.5" allows the ball to be seen easily in the rough.  That improves the need for tee shot accuracy, reduces overall mowing time, and reduces lost ball searches considerably from decades ago.

[Carl Johnson]

“There should be a complete absence of the annoyance and irritation caused by the necessity of looking for lost balls.”

My thoughts.

Personally, I find it annoying to look for "lost" balls in the rough.  By rough I mean the longer grass adjacent to the closely mown fairways.  I am annoyed because it doesn't fit with the way I enjoy playing, which is to hit the ball, go to it and hit it again, and so on into the hole.  My preference is for wide closely mown fairways, and for rough that doesn't disappear the ball.  Others clearly enjoy a different sort of game.  A number of years ago my "Ross" course hosted a USGA championship event.  Our fairways had been cut wide in the Ross manner, but the USGA advisers "suggested" that the fairways be narrowed, a suggestion we took and have stayed with.  It's just a matter of personal preference.  You have my vote.

[Wayne_Kozun]

With improved rough grasses and mowers, fairways can be mowed at <0.5" and rough can be mowed at 1.5-3".  For most courses, keeping rough at 1.5" allows the ball to be seen easily in the rough.  That improves the need for tee shot accuracy, reduces overall mowing time, and reduces lost ball searches considerably from decades ago.

This makes sense to me.  Is it easier to maintain the health of the grass at a height of 1.5" as opposed to fairway height?  Is there a difference in terms of how much water or nutrients are needed?

[Jeff_Brauer]

If the same type of grass, longer usually equals easier, to a degree, although some of the new bents have to be mowed lower as they were genetically engineered that way.  In many areas, there are different grass types between fw and rough, and yes, blue or fescue is probably easier to maintain than bent from many perspectives.