News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Peter Pallotta

an observation from around
« on: August 23, 2011, 12:49:47 AM »
When you have one type of grass but cut it at different heights (ie fairway and rough) it looks unnatural and, depending on the proportion/ratio of fairway to rough, un-architectural too. But when you cut the grass at one height everywhere, it looks both more natural and more architectural. Strange, since all grass and any mowed grass of whatever height is all put there and tended by human hands, so it should all look equally fake no matter what. But there is something about matching the uniformity of one type of grass with the uniformity of one cutting height that seems to help hold the con/help me suspend my disbelief. If you have different grasses/textures (eg bent, heather, fescue), anything goes, ie you don't need uniformity in heights (and in fact, you want the opposite). But if there is only one type of grass, it looks better and more real and more golfy if its all at the same height.
Peter

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2011, 09:02:24 AM »
"But there is something about matching the uniformity of one type of grass with the uniformity of one cutting height that seems to help hold the con/help me suspend my disbelief..."

Peter -

Interesting observation.

MacK, Behr etc. usually objected to rough because they though it restricted playing choices. Which it does. But I wonder if part of their objection wasn't also that cutting grasses at different heights makes courses look less natural, something they and others thought important to avoid. Rough as a threeat to the natualism conceit and all that.

I don't recall anyone actually saying things like that about rough, but your point makes sense.

Bob 

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2011, 09:24:37 AM »
Is a golf course "natural"?  Where in nature, untouched by man, is uniformity encountered?

The preference for a short cut is just that, a preference.  It has little foundation on qualitative or critical analysis, IMO.

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2011, 09:45:49 AM »
Lou -

Obviously golf courses are always man-made. No one thinks otherwise. The issue is trying to make a golf course look as natural as possible. And thereby more effectively suspend disbelief about its true origins. You might call it the naturalism conceit. No golf course simply appears out of the primal mists, but depending on how it is built, we might pretend (in a non-crazy sense) it did.

The ability of golfers to buy into that conceit is something that MacK, Behr and most all of the best archies of the GA thought important to promote in their courses. I agree with them.

Bob

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2011, 10:16:55 AM »
Peter
I've seen landscapes with short grass that occur naturally
They look very cool
Cheers
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil & Tiger.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2011, 10:52:05 AM »
Peter. What's even more disbelievable is how the texture of a browned out native grass adds to the natural look. Its like the couinter intuitive juxtaposition but its my opinion. Go figure. I once asked an architect why he spec'ed the rough cut on his links course. His reply was the opposite of your fine analysis. Well done. 
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2011, 11:00:37 AM »
Bob,

I am learning to use a smart phone, so if you  like, Google CONCEIT OF KNOWLEDGE for my impressions on the subject.

Mike,

Where have you found these short grasses?  Any sheep around?

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2011, 11:10:31 AM »
Lou, Buffalo grass is a short grass that never gets long at all. It's not good for golf because it can't stand the traffic. Which is a shame because it's drought tolerant.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2011, 02:47:42 PM »
Peter:

My associates made the same observation as you have years ago, and we've tried since then to limit the number of mowing lines we show on our courses because of it.  I think it's one of the things that has made our courses look different [and cooler] than everybody else's.

Dave McCollum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2011, 03:03:54 PM »
It costs a little less to cut the rough than fw & greens.  Skip a day if the guy doesn't show up. 

Peter Pallotta

Re: an observation from around
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2011, 05:34:57 PM »
Thanks gents. Dave's post reminds me that I also had economics in the back of my mind.  I've read here that it is expensive to maintain (irrigate, mow) so much fairway. But if the architect and/or client decide they want 40 yard-wide fairways, it seems to me easier and cheaper to maintain just those 40 yards of fairway, as fairway (edged with whatever you want, e.g,, waste areas, trees, fescue) than it is to irrigate and mow 60 yards of turf with 10 yard-wide strips of rough of differing height on either side -- which rough seems inevitably to become 15-and then 20 yard-wide strips in due course.

Peter 

Kyle Harris

Re: an observation from around
« Reply #11 on: August 23, 2011, 07:02:23 PM »
The preference for a short cut is just that, a preference.  It has little foundation on qualitative or critical analysis, IMO.

Not so fast.

The elimination of any defining features that are linear is a key component to camouflage.

It becomes an incredibly more complex feat to aim and judge distance without any sort of linear aid.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2011, 08:07:31 PM »
Kyle,

Maybe...but I'd take a foot into the low side rough all the way around the front nine at HVCC against your middle of the fairway when the course is flying everytime.


BTW, got your note a few weeks ago. Good Luck! You're doing something awesome...

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: an observation from around
« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2011, 08:23:39 PM »
...But if the architect and/or client decide they want 40 yard-wide fairways, it seems to me easier and cheaper to maintain just those 40 yards of fairway, as fairway (edged with whatever you want, e.g,, waste areas, trees, fescue) than it is to irrigate and mow 60 yards of turf with 10 yard-wide strips of rough of differing height on either side -- which rough seems inevitably to become 15-and then 20 yard-wide strips in due course.

Peter 

Peter,

Check this article out.  http://nuzzogolfcoursedesign.blogspot.com/2010/04/here-comes-gang-mower.html  I think it will go some ways to addressing your observations and also stoking the conversation from the traditional maintenance guys.  They hate it when Don does something simple and brilliant. 

Peter Pallotta

Re: an observation from around
« Reply #14 on: August 23, 2011, 10:55:58 PM »
Thanks, Ben. Interesting (and telling of how bloated the industry/maintenance has become, I think) that Don's use of a re-furbished gang mower is seen as revolutionary!  Maybe that crazy idea he and Mike had to ensure that the spaces between bunkers were wide enough to accomodate them was just too much for some folks....

Don - keep taking the road less travelled. The other road is for hacks and sell-outs

Peter

Kyle Harris

Re: an observation from around
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2011, 06:06:37 PM »
Kyle,

Maybe...but I'd take a foot into the low side rough all the way around the front nine at HVCC against your middle of the fairway when the course is flying everytime.


BTW, got your note a few weeks ago. Good Luck! You're doing something awesome...

Jim:

I'm with you. My point is more about stretching and extending the mowing lines to include the area that is presently "one foot in the rough." Imagine a hole like the first or seventh with no linear edge for which to aim. You'd have to be able to read and aim for the topography.

Bowling becomes a lot harder without the gutters/rails.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back