Pinehurst

Ronald Conard

4 posts

6/13/2014 11:06 AM

The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Melvin Waldron

43 posts

6/13/2014 11:06 AM

Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

I wonder if they would if prices dropped?

Mel

Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

Clay Putnam

33 posts

6/13/2014 11:06 AM

Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Love the new look.

Ronald Conard

4 posts

6/13/2014 11:06 AM

Melvin Waldron, CGCS said:
Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

I wonder if they would if prices dropped?

Mel

No, not a chance. The cheaper the price the more the fat, cart riding, beer swizzlin' necks want mush.

Steve Nelson

0 posts

6/13/2014 12:06 PM

I hope it helps deliver a message. I've been getting b!$^#@d at all spring about dry spots. Nevermind we just had the driest recorded year in history in Southern California. For certain people, green=good and there's no telling them otherwise.

Peter Bowman

11 posts

6/13/2014 2:06 PM

I suppose the trick is keeping the brown grass alive. If it turns to dirt.....

Ronald Conard

4 posts

6/14/2014 6:06 AM

Peter Bowman, CGCS said: I suppose the trick is keeping the brown grass alive. If it turns to dirt.....

Of course Pete there is a need to find some middle ground somewhere in the management of the course. It's the U.S. Open. The level of management for that event never looks sustainable over the long run, especially if you consider the cart traffic we all endure. But, as Steve indicates, try drying out a course even to a tenth of a degree as Pinehurst and the average American golfer does....not....get...it. Whatsoever. Mush, lush is all they know and all they want.

I was talking to some of my older guys on the staff about Pinhurst yesterday and commenting on how great it looked and they cringed. We dry the snot out of the golf course as the summer goes on but other than a few individuals the vast majority prefer the wet conditions during a soggy spring.

Jeffrey Whitmire

0 posts

6/14/2014 9:06 AM

I don't think you can kill bermudagrass in North Carolina during the summer. It just rains too much.

Pinehurst is a great example. They use what they have. The nutrient deprived soil supports thin wispy "native" areas. I don't believe this could be done in other parts of the state or in most places east of the Mississippi where heavy soils, combined with abundant rainfall would leave these areas densely packed with invasive weeds.

"Dialing back" maintenance is what golf needs. We cannot keep trying to have pearly white bunker sand, razor edged bunkers and cart paths, and blemish free rough on every golf course and expect the game to grow among the masses. They simply cannot afford it!

Steven Huffstutler

11 posts

6/15/2014 6:06 PM

Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

Larry Allan

0 posts

6/16/2014 4:06 AM

Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

I heard him say that as well. He seems to know just about everything

Andy Jorgensen

1 posts

6/16/2014 5:06 AM

Dialing back maintenance is a piece of cake, except for one major factor that we all deal with that Pinehurst does not: traffic. Throwing carts on a surface like Pinehurst would leave less than acceptable conditions at most, if not all courses. Even foot traffic would cause issues. If the turf is not growing and recovering from traffic, what follows? Dirt.

Although the course was in absolutely beautiful condition this past week, the average golfer would not and could not play on something similar on a regular basis. If they can't have fun playing, why would they come back?

Clay Putnam

33 posts

6/16/2014 5:06 AM

Larry Allan said:
Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

I heard him say that as well. He seems to know just about everything

Just shut your pie holes and do it.

Melvin Waldron

43 posts

6/16/2014 6:06 AM

Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

If they would dial back the green speeds about a foot then I think they would be fine, just my opinion. Of course we are testing for the best players in the world. Wonder how fast they are normally? And did Donald Ross design them for those speeds?

Agree with Andy, shouldn't we be making the game fun? And we wonder why more people are quiting compared to taking up the game.

Mel

Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

Sandy Clark

0 posts

6/16/2014 9:06 AM

The new look at the course has developed some healthy debate here on how we should look. I forecast 20 more acres of turf reduction in the future at Barona. Water what you can and make it look acceptable. We will not develop new water sources so make the water match the acreage!

Melvin Waldron

43 posts

6/16/2014 10:06 AM

Sandy Clark, CGCS said: The new look at the course has developed some healthy debate here on how we should look. I forecast 20 more acres of turf reduction in the future at Barona. Water what you can and make it look acceptable. We will not develop new water sources so make the water match the acreage!

I think that is the best thing that Pinehurst has done, is starting the dialogue. We know that look for us and our clientele is not sustainable. We don't have the soils and weather conditions for it. And thanks to some that have already made the comments, depending on the traffic, play, carts and the like to see if other courses can do it.

But can we take the some of those lessons and apply them to our courses? I think absolutely, heck we have done it long before Pinehurst restoration. We don't fertilizer our fescue roughs except for what is thrown on them from our fairway apps. We don't apply insecticides, unless we see an issue, we only apply weed control post emergent. Of course that wasn't to be environmentally sensitive, it was because we couldn't afford the "manage" the extra acreage.

Irrigation wise, we aren't wall to wall, we do try to conserve in rough areas where we can with a system that was installed in 1993 and honestly isn't wired to be able to pin point irrigation as well as we would like. But we also don't have the staff to hand water anything more than greens. I know some courses can. They can also afford to spray wetting agents and other water conservation efforts. There will of course be savings if someone is paying for water and electricity from pump stations as well. We probably need more tools and research to help us know if we are saving enough. I do know we have cut back on some watering especially on greens because of moisture meter use.

There was some great dialogue on twitter about it all day yesterday. Hopefully what we can learn from it isn't taken out of content as climates and locations vary greatly. And those courses that were doing this before hopefully get recognized for it, even if the "look" is different. But those are just my opinions.

Mel

Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

Corey Eastwood

80 posts

6/16/2014 11:06 AM

Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

Best thing Johnny ever said. Probably the only good thing he ever said. They forgot to put up the Windmills and Clown Faces for the approach shots and chips. What a joke.

Corey Eastwood CGCS, Stockton Golf & CC, Retired

Ronald Conard

4 posts

6/16/2014 11:06 AM

Corey Eastwood, CGCS said:
Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: Now Johnny thinks they need to redo the greens.

Best thing Johnny ever said. Probably the only good thing he ever said. They forgot to put up the Windmills and Clown Faces for the approach shots and chips. What a joke.

And yet Phil said it was perfect and the best course set up the USGA has put together in years.

Ronald Kirkman

40 posts

6/16/2014 12:06 PM

Greetings;

Maybe we should start calling him "Johnny Obama" - Just a thought!

Capt Kirk
Retired Alien
Needham Golf Club
Needham, MA

Cerminara Jamie L

6/17/2014 3:06 AM

I like the "throw back" renovation. Would have been a little happier to see some concern for plant health in the fairway / transition areas. We all know plant health is not of concern during tournaments at this level. Pics I have seen otherwise show a fairly green course.

Donald Ross greens were most likely mown at .250" or above? I don't think he saw this coming, but bet he would love the see professionals get tested. Besides that someone always proves no course is too tough.

Steve Nelson

0 posts

6/17/2014 7:06 AM

Jamie Cerminara said:
Donald Ross greens were most likely mown at .250" or above? I don't think he saw this coming, but bet he would love the see professionals get tested. Besides that someone always proves no course is too tough.

If I'm not mistaken I think they were actually sand greens up till sometime in the mid 1930's.

Steven Huffstutler

11 posts

6/17/2014 8:06 AM

This is a really interesting article about Donald Ross and Pinehurst #2. Not what I expected at all.

http://www.donaldross.org/resources/doc ... rstood.pdf

Regards,
Steve

Keith Fellenstein

0 posts

6/17/2014 10:06 AM

Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Pinehurst looked the way Pinehurst should look. Pretty big stretch to say all golf should look that way...even all American golf.

Melvin Waldron

43 posts

6/17/2014 10:06 AM

Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: This is a really interesting article about Donald Ross and Pinehurst #2. Not what I expected at all.

http://www.donaldross.org/resources/doc ... rstood.pdf

Regards,
Steve

Thanks for the article Steve, great read.

Mel

Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

Ronald Conard

4 posts

6/17/2014 10:06 AM

Keith Fellenstein said:
Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Pinehurst looked the way Pinehurst should look. Pretty big stretch to say all golf should look that way...even all American golf.

would agree but I'm not sure I said all golf should look exactly like Pinehurst. You've missed the point. The point is, many elements could be applied at most all of our courses. Do we need manicure lush turf from tee to fairway? Do bunker edges need to be perfectly edged and maintained? Can fairway bunkers be more waste areas than expected to be perfectly maintained, everyday of the week? Can we reduce irrigation by say.. 30%?

The point is absolutely we can. But it's the perception of the American golfer that won't allow it. Not a chance. At least at this time. In 2002 we went through a extremely dry year. We were on a very strict water allotment between our two courses. We shut the water off completely in the roughs on our 9-hole course as the system was old and in need of replacement. Basically we turned the place into a target golf set up very similar to the look of Pinehurst minus the sand waste areas of the fairways. That was dormant bluegrass. It played great and to me looked great. But you know what? People hated it. They stop playing because the only thing different that season was that the rough was not irrigated. As soon as the drought broke and the roughs recovered, which since it was bluegrass it did not take long, people came back in droves.

Bottom line: We are fighting an uphill battle in that we are pressured to save money by reducing inputs and yet when we do, the deep seated perception that "lush is good, lush is golf, firm and fast is not", rises to the surface.

Take a look around your course. How much of the maintenance that you are doing is fluff? Of course fluff that your golfers want, but all the same, fluff. That's the problem. Pinehurst at least showed the world, on the big stage, that some in America get it. that over the top maintenance is not necessary to be accepted by some at least. The good news it's a start.

Steven Huffstutler

11 posts

6/17/2014 12:06 PM

Ron, I would agree with all of your points, the problem is that even though the USGA is championing the look of lower maintenance, they use the US Open to showcase their vision of golf and then make the place so freaking hard that no average golfer is interested in trying that out.
I have asked a dozen of my members if they would be interested in playing Pinehurst #2 as presented in the US Open and they all, to a person, said no thanks. Not interested in what looks to be a 7 hour round for them.

Regards,

Steve

Christopher Thuer

101 posts

6/17/2014 8:06 PM

Jacobsen says live during the coverage that Mike Davis was cutting the hole on #15 Sunday. Right. I bet a lunch in San Antonio that Mike Davis has no clue how to cut a hole.

Chris Thuer, CGCS, Bear Slide Golf Club, Cicero, IN

Douglas Eggert

1 posts

6/18/2014 8:06 AM

Cutting the hole is the easy part, can he fill in the old hole....

Keith Fellenstein

0 posts

6/18/2014 10:06 AM

Ronald Conard, CGCS said:
Keith Fellenstein said:
Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Pinehurst looked the way Pinehurst should look. Pretty big stretch to say all golf should look that way...even all American golf.

would agree but I'm not sure I said all golf should look exactly like Pinehurst. You've missed the point. The point is, many elements could be applied at most all of our courses. Do we need manicure lush turf from tee to fairway? Do bunker edges need to be perfectly edged and maintained? Can fairway bunkers be more waste areas than expected to be perfectly maintained, everyday of the week? Can we reduce irrigation by say.. 30%?

The point is absolutely we can. But it's the perception of the American golfer that won't allow it. Not a chance. At least at this time. In 2002 we went through a extremely dry year. We were on a very strict water allotment between our two courses. We shut the water off completely in the roughs on our 9-hole course as the system was old and in need of replacement. Basically we turned the place into a target golf set up very similar to the look of Pinehurst minus the sand waste areas of the fairways. That was dormant bluegrass. It played great and to me looked great. But you know what? People hated it. They stop playing because the only thing different that season was that the rough was not irrigated. As soon as the drought broke and the roughs recovered, which since it was bluegrass it did not take long, people came back in droves.

Bottom line: We are fighting an uphill battle in that we are pressured to save money by reducing inputs and yet when we do, the deep seated perception that "lush is good, lush is golf, firm and fast is not", rises to the surface.

Take a look around your course. How much of the maintenance that you are doing is fluff? Of course fluff that your golfers want, but all the same, fluff. That's the problem. Pinehurst at least showed the world, on the big stage, that some in America get it. that over the top maintenance is not necessary to be accepted by some at least. The good news it's a start.

I didn't miss the point and you did say it looked the way golf should. I think you missed my point. Not every property could or should do what they did at Pinehurst. Removing the rough on my clay soils will not produce the same product as Pinehurst sandy soils. The US Open is always an extreme to test the best golfers in the world. The average player doesn't understand that and any good message gets lost in translation. Why can't we celebrate the uniqueness of every property and every climate...be responsible with resources sure, but one size does not fit all.

James Schmid

1 posts

6/18/2014 12:06 PM

I played there last year in July. The whole place was bright green - I think it had been raining though. The greens were not super fast - 10.5 - 11.5 maybe. I talked to a couple of the superintentendents there while I was there, they have already converted several of the courses there to ultradwarf bermudagrass. If I recall correctly #2 was scheduled for conversion right after the ladies event.

The superintendents were saying that in hot years there is severe turf loss on the bentgrass greens.

The waste areas were very playable even for a high handicapper like myself.

I agree with Keith that this concept would not work in many areas. It takes the right mix of soils and weather to maintain playability in those "Native Areas". Too much rain or too little and the balance in those areas is thrown way off. Also you really do need a fairly sandy soil or dry climate to make that work. The only way that concept works is if you are able to maintain a proper density of plant material in those areas. Those areas are not really that low maintenance. Constant backpack spraying of weeds with numerous employees in those areas to maintain the correct density of plants and keep out weeds, invasive species, and Bermudagrass.

Clay Putnam

33 posts

6/18/2014 1:06 PM

Keith Fellenstein said:
Ronald Conard, CGCS said:
Keith Fellenstein said:
Ronald Conard, CGCS said: The place looks like golf should look. They get it....too bad the American golfer doesn't.

Pinehurst looked the way Pinehurst should look. Pretty big stretch to say all golf should look that way...even all American golf.

would agree but I'm not sure I said all golf should look exactly like Pinehurst. You've missed the point. The point is, many elements could be applied at most all of our courses. Do we need manicure lush turf from tee to fairway? Do bunker edges need to be perfectly edged and maintained? Can fairway bunkers be more waste areas than expected to be perfectly maintained, everyday of the week? Can we reduce irrigation by say.. 30%?

The point is absolutely we can. But it's the perception of the American golfer that won't allow it. Not a chance. At least at this time. In 2002 we went through a extremely dry year. We were on a very strict water allotment between our two courses. We shut the water off completely in the roughs on our 9-hole course as the system was old and in need of replacement. Basically we turned the place into a target golf set up very similar to the look of Pinehurst minus the sand waste areas of the fairways. That was dormant bluegrass. It played great and to me looked great. But you know what? People hated it. They stop playing because the only thing different that season was that the rough was not irrigated. As soon as the drought broke and the roughs recovered, which since it was bluegrass it did not take long, people came back in droves.

Bottom line: We are fighting an uphill battle in that we are pressured to save money by reducing inputs and yet when we do, the deep seated perception that "lush is good, lush is golf, firm and fast is not", rises to the surface.

Take a look around your course. How much of the maintenance that you are doing is fluff? Of course fluff that your golfers want, but all the same, fluff. That's the problem. Pinehurst at least showed the world, on the big stage, that some in America get it. that over the top maintenance is not necessary to be accepted by some at least. The good news it's a start.

I didn't miss the point and you did say it looked the way golf should. I think you missed my point. Not every property could or should do what they did at Pinehurst. Removing the rough on my clay soils will not produce the same product as Pinehurst sandy soils. The US Open is always an extreme to test the best golfers in the world. The average player doesn't understand that and any good message gets lost in translation. Why can't we celebrate the uniqueness of every property and every climate...be responsible with resources sure, but one size does not fit all.

I agree with Ron and he is not suggesting all courses should be identical to Pinehurst. What he is suggesting is that, generally speaking, most golfers are used to and only accept green, everywhere. The golfers are not used to nor accept droughty surfaces, no matter how small, within the playing surfaces. Additionally, these same golfers are used to crisp straight edges on bunkers, etc, etc...IMO, maintenance reductions while providing quality playing surfaces are not exclusive to sand based golf courses. Every golf course can make reductions. The only thing holding them back are egos and their unwillingness to change.

If I have said it once I have said it a hundred times, golf has to make a comprehensive change to include how, when, and where maintenance is performed.

Forum Groups

Pinehurst Cancel

Forum Groups

Pinehurst Cancel The title field is required!

Pinehurst Cancel