GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture
Turtle Back Greens
paul cowley:
Gary...I described how the deviation could have happened... through error......I am waiting for confirmation as to whether my memory serves me correctly.
Be patient, someone here is sure to soon answer the call as I have activated the YaBBGod signal.........
Peter Pallotta:
Scott,
a good question, and I await the answer that Paul promised would come.
In the meantime, and just as an aside, I find it interesting to watch how, whether in golf course architecture or in medicine or politics, the consensus opinion/common wisdom/standard answer develops.
For years, Pinehurst #2's turtleback greens were "just the way Donald Ross designed them" - or so everybody said. Then (as Gary points out) Pete Dye mentioned that he watched the topdressing change the character of those greens, and soon everybody was agreeing that THAT was the cause.
Then one day an actual working architect asks, seemingly for the first time, the obvious question: well, if that's the case, why haven't I seen the same 'topdressing affect' on other greens... and suddenly the consensus opinion/common wisdom/standard answer gets challenged.
I wonder how many other times this has happened in the history of golf course architecture, and whether we may be overdue for a few more challenges to the common wisdom.
Peter
peter_p:
I think I remember something about adding an inch of topdressing a year for decades.
Jeff_Brauer:
yeah, Pete always said they were on an extremely heavy topdressing program. Why (given its sand anyway) I have no clue. Have never heard Paul's contractor error story, but it could be possible as well.
Kris Spence:
Ron Whittens article in the May 05 issue of GD explains alot about the evolution of the #2 greens. Topdressing is not entirely to blame and some of it probably has to do with things like Paul describes. The process of topdressing today and what it was like in the 40's and 50's are completely two different animals. Many of the greens we see today that have significant accumulation + 8 or 9 inches, the build up does not extent to the outer edges of the original fill pad, most of the time it follows the smaller rounded form of the present green. This creates an uneven tie in or transition from the green to surrounds.
The greens at the Roaring Gap Club NC (1924 Ross) are exactly like this today and if you were to integrate the existing putting surface elevation and edges to the surrounds you would create many down sloping edges you see at #2, when if fact the original greens turned up as the neared the edges of the fill pads, bunkers and side slopes.
Like Rons article states, someone carved the build up down to tie it into the surrounds and shoulders. The subsequent rebuilds replicated this versus changing it which resulted into one of the worlds greatest sets of greens.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version