[Steve Okula]

Pure swards are exactly that, the behaviour of the grass is pretty much the same so the grasses grow together and whilst they may be at 3mm at 7.AM they are likely to be say 4mm at NOON.
Poa comes in many types even over a squared metre and whilst the plants may all be at 3mm early, those plants are not the same height later in the day, resulting in a bumpy surface.

Adrian,

It doesn't need to be that way. With the plant growth regulator trinexypac-ethyl (i.e. Primo) the difference in growth between varieties and species during the course of the day is reduced to being imperceptible.

[Michael_Stachowicz]

Poa, with enough money, can be a pretty surface, perhaps the the best (some guys can get a monostand looking like the felt on a pool table).  But, let's not fool ourselves here, poa is more expensive to maintain in most areas of the country, except the Monterrey peninsula and the pacific northwest.  The spray programs to keep anthracnose and summer patch under control is more expensive than a disease control program for bent.

So now, we can talk about disaster prevention, poa is on such life support that it spends alot of its life cycle looking for an excuse to die.  Let's throw in nematodes (big movement in California to regrass greens to bentgrass to help withstand the onslaught of Nematodes...bent has a better root system to withstand the attacks) which are no impossible to control as the only proven control product, Nemacur, has been pulled off the market.  Oh yea, I forgot, poa wants to die when under a sheet of ice.

Now, I am not talking about the perennial poa types...these seem to be a much more sustainable plant.  It is just that there isn't a monostand of this biotype out there other than Oakmont that I am aware of.  Friends don't let freinds pretend to be Oakmont.  There is one Oakmont, with one type of poa, with an unlimited budget, and a benevolent dictator running the show...it is not a good example for promoting poa use.  It is a good example to promote more research into its turf.  Oakmont is a freak of nature.

The true skill in greenkeeping is picking the most sustainable grass for the part of the world you are in and implementing programs to encourage that.

Ian, I thought you had a great treatise on poa back there, except for the part where you sound like a fertilizer/ snake oil salesman and your comment on budgets.  Yes, small budget clubs can be creative in order to afford to maintain poa, but that doesn't change the fact that bent is cheaper, more consistent, and more sustainable.

[Bradley Anderson]

One of the things I have noticed with anthracnose is it seems to be more severe on the edges of the greens in the clean-up pass area.

I was wondering if any other superintendents have had that same experience?

[Jeff Goldman]

Anyone have experience with Velocity?  I saw one post on the Stonewall thread, which was positive.

[JSPayne]

As someone in the golf maintenance business having worked on nothing but Poa greens until my current course, which is 7 years old and still about 80-90% bentgrass, from a maintenance & financial standpoint, bentgrass is a much more desirable grass. Why?

1) At least in this regioin, bentgrass is far less susceptible to diseases. I've used maybe 1/4th of the fungicides on my bentgrass greens than I've had to use at other courses with Poa. A couple top notch courses I know have to be on a preventative fungicide program, spraying almost every other week, just to prevent their greens from being attacked and dessimated.

2) Bentgrass has much lower fertility requirements. Most supers I know with Poa greens have excellent fertility programs, but aim for a yearly fertilization of around 4# nitrogen per 1000 sq ft on their greens. I'm on pace for closer to 2# N per 1000 and my coworkers say the grass has never looked healthier.

3) Bentgrass is much deeper rooting and, as a result, requires a less intensive irrigation management program. Not necessarily less water than Poa, but I use deep, infrequent irrigation on my greens and have only had to hand water them twice all summer, even in 100+ degree temps. Poa, being much shallower rooted, needs CONSTANT attention, as Ian describes, with syringing and handwatering, requiring more time from somebody that could be spent elsewhere.

As for the playing quality of Poa versus Bent, I will personally select Bentgrass, even though I've played on some EXCELLENT, well-maintenaned Poa greens that just as good as any Bent. But on average, bentgrass tends to provide a more uniform and consistant playing surface, through the day and through the seasons (Poa that is not well maintenaned typically gets seedheads and also becomes puffy and bumpy in the afternoons).

But that last bit is purely opnion. The facts about lower maintenance and financial input aren't, and I would be interested to see someone argue against them.

[archie_struthers]

 

I truncated my poa post Friday as work called , isn't that awful!


I appreciate Ian's exuberence over poa annua as a surface butttttttttt only really high quality superintendents , generally armed very large budgets can keep it in championship condition over the course of a season ,

It wasn't that long ago that the whole east coast ... (particularly Mid Atlantic) was facing an anthracnose outbreak of bilblical proportions ..good superintendents had their worry beads, rabbits feet and rosaries all worn out from action!

Poa is fabulous when perfect but if you watch the tournaments on the West Coast every year you can be sure to see balls hopping and dipping on the poa, withthe appropriate wailing and whining by the touring pro's who are unaccustomed to yipping four footers all week long...

Hence the search continues for the perfect bent, which will grow in the spring and not have all the frailties of poa....Ian knows that a bad guy on the hose can turn a perfect green into a bad one rather quickly in the mid-summer heat ...hence the fear of poa continues for many even today

If only the secrets of Oakmonts greens were revealed to the masses and we could get a permanent cure for anthracnose

[Steven_Biehl]

Just a pet peeve of mine, but, why not call it ANNUAL BLUEGRASS!  Nobody on here refers to other grasses as Festuca rubra, Agrostis palustris, Lolium perenne, or Cynodon dactylon.  Poa is the genus name for all bluegrasses. So, when you call annual bluegrass, Poa, realistically I know which grass you are talking about, but technically, it is incorrect.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Trying to answer my own question about the poa at Oakmont -- which should encourage the experts to post the correct answers! -- here's what I found.

Arnold Palmer said when he began playing Oakmont in the 1940s, the greens were bent; however, "The poa just came in gradually and slowly over the years," he told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2007. "Oakmont didn't change their whole process to accommodate poa. They just kept doing what they've always done. Poa is a type of grass that becomes acquainted to how its cared for, and they cared for it just like we did at Latrobe Country Club."

Over the years, poa crept in and apparently underwent an amazing evolution -- I think that is the right word.  According to superintendent John Zimmers, Oakmont's poa actually is perennial.  Here is a brief excerpt from a June 2007 Post-Gazette article:

Oakmont Poa annua is a bit freaky. It doesn't produce any seed at all. Instead, all of its energy goes into sustaining itself year after year.

"It's a perennial annual," [Penn State agronomist David] Huff said paradoxically. "It certainly has a mystique about it."

If you wanted to build a golf green from scratch and wanted to seed it with Oakmont grass, you're out of luck. There are no seeds. Oakmont grows reserve patches of the grass by saving the plugs when the greens are aerated, and then transplanting the plugs elsewhere.

...or maybe not: a 2006 article comparing Oakmont's poa to Winged Foot's noted Oakmont's produces less seed. The articles conflict; does anyone know one way or the other? If I had to bet, I would bet on the 2007 article that calls it seedless, as it carries quotes from Huff and Zimmers -- seems better researched.

Less or none regardless, Zimmers maintains a stand of the stuff (using aeration plugs) as he can't get any / enough seed from it or anywhere else.

And it is unique to Oakmont; even next-door Oakmont East cannot grow it.  As obviously significant as the strain is, sustaining this special grass requires special conditions and those conditions do not appear fully understood, things like soil conditions as well as how maintenance has "conditioned" the grass.  Palmer says Oakmont greens are elevated and this makes a difference, too.

Even if clubs somehow could control for soil, climate, architecture, maintenance, etc., still these courses would face another problem: supply.  The grass produces few / no seeds.  Huff has been trying for 10 years to produce a plant from the Oakmont strain that produces seeds.  The 2007 article said seed production "may" be three years away.

Which calls to mind the heroic efforts of two scientists to find seeds of the seedless Persian Lime, a quest memorably documented by John McPhee in "Oranges." Hand-picking their way through the pulp of tens of thousands of limes -- two dump trucks' worth -- they managed 250 seeds.

They planted these seeds.  And got two lime trees.  But what amazed their fellow scientists? That they managed to get even two from 250 seeds!

So good luck to David Huff...

Now, does anyone out there have the facts? What about those who worked at Oakmont or graduated from Penn Street?

Mark

[Cory Brown]

Michael,
I haven't played Oakmont, but I can pretty much guarantee that they don't have magic Poa there.  I am sure they have old, well adapted varieties, but Poa will never truly be a monostand.  That said give them credit for developing an excellent program and consistently having some of the best greens in the world.

Another question I hear frequently especially in the Pacific Northwest (where most of the top clubs have Poa greens) is when discussing a newer course with Bent greens that are struggling.  Why didn't they seed that course to Poa.  The truth is, is that there is very little for Poa seed on the market.  What seed there is out there tends to produce plants that produce a huge amount of seed heads.  The reason for this makes sense when you think about from a seed production perspective.  A seed producer needs a plant that will produce a lot of seed so it can be harvested and sold.  Quality Poa greens produce very few seedheads so those varieties are eliminated.  Your best bet is to start with Bent and determine whether or not the battle to keep the Poa out is worth it.

What happens as Poa takes over a green is the annual seedy types come in first, this is what you will see on greens that are half Poa and half Bent.  This is also where Poa gets its bad reputation.  Eventually though more short lived Perennial varieties take over, and that is what you see when you see the dense, upright turf that can be cut at below .100".  This is I'm sure what they have at Oakmont.  For any scientists out there the difference is the annual biotypes are known as Poa annua var. annua, and the short seasoned perennial types are known as Poa annua var. reptans.

Poa is not correct in every situation, in fact it is probably to be fought in most situations.  But in certain parts of the country it makes for a putting surface that I would put up against any other in a second.  To those who say Poa can't be maintained at high standards on a lower budget course, I would definitely disagree.  It is a challenging grass, but I would certainly not say it is any more challenging or costly than trying to maintain Bentgrass while trying to fight Poa.  Chemical control is expensive, as is labor to remove it by hand.

[Mark_Fine]

As an FYI - the greens at the public course next door (Oakmont East) are the same grass as the championship course.  I am guessing but I bet they probably get half the attention as the big course greens but are still pure putting surfaces. 

By the way, I believe you could count on one hand the number of times the U.S. Open has been played on greens that did not have Poa. 

[JSlonis]

Anyone have experience with Velocity?  I saw one post on the Stonewall thread, which was positive.

Jeff,

You probably saw my post on that other thread.  Our Supt. has had very good results with the Velocity program this year.  It did a great job in wiping out the Poa that we still had in our fairways.

Overall I've seen some Poa greens that have been fantastic but those courses have not been in this Middle Atlantic region.  Even the very best courses like Pine Valley struggle each year to maintain their primarily Poa greens through the stress of the summer and it isn't due to a lack of $$ or a lack of expertise by the Supt.  It just seems that in the DC to Philly area, the poa is very difficult to maintain.  There are courses just over an hour away in North Jersey that seem to handle the poa fine.

[Steve Okula]

Just a pet peeve of mine, but, why not call it ANNUAL BLUEGRASS!  Nobody on here refers to other grasses as Festuca rubra, Agrostis palustris, Lolium perenne, or Cynodon dactylon.  Poa is the genus name for all bluegrasses. So, when you call annual bluegrass, Poa, realistically I know which grass you are talking about, but technically, it is incorrect.

Because it's a matter of convenience.

"Annual bluegrass" is five syllables and fifteen letters to write, while "Poa", is one and a half syllables and a concise three letters.

It has become an industry standard to refer to "Poa annua" as "Poa". Everyone in the turf business expects that when you say "Poa" alone that you are refering to the annual variety. If you want to speak of the other bluegrasses, you must add their species name, "Poa pratensis", or "Poa trivialis" (more commonly referred to as  "Poa triv").

Also, it avoids confusion, internationally. In the British Isles, the common names for bluegrass is "meadowgrass", as in "annual meadowgrass", which is even more of a mouthful than "annual bluegrass". But everyone knows what you mean by "Poa".

Here in France, the commmon name for annual bluegrass is "pâturin", still, everyone understands "Poa", as they do in Spain, Portugal, Australia, South Africa and so on.

Language is a living entity that evolves, much like Poa on an Oakmont green.

[Rick Sides]

Poa does not like heat and is prone to disease, however, it is the most true surface you can putt on and the speed is very consistent.

[Ian Larson]

Eric Johnson,



"1. "No cost to the club"  Are you suggesting the time of the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent is of no value?  ANY TIME ANYONE is working on the golf course and/or club, that time has a value."

.....of course time has a value. But lets say I need to spray or flush greens or do whatever is needed that could be done in the evening time to free up manpower during the day and not interfere with golfers. You can bet its gonna be myself or another salaried worker doing it so as to not be paying hourly wages and overtime to get it done. I have no problem whatsoever working all day and then into the evening especially if it allows me to get more done during the day with hourly staff. I dont punch a clock for my own golf courses good and I never will. I love being out there and often I think I would do it for free.





"2. What does a growth regulator like Primo regulate?  What is one of the active ingredients in A____n or Seaweed or Kelp Extract?  Would you implement a program with both as components of the program?  Why?"

.....Primo inhibits Giberillic Acid production. And there are three main ingredients in Astron, or Seaweed and Kelp extract. Gibberellic Acid, Auxins and Cytokinins. GA's are in the foliage, Auxins are in the crown and Cytokinins are in the roots. These hormones are produced in the plant and translocate throughout. The GA's move from the foliage down to the roots, Cytokinins move from the roots up to the foliage while the Auxins move up and down to the foliage and the roots, but only toward the concentrations of GA's. All three of these are vital and its even more vital to have them in correct proportions in the plant. Having them in the right ratios "tricks" the plant physiologically into thinking that everything is AOK and it pushes itself to grow more roots. With Astron, all of them are in the perfect ratio to accomplish this. So would I use Primo and Astron in a program together? Absolutely!!! Its accomplishing more roots without the flush in topgrowth.





"Have you ever seen a Phosphorus deficient grass plant or for that matter Potassium?  Do a little research into the work Dr. Rossi has embarked on regarding fertility needs (no conclusions but interesting data nonetheless)."

.....Phosphorus and Potassium deficiencies? Absolutely!!! You may not have ever seen it personally, that doesnt mean that it never happens and  I have reports and pictures to prove it. Dr. Rossi's study will never come to a conclusion. Its physiologically proven that the grass plant needs certain elements and in certain amounts. His studies data is very inconsistent and will never be conclusive by way of the scientific method.





"Have you ever seen a soil report that doesn't show a deficiency among the cations that requires attention?  Have you thought that maybe the recommendations within the soil test are based on yield (plant growth) not on plant health and surface playability"

....What planet are you from? Of course Ive seen reports that dont show a deficiency. Because I base every single spray and spreader application off of the report. If you have a program putting down the right rates at the right frequency that is in line with the CEC of the soil its very possible to have all the elements in desired ranges. I dont know who you do soil testing through but if they are making recommendations geared towards plant yield. You might want to change labs. Plant health is what the report is all about!!! The most important element is the one that is most deficient. Thats because they are all important for the plants health. The elements are like vitamins. If the plant doesnt take its vitamins its going to get sick and cant perform its best. Plant yield is only the product of a healthy grass plant.





"3. If you decrease the fertilization of a given area and increase the vertical mowing/grooming and topdressing, are you sure there is no additional cost to the club?  I remember paying $75/yard for green topdressing sand back in 1998.  I cannot fathom the cost of that sand today.  Also when decreasing the fertility, would you not increase the risk of Anthracnose and other secondary pathogens associated with low fertility?  Fungicides cost money too."

.....I never said anything about decreasing the fertilization of a given area. I talked about putting correct amounts down based on soil / tissue reports and the plants needs. If a green needs to be verticut and topdressed more often to achieve the level of quality the club desires then that amount of cultivation is the CORRECT amount of cultivation. The old amount is not enough and the super is doing a disservice to the club by not realizing more needs to be done. If the correct amount of cultivation is being performed then the extra cost is what it is, its not an extra cost anymore. Its the needed cost. Fungicides cost money? Really? When the plant's fertility needs are met and the plant is healthy, that plant now runs less risk of being innoculated by a pathogen. I know thats true with even my own body!

And why would you pay that money for green topdressing sand? Why do you even need green topdressing sand? Thats such a waste of club's money. That is what you topdressed greens with? Dont get me wrong, I use green sand. I use it for tee and fairway divots and ball marks on greens. But I buy cheaper masonry sand for tees and fairways and dye it with green lesco paint in a old cement mixer. There is absolutely no way in hell I could justify using it as a topdressing for all of the greens because its completely not necessary and not practical.




"Ian, I hope this didn't seem too harsh but, I had to throw my three cents into the fray."

....dont worry it wasnt harsh. It just wasnt very correct.
   

[Jon Wiggett]

Just a pet peeve of mine, but, why not call it ANNUAL BLUEGRASS! 

because it is called annual meadow grass Steve or no Einjährige Rispengras where I am living. Maybe that is why its easier to say Poa Annua.

[Jon Wiggett]

For what it is worth my opinion about poa annua is as it is probably the most successful grass art despite never being grown on any scale it is likely to appear in any sward if the conditions allow. If it is the dominant grass then you are going to have times when the putting surface is going to be less than perfect but this can be said for most grasses. If handled correctly then it will provide a very good putting surface.

I would never try and promote poa annua but am quite happy to live with it. Just to be controversial I would say any super who actively promotes the grass to 100% of the sward has lost the plot or is not motivated to do his work properly

[JSPayne]

Jon,

Mark Woodward, CGCS, oversaw the rennovation of Torrey Pines for the last US Open. He PURPOSEFULLY aerated the greens 8 times (the number could be off by 1 or 2) in the 16 months leading up to the tournament to PURPOSEFULLY encourage Poa annua germination and infiltration into the greens in order to try and create 100% Poa greens (or as close to it as he could get).

He is now the new CEO of the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America.

Did we just hire a guy who "lost the plot or is not motivated to do his work properly?"

P.S. I STILL think bentgrass is the best putting surface I have ever maintained or played on, as per my post above. Still waiting for someone to debate that.

[Jon Wiggett]

JS,

I don't know if you did No, of course you didn't and I have of course being far to general in my statement and it was intended to provoke just a little bit. Is what Mark Woodward did wrong? No, of course not but I would point out that preparing a course for a US Open isn't your normal supers job. I think it would be a brave man who pushes a 100% sward of any grass sort if he is working at a club all year round.

As I said in my last post

For what it is worth my opinion about poa annua is as it is probably the most successful grass art despite never being grown on any scale it is likely to appear in any sward if the conditions allow. If it is the dominant grass then you are going to have times when the putting surface is going to be less than perfect but this can be said for most grasses. If handled correctly then it will provide a very good putting surface.

What is interesting JS is that it seems that you don't agree with the 100% Poa annua to produce the best surface

P.S. I STILL think bentgrass is the best putting surface I have ever maintained or played on, as per my post above. Still waiting for someone to debate that.

or were you being general like me 

[Phil_the_Author]

Bethpage Black has Poa greens. They were stimping at 14 & 15+ during the Open and wer universally praised by all of the players.

They are still in superb condition.

[JSPayne]

Jon,

You've read my post correctly. I'm not convinced Poa is the best putting surface. Bentgrass wins hand down in my mind right now. From all I've experienced, heard and seen, Poa is too tempermental.

Many on this thread are correct, there are some brilliant examples of near-perfectly conditioned Poa, especially in major events. However, I think you could also find similar examples where Poa greens in Tour events were admonished and blamed over and over for missed putts and poor scoring by the world's best. Likewise, Poa greens on a day to day basis, excluding these key events where they are pushed and manicured to the max, tend to yeild wildly variable results. Even more so on your average private or daily fee public courses.

Bentgrass, while it may have some minor faults, seems to me to be a much more solid, consistant, logical grass to work towards on greens surfaces, should the climate support it.

I'm not sure this thread is intended to be Ian's claim that Poa is the BEST, but rather that it shouldn't get such a bad rap, which I can agree with. If he, and others, are indeed trying to claim it to be the best, I don't know why anyone hasn't argued against the points I make for bentgrass being superior, from a maintenance and playability standpoint.

[JSlonis]

JS,

I'd agree with you about the superiority of Bent vs. Poa, especially in my area of the country.  I'm not sure if any Supt. who has workerd in this region would agree that Poa is a better surface.  From what I've seen, it is more labor intensive, more susecptible to disease, less heat resistent and overall more difficult to maintain.  That's not to say there aren't good greens around here with a mix of both grasses. 

[Ian Larson]

To say which grass is the best is such a subjective thing, everyone is entitled to their opinions.

But for the non superintendents, you should only be making comments on which surface you prefer to putt on. I cant stand armchair superintendents that throw out bland generalizations about something they hardly know about. Im a numbers and facts kinda guy, dont make a statement you cant back up with first hand experience, proven science or data.

The reality is, I wouldnt do anything different with bent greens than what I already do for poa greens.....

I would still do biweekly foliar fert spray applications.

I would still do biweekly soils fert spray applications.

I would still be on a preventative fungicide program when pressure is high.

I would still have 2 to 3 guys syringing in the heat of the afternoons.

I would still aerify the same way.

I would still broom, verticut and topdress the same way.

I would still mow at the same heights.

I would still roll 4 to 5 times a week.

I have worked with both grasses. If I had new greens with 100% bent it would be my first priority to combat poa and keep it out. If I had greens with 50 / 50 poa-bent. I would promote the poa to get 100% poa. If half of the greens are already poa the battle has been lost. They are too far gone to get rid of the poa IMO. You start killing off that much poa youre going to have ugly greens and you may lose your job. Promoting the poa is the only logical thing to do.

I have also been with poa greens in South Carolina, Philly, Met area and Southern California. I was at Ridgewood Country Club the summer of the big Anthracnose invasion which led to the big study done at Rutgers. i know how bad it can get.

The only difference with having poa greens would be an increase in fungicide frequency only at the threat of Anthracnose. Does that happen everyday or every year? maybe at someplaces, but no. Its not happening all over all the time. Not enough for poa to get its reputation it has gotten by armchair superintendents.


Heres some reality....

Bent gets its share of disease, youre an idiot if you think its less susceptible to all the diseases.

poa is only susceptible to one more disease that bent is, Anthracnose.

All of you guys that talk about bent greens being cheaper?! Do you even know the amount of time, labor and money that goes in to keeping them poa free? If you dont then Ill give you the number to the superintendent at Bent Creek Country Club in Lancaster,Pa.. His name is Jim Loke. He is only super the club has had in its history which I think has been close to twenty years. I think it was built in the early nineties. Jim has kept those greens poa free since they were built.

poa MAY have to be sprayed more frequently for the threat of anthracnose.

But bent WILL ALWAYS have to be managed to keep it poa free.

I respect everyones opinion on here but unless you can give me some hard numbers and data I think you should just keep your opinion to yourself unless your commenting on which you prefer to putt on.



ps......funny thing. LACC is 36 holes. The North Course is mostly bent. The South Course is entirely poa. The South Course doesnt have to spray more fungicides than the North. And it doesnt cost more to maintain them. The only difference is the Souths poa needs A LITTLE more Nitrogen per year. And the members that I know and are friends with prefer the South's putting surface.

[archie_struthers]

 


Hey Ian , I don't tend to claim to know anywhere near what you or a good superintendent does about growing grass...however to say that because you're not a superintendent you can't have an opinion is pretty silly.

does that mean that everyone who hasn't built and designed a course can't have an opinion on architecture...

I'm in agreement with your post relative to poa to a great extent, yet golf course operators , architects and most importantly superintendents will continue to search for better grasses ...why wouldn't they???

Have a lttle tolerance ...it' obvious your opinion has merit

[Ian Larson]

Archie, your right and I retract the statement. The spirit of the website is based on opinions. I just get annoyed at generalizations that cant

be backed up with fact. And with these posts Im not trying to be the poa spokesperson. I love both surfaces.

[archie_struthers]

 

well said

archie

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()