News:

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


Kyle Harris

I seen soil/surface temps hotter than my cup of coffee before.

Patrick_Mucci

I would take 97deg surface temp right now...

Surface temps at 107deg, soil temps at 97deg in DC right now...

Heat index 113 and golfers still teeing off ???

Exactly,

Dropping a surface temp from 97.5 to 89.3 at what appears to be 1 o'clock in the afternoon by turning on a fan is an outright lie.

Not necessarily.
Those fans can have a major impact, especially when greens are surrounded by tall trees that prevent air circulation, but provide shade.

Don't be so quick to judge until you have all the facts.

Over the last few days I saw courses employing portable fans on greens that had air flow restricted by trees


JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
What kind of grass is that in the photo?

It is a combination of featherwood bent, kentucky blue and a northern california sensamia.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

Greg Chambers

  • Karma: +0/-0
What kind of grass is that in the photo?

It is a combination of featherwood bent, kentucky blue and a northern california sensamia.

That would be "sinsemilla."  Translated into english meaning "without seed."
"It's good sportsmanship to not pick up lost golf balls while they are still rolling.

PGertner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Don't be so quick to judge until you have all the facts.....JK quote

As most of us know, JK has no turf facts, judges freely and enjoys personally bashing Supers and turfgrass science in general. He is quite ignorant, with a touch or arrogance...and for anyone schooled in turf, pretty hilarious too!!

Patrick Gertner
GC Super
Potowomut Golf Club
East Greenwich, RI


Kyle Harris

Don't be so quick to judge until you have all the facts.....JK quote

As most of us know, JK has no turf facts, judges freely and enjoys personally bashing Supers and turfgrass science in general. He is quite ignorant, with a touch or arrogance...and for anyone schooled in turf, pretty hilarious too!!

Patrick Gertner
GC Super
Potowomut Golf Club
East Greenwich, RI



I think John's post #19 explains his method and reasoning.

In other words that in many cases the use of fans is like putting a band-aid on an amputation and the root cause of the issue (air movement) has other solutions.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
What kind of grass is that in the photo?

It is a combination of featherwood bent, kentucky blue and a northern california sensamia.

That would be "sinsemilla."  Translated into english meaning "without seed."

And a mild hallucinogenic when rolled in Zig-Zag paper and smoked.  ;D

Anthony_Nysse

  • Karma: +0/-0
Don't be so quick to judge until you have all the facts.....JK quote

As most of us know, JK has no turf facts, judges freely and enjoys personally bashing Supers and turfgrass science in general. He is quite ignorant, with a touch or arrogance...and for anyone schooled in turf, pretty hilarious too!!

Patrick Gertner
GC Super
Potowomut Golf Club
East Greenwich, RI

Well put, Patrick. The following is an article that was published for the Georgia GCSA last year by my friend, Patrick Reinhardt of the The Standard Club. He is a lurker here and passed on the article for me to post here.

"The summer of 2010 showed all of it's teeth when it came to the extended lengths of heat and humidity that enveloped the region.  From the scorching heat that lasted for months on end, humidity that thickened the air, and the afternoon thunderstorms that created perfect conditions for bentgrass greens to decline, it was one of the toughest summers for bentgrass growers in recent memory.  It seemed as though the only positive to come from the summer was the demonstration of the effectiveness of fans in helping to keep bentgrass healthy and alive.
 The basic concept of using fans for greens is relatively simple.  Turf diseases that contribute to the decline of bentgrass in the summer months rely on warm temperatures and high moisture levels in order to thrive.  At the same time that the disease pathogens are thriving, bentgrass is going through it's normal cycles of root degradation.  The use of fans helps to reduce the high relative humidity levels at the canopy level of the turf.  As well, the fans provide for a cooling effect of the greens, both at the surface and subsurface levels.
 Beginning in 2005, we started installing fans at The Standard Club in order to combat the hot and humid conditions that led to some turf loss on our greens.  The decision was made to consult with Tom Michaels of TurfBreeze Fans, now a part of SubAir Systems, L.L.C.  We were provided with help on choosing the correct fan sizes, as well as the initial placement and heights of the fans.  Since the initial consultation, we have added fans on multiple occasions using a few lessons that were learned about proper placement.
 In order to achieve the most effective results from the fan, we try to keep the fan placement close to the green.  The most effective fans that we have installed at The Standard Club have been approximately 30 feet from the green.  The fans are positioned so the fan is approximately 4 feet above the surface of the green.  The distance from the green can vary slightly depending on the contours around the green, as well as the placement of the fan cable.  Installing the fan too close to the green can not only interrupt play on and around the green, but can also lead to accelerated wilting of the turf directly in front of the fan.  If the distance from the green is too great, the effectiveness of the fan across the entire green surface is reduced, and the turf farthest from the fan could suffer.  
 The size of the fan is an important decision to make when installing new fans.  One larger fan is generally more effective than multiple smaller fans.  In some cases, the smaller fan may provide sufficient air flow for smaller greens, or if only a portion of the green is in need of a fan.  On the greens that we installed smaller 36 diameter fans in 2005, the areas directly in front of the fan have significantly stronger turf than the areas away from the greens.  The greens that have 50 diameter fans installed have a more consistent turf quality across the entire green surface, which can be attributed to the larger volumes of air moved at longer distances.
 The 50 diameter fans that we have installed can sustain a 3 mile per hour wind speed at a distance of 150 feet from the fan, while the 36 fans can sustain the same speed at just over 110 feet.  When placing the fan 30 feet from the green surface, this provides about 80 feet of green surface covered by the smaller fans.  In most cases, even on very large greens, the large diameter fan can be used near the center line of the green to provide coverage over the entire surface of the green.  While the initial cost of the 50 fan is more than the 36 fan, when comparing the price of only using one large fan it is significantly less expensive than using multiple smaller fans.
 The effectiveness of the fans in cooling the turf surface, as well as the green subsurface, was evident throughout the day.  During the morning hours, temperatures averaged 2 degrees cooler on the surface of the green in front of the fans, as opposed to greens that did not have fans.  As well, the subsurface temperatures averaged 4 degrees cooler in front of the fans at a 4 depth, compared to the same depth on greens without fans.  The relative humidity at the surface of the green was consistently 80% in the mornings, which may be attributed to the dew on the surface of the greens in the mornings.
 Temperature and humidity levels start to differentiate more drastically as the heat of the afternoon starts.  In order to see the differences between multiple greens more clearly, surface and subsurface greens temperatures, as well as surface humidity readings were taken on greens that are placed in different micro-environments on the golf course.  Temperature and humidity levels were tested on a green that sits high on the property with good airflow and no fan, as well as a green that sits lower on the property with poor airflow and no fan.  Readings were also taken close to fans, as well as the farthest point of the green from the fan.
 On one recent afternoon, the measured air temperature at 2:00 pm was approximately 92 degrees with a relative humidity of 64%.  The #5 green at The Standard Club has good airflow, sits high on the property, and does not utilize a fan.  The surface  of the green reached a temperature of 105 degrees, and the humidity measured 61%.  At a 4 depth in the green, the temperature had reached 95 degrees.  In contrast, the #1 green sits lower on the property and has a restricted airflow.  There has not been a fan placed on the green, and the resulting temperature and humidity levels showed a surface temperature of 110 degrees, humidity level of 70%, and a 4 depth temperature of 96 degrees.
 In order to see the effectiveness of the fans, measurements were taken on the #12 green both in front of the 50 fan, and the front of the green.  The measurement in front of the fan was taken 30 feet from the fan, and the measurement at the front of the green was 120 feet from the fan.  The front of the green measured a surface temperature of 114 degrees, with a humidity level of 58%.  The subsurface temperature was 93 degrees, which is slightly lower than the greens without fans.  Directly in front of the fan the surface temperature was 108 degrees, and a humidity level of 43%.  The subsurface temperature was 88 degrees at a 4 depth, which is a significant reduction from the greens without fans.
 The benefits of the fans have been shown through the temperature and humidity readings, as well as in the quality of the turf in front of the fans.  By utilizing the fans 24 hours per day, from May through September, we have been able to achieve the maximum results from our fans.  With careful planning, the installation of fans may help bentgrass greens survive the stresses associated with the summer."
Anthony J. Nysse
Director of Golf Courses & Grounds
Apogee Club
Hobe Sound, FL

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Here is the truth of the matter where I live.  I am a member of four courses in the Southern Illinois-Indiana region.  One course has 22 of the large fans for 18 greens.  Another has the small fans on most if not all greens.  The other two do not have fans.  All four have perfect greens with zero problems and roll at the same speeds and firmness. 

The course with the most largest fans has the largest budget.  The course with the smaller fans is second. The courses with no fans both cost less than $800 per year to be a member.

Each of the courses has had dead greens some time in the last ten years.  I have no way of proving or knowing if the courses with the fans now would have dead greens without them. 

Most importantly:

Now that the fans are installed I believe I am the only member of either course that would support removing them today and taking our chances.  If I was an owner or employee of either course with fans I would not recommend they be removed.




Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Well put, Patrick. The following is an article that was published for the Georgia GCSA last year by my friend, Patrick Reinhardt of the The Standard Club. He is a lurker here and passed on the article for me to post here.


Tony, i have little doubt that fans can help keep a green alive in a climate like Ga., or even here in Kansas during the last couple of years.  Earlier this year I wrote a story for Golfdom about heat stress and talked to some supers who have added fans in response to the summer of 2010.  But at a couple of other courses they are switching to one of the newer Bermuda cultvars, and still other admitted that tree removal would have been a solution.

So the real questions are, "Are we trying to grow cool-season turf in places where it makes no sense?" and "Are there aesthetically better solutions than sticking a bunch of ugly electrical monsters on your golf course?"

Personally I hate hate the damned things. They are ugly, loud and obnoxious.

About 10 years ago I spent some time tracking down the source of a quote that relates to this issue for GCSAA NewsWeekly (which I edited).  It turned out that Jim Moore said:

"The three best fungicides are Stihl, Poulan and McCulloch."

I have to ask, if you're in an unreasonable location for betgrass, why fight it?  And if you are in the transition zone, how often could some judicious (or wholesale?) tree removal eliminate the need for a bunch of fans?

This year I have been on two courses that had a number of the biggest, baddest  fans you've ever seen. In both cases they were an eyesore, IMHO.

I have little doubt that some of the green sites would be problematic even with tree removal, but certainly not all of them.

I'm not as adamant as Kavanaugh, but I wish more golfers and board of directors would realize how often trees and turf are incompatible.

K
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Patrick_Mucci

Ken,

I recently had a conversation with a club President who was opposed to tree removal.

I tried to explain why removing trees from his course would benefit the course and the golfers, but, I think his mind is set.
Unfortunately, He equates trees with the quality of the golf course.

I told him to visit "historicaerials.com" where he could see photos of his club dating back to 1931, with great photos from the 50's and 60's showing practically NO trees, since many of the trees were added in modern times, in the 70's and later.

In the NE, introducing new Bermuda's isn't a prudent alternative.
So, While I'd like to see more tree removal, fans, both permanent and portable seem to be achieving their intended goal during this rather unusual July.  We also had a good deal of rain in the Spring, which hasn't helped now that the very, very hot and humid weather has settled in.

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Ken,

I recently had a conversation with a club President who was opposed to tree removal.

I tried to explain why removing trees from his course would benefit the course and the golfers, but, I think his mind is set.
Unfortunately, He equates trees with the quality of the golf course.

I told him to visit "historicaerials.com" where he could see photos of his club dating back to 1931, with great photos from the 50's and 60's showing practically NO trees, since many of the trees were added in modern times, in the 70's and later.

In the NE, introducing new Bermuda's isn't a prudent alternative.
So, While I'd like to see more tree removal, fans, both permanent and portable seem to be achieving their intended goal during this rather unusual July.  We also had a good deal of rain in the Spring, which hasn't helped now that the very, very hot and humid weather has settled in.


Does he think that removing the trees would make it easier? That is what I hear from most tree removal opponosition.....The "you shouldn't hit it there anyway" logic...

Patrick_Mucci

Sean Leary,

Absolutely.

He feels that the course will be less challenging without the trees.

The course has small greens that are well guarded and challenging to putt.

He equates difficulty with quality architecture.

He also wants to lengthen the course even though scores in the 80's qualified for this year's club championship.

It's not an unfamiliar refrain.

Some people take delight in making their course difficult and anything that might be perceived as diminishing the challenge is opposed.

By the way, he's a very nice fellow.

Just misguided, but, not to the extent that TEPaul or Lord Voldemort are misguided ;D

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Don't worry, once the young highly educated super gets them to buy fans the greens will continue to die and then the trees will be removed.  Everybody wins, it even speeds up play as it is impossible to have a discussion near the green forcing people to hurry to the next tee.

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Ken,

I recently had a conversation with a club President who was opposed to tree removal.

I tried to explain why removing trees from his course would benefit the course and the golfers, but, I think his mind is set.
Unfortunately, He equates trees with the quality of the golf course.

I told him to visit "historicaerials.com" where he could see photos of his club dating back to 1931, with great photos from the 50's and 60's showing practically NO trees, since many of the trees were added in modern times, in the 70's and later.

In the NE, introducing new Bermuda's isn't a prudent alternative.
So, While I'd like to see more tree removal, fans, both permanent and portable seem to be achieving their intended goal during this rather unusual July.  We also had a good deal of rain in the Spring, which hasn't helped now that the very, very hot and humid weather has settled in.


Oh, I fully understand the problem.  And I thought I was careful to note that the conversion to bermuda only applied to places where bent isn't meant to grow.

To give you an idea just how well aware I am, last week at dinner after playing my Men's League match I had to listen to a tirade about one tree that got cut down because my wife offered to pay an arborist to do it, and the manager who is currently running the place for the bank said she could do it.

We had the approval of the super and the GM, to take down a fairly large maple that made the hole almost unplayable for about 75% of teh people who play here. It was on the inside of a dogleg @ about 230 yards which wouldn't have been such a big deal except that there's also a significant valley running across the fairway that left average hitters without a place to lay up to make bogey.

That wasn't the only negative comment I heard about it, but ALL of them ripped us and the GM for wanting to make the course "easy". Meanwhile, one of the reasons we ended up in bank ownership is that the course had become no fun to play due to unmanaged trees, narrow fairways and heavy rough.

Out here virtually everyone who plays t believes two things about golf courses:

1) Hard = Good
2) More trees  = Better

It's insane, but there it is.

K
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Maybe when more people understand that fans are a crutch used to justify bad architecture I will no longer stand alone in my protest.

Patrick_Mucci


Maybe when more people understand that fans are a crutch used to justify bad architecture I will no longer stand alone in my protest.

Would you point out the bad architecture that's using fans as a crutch at Pine Valley ?

Mountain Ridge ?

Ridgewood ?


John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Patrick,

If the option of fans was not on the table the mentioned clubs would have no choice but to open up the air flow passages as originally designed. Or, God forbid, keep the greens and contours as designed. Fans allow change, all for the bad.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Patrick,

If the option of fans was not on the table the mentioned clubs would have no choice but to open up the air flow passages as originally designed. Or, God forbid, keep the greens and contours as designed. Fans allow change, all for the bad.

John,

Sounds like your beef is with the maintainence meld, not the architecture.

And it may shock you, but I partially agree with you on this one!  ;)

Patrick_Mucci

JakaB,

I've certainly advocated for tree removal at PV.

Old photos of # 10 show virtually no surrounding trees on the 10th green.

Fans are probably a quick fix.

Metedeconk had them, but now they're gone as are most of the trees around the greens where the fans were located.

One can only hope that PV will remove surrounding trees and subsequently remove the fans.

Jason Walker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Maybe it's because I grew up in the south, but fans have never really bothered me.  Not sure what the beef is--they're usually out there for a reason, as has been discussed.

As to being a crutch for bad architecture or tree encroachment--would anyone argue that Merion suffers from a choking tree problem or bad architecture?  Well guess what, when I was out there last year several times in August they had fans blowing all over the place.  When it's 95+ here in the Northeast for an extended period, the fans are coming out.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2011, 09:01:24 PM by Jason Walker »

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Maybe it's because I grew up in the south, but fans have never really bothered me.  Not sure what the beef is--they're usually out there for a reason, as has been discussed.

As to being a crutch for bad architecture or tree encroachment--would anyone argue that Merion suffers from a choking tree problem or bad architecture?  Well guess what, when I was out there last year several times in August they had fans blowing all over the place.  When it's 95+ here in the Northeast for an extended period, the fans are coming out.


Every course preparing for a major brings in fans to secure proper growth of the recontoured greens.

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Maybe it's because I grew up in the south, but fans have never really bothered me.  Not sure what the beef is--they're usually out there for a reason, as has been discussed.

As to being a crutch for bad architecture or tree encroachment--would anyone argue that Merion suffers from a choking tree problem or bad architecture?  Well guess what, when I was out there last year several times in August they had fans blowing all over the place.  When it's 95+ here in the Northeast for an extended period, the fans are coming out.


Every course preparing for a major brings in fans to secure proper growth of the recontoured greens.



Not true

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Ian,

Please name a course in the U.S. which has or will host a major within five years that has not brought in fans to help with the growth of the greens.  Even Oakmont cut down all those trees and still felt the need to bring in fans.  I understand as courses who host majors have a responsibility far greater than the golfing pleasure of their members.  It's also is a great way to convince lesser courses to buy fans.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2011, 10:35:55 PM by John Kavanaugh »

Anthony_Nysse

  • Karma: +0/-0
Ian,

Please name a course in the U.S. which has or will host a major within five years that has not brought in fans to help with the growth of the greens.  Even Oakmont cut down all those trees and still felt the need to bring in fans.  I understand as courses who host majors have a responsibility far greater than the golfing pleasure of their members.  It's also is a great way to convince lesser courses to buy fans.

Jon,
  You HAVE to stop making such broad statements. You're starting to get way off base, though you'r logic in you're home area makes some sense.
  As for courses in the US which has or will host a major that have not brought in fans...its a longer list then those that have fans...-Pebble Beach, Bethpage Black, Torry Pines, Winged Foot, Shinnecock. Olympic wont have any, Chambers Bay, Erin Hills, Whistling Straits, Hazeltine, Oakland Hills.....On the Women's side-Blackwolf Run, Broadmor, Interlachen.  I rest my case.
Anthony J. Nysse
Director of Golf Courses & Grounds
Apogee Club
Hobe Sound, FL

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back