A publication on Turfgrass Management 11 in wiHtf <■ ■ -— DARE TO COMPARE Contents November-December 2005 Volume 43, Number 6 Death,Taxes, and Comparing Golf Courses Golf course comparisons are inevitable; however, get the facts first before you “dare to compare.” BY LARRY GILHULY Overseeding and Nematicides Affect Sting Nematodes in Bermudagrass Fairways Research shows that when it comes to nematodes, timing is everything. BY WILLIAM T. CROW, TODD LOWE, AND DARIN LICKFELDT 12 Getting It Right A success story from Lake Merced Golf Club. BY BO LINKS AND AL OPPENHEIM Putting Green Drainage, Drainage, Drainage Just as location is important in real estate, drainage is the foundation of any good putting green. BY JAMES H. BAIRD Z1 Rootzone Depth Affects Putting Green Performance Research at Michigan State University demonstrates how varying putting green rootzone depth affects moisture retention. BY KEVIN W. FRANK, B. E. LEACH, J. R. CRUM, P. E. RIEKE, B. R. LEINAUER, T. A. NIKOLAI, AND R. N. CALHOUN Southwestern Golf Courses Offer Needed Riparian Habitat for Birds A comparison of golf courses with natural areas underscores the importance of golf courses as bird habitat. BY MICHELE MEROLA-ZWARTJES AND JOHN P. DELONG ) Great Results Pictures of success. BY JEAN MACKAY, NANCY RICHARDSON, AND JEREMY TAYLOR News Notes Grain on the Brain Along with putting green speeds, the effects of grain on ball roll receive too much television air time. BY JOHN FOY Turf Twisters Green Section Committee Chairman Bruce C. Richards 12202 NE 31st Place Bellevue, WA 98005 Executive Director David B. Fay Editor James T. Snow Associate Editor Kimberly S. Erusha, Ph.D. Director of Communications Marty Parkes Cover Photo When comparing golf courses, it is important to remember that tournament conditions are usually quite different from regular course setup. USGA President Fred S. Ridley Death, Taxes, and Comparing Golf Courses Golf course comparisons are inevitable; however, get the facts first before you “dare to compare.” BY LARRY GILHULY “All golf courses are good. Some are better than others!” his great quote was first heard several : decades ago when a wide-eyed young assistant superintendent (the author) at Seattle Golf Club was in the company of John Zoller, Sr., superintendent of the Eugene Country Club. After I made an unflattering remark about a recently played golf course, Mr. Zoller was quick to point out that every golf course is good, and it does no good to belittle other golf courses without knowing the facts behind the agronomic and non-agronomic pro­ grams that define the condition of the golf course. While architectural discussions are always in the eye of the beholder, let’s look a little closer at the comparison dilemma facing virtually every golf course today. More specifically, let’s examine why golfers have the need to compare golf courses, the agronomic and non-agronomic dif­ ferences between golf courses, some tips to avoid comparisons, what to be aware of when com­ parisons are made in your presence, and the most common comparisons found in the game. NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2005 I Lights, camera, action may be best for the U.S. Open, but it is not needed at your golf course on a daily basis.When the cameras go away, even the best golf courses tone down their maintenance practices. SO WHY DO GOLFERS MAKE COMPARISONS? They can’t help it! The inherent inconsistency of the game, combined with a playing field that is constantly changing, results in situations where excuses for one’s own ineptitude need to be found. It can never be the fact that the lack of talent caused the missed shot or the short putt that did not fall. Golfers’ egos what they are, it must be the fault of the golf course (maintenance staff) that the greens are too slow, the fairways too short, the roughs too long, and (a personal favorite) the bunkers too “inconsistent.” When players begin to complain about another hazard (water) found on golf courses being too wet or too dry, then the bunker consistency issue deserves equal attention! In addition to this basic human tendency, we are also creatures of habit. For example, Darin Bevard stated it correctly in his USGA Green Section Record (Nov./Dec. 2004) article titled “No, It Really Is Not Just Your Golf Course!” This article points out two major reasons why many players choose to make comparisons without understanding all the facts: • Head-up vs. head-down syndrome. This fact was pointed out to me nearly two decades ago by Jim Moore, the USGA’s Director of Con­ struction Education. His point (and Mr. Bevard’s) is that players generally are not prone to enjoy the surroundings at their own golf course as much as a new course where new vistas and architecture beckon the human eye. At home, the eye has seen all of these features countless times; thus, the eyes tend to go down, and all of the flaws are noticed. It’s a very interesting observation, and I agree that this is part of the problem. • Big event syndrome. Generally, this is the major problem with comparisons. Players are invited to participate in special events or tourna­ ments that are specifically prepared for one to four days of play. The comparisons ensue, and then you host the same type of event in which other players from visiting courses go home and make the same inane comparisons of their course to yours. I could not agree more with one golf course superintendent at a prominent private club in the Pacific Northwest who describes his club’s way of coping with this situation: “If everyone would just stop going over the top for their 2 GREEN SECTION RECORD Member-Guest Invitational, the comparisons would die down. We maintain our golf course at a certain standard throughout the year, including our Member-Guest Invitational.There is no extra mowing or rolling on the greens, since our members cannot adapt to greens that suddenly are two feet faster than what they are used to. We want all of the players to have fun first, score as low as possible, get through the golf course fast, and enjoy the great food and other aspects of our facility. Our goal is to not watch balls trickle off greens due to regular hole locations suddenly becoming unplayable.” It sounds like their board of directors has nailed it. Must not be a bunch of low-single-digit players! There are myriad reasons why golfers feel the need to compare golf courses; however, the previous two offer a great starting point for the comparaholics out there who simply cannot resist the urge to compare their golf course with others. Hopefully, those who have made it this far will not require shock treatment to get you to wake up and change the way you look at your golf course and others’ courses. Get the facts before you “dare to compare.” ARE THERE AGRONOMIC AND NON-AGRONOMIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GOLF COURSES? In a word, yes there are! In early May 2004 I saw a perfect example of a comparaholic at a pro shop that will remain unnamed. This player had just played Perfection C.C., where the bunkers were perfect, the greens were perfect, and the fairways were perfect. The following quote, however, crossed the line: “My home course is a disgrace and I will not bring guests out there due to embarrassment! We need to hire the superintendent at Perfection C. C. since he knows how to maintain a golf course!” This player then went on to describe in great detail how nice his winter had been while playing golf in Palm Springs, and how much better the golf courses were maintained in that area compared to the Pacific Northwest. After taking a deep breath, I decided that this golfer needed to be educated on a few of the facts that existed between Perfection C.C. and the course where he was a member. These included: Good communication is a key to educating players before they begin making comparisons of playing conditions between golf courses. Facts about Perfection C.C. Facts about his home course • Bunkers were reno­ vated winter 2004 • Bunkers are contami­ nated with fines and scheduled for renovation • Greens were aerified in March and had completely recovered • Greens were aerified 10 days before his tirade • Fairwayss are not topdressed or aerified in the spring • Fairways were sand topdressed heavily and aerified four days before his tirade • Dry weather one • 1" rainfall two days week before played before tirade Just as there are no two snowflakes the same, there are no two golf courses that are identical, even in regard to the timing of major mainte­ nance programs and weather conditions prior to play. These facts are often forgotten by those who compare the golf course they play all year with a snapshot of a golf course that they may play on one occasion. Unfortunately, most of the differ­ ences between golf courses that most impact turf growth, and therefore playing conditions, cannot be seen. As a way of condensing the main differ­ ences between golf courses, note the two lists below. The next time you play a golf course, realize that nearly every one of these differences exists between your golf course and the golf course that you just played! NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2005 3 Agronomic Differences • Climate/geographical • Grass type • Construction material used for greens/tees • Native soil fairways/roughs • Trees — number and size • Irrigation age/coverage • Water quality/quantity • Timing of major programs — greens/fair way aeration, drainage projects, fairway topdressing, reconstruction Trees seriously impact turf growth and frost removal during the winter. 4 GREEN SECTION RECORD Non-Agronomic Differences • Amount of play • Course age • Architectural style (especially greens) • Green size • Bunkers — sand type/amount/drainage/size • Overall maintained acreage • Budget — staff size • Equipment age/amount • Membership philosophy/handicap • Wildlife — Canada geese, other grass-feeding birds, elk, voles, ground squirrels WHAT CAN BE DONE TO REDUCE THE NATURAL TENDENCY TO COMPARE GOLF COURSES? Trying to change a natural human tendency is virtually impossible; however, making golfers aware of the differences between golf courses can be done to at least minimize the potential for comparisons turning into major issues. The next time you feel the urge to compare your course with a recent round at Perfection C.C., consider the following: • Be aware of comparisons — especially when you have a bad day on the links! As mentioned earlier, a bad day on the greens can often result in a negative perception of the greens just played, rather than the possibility that you may need to take a putting lesson. The same goes for bunker sand and fairway mowing height! • Educate others when you hear compari­ sons. We have all been around players who can’t wait to let their recent rounds of golf at another course be shared with everyone! Although posi­ tive comments about any golf course are always worth listening to, keep your radar on when the positives are followed by, “I wish our golf course could be that good.” A very simple question should be asked immediately: “Did you play in a tournament or special event?” If the answer is yes, then make the player aware that all golf courses generally receive a little extra maintenance for tournaments, just as yours does. • Develop maintenance standards. The establishment of maintenance standards has been successful in instances when golf courses face changing committees and boards that alter main­ tenance philosophies on a regular basis. When course comparisons begin to happen, it is very easy to simply state that your golf course super­ intendent follows a solid set of maintenance stan­ dards created by the green committee and with board approval to assure good playing and grow­ ing conditions through the main portion of the playing season. You simply cannot maintain a golf course at tournament levels at all times; thus, your maintenance standards need to be realistic with the regular player in mind. • Resist making your golf course (especially greens) dramatically different during your Invitational or Member-Guest! This point cannot be overstated because it is the main reason why so many comparisons occur in the game today. Focus on creating smooth putting surfaces (who said fast equals good?) that are not more than one foot faster than your golfers normally play. Based on the playing skill anticipated at these events, every golf course would be far faster and more fun to play when greens are in a more reasonable Stimpmeter range of 9-10 rather than the 11+ speeds that usually are associated with the major championships for professional golfers. WHAT ARE THE MOST COMMON COMPARISONS? During a recent winter visit to a golf course here in the Pacific Northwest, a unique (and increas­ ingly common) comparison was being made about the condition of this golf course at the time of its Member-Guest Invitational (mid­ summer) and the remainder of the year. A low- single-digit member was appalled enough at the condition of the golf course from August to October to write a rather negative letter about his displeasure with the condition of the golf course when compared to the Invitational and when compared to the other older club in this town. This course had suffered through two major rain events exceeding two inches in one week, the return of summer labor to high school and col­ lege, falling leaves, and a major reconstruction of the practice facility. It was no wonder that the overall condition of the course suffered in the late summer and early fall! After this Turf Advisory Service visit, the phone rang while I was sitting in the club parking lot preparing to leave. The call was from the superintendent at the other club men­ tioned in the letter. He laughed when informed about the comparison, as he had just had a letter read at a recent board retreat that complained about the condition of his course and“/t to %) inch, being able to read the grain was essential. Putting into the grain (and uphill) meant that the putt would be extremely slow, and you had to really give it a good rap to get the ball to the hole. Putting down grain or across the grain naturally had an impact on both speed and amount of break to play. Bermudagrass greens were always the worst as far as grain was concerned, but it also occurred on northern bentgrass and less so on Poa annua greens. Beginning in the early 1980s and continuing through today, much more intensive putting green management has been employed in pursuit of faster speeds, but a reduction in grain and its influence on ball roll is a benefit of the advances that have been made in putting green management. Routinely changing the direction of mowing pat­ terns, using grooved rollers on the mowing units, verticutting, brushing, groomer attachments, and frequent, light topdressing are some of the stan­ dard practices for promoting an upright shoot growth character and in turn minimizing grain. There is a consensus among the Green Section staff and golf course superintendents at facilities where pro­ fessional events are hosted that the big­ gest reason why the effect of grain is not a factor today is the extremely low heights of cut being practiced. It was not that long ago that a height of cut of 0.156 (%?) inch was considered “pushing the envelope.” However, today there are mowing units that can be set at a height of cut of 0.100 (Xo) inch or less, and new turf varieties or cultivars can tolerate these extreme heights, at least for short periods of time. At very low heights of cut, there is simply not enough leaf surface area in contact with the ball to affect its roll. In an unpub­ lished university study, it was found that at a height of cut of 0.125 (X) inch, there was no measurable effect of grain on ball roll. With long putts of 30 feet or more, wind was the principal factor causing balls to go off line. Along with the practice of lower heights of cut, double cutting and/or rolling of greens are now routine practices used to provide faster and smoother surfaces. It has been my observation that with frequent rolling of bermudagrass greens, grain patterns tend to be highlighted. An interesting phenomenon with the ultradwarf bermudas is the occurrence of swirling patches of gain. Yet again, this horizontal leaf blade orientation does not affect ball roll. Even with the most intensively man­ aged putting greens, some horizontal leaf growth can be found and no doubt some will continue to expound on the perceived effects of grain on ball roll. However, for the vast majority of golfers, gravity rather than grain should be the concern. Accurately determining whether a putt is going uphill or down­ hill will lead to greater success com­ pared to constantly having “grain on the brain.” John Foy is director orfthe Green Section’s Florida Region. GREEN SECTION NATIONAL OFFICES United States Golf Association, Golf House P.O. Box 708 Far Hills, NJ 07931 (908) 234-2300 Fax (908) 781-1736 James T. Snow, National Director jsnow@usga.org Kimberly S. Erusha, Ph.D., Director of Education kerusha@usga.org Green Section Research P.O. Box 2227 Stillwater, OK 74076 (405) 743-3900 Fax (405) 743-3910 Michael P. Kenna, Ph.D., Director mkenna@usga.org Construction Education Program 770 Sam Bass Road McGregor, TX 76657 (254) 848-2202 Fax (254) 848-2606 James F. Moore, Director jmoore@usga.org 904 Highland Drive Lawrence, KS 66044 785-832-2300 JefFNus, Ph.D., Manager jnus@usga.org Northwest •Mid-Atlantic Region Stanley J. Zontek, Director szontek@usga.org Darin S. Bevard, Agronomist dbevard@usga.org 485 Baltimore Pike, Suite 203 Glen Mills, PA 19342 (610) 558-9066 Fax (610) 558-1135 Keith A. Happ, Senior Agronomist khapp@usga.org Manor Oak One, Suite 410, 1910 Cochran Road Pittsburgh, PA 15220 (412) 341-5922 Fax (412) 341-5954 •Southeast Region Patrick M. O’Brien, Director patobrien@usga.org P.O. Box 95 Griffin, GA 30224-0095 (770) 229-8125 Fax (770) 229-5974 Christopher E. Hartwiger, Senior Agronomist chartwiger@usga.org 1097 Highlands Drive Birmingham, AL 35244 (205) 444-5079 Fax (205) 444-9561 •Florida Region John H. Foy, Director jfoy@usga.org P.O. Box 1087 Hobe Sound, FL 33475-1087 (772) 546-2620 Fax (772) 546-4653 Todd Lowe, Agronomist tlowe@usga.org 127 Naomi Place Rotonda West, FL 33947 (941) 828-2625 Fax (941) 828-2629 •Mid-Continent Region Paul H. Vermeulen, Director pvermeulen@usga.org 9 River Valley Ranch White Heath, IL 61884 (217) 687-4424 Fax (217) 687-4333 Charles “Bud” White, Senior Agronomist budwhite@usga. org 2601 Green Oak Drive Carrollton, TX 75010 (972) 662-1138 Fax (972) 662-1168 •North-Central Region Robert A. Brame, Director bobbrame@usga.org P.O. Box 15249 Covington, KY 41015-0249 (859) 356-3272 Fax (859) 356-1847 Robert C.Vavrek, Jr., Senior Agronomist rvavrek@usga.org P.O. Box 5069 Elm Grove, WI 53122 (262) 797-8743 Fax (262) 797-8838 •Northwest Region Larry W. Gilhuly, Director lgilhuly@usga.org 5610 Old Stump Drive N.W, Gig Harbor, WA 98332 (253) 858-2266 Fax (253) 857-6698 Matthew C. Nelson, Agronomist mnelson@usga.org P.O. Box 5844 Twin Falls, ID 83303 (208) 732-0280 Fax (208) 732-0282 •Southwest Region Patrick J. Gross, Director pgross@usga.org 505 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 121 Santa Ana, CA 92705 (714) 542-5766 Fax (714) 542-5777 Mid-Continent Florida REGIONAL OFFICES •Northeast Region David A. Oatis, Director doatis@usga.org James H. Baird, Ph.D., Agronomist jbaird@usga.org P.O. Box 4717 Easton, PA 18043 (610) 515-1660 Fax (610) 515-1663 James E. Skorulski, Senior Agronomist jskorulski@usga.org 1500 North Main Street Palmer, MA 01069 (413) 283-2237 Fax (413) 283-7741 ©2005 by United States Golf Association® Subscriptions $18 a year, Canada/Mexico $21 a year, and international $33 a year (air mail). Subscriptions, articles, photographs, and correspondence relevant to published material should be addressed to: United States Golf Association, Green Section, Golf House, P.O. Box 708, Far Hills, NJ 07931. Permission to reproduce articles or material in the USGA Green Section Record is granted to newspapers, periodicals, and educational institutions (unless specifically noted otherwise). Credit must be given to the author, the article’s title, USGA Green Section Record, and the issue’s date. Copyright protection must be afforded. To reprint material in other media, written per­ mission must be obtained from the USGA. In any case, neither articles nor other material may be copied or used for any advertising, promotion, or commercial purposes. Green Section Record (ISSN 0041-5502) is published six times a year in January, March, May, July, September, and November by the United States Golf Association®, Golf House, Far Hills, NJ 07931. Postmaster: Address service requested — USGA Green Section Record, P.O. Box 708, Golf House, Far Hills, NJ 07931-0708. Periodicals postage paid at Far Hills, NJ, and other locations. Office of Publication, Golf House, Far HiUs, NJ 07931. @ Printed on recycled paper Turf Twisters Every fall when we return to South Florida, the fairways and roughs at the course we play are always in great condition. By January, however, the fairways have become very thin, and tight lies are quite penal. Further­ more, the definition between the fairway and rough cuts disappears. Can’t the super­ intendent put out more fertilizer to keep the course in better condition through the winter season? (Florida) Although wintertime temperatures in Central to South Florida are not cold enough to result in the base bermudagrass turf cover go­ ing completely dormant and turning brown, its growth rate slows drastically for two to four months. Regardless of inputs, it is impossible to force continued growth and, in turn, produce any degree of recovery from golf cart wear and damage. Com­ plaints about tight lies and no definition are common at facilities that host moderate to heavy winter-season play because the turf literally becomes beaten down. To minimize this normal course deterioration, adherence to cart usage policies and other traffic control measures cer­ tainly helps. However, until environmental conditions in the spring are again favorable to sustain turf growth, a degree of patience and understanding must be exercised. whether our water hazards should be defined with stakes or painted lines on the ground. Any suggestions would be appreciated. (Maryland) E Our head golf profes­ sional and superintendent must work together to mark our golf course properly. They disagree about They are both correct. Stakes and/or lines can be used to define the margins of water hazards. The benefit of a painted line is that it can more accurately define the actual margin of the water hazard. Stakes provide better visibility for golfers at a dis­ tance. Once lines are initially established, they can be re­ painted periodically to main­ tain visibility. Because of their irregular shapes, it is nearly impossible to install enough stakes to completely define the margins of water hazards. Stakes and lines together provide the best scenario for defining your water hazards. Where both stakes and fines are used, the stakes identify the hazard and the lines define the margin of the water hazard. Remem­ ber, both the stakes and the lines defining the margins of water hazards are considered to be in the hazards. E We are about to begin our annual tree-pruning work, much of which we are able to complete in-house. What is the best pruning cut to promote healing of the wound? (New York) 2 3-Step Pruning Cut Branch Collar rapid callous tissue formation and helps protect the tree from decay fungi. Be careful to use the “three-cut” method to reduce the weight of heavier branches and avoid bark tearing. The pruning cut should be made at the point where the branch collar joins the branch. Making the cut at this part of the branch collar leads to the most www.usga.org