Golf “ O
ne thing I have always loved about the greenkeeping profession is its lack of hard and fast rules when it comes to maintenance and management
programmes. These vary greatly, are site specific and, in many instances, down to the personal decision of the turf manager. The only rules which all successful managers follow are the traditional ones and, in my opinion, there is not a successful turf manager out there who is not a modern hybrid of the Gingerbread men. As much as some don’t like to admit it, they all use traditional sustainable foundations to base their modern programmes around. Since the likes of Tom Morris put forward his management strategies, the world has definitely progressed. As with all successful practices, inside and outside the greenkeeping profession, they don’t change or vanish, they simply evolve and improve. The modern greenkeeper benefits from:
- Improved Scientific Research - Improved Technology - Improved Machinery - Improved Support - Improved Education and Understanding
No greenkeeper will ever cut their greens at a sensible HOC which has not needed some input, chemically, culturally or mechanically, to sustain playing surfaces and healthy grass coverage
4mm is a sensible height to cut
I recently had a great conversation with a fellow senior greenkeeper who had played my course. He commented that the surfaces were unbelievably good, but expressed his opinion that I was mad cutting my greens constantly less than 3mm, as that is not a natural healthy height to be mowing and I was asking for trouble. I knew what was coming my way! Sure enough he added: “My greens are running really well too, but nowhere near as low as that height of cut (HOC). They won’t be anywhere near that even for my club championship and, whatever I cut them down to, they will be back up to 4mm the following day.” A previous course I managed was a typical
parkland where Poa wants to be king and always will be, so embracing it and enjoying it as my targeted mono species, producing site specific Poa reptans around proven management techniques, is my most sensible and only choice. This left me thinking about HOC and how,
no matter what type of course, species of grass or practices followed, no greenkeeper will ever cut their greens at a sensible HOC which has not needed some input, chemically, culturally or mechanically, to
sustain playing surfaces and healthy grass coverage. Grass wants to grow freely, so no chosen mowing height is natural. Why not use all modern technology and machinery to your advantage? The benchmark HOC of 4mm was more than likely determined by machinery limitations and not contentious Gingerbread greenkeepers back in the day. We are skilled professionals trained to push the limits, allowing us to achieve the ever increasing expectations of our customers. If this is possible at 6mm then that's great; if it was easy, everyone would be doing it, not just the select few! After all, producing true, fast playing surfaces is one of our biggest challenges and we need to use all the modern technology and machinery to our advantage in achieving this. Within these limits and narrow margins of error, you will find the Holy Grail - consistency. This parameter lies somewhere between the acceptable upper and lower target standards. Chasing the upper target constantly is somewhat unachievable and can lead to the gap widening and conditions becoming inconsistent. Discovering your maximum achievable standards and ensuring these are continuously raised will ensure consistent customer satisfaction.
PC FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015 I 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148