Technical
“
Can such data be used as a diagnostic for healthy greens and grasses most appropriate to individual circumstances? Can it be used to indicate the potential for greens to support fine grass?
Testing the putting surfaces for The Open at St Andrews
on the graph, then the soils are approaching saturation point. Were all of the values close to this mark recorded after heavy rain, or could they be indicative of over-watering and a management strategy aimed at preserving annual meadow-grass, which will compromise year-round playability?
- Is it possible to draw a line to indicate where the different grasses are best suited to site conditions? For example, if you are managing greens routinely at less than 15% VSMC and hardness higher than 110 Gravities, is fescue naturally favoured and, conversely, is meadow-grass the only really viable option at VSMC >45% and <70 Gravities of hardness (accepting that these will probably be unplayable after a few millimetres of rain!)? Beyond this, what is the range which bent will tolerate? I suggest that this is quite a wide one and would imagine that those fine grass greens routinely over 25% VSMC will probably support mostly bent, and have more annual meadow-grass than fescue.
Smithco greens roller at Royal Lytham & St Annes
- What is the influence of the amount and the nature of organic matter on the hardness/soil moisture content relationship? Could the physical and structural differences between the fibre associated with bent/fescue turf and the more water retentive thatch associated with annual meadow-grass be significant? Could the proportion of fibre to thatch influence species composition and the opportunity to bring about a successful and relatively painless conversion? Are the annual meadow-grass surfaces at the higher end of the hardness and lower end of the soil moisture ranges almost devoid of thatch and, hence, being managed on a knife edge?
- In essence, can such data be used as a diagnostic for healthy greens and grasses most appropriate to individual
circumstances? Can it be used to indicate the potential for greens to support fine grass?
What next? Tru-Turf greens roller in action 136 I PC AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2015
More data, please! Only by collecting this sort of information and analysing it critically will we gain a better understanding of how turf
management really impacts on playing performance. This is the sort of information that, if handled properly, can provide real practical guidance to greenkeepers which will benefit their profession, the surfaces they prepare and the clients they serve.
This, however, is only part of the story. Yes, golfers want great playing surfaces, but they also want them at an affordable price. Great golf surfaces must not come at the cost of damage to the environment or at the expense of golf’s environmental reputation, or in a way that antagonises and alienates local communities. One important next step might be to undertake economic and environmental impact assessments, along with playing performance, at sites with optimal fine grass and annual meadow-grass surfaces. We await a proposal!
Only by collecting this sort of information and analysing it critically will we gain a better understanding of how turf management really impacts on playing performance
”
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 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164