Greens Maintenance -- More Art Than Science
Richard L. Duble

Over the centuries the art of greens maintenance was passed from one generation to the next by greenskeepers of chiefly Scottish descent. Many of the early greenskeepers in the U.S. were Scottish. In fact, there was a time in this country when one was not considered a skilled greenskeeper unless he came form Scotland. The Scots seemed to have had a monopoly on the art of greenskeeping since Scotland was the origin of golf and the country where most golf courses were found prior to the 20th century.

Today, the golf course superintendent has replaced the greenskeeper, and science is rapidly replacing art in the profession of greens maintenance. Yet, there still may be more art than science involved in greens maintenance. For example, science tells us when to fertilize greens, which nutrients to apply and what ratio of nutrients are needed to maintain a healthy turf on greens. But, science tells us little about the effect of fertilizer on the playability of the greens‹the speed, uniformity, texture, graininess and trueness. Playability of greens depends more on the skill of the superintendent to judge when to apply fertilizer, how much to apply and what material to use. Too often textbook fertilization practices produce thatchy greens, excessive grain and disease problems all of which lead to poor playing surfaces. On the other hand, the superintendent who relies more on experience and observation to develop a fertilizer program usually has very good playing greens.

Similarly, greens irrigated by automatic systems programmed to apply water at specific times and amounts are often too spongy for good playing surfaces. Whereas, greens watered by a superintendent based on experience and frequent observation are usually firmer, less weedy and better playing surfaces.

Topdressing is another practice that requires more art than science. The scientific approach to topdressing using particle size distribution, percolation and moisture retention can provide helpful information, but tells the superintendent little about putting quality, ball holding or compatibility with existing greens mixtures. The superintendent must develop a topdressing material with all of these criteria in mind. Even after developing a topdressing material, he must also decide when to topdress, how much to apply and how to work the topdressing into the turf so as to provide the least interference with play. These decisions on topdressing, watering and fertilization are a part of the `art of greens maintenance'.

My point in this discussion is not to play down the contributions science has made to greens maintenance, but to emphasize the importance of experience and observation to the maintenance of fine playing surfaces. Without the skills acquired by experience and observation, even the best educated individuals fail in the development of fine playing greens. Their greens may look great, but the speed, uniformity, trueness and holding ability of the greens may not be acceptable for golf.

The superintendent must also keep in mind that practices which work for one golf course may not work for another. Greens construction,grass species, location and maintenance programs all affect the response to specific practices. Also, superintendents must recognize that the difference between success and failure is often in the timing of maintenance practices. Cultural practices, equipment and people required for greens maintenance cannot be put together in a haphazard order. Timing of each operation can be as important as performing the operation. Even though you may have a list of good excuses for delays in carrying out operations, delays only result from poor planning. Maintenance programs must be flexible to allow for unusual conditions and unscheduled activities.