Richard Ball

Course Committee.
15/02/12

The course committee thank you for your interest in the Winter Course Improvement Plan.
Please bear in mind that this is still a work in progress and will be continually reviewed during the year when the new developments come into play.
We are following the plan put in place by the architect, Ken Moodie, to update the challenge of the course while making it a fair and enjoyable to all members.

We respond specifically to your comments after our meeting last night.
• The idea of a drop zone at the back of the first is a good one and we will put this in place.
• The idea for removing the leylandii on the 2nd is to give site of the green and we do not plan to put up more netting. The fairway has been extended on the left.
• Greenside bunker on the 2nd has been looked at by other members and has not currently been considered a problem.
• Bunkers on the 3rd. We have already agreed that the new bunker requires alteration. The greenside bunkers are still being worked on.
• Planting along the fence on the 4th. We will plant more trees in the out of bounds area but cannot plant too close to the netting (to retain access for maintenance). There are no plans to plant at the netting on the 5th. Hopefully this netting will satisfy the new home owner but members still will have to be very careful when teeing from the 5th. The netting is not the perfect solution!
• The new bunkers on the 7th and the 10th will be reviewed.
• The short game area is being reviewed and is on the agenda for the Development Committee. Now that more teaching takes place at Ash Lane is hoped to make the area a better short game area for members. It does require draining first.
• We have asked The Course Manager to look at shortening the carry on certain holes to make the tee shot fairer for all members.

Course Committee
15/02/12

I agree 100% with Nigel’s comments and would also add that when they become heavily trafficked throughout a competition day they become slippy and dangerous.

Cheers

Jeremey Plastow

The counter argument is that “driving range style” mats concentrate traffic in specific areas and the result is concentrated wear in the immediate vicinity of the mat. Most of our winter tee boxes are defined by tee markers no more than 8 feet apart again concentrating wear in a very small area. You can see quite clearly where the tee boxes have been week by week on many tees.

On that basis not using driving range style mats and placing the tee markers the whole width of the tee apart, giving players more options, spreads the wear more evenly and does not produce concentrated areas of wear. Given such a choice you will generally find that half the field favours the left half of the tee box and half the field favours the right half of the tee box therefore spreading not concentrating wear during play of the ball. Natural faders of the ball will generally use the opposite side of the tee box to natural drawers of the ball.

Obviously when using driving range style mats the entire field beats a path to the exact same spot where, by definition, the mat has been placed because the surface is susceptible to damage? Placing tee markers the whole width (within reason) of the tee apart means we all approach the job from different angles and we are using portable mats to prevent the taking of divots anyway.

In general the worst areas, and therefore the most susceptible to damage, are those getting to the tee, not the tee itself. Thankfully even those areas are now few and far between thanks to the fantastic work that Jim Grainger has done over the years draining what used to be low grade farmland and is now a very good golf course that has the potential to move to the next level. Jim’s endeavours in the past now allows us to leave the “driving range style mat” mentality way behind, everything about RGC should say quality………….not driving range.

Without Jim and his team’s hard work we would not be able to have the discussion, we would all be playing in wellies so many thanks to him/them.

Nigel Reed

Tripe.

Nigel Reed