Spikes; Soft or Metal?

[jamo]

I beleive that golf carts have done far more damage to the courses than spikes could ever do.

That I will agree with, but that's mostly for my overall dislike of carts, not for any reasons about spikes.

[HoosierGolfer]

I played yesterday evening and I wish I had taken my camera. My playing partner and I were making some observations while on the green's, which were damp from all the rain we have been receiving and he was actually leaving much deeper marks with his "soft" spikes. Nice round quarter sized marks or indentations everywhere he stepped versus my little holes from the metal spikes. After just a couple of minutes, both sets of marks would disappear almost entirely.
Just to note also; I change my shoes at the first tee when I play and anyone that would walk inside the clubhouse with steel spikes should get thrown out. Bottom line for me is that they are allowed where I play so I will wear them for now. There is about 100 rounds a day played at my home course and with a couple of dozen people wearing steel there is nothing noticable happening on the greens and many of these players have been wearing steel much longer than I have. Everyone has the right to their opinion on this topic and I respect everyones. Thanks for the replies.

[Fourputt]

Actually the true damage to the greens from steel spikes isn't that immediate. What has been found by actual research is that the steel spikes tear open the roots of the grass plant, opening an avenue for disease to attack the plant. It was shown that several grass blights and fungi were more harmful to turf which was bruised and torn by steel golf spikes than to turf trafficked by other types of soles. It was that research which started the real conversion to soft spikes, not simple day to day visible scuffing.

[HoosierGolfer]

Actually the true damage to the greens from steel spikes isn't that immediate. What has been found by actual research is that the steel spikes tear open the roots of the grass plant, opening an avenue for disease to attack the plant. It was shown that several grass blights and fungi were more harmful to turf which was bruised and torn by steel golf spikes than to turf trafficked by other types of soles. It was that research which started the real conversion to soft spikes, not simple day to day visible scuffing.

I really don't have the desire for any sort of debate on this subject and I have been around the game for nearly thirty five years and I remember the whole debate back when soft spikes first came out. The PGA Pro at our course, as I stated in a couple of prior posts, has been a PGA professional almost as long as I have been alive (48) and he mows the greens almost everyday as he has done since the course opened in 59' and his observation does not support this "actual research". Our greens right now are disease and fungus free. As he and I talked about this subject once again just this morning he pointed out that there have been several "old timers" at the course that have in fact never made the switch to solf spikes which was his reason for continuing to stock them. He noted also that they have become harder to find in some cases but he has always been able to stock them and while not really encouraging their use to everyone, he has always allowed their use and he intends to continue to do so.

We are also keeping in mind that this course is not Pebble Beach in terms of number of rounds played per day or per year but it does see its fair share of play day in and day out for a very rural country course. As the owner also pointed out to me, this is another reason why it is nice to live in America. If you own the course, you get to make the rules and in fifty one years in the golf business, he has never received a single complaint about the use of metal spikes on the course. The clubhouse is another story and one must suffer the wife of the owners raft for wearing them inside. Like I said before, I respect everyones opinion and both myself and our pro/owner have enjoyed following this thread and it has served its purpose, which was to hear the thoughts of others. Thanks to those that posted and kept the bashing/bad mouthing to a minimal. It was much appreciated. This pretty well sums it up from me and my thoughts have been made as well as your thoughts. Thank you!

[Shanks A Million]

I really don't have the desire for any sort of debate on this subject and I have been around the game for nearly thirty five years and I remember the whole debate back when soft spikes first came out. The PGA Pro at our course, as I stated in a couple of prior posts, has been a PGA professional almost as long as I have been alive (48) and he mows the greens almost everyday as he has done since the course opened in 59' and his observation does not support this "actual research". Our greens right now are disease and fungus free. As he and I talked about this subject once again just this morning he pointed out that there have been several "old timers" at the course that have in fact never made the switch to solf spikes which was his reason for continuing to stock them. He noted also that they have become harder to find in some cases but he has always been able to stock them and while not really encouraging their use to everyone, he has always allowed their use and he intends to continue to do so.

Ignorance truly is bliss. Despite all of the published evidence people have pointed out, your best defense is that "he's been a pro for 50 years, and he owns the course." Well, good for him. Maybe one day ya'll up there in "east central Indiana" will get that newfangled color television too. The point is, just because some backwater range pro says metal spikes are better is not a very good argument. Many of us live minutes from dozens, if not hundreds of golf courses, many of which contest tour events and majors. Sure, it sounds ignorant for me to call you backwater hicks, but you're the ones telling us we don't know what's right.

[James_Black]

Ignorance truly is bliss. Despite all of the published evidence people have pointed out, your best defense is that "he's been a pro for 50 years, and he owns the course." Well, good for him. Maybe one day ya'll up there in "east central Indiana" will get that newfangled color television too. The point is, just because some backwater range pro says metal spikes are better is not a very good argument. Many of us live minutes from dozens, if not hundreds of golf courses, many of which contest tour events and majors. Sure, it sounds ignorant for me to call you backwater hicks, but you're the ones telling us we don't know what's right.

no need to start name-calling.....

And I'd side with the guy who's been working there for 50 years, I think he'd get more info over that period of time than any other study. Maybe steel spikes do affect some types of grass, maybe that course was lucky.

[Fat Slice]

Good idea. Not.

[Shanks A Million]

no need to start name-calling.....

Again, my problem is not with that, but rather his discrediting the information of several pros here, some with many years of experience as well. I'm defending these people. You can't just discredit study after study with anecdotal evidence.

[James_Black]

Again, my problem is not with that, but rather his discrediting the information of several pros here, some with many years of experience as well. I'm defending these people. You can't just discredit study after study with anecdotal evidence.

50 years of greenskeeping is a reliable source, if I see a greenskeeper during the week I'll ask them about it.

[iacas]

I really don't have the desire for any sort of debate on this subject

C'mon,

you started the thread . Clearly you wanted some "sort of debate on this subject."

The PGA Pro at our course, as I stated in a couple of prior posts, has been a PGA professional almost as long as I have been alive (48) and he mows the greens almost everyday as he has done since the course opened in 59' and his observation does not support this "actual research".

So one guy beats the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent scientifically determining these kinds of things? Yeah, I'll believe that... or not, no. He's wrong. It's that simple. Nick Faldo's wrong about the ball flight laws and he's a six-time major champion.

Like I said before, I respect everyones opinion

The problem is that you are the chaps with an opinion, while everyone else is not only sharing their opinions but the science that backs those opinions.

I played golf at a country club when the switch was made. I was amazed at how quickly the greens improved (and how much better my ankles felt after a round of golf). There's my opinion. The science is pretty easy to find. What your owner does at his course is fine.

[trumpetgolf]

C'mon,

+1

I hate when people ask a question, get an answer supported by research or an answer from an expert, and then totally disregard the answer based on anecdotal evidence. In general, research doesn't lie and experts are experts for a reason. The Pro can do whatever he wants, but the reality is he's not helping his course. The fact that he's been doing it for 50 years just gives me the impression that he formed his opinions before research was done and doesn't like change.

[Shanks A Million]

+1

Hell yeah. Although everyone does it. Take, for example, that the United States' healthcare system is ranked very low by the WHO, but people insist it must be good because they like it, or because they think other countries ration care. It's all hyperbole. There is some rationing in countries like Canada (the extreme in one direction, it's not legal to have private healthcare), and there's some people left out to die in the U.S. (the extreme in the other direction). But few realize that nations like Germany and England have both public

and private healthcare systems, and focus solely on the idea that these nations ration care (even if you were denied care by the government, you could just buy your own private care!) The point I'm trying to make is, people ignore inconvenient facts to make their point. We have entire jobs dedicated to it: lawyers and politicians.

[Titleist_ProV1x]

I played golf at a country club when the switch was made. I was amazed at how quickly the greens improved (and how much better my ankles felt after a round of golf).

+1 The greens at my club have never looked better since the switch, not to mention how much better the ball rolls

[Fourputt]

C'mon,

+1 from me too Erik. The greens on my home course are fantastic. We get as many as 145,000 golfers a year through our facility, and the change in green condition since the banning of steel spikes is like night and day. Now they can be cut, rolled and maintained at 11+ on the Stimpmeter, without dead spots, patching, etc. Before we were lucky to have them at 8, with a couple of tournaments a year where they cut them closer to 10, then had to pray that they didn't start to die before they could let them grow out again.

[HoosierGolfer]

Ignorance truly is bliss. Despite all of the published evidence people have pointed out, your best defense is that "he's been a pro for 50 years, and he owns the course." Well, good for him. Maybe one day ya'll up there in "east central Indiana" will get that newfangled color television too. The point is, just because some backwater range pro says metal spikes are better is not a very good argument. Many of us live minutes from dozens, if not hundreds of golf courses, many of which contest tour events and majors. Sure, it sounds ignorant for me to call you backwater hicks, but you're the ones telling us we don't know what's right.

I really don't appreciate the personal attack. I am entitled to my opinion as is the course owner. You don't have to like it or agree, but the personal attacks are unwarranted and uncalled for.

I NEVER ONCE disputed any of the information posted by others.

[TakeDeadAim]

nothing like crawling back to the 20th century...