Cover Story
to Manage Putting Surface Quality and Consistency By Brandon Horvath, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Turfgrass Pathology, The University of Tennessee
E
verywhere we look these days, an electronic device is capable of providing us with information to figure out where we are going, what we have scheduled for the day, what someone’s contact info is, what that person is doing/thinking/feeling, etc. Not only can we get information, but also companies can get information about us, particularly about what we like and might be more willing to consider in a purchase. Whether we like it or not, this era of big data is here to stay. The golf industry is no stranger to big data. Take ShotLink, for instance. Prior to ShotLink’s development, all of the statistics kept by the PGA Tour were done by hand using relatively easy calculations. Did the player hit his/her drive in the fairway (fairways hit %)? If the player was in a bunker, did he get up and down (sand save %)? On tournament course holes where most of the field could be expected to use a driver, driving distance was measured for balls hit into the fairway. Putts were counted (total putts/round), and the number of putts taken per green hit in regulation (putts/GIR) was considered the gold standard in determining who was Boss of the Moss.
All of this information is still being collected, but now the PGA Tour uses lasers, spotters and GPS-surveyed golf courses to collect more data… lots more. In 2011, the Tour decided to adopt the statistic called “strokes gained,” which represents a measure based on the comparison of the player to the field at a given putting distance. A positive measure meant that regardless of the distance to the hole that the player played from, he/she was able to take fewer strokes on average than the field. Similarly, a negative number meant that the player was losing strokes to the field. This data wasn’t nearly as easy to capture until the PGA Tour started measuring every shot on the golf course using ShotLink. Enter big data. We are also beginning to see the use of technologies that fit in the big-data category in golf course management. These technologies include moisture sensors, turf-quality measurements and GPSbased mapping of all this data. To effectively use these tools to make management interventions on the golf course, turf managers must be prepared to deal with the amount of data and what the data means.
Moisture meters Available today are several moisture meters, which measure the amount of water in the soil solution. For turf management, the meter should either use a TDR probe or a Theta probe. The TDR probe’s method can be prone to some inaccuracy from dissolved salts in the soil solution (like fertilizer salts), but as long as salt is not a major issue for you, the inaccuracy is relative and won’t affect your overall management decisions. The Theta probe is immune to the salt issues, but it tends to cost a bit more. These instruments range in cost from ~$600 to $1,800 depending upon the features, type of probe and software that might be included to assist with map development from a GPS unit tethered to the meter. I recommend a probe size of 2" to 3", depending on the depth of the turf roots and the moisture you are trying to manage for plant growth. When a dry period is predicted, let your greens dry down, and take regular measurements of all of the areas where you first see wilt or any other spots that cause problems. As the greens dry down, take note of when you spot the first sign of wilt and what the percent
Turf-quality sensors, like this NDVI sensor that is connected to a GPS unit, can be used to measure how “green” the turf is and detect signs of stress before they are visible. Simpler models are now available for superintendents as costs decline.
22
TENNESSEE TURFGRASS April/May 2014 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com