An unmarked Sod Farm under the new rules?

[Newby]

But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

[James the Hogan Fan]

> @Newby said:

> But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

 

But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

 

Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

 

A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

 

 

[Mr. Bean]

> @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > @Newby said:

> > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

>

> But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

>

> Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

>

> A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

>

>

 

So, a chipping green may be a putting green even if it is not prepared for putting? Wow.

 

I guess you meant that a chipping green may be a Wrong Green and there you are correct.

[Mr. Bean]

> @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > @Newby said:

> > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

>

> But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

>

But that is the whole point! Sod farm is NOT prepared for any kind of play not even putting. That is why it should be marked as GUR to protect it. But in no way that can be a Wrong Green.

[antip]

> @Newby said:

> But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

 

I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

[Newby]

Such areas should have been GUR play prohibited or now NPZ.

[antip]

> @Newby said:

> Such areas should have been GUR play prohibited or now NPZ.

Sure, a local rule declaring them so is one approach. But they are already covered in the Rules without a local rule being put in place via the definitions and 13.1f. These are different situations than the original post, where there was a distinct lack of clarity.

[Imp]

> @antip said:

> > @Newby said:

> > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

>

> I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

 

USGA doesn't have rules authority in Japan.

 

--kC

[Newby]

> @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > @Newby said:

> > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

>

> But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

>

> Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

>

> A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

>

>

 

13.1f says "Putting greens are specially prepared for playing the ball along the ground and there is a flagstick **for the hole** on each putting green, ..."

This clearly shows the requirement for a hole.

[Mr. Bean]

> @Imp said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> >

> > I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

>

> USGA doesn't have rules authority in Japan.

>

> --kC

 

So..?

[Mr. Bean]

> @antip said:

> > @Newby said:

> > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

>

> I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

 

We are talking about a sod farm, that is, a place where grass is grown for later use in another place. Japanese greens with or without hole have absolutely nothing to do with this. This is a case where solid common sense is allowed...

[Mr. Bean]

> @Newby said:

> > @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> >

> > But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

> >

> > Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

> >

> > A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

> >

> >

>

> 13.1f says "Putting greens are specially prepared for playing the ball along the ground and there is a flagstick **for the hole** on each putting green, ..."

> This clearly shows the requirement for a hole.

 

I think we are on our way to an area where Rules and 'this area needs to be marked as GUR' seem to collide.

 

A practice green with no holes (temporarily) apparently is a Wrong Green. Such a green with no holes permanently (they must exist at least in Japan...) must also be a Wrong Green as it is a practice green although that does not fulfil the letter of 13.1f.

[Sawgrass]

I don't see how a "sod farm," which in my world is never intended to be either a practice area or as a legitimate putting green, qualifies as a wrong green. (BTW I've seen many legitimate practice greens with no holes dug, only target stakes put in.) IMO it's simply a farm area which grows grass that may be later moved to a practice green or putting green. IMO the length the grass is cut to on the farm is not meaningful. But, as I've said before, a simple statement from the Committee would stop all the teeth gnashing.

[antip]

> @Imp said:

> > @antip said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> >

> > I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

>

> USGA doesn't have rules authority in Japan.

>

> --kC

 

Quite true. But this comment doesn't have relevance. Precisely the same rules book operates in Japan, and everywhere else in the world.> @Newby said:

> > @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> >

> > But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

> >

> > Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

> >

> > A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

> >

> >

>

> 13.1f says "Putting greens are specially prepared for playing the ball along the ground and there is a flagstick **for the hole** on each putting green, ..."

> This clearly shows the requirement for a hole.

That is not R13.1f. There is no such reference in 13.1f, a rule that tells you precisely what to do when a ball is on a wrong green. And a green prepared for putting meets the definition of wrong green even when not in use. The definition of wrong green is the key issue, not what you have quoted from the general introduction to the rule - that cannot over-ride the definition or the definitions are useless.

 

PS/EDIT I have no idea how my responses to two different posts ended in the same post.

[Imp]

Antip, while you're right it's not in R13.1.f, it's in the introduction to the rule at the top setting the groundwork for which the rule applies. In addition, the actual definition of putting green, states:

> The putting green for a hole contains the hole into which the player tries to play a ball.

Wrong green is defined as:

>Wrong Green

>Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

>The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

>The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

>All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

>Wrong greens are part of the general area.

 

For it to be a putting green, I would argue there has to be a hole in it, per the definition. A sod farm doesn't meet the definition of a putting green due to the lack of a hole. It doesn't meet the definition of wrong green because a) no hole (definition of putting green), b) not a temporary green intended for play with a hole in it, or c) nor is it a practice green.

 

--kC

[antip]

> @Imp said:

> Antip, while you're right it's not in R13.1.f, it's in the introduction to the rule at the top setting the groundwork for which the rule applies. In addition, the actual definition of putting green, states:

> > The putting green for a hole contains the hole into which the player tries to play a ball.

> Wrong green is defined as:

> >Wrong Green

> >Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> >The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> >The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> >All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> >Wrong greens are part of the general area.

>

> For it to be a putting green, I would argue there has to be a hole in it, per the definition. A sod farm doesn't meet the definition of a putting green due to the lack of a hole. It doesn't meet the definition of wrong green because a) no hole (definition of putting green), b) not a temporary green intended for play with a hole in it, or c) nor is it a practice green.

>

> --kC

 

@Imp

My point relates not to the original post (sod farm) but to the different example that I think Newby identified along the way - a nursery green specifically maintained as a perfect putting surface - groomed exactly like a putting green but is not in play and my different Japanese examples - courses that have two perfect greens on every hole, one with summer grass and one with winter grass but only one is in play as a putting green at any one time. These 'second' greens, and the nursery green maintained as a perfect putting surface are not currently operating as "putting greens" but they still meet the definition of wrong green. And yes, such greens are not explicitly listed in the wrong green definition - that definition, like many others in the current book, is not exhaustive of the possible inclusions, it is just giving the most common examples.

 

Making the point differently: a green does not fail the definition of wrong green just because it doesn't have a hole.

[Imp]

I flatly disagree, per the definitions of each. For something to be a wrong green it must be one of three things (no more, no less. The number shall be three - it doesn't say "Wrong greens include, but not limited to" and is devoid of another bullet that would say something more generic allowing for additional items, like, "and other such greens" or "etc..."). In this instance, "include" means "are".

 

http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=73

 

>Wrong Green

> Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> * The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> * The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> * All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> Wrong greens are part of the general area.

 

http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=54

 

> Putting Green (Pertinent part of the definition...)

> The putting green for a hole **contains the hole ** into which the player tries to play a ball.

No hole? Not a putting green. Soup.

 

--kC

[Mr. Bean]

> @Imp said:

> I flatly disagree, per the definitions of each. For something to be a wrong green it must be one of three things (no more, no less. The number shall be three - it doesn't say "Wrong greens include, but not limited to" and is devoid of another bullet that would say something more generic allowing for additional items, like, "and other such greens" or "etc..."). In this instance, "include" means "are".

>

> http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=73

>

> >Wrong Green

> > Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> > * The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> > * The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> > * All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> > Wrong greens are part of the general area.

>

> http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=54

>

> > Putting Green (Pertinent part of the definition...)

> > The putting green for a hole **contains the hole ** into which the player tries to play a ball.

> No hole? Not a putting green. Soup.

>

> --kC

 

The original issue whether a sod farm qualifies as a Wrong Green is not about a green to be a putting green or not. A Wrong Green has been defined in the Definitions and it includes all kinds of greens prepared for play or practice, with or without holes.

[Newby]

> @antip said:

> > @Imp said:

> > > @antip said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> > >

> > > I see no authority for this restriction that you propose. In parts of the world (eg parts of Japan) they have two greens per hole. One is for summer and one is for winter. The ones not in use are not DQd from being a wrong green because they have no hole. Ditto for a nursery green, unmarked, that is obviously groomed as a putting green. IMO, absolutely no grey area there.

> >

> > USGA doesn't have rules authority in Japan.

> >

> > --kC

>

> Quite true. But this comment doesn't have relevance. Precisely the same rules book operates in Japan, and everywhere else in the world.> @Newby said:

> > > @"James the Hogan Fan" said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > But this area hasn't got a hole in it so isn't prepared for nor intended to be used for putting.

> > >

> > > But if it were cut to the height of a putting green, it is prepared for putting, albeit not in-situ

> > >

> > > Also, suppose a hole has two greens, surely the green not in use on a particular day is a wrong green regardless of the presense of a hole in it.

> > >

> > > A wrong putting green can also be a ”chipping green” which may not be prepared for putting anyway.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > 13.1f says "Putting greens are specially prepared for playing the ball along the ground and there is a flagstick **for the hole** on each putting green, ..."

> > This clearly shows the requirement for a hole.

> That is not R13.1f. There is no such reference in 13.1f, a rule that tells you precisely what to do when a ball is on a wrong green. And a green prepared for putting meets the definition of wrong green even when not in use. The definition of wrong green is the key issue, not what you have quoted from the general introduction to the rule - that cannot over-ride the definition or the definitions are useless.

>

> PS/EDIT I have no idea how my responses to two different posts ended in the same post.

 

No idea how the **.1f. **got there. It is simply in the intro to rule 13.

[Imp]

> @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > @Imp said:

> > I flatly disagree, per the definitions of each. For something to be a wrong green it must be one of three things (no more, no less. The number shall be three - it doesn't say "Wrong greens include, but not limited to" and is devoid of another bullet that would say something more generic allowing for additional items, like, "and other such greens" or "etc..."). In this instance, "include" means "are".

> >

> > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=73

> >

> > >Wrong Green

> > > Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> > > * The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> > > * The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> > > * All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> > > Wrong greens are part of the general area.

> >

> > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=54

> >

> > > Putting Green (Pertinent part of the definition...)

> > > The putting green for a hole **contains the hole ** into which the player tries to play a ball.

> > No hole? Not a putting green. Soup.

> >

> > --kC

>

> The original issue whether a sod farm qualifies as a Wrong Green is not about a green to be a putting green or not. A Wrong Green has been defined in the Definitions and it includes all kinds of greens prepared for play or practice, with or without holes.

I quoted the definition of Wrong Green. I quoted the only three conditions listed in the new rule.

 

Show me in the rules where it states how you read it. Please, quote it. Highlight it. I don't see "all kinds of greens". I see two very specific types in the 1st two bullets, they MUST be **putting** greens (and the new definition of a putting green is **it contains a hole**. The third and last test for a Wrong Green are practice greens unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

 

If the Sod Farm were a practice green, You'd have a point. But, per the discussion, it does not appear to be.

 

So, I kindly request you to show me in the rules where it says "all kinds of greens" other than "putting greens (which must have holes into which the player tries to play a ball)."

 

--kC

[Mr. Bean]

> @Imp said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @Imp said:

> > > I flatly disagree, per the definitions of each. For something to be a wrong green it must be one of three things (no more, no less. The number shall be three - it doesn't say "Wrong greens include, but not limited to" and is devoid of another bullet that would say something more generic allowing for additional items, like, "and other such greens" or "etc..."). In this instance, "include" means "are".

> > >

> > > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=73

> > >

> > > >Wrong Green

> > > > Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> > > > * The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> > > > * The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> > > > * All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> > > > Wrong greens are part of the general area.

> > >

> > > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=54

> > >

> > > > Putting Green (Pertinent part of the definition...)

> > > > The putting green for a hole **contains the hole ** into which the player tries to play a ball.

> > > No hole? Not a putting green. Soup.

> > >

> > > --kC

> >

> > The original issue whether a sod farm qualifies as a Wrong Green is not about a green to be a putting green or not. A Wrong Green has been defined in the Definitions and it includes all kinds of greens prepared for play or practice, with or without holes.

> I quoted the definition of Wrong Green. I quoted the only three conditions listed in the new rule.

>

> Show me in the rules where it states how you read it. Please, quote it. Highlight it. I don't see "all kinds of greens". I see two very specific types in the 1st two bullets, they MUST be **putting** greens (and the new definition of a putting green is **it contains a hole**. The third and last test for a Wrong Green are practice greens unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

>

> If the Sod Farm were a practice green, You'd have a point. But, per the discussion, it does not appear to be.

>

> So, I kindly request you to show me in the rules where it says "all kinds of greens" other than "putting greens (which must have holes into which the player tries to play a ball)."

>

> --kC

 

Here is the entire text of the Definition of Wrong Green. Please read all of it.

 

'Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing.

 

Wrong greens include:

 

The greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

**All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching**, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

Wrong greens are part of the general area.'

[Newby]

Can the OP tell us if it is used or intended to be used for practice?

[HitEmTrue]

> @Imp said:

> > @"Mr. Bean" said:

> > > @Imp said:

> > > I flatly disagree, per the definitions of each. For something to be a wrong green it must be one of three things (no more, no less. The number shall be three - it doesn't say "Wrong greens include, but not limited to" and is devoid of another bullet that would say something more generic allowing for additional items, like, "and other such greens" or "etc..."). In this instance, "include" means "are".

> > >

> > > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=73

> > >

> > > >Wrong Green

> > > > Any green on the course other than the putting green for the hole the player is playing. Wrong greens include:

> > > > * The putting greens for all other holes that the player is not playing at the time,

> > > > * The normal putting green for a hole where a temporary green is being used, and

> > > > * All practice greens for putting, chipping or pitching, unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

> > > > Wrong greens are part of the general area.

> > >

> > > http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/rules-of-golf/rules-and-interpretations.html#!ruletype=fr&section=definitions&subrulenum=54

> > >

> > > > Putting Green (Pertinent part of the definition...)

> > > > The putting green for a hole **contains the hole ** into which the player tries to play a ball.

> > > No hole? Not a putting green. Soup.

> > >

> > > --kC

> >

> > The original issue whether a sod farm qualifies as a Wrong Green is not about a green to be a putting green or not. A Wrong Green has been defined in the Definitions and it includes all kinds of greens prepared for play or practice, with or without holes.

> I quoted the definition of Wrong Green. I quoted the only three conditions listed in the new rule.

>

> Show me in the rules where it states how you read it. Please, quote it. Highlight it. I don't see "all kinds of greens". I see two very specific types in the 1st two bullets, they MUST be **putting** greens (and the new definition of a putting green is **it contains a hole**. The third and last test for a Wrong Green are practice greens unless the Committee excludes them by Local Rule.

>

> If the Sod Farm were a practice green, You'd have a point. But, per the discussion, it does not appear to be.

>

> So, I kindly request you to show me in the rules where it says "all kinds of greens" other than "putting greens (which must have holes into which the player tries to play a ball)."

>

> --kC

 

Imp, the definition you gave was not for a putting green. It was “putting green for a hole”, and it is the definition for the putting green of a hole you that can actually be played. Some courses have practice putting greens with no holes...the flags stand on their own on the ground...and those practice greens meet the definition for wrong green.

[Newby]

> @HitEmTrue said:

Some courses have practice putting greens with no holes...the flags stand on their own on the ground...and those practice greens meet the definition for wrong green.

>

What has this got to do with the turf nursery in the OP?

[James the Hogan Fan]

> @Newby said:

> > @HitEmTrue said:

> Some courses have practice putting greens with no holes...the flags stand on their own on the ground...and those practice greens meet the definition for wrong green.

> >

> What has this got to do with the turf nursery in the OP?

 

One of the things was said that made a turf nursery not a green was a lack of a hole; the logic appeared that without a hole, the area was not specifically prepared for putting, without being so prepared it could not be a green, without being a green it could not be a wrong green.

 

He has provided examples of areas of closely mown grass without holes still beling treated as wrong greens.

 

Edit: which is to say, very little to do with the OP, but all to do with the last 30-odd posts about if a sod farm/turf nursery such as the OP’s were maintained to the standards of a putting green.

[rogolf]

I don't see how such a straight-forward question can migrate in so many directions. The answer was already provided - the Committee failed to mark it correctly as GUR/NPZ and/or failed to communicate it to the players.

[Augster]

There is NO WAY that sod farm is supposed to be chipped or pitched to.

 

No holes. No flag. Not allowed to putt, Chip, or pitch to. The only thing the sod farm has in common with a wrong green is that it is cut to green height. That’s it.

 

It’s a valid place to play from if it’s in bounds and hasn’t been declared a no play zone of some sort.

[antip]

> @rogolf said:

> I don't see how such a straight-forward question can migrate in so many directions. The answer was already provided - the Committee failed to mark it correctly as GUR/NPZ and/or failed to communicate it to the players.

 

Absolutely agree, the original question was answered fully and nothing in that appeared contentious IMO. Then another example was identified - of a nursery green with perfect putting conditions, groomed exactly as a putting green - and a separate discussion ensued about whether such a green is a wrong green. And respondents fall neatly into two camps. One group has fixated on the view that if it doesn't have a hole it cannot be a wrong green, and the other view (include me as a proud member) is there is nothing in the rules/definitions that requires a wrong green to have a hole. So it is a different question than the original and it has attracted sharply contrasting views - that makes it very interesting I think.

So the question: A course has a nursery green, and a number of second greens on some holes (one green used in winter and the other in summer) and all are prepared and maintained precisely the same as the greens that are in play. Only the greens in play have a hole in them. In the absence of any local rule, are the nursery green and the second greens (not in play) considered to be wrong greens - that is, if a ball in play comes to rest on such a green must the player play as lies or take relief under R13.1f?

[HitEmTrue]

> @Newby said:

> > @HitEmTrue said:

> Some courses have practice putting greens with no holes...the flags stand on their own on the ground...and those practice greens meet the definition for wrong green.

> >

> What has this got to do with the turf nursery in the OP?

 

Weren’t you saying that a green must have a hole in it to be a wrong green? Post #39?

 

I agree it has nothing to do with the sod farm. And I don’t think there is anything left to discuss on that situation.

[Newby]

A contact at the R&A says _"_If is not an area designed for or intended to be used for putting (albeit that the turf may at some point become part of a green), it is not a wrong green_." _

Unsurprisingly they go on to say _"_If the Club want to protect this, they should be declaring it as an ACC or ACC NPZ_".

_