Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: David_Tepper on February 11, 2012, 07:48:18 PM
-
Interesting column by John P. Newport in today's WSJ. It presents a nice contrast to the narrow-minded, stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently being promoted elsewhere on this website. ;)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203646004577213533058811256.html?mod=WSJ_hps_RIGHTTopCarousel_4
-
The correlation between the Reformation and the present state of golf is laughable. Luther did not want to leave the church, begin a new denomination, or have a different set of rules for different segments. He felt that the church should reform itself from within. He did not leave the church as much as the church left him by an act of a Papal Bull of excommunication. The result did not add Christians and most certainly created the deep divide in Christianity that exists today. I say this as a Lutheran Pastor. If anything the Reformation was a tragic necessity. Tragic because it spilt the church. Necesserary because it made some needed reforms. I would hope that changes in golf could be less contentious and more positive.
-
The idea that golf must grow, or die, is misguided -- it's an imperative of business school, for people who seek to make money off the game.
I hope that we do not change the game of golf just so some jackass MBA's can make a go of it.
-
The idea that golf must grow, or die, is misguided -- it's an imperative of business school, for people who seek to make money off the game.
I hope that we do not change the game of golf just so some jackass MBA's can make a go of it.
Tom,
Well said. When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee. ;) ;)
-
When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee
Quite frankly, that is hilarious.
-
Whenever any thing or any person or any institution thinks it needs to re-define itself, to find again the soul that it has lost, the times become, almost by necessity/definition, times of change and upheaval, of breaking ups and building anews. Whether or not that need is real, or justified, or even in anyone's best interest, seems almost besides the point -- especially in our day and age; we seem to be in love with the idea and the process of re-definition, of change -- as if nothing and no one is simply good or useful or meaningful just the way it/he is and has always been. So - they'll be those, the MBAs for example, who will try to drive this change in the way they want it to go; others have and will continue to shape it in the way they believe best. I think in this area I'm an existentialist, i.e. I believe that existence pre-dates essence; and so the essence of the game, its soul, will be precisely what we as individuals -- clients, architects, golfers -- decide to imbue it with.
Peter
-
When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee
Quite frankly, that is hilarious.
Except for the fact that a good cup of coffee is a lot easier to find these days. Oh, and the coffee market isn't retrenching.
-
Well, yeah. But the fact an entire industry has sprung up a round a cup of coffee is very funny to me.
-
The idea that golf must grow, or die, is misguided -- it's an imperative of business school, for people who seek to make money off the game.
I hope that we do not change the game of golf just so some jackass MBA's can make a go of it.
Tom,
Well said. When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee. ;) ;)
+1
on both counts
coming from three people who make their living" in" the game
too many trying to make their living "off" the game
-
“It presents a nice contrast to the narrow-minded, stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently being promoted elsewhere on this website. ”
Perhaps, but then you do play at Royal Dornoch which is in some ways can be described as ‘stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently’, so welcome to the club. Yet far more importantly it is a Scottish model course based upon the principles I hold dear and which you continue try to rubbish.
David you are a Cuckoo, a cuckoo in a Scottish nest, or perhaps just very, very, very narrow minded, certainly stilted not to mention parochial with a regressive view of others who you do not agree with you.
For someone who apparently loves the game of golf, who has a place beside a classic Scottish model, you seem rather fast to rubbish its golfing traditions. Living in Dornoch at times you must have realised the way many play the game in Scotland and the many old little gems of courses scattered all around the country, many as you put it regressive in their own way.
You do not insult me, but you are taking a swipe at the country you play golf in and the Scottish game, but then like some on this site it is more important to attack others for your own lack of balls in having a real opinion on golf, you know that regressive game you play on one of Scotland great old courses.
I think it speaks volumes about you more than me particularly as I have tried to leave on a friendly note but you threw it back in my face.
While you have brought up the subject, let’s look at my opinions which seem so distasteful to you.
Carts, - the game is some 600 years old carts are new approx. 60 years old – We play golf by the grace of God, but today if suffering from a medical ailment carts seem a good idea but to stay true to the game they should be made available for those who need them on medical grounds including age.
Side issues with or without cart tracks the course design must consider the use of carts and its additional cost to the wear and tear which far exceeds those of walking, plus hiding of the tracks if off the fairway.
What about the great advantage in the saving of energy by riding rather than walking, proved by that American scientific journal from 1920.
Distance Aids – my point being they are not required because the human mind and body takes over automatically you address the ball for the last time then take the shot. All previous input is null & void the moment your eyes finally focus on the ball and target just before you take your swing.
Technology/Long ball travel achieves little apart from flying over a course rendering much of it redundant, meaning the design, the long or short course, its hazards have been marginalised, yet the expense to design, build and maintenance still exists and has to be paid for. So why not roll back the ball, use technology to sustain the game and its equipment but limit the ball travel to circa 200 yards give or take. It will give us back our great courses as they were originally designed to play, add more spice to our golfing life by having to consider navigating around the ground hazards. The seeking and finding of options to overcome the designer clever little traps.
The Governing bodies for allowing cons like distance aids to enter the game, for lack of foresight re the consequences of their decisions and overall accountability for their said decisions.
I see nothing radical in any of the above, I do see it all having a major impact upon the game and GCA. In fact I see each in their own right as a great debating subject for the GCA.com DG
At least they are true genuine issues that have a major impact on the game of golf so are worth discussing in detail, more so than club listings, ratings or the many OT topics, but then that’s just my opinion.
So pray tell me David who really is responsible for the “narrow-minded, stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently being promoted elsewhere on this website. ”
-
When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee
Quite frankly, that is hilarious.
Except for the fact that a good cup of coffee is a lot easier to find these days. Oh, and the coffee market isn't retrenching.
I currently have a free desk at a client's office in midtown Manhattan where I go 2-3 days per week. I recently looked at getting my own office, but just could not pull the mental trigger at $1500+ per month in midtown Manhattan.
I will take some of the $18,000 of savings per year and have meetings at Starbucks when I work out of my apartment for $4.50 per meeting. ;)
I hope to use some of the remaining savings and play Mike Young and Tom Doak courses in the coming year. ;) ;)
In ten years of savings $18,000 per year, I will be 1/3 of the way to being able to afford a membership at Jeff Warne's club!!!
Mike Sweeney
Cornell MBA, 1989
Consumer of Fancy Coffee and Fancy Golf :D
-
Mike Sweeney
Cornell MBA, 1989
Consumer of Fancy Coffee and Fancy Golf :D
Are you a Cornell MBA, or a Cornell Jackass MBA?
I am pretty sure that I have been described as a jackass myself (although I am guessing Doak has as well).
I find the coffee analogy interesting. Some 20-25 years ago, lured by Starbucks marketing, I started drinking espresso...which led to purchasing an espresso machine.
Today I have evolved or devolved into buying green coffee from an internet business, http://www.sweetmarias.com/index.php, which I am guessing is not run by MBA's, jackass or otherwise, and roast my beans at home in 30 year old hot air popcorn popper I bought on ebay. I either drink espresso straight or coffee which I make hand poured through a filter.
I am pretty sure this makes me a coffee minimalist...but I am also sure I got here because of growth in the coffee industry....without which who knows what this guy who travels and buys high end beans and sells them through a website would be doing now?
I cannot disagree that the money driven imperative for growth is disheartening at times....but it's also a driver for things good as well. Without a boom in golf 20 years ago would a place like Bandon have been possible?
-
When we think how much the MBA's tried to make golf into a corporate business just look at what they did to the cup of coffee
Quite frankly, that is hilarious.
Except for the fact that a good cup of coffee is a lot easier to find these days. Oh, and the coffee market isn't retrenching.
I currently have a free desk at a client's office in midtown Manhattan where I go 2-3 days per week. I recently looked at getting my own office, but just could not pull the mental trigger at $1500+ per month in midtown Manhattan.
I will take some of the $18,000 of savings per year and have meetings at Starbucks when I work out of my apartment for $4.50 per meeting. ;)
I hope to use some of the remaining savings and play Mike Young and Tom Doak courses in the coming year. ;) ;)
In ten years of savings $18,000 per year, I will be 1/3 of the way to being able to afford a membership at Jeff Warne's club!!!
Mike Sweeney
Cornell MBA, 1989
Consumer of Fancy Coffee and Fancy Golf :D
Better check that math again
oversubscribed items go up faster than coffee
also don't forget to deduct the cost of Starbux coffe from your savings ;)
-
OK OK OK...maybe MBA was a bad choice of words...but jack ass wasn't.
Another way of putting it for me is:
Maybe, just maybe, our institutions for higher learning have put out people who view most businesses as growth businesses because they are in a position to have to make money for the shareholders and they pursue growth as much as they do profits. For a long time dividends had as much bearing on investments as growth. Over the last 25 years people have tried to take the sport of golf and make it into one of these growth oriented businesses and in doing so they did not worry about the sustainability of the game. (Same for coffee).
Anyway, the last 25 years were the exception and not the norm for golf. Clubs and the industry need to realize they need to take care of the members or players they now have and quit worrying about how to put all their efforts into growing more members or players. If they do this the game will take care of itself. Sure there will not be as many courses or equipment companies or golf cars but what is left will become solid. Pros need to be allowed to be pros again and golf supts need to understand and WANT to be golf supts ( the good ones already do) instead of vying for an office at the clubhouse. PGM programs need to go away and the golf associations need to reevaluate their purpose. And in doing all of this, if their are some MBA's in the mix then maybe the shoe fits. ;) ;)
-
I have always been struck by how different threads on this site intermingle ....
reference the Bill Murray, PB Saturday and growing the game via entertainment threads
-
Anyway, the last 25 years were the exception and not the norm for golf.
Sorry to pick on you Big Guy but here goes....
25 years ago for me takes me back to 1987 (Jeff check my math!!) and I was a "member" at the newly re-designed Stone Harbor Golf Club:
(http://www.gapgolf.org/i/p382_01.jpg)
It was a funky time for architecture and in that market, Stone Harbor was the first of a new wave of for-profit golf, either country club for a day or relatively cheap membership which Stone Harbor was as a "private" club.
No membership meetings, just join and write a check.
Before this, the only "private" clubs in that market were Atlantic City, Wildwood and Greate Bay, which were/are all pre-war courses from some now well known designers.
My Dad did not play golf, so I did not have the connections to join those clubs and they really did not want young guys at that time.
As a consumer of golf, Stone Harbor despite is flaws, changed the market to what it is today in that area. It is very affordable, there are some private but very accessible clubs, there are some very good courses, there are some average courses and it is clearly an overbuilt market.
The "Soul of the Game" are guys (and girls) who play golf, not the guys who run golf.
As a consumer of golf, it is the GREATEST time in golf:
* Many great courses are now accessible, Atlantic City is public,
* You can find places to play in 4 hours, it simply cost more money,
* Memberships are more diverse,
* There are walking oriented courses, there are riding oriented courses, there are caddy oriented courses.
The "Soul of the Game" golfer (me) has more choices than ever.
The fact that a second tier country club now has to scramble to make their number IS good for golf as it will force people to think about ways to make the game "better". That game may be different than what I and many people here want, but now we have the ability to choose.
Twenty six years ago, I basically had to play Avalon Golf Club and The Jersey Devil (predecessor on the same land as Stone Harbor), and those Doak 3's get old pretty quickly.
That crazy hole above, as bad as it was now with hindsight, may have kept me in the game because it opened up options for me as the son of a non-golfer.
-
Anyway, the last 25 years were the exception and not the norm for golf.
Sorry to pick on you Big Guy but here goes....
25 years ago for me takes me back to 1987 (Jeff check my math!!) and I was a "member" at the newly re-designed Stone Harbor Golf Club:
(http://www.gapgolf.org/i/p382_01.jpg)
It was a funky time for architecture and in that market, Stone Harbor was the first of a new wave of for-profit golf, either country club for a day or relatively cheap membership which Stone Harbor was as a "private" club.
No membership meetings, just join and write a check.
Before this, the only "private" clubs in that market were Atlantic City, Wildwood and Greate Bay, which were/are all pre-war courses from some now well known designers.
My Dad did not play golf, so I did not have the connections to join those clubs and they really did not want young guys at that time.
As a consumer of golf, Stone Harbor despite is flaws, changed the market to what it is today in that area. It is very affordable, there are some private but very accessible clubs, there are some very good courses, there are some average courses and it is clearly an overbuilt market.
The "Soul of the Game" are guys (and girls) who play golf, not the guys who run golf.
As a consumer of golf, it is the GREATEST time in golf:
* Many great courses are now accessible, Atlantic City is public,
* You can find places to play in 4 hours, it simply cost more money,
* Memberships are more diverse,
* There are walking oriented courses, there are riding oriented courses, there are caddy oriented courses.
The "Soul of the Game" golfer (me) has more choices than ever.
The fact that a second tier country club now has to scramble to make their number IS good for golf as it will force people to think about ways to make the game "better". That game may be different than what I and many people here want, but now we have the ability to choose.
Twenty six years ago, I basically had to play Avalon Golf Club and The Jersey Devil (predecessor on the same land as Stone Harbor), and those Doak 3's get old pretty quickly.
That crazy hole above, as bad as it was now with hindsight, may have kept me in the game because it opened up options for me as the son of a non-golfer.
Mike - Great post. Right on the money. :)
-
Great post Mike. Spot on!
-
Just to lighten things up a little part of the soul of the game that is perhaps bleeding away is the recognition that it is a GAME.
I love this quote from Robert Rock's caddy after his player won at Abu Dabai:
Apparently well versed at the dying art of the good night out the caddy said " this is a win he won't remember for a long time."
I am not sure this speaks to turning golf into a bottom line game but we sure need to keep in mind that we need to remember to transmit an attitude about playing the game and not just the standards and facts and limitations plus i just wanted to find a way to get that quote out in the treehouse
-
I will take some of the $18,000 of savings per year and have meetings at Starbucks when I work out of my apartment for $4.50 per meeting. ;)
Mike Sweeney
Cornell MBA, 1989
Consumer of Fancy Coffee and Fancy Golf :D
No surprise that you only pick up the tab for YOUR coffee. ;)
-
Probably very true for the home US market but does that really apply to the rest of the world?
So perhaps a certain individual should have posted a different heading ‘The Battle for the Soul of the US Game’.
I hope that battle is not lost, but wonder at times when I see so many Americans invading our Scottish courses. However, you do miss out on some of our real gems sticking to TOC, Dornoch, Cruden. By revisiting these courses seems to indicate that your soul is too deeply hidden to venture to far into the unknown in case of disappointment.
-
Melvin, I think you were looking in the mirror when you described David. the man you describedis not the David I know and friends with.
-
Tiger
Enjoy being anti-Melvyn, but do so because you do not like my opinions on golf don't start copying some of your friends, it makes you look as petty as them.
Between us let’s just stick to the Golf
-
The idea that golf must grow, or die, is misguided -- it's an imperative of business school, for people who seek to make money off the game.
I hope that we do not change the game of golf just so some jackass MBA's can make a go of it.
Tom,
I wasn't aware the Mosaic Company doesn't hire MBA's? ;)
-
Mr. Morrow please read your post in direct response to David Tepper. It is not anti you. I am defending a friend you insulted. I would rather you not say something wrong and ugly about a very nice man who happens to love Scotland and golf as much as anyone on here. As to your last point, I feel the american style of design is what most in England, Europe and Asia have bought and paid for the last 20 years. I do not think that is a good thing. It is just the type of course and style of play in demand on the world stage.
-
I attach him, that’s priceless, just look at the his opening lines 'It presents a nice contrast to the narrow-minded, stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently being promoted elsewhere on this website'.
Tiger, there is not much more to say, defend away
-
Anyway, the last 25 years were the exception and not the norm for golf.
Sorry to pick on you Big Guy but here goes....
The "Soul of the Game" are guys (and girls) who play golf, not the guys who run golf.
As a consumer of golf, it is the GREATEST time in golf:
* Many great courses are now accessible, Atlantic City is public,
* You can find places to play in 4 hours, it simply cost more money,
* Memberships are more diverse,
* There are walking oriented courses, there are riding oriented courses, there are caddy oriented courses.
The "Soul of the Game" golfer (me) has more choices than ever.
Mike Sweeney,
You know you can pick on me anytime you wish....ya'll been doing it since 1861.
Everything you state above is true and I agree with you. But all of what you say is also created by excess product. Some of that will go away because many of the "deals" you see today are guys just trying to hang in there but eventually some will cave. A good owner once told me that you aren't making money in this game until you have guys complaining about having to wait . Now that scenario might not be what we want but the excess and the little kinks are going to go away and the free enterprise system will prevail. ( I learned that word "free enterprise" in one of those MBA books and thought I would impress you with it).
And"hell no we ain't forgot" ;D ;D
-
From John Paul's article:
"Two million U.S. jobs are now tied to golf, according to an industry lobbying consortium called We Are Golf, and those businesses are desperate to reverse their losses and expand."
Looking at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are about 140 million employed people in the U.S., meaning over 1 percent of people working in the country are directly or indirectly supporting the golf industry. Does that sound reasonable to you? Does a fully functional society devote 1 percent of its workers to the seventh or eighth most popular sport?
There's no way the game of golf will grow, at least economically, in the next twenty years. No chance; forget it. The luxurious golf life we have come to enjoy and expect will be scaled back. Less money will be spent, and less people will be employed by golf. Mike Sweeney is right - golf has never been better; and may never get more luxurious and varied than now.
Add golf to the list of nonessential industries that will wither as the world deals with overwhelming debt and dwindling natural resources.
-
As far as business (management companies) ruining the soul of golf, I don't think so overall. The mom and pop model got taken over for good reason in corner stores, coffee shops, lumber yards, 5 and dimes, etc. While free markets are brutal, making operations more efficient isn't killing golf.
Frankly, I wonder if global warmig (no more afternoon rounds) laziness, etc. aren't killing golf more. The essense of golf still lies in the weather, nature, comraderie, etc. or at least as close an approximation of it as we can get. Can't kill those things off via corporations running golf courses.
As to individual courses, I always thought that without a great site, and beautiful day, most courses wouldn't have soul if they hired Aretha Franklin to sing from hidden bushes behind the first tee.
-
As to individual courses, I always thought that without a great site, and beautiful day, most courses wouldn't have soul if they hired Aretha Franklin to sing from hidden bushes behind the first tee.
I'd have to disagree.
We've had some of the best sites in golf development history become available in the last 20 years, while the "soul of the game" has slipped considerably.
Some of the most "soulful" courses I've played have been on borderline sites that were populated by players who were full of soul and love for the game, and tack their way around the subtle, unkempt hazards they have available,..........as opposed to many who won't set foot on a property unless it's on some fancy Top 100 list with spectacular views,spend 25% of their budget on "bunker maintenance" ::) ::), has a caddie with a white suit, a great wine list, "anything you want off the menu" etc., many built on these wonderful sites that have been used recently.
As far as a beautiful day, the most soulful places in golf,( Ireland, and the UK) have some of the most "not beautiful" days one can imagine.
So if the majority feels a great site and a beautiful day is needed beautiful day for a golf course to have soul, let's just say I respectfully disagree......
-
Jeff,
actually, had a thought to type about steel blue skies, (ie. threatening, ominus, cold) which have made for some of my best days of golf, too. So, I agree.
-
Jeff,
actually, had a thought to type about steel blue skies, (ie. threatening, ominus, cold) which have made for some of my best days of golf, too. So, I agree.
Where's the fun in that? ;D
I just think that we can't "grow the game" faster than we educate the players.
More golfers and players isn't always a good thing.
Golf's not for everyone, but should be AVAILABLE to everyone, albeit with some effort.
The most passionate golfers are usually/often the ones to whom golf was made the least available, and who had to sacrifice greatly to have access to the game.
The least passionate are often the ones with the most entitled access.
-
When folks speak of golf currently enjoying its best times ever, they are clearly talking about what they can get FROM the game as it struggles to shed the greed and excess created by those determined to "Grow the Game" on a foundation with lots of quicksand under it.
How healthy is golf? Not good at all would be my take. Sure, we can enjoy great golf, at cheap prices, on those properties that are shortly heading for the auction block. Few would argue that golf needs to contract, there are simply not enough golfers to support the wild overbuilding and industry-wide bloating of the past 15 years.
Many of the observations posted on this thread are dead on...self-preservation, particularly at the top, is the order of the day. When simple common sense, such as "get on the right damn tee," is packaged and glorified as some marvelous initiative, what more needs to be recognized to know the ship is adrift.
It's a tough game, that takes time to learn, and even at "affordable" levels, isn't cheap. Attach those realities to ANY other endeavor on the planet..and the word "niche" is sure to enter the conversation. Striving for quality presentation, at all levels, and at all GCA pricepoints, should be the goal. Take care of the game, SHARE the game...and the game will gradually transition to a healthier state.
Cheers,
Kris 8)
-
Tommy probably has a much better understanding of the reformation than I do. But, my basic understanding was that the church had become corrupt and deviated from its roots, and therefore needed to be brought back to its roots. Therefore, I think the reformation is a perfect analogy to the golf situation. I think Susie Meyers has hit the nail on the head pretty well.
"When I was learning to love this game, it was never seen as too hard, or too time-consuming to play, or too expensive, or too frustrating," said Susie Meyers, 51, who later played on the LPGA Tour and now teaches golf in Arizona. The course she played on with her family and friends was short and simple, but in her memories it was heaven.
In the intervening years, the character and challenges of the game changed, Meyers said. "Whose idea was it to make courses so difficult it takes 5½ hours to play?" she asks. "Whose idea was it to say there's a perfect swing and if you come to me I'll show you what's wrong with it and fix it? Whose idea was it that you have to find the perfect club and the perfect ball and play on perfect grass?"
So it seems Ms. Meyers wants to start the golf reformation, and get away from its excessive, corrupt, deviation from the game, and back to its roots.
It would seem that a huge portion of the members of this website agree with her on the rejection of the penal/heroic style of golf course.
Another huge portion of the members would agree with her on the rejection of perfect conditoning.
She really hits home with me on golf being too expensive and the need for the perfect club, and ball. When I joined this website, I was ridiculed for making statements about golf being too expensive. But, then every once in a while there would be a question about how much you would pay to play, and a significant number of the posters would come out of the woodwork and say they limited their games to under $50, and I knew I wasn't alone. The clubs are needlessly expensive. When my son expressed the desire to play more golf, my wife went to Target and came home with 12 clubs for $100. You can hardly buy a single club for that price in some "golf" shops. After a couple of years, I doubled the value of his set by going out and buying him a Ping putter for $100. In my opinion the advancement in club design is of no value. To demonstrate that, last year I replaced my cavity back irons with blades, and my handicap didn't change one iota. As a matter of fact, as the year wore on I believe the blades helped me discover why I shot worse scores at the end of the golf season than at the beginning every year, and for the first time in several years my handicap began to edge down at the end of the year.
I find it interesting that coffee has been bandied about on this thread as an example of MBA's gone to excess. You've got the right product, but it seems to me you totally misunderstand the whole situation. In the middle of the 20th century, coffee became heavily promoted, and the MBA's at the coffee companies began to try to grow sales and began to compete on price until it became absolute swill by the time I reached coffee drinking age. Upon completion of college, I went into the Peace Corps in Ethiopia. Ethiopia begin in close proximity to Arabia has always had arabica coffee trees growing wild in their forests. It is a tree that grows in the shaded understory of the forest. In some parts of Ethiopia at the time "coffee plantations" were harvested by simply going out into the wild forests and picking the wild crop. Perhaps needless to say, Ethiopia has a long historic coffee culture. To come there from the souless wasteland of American coffee was a true awakening. On returning to the U.S. I spent a significant amount of time in Europe drinking the same high quality coffee. So you see, Starbucks had brought the true reformation to coffee in the U.S., a return to its roots, and an overthrow of its godless MBA roots.
I find it pretty disturbing that the PGA of America is trying further to take golf away from its roots with the tee it forward program so people can make birdies and pars. That is not golf! The PGA of America needs to emphasize bringing players together to play enjoyable matches. And, I am not talking medal play here. Old Tom Morris did not create a handicap system so that people could play 18 holes, tally up their scores, deduct their handicap, and decide who won. Old Tom Morris created a handicap system so that it could be determined equitably who won or lost each hole in succession.
Guess I best push the post button so I don't muck it up and lose what may be my longest essay ever.
-
BTW David, is mine a "narrow-minded, stilted, parochial and regressive view of the game currently being promoted elsewhere on this website."?
-
by the way, freshly minted MBA's are avoiding Wall Street like the plague these days, so by logical extension they're no longer scumbags. ::)
-
Frankly, I wonder if global warmig (no more afternoon rounds) laziness, etc. aren't killing golf more. The essense of golf still lies in the weather, nature, comraderie, etc. or at least as close an approximation of it as we can get. Can't kill those things off via corporations running golf courses.
To be a pedant corporations running golf courses could contribute to killing the weather by using hundreds of golf carts, which use more energy which has been produced by burning fossil fuels etc etc .....you get what I mean but more importantly both in my opinion and experience they can definitely kill the soul of a course/club and therefore part of the game.
At least in the UK (my experience of the US is limited) you can tell a corporate run course as soon as you step foot on the property, everything about them feels clinical and everything seems to revolve around trying to sell you something for adverts around the place for green fee deals to the over price coffee/pint after the round. Even as a member they control how you experience the place from the moment you have to book in to play a round to swiping your bar card to pay for the over price coffee. You just don't seem to get the freedom a 'real' members run club or lots of privately owned clubs offer. The larger corporations also manage to make all of their clubs and courses feel the same, making you feel anything but special when you get the chance to play one.
The soul of golf to me is the variety and individuality about every part of the experience of playing the game, from differing types of shots, lies, courses and conditions to the clubhouses and your playing partners. That variation is what brings me back week after week. In my opinion corporations running courses take most of this variation away, making you experiences outside of actually hitting the ball repetitive and boring. Yes the hitting the ball is the important part but it is the small details which contribute massively to the overall experience which really make the game and pretty much anything in day to day life more enjoyable.
-
Poor, poor Mr. Spode,
I am not rubbishing "Scottish Golf." I have been fortunate enough to play 40-50 rounds of golf a year in Scotland for many years now, which I enjoy very much. If I am rubbishing anything, it is your narrow-minded view of how golf can be played (and even enjoyed!) in modern times. I trust that even you recognize that you and "Scottish Golf" are not one and the same. ;)
Fortunately, most golfers I have met in Scotland have a much more inclusive view of golf than the ones you express. They are happy to be living in the 21st century and have little or no interest in returning to the primitive and rudimentary state of golf in the 19th century. They realize that the world of golf is very large and that, just because golf has a certain heritage in Scotland, it does not mean that other countries, with different climates, geographies, social customs, etc. cannot develop a legitimate golf culture of their own.
For example, in Japan it is customary for golfers to take a break after 9 holes to enjoy a meal before playing the back 9. Does this custom mean that golf in Japan is not "real" golf by your standards?
I have even met a number of Scots who travel to the U.S. regularly. They go because they enjoy their golf there. They go because the dynamics of the game are somewhat different from the game they play in Scotland. They embrace and appreciate the differences.
Your ignorance of this is woeful. Regrettably, in your case it appears to be willful as well.