Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Chris_Hufnagel on July 24, 2014, 02:17:34 PM
-
I thought this was a pretty interesting view on the current state of the golf industry and was a nice consolidation of many thoughts/threads we have seen on the pages of GCA lately.
The Millennial Generation is a force in today's economy and I suppose having "lost" them is not a good harbinger of things to come...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mattpowell/2014/07/24/sneakernomics-how-golf-lost-the-millennials/
-
My generation ruined junior golf for the kids born from 1980+. I know that I would not be playing today if I had a helicopter mom following me around in the 70's. I learned everything I know about enjoying life from my days of youth golfing with my buds and my mommy would have put a stop to all of it. Sadly, many of these same Millennials end up with a helicopter wife. Golf don't play that game.
-
Life was apparently so much better when family members couldn't stand each other.
-
John,
I agree. As soon as my 10 year old was spending 5 hour rounds grinding over 5-footers in medal play Junior tournaments I knew the fat lady was gargling in the wings.
Re-the inclusion point- the most shocking thing to me recently was the vitriolic response to private clubs not listing their membership fees online. I understand inclusion, but the intensity of some of the reactions was, shall we say, illuminating...
-
Was that actually the NGF that came out with these recent numbers?
Issues I found questionable in this authors synopsis ; "Doing the same thing over and over again for four hours"? ,,, sounds like a maintenance meld problem. Which brings us to the gca, and how the perceived ideal canvas, post WWII, led to the loss of participants by putting the golfer to sleep with repetitive dictated bowling ally looking dreck.
And, "the rules are too complicated"? They really do want it easy, don't they?
The only ones suffering here are those with an industry mindset, that thought charging $500 a club, and/or a round, was ever going to last.
-
That article was written by a simpleton with little knowledge of how the real world works. Instead of "Sneakernomics", perhaps Mr. Powell should call it "Stupidnomics", or "Ignoranomics", which is what happens when "smart" people write what they think should happen, rather than what does happen.
-
John - definitely agree with that, and it's only getting worse. When I was playing junior golf (born 1980), there were a few parents, but not too many. I've been around some junior events in the last five years, and it seemed that there were very few players without a parent present.
Although I agree about pace being too slow, I find it ironic that golf takes too long for Millennials, but from my experience, most of the slowest players I run into are Millennials.
I realize it is a small slice of the golfing universe, but I'm very apprehensive when paired with anyone under 25 at a tournament. For the vast majority, pace is glacial.
-
Now if we could just embark on a strategy to lose a few others, we could be well onto something ;) ;D
-
What is a Millennial?
Born in this century? Or growing up (like teens and twenties...) in the first decade or two of this century?
I was born in 1974, what am I?
-
Jim,
I believe the media means the generation born between roughly 1980 and 2000. So it would be one generation later than yourself (and two generations later than me and some of the other guys active in this thread).
-
Although I agree about pace being too slow, I find it ironic that golf takes too long for Millennials, but from my experience, most of the slowest players I run into are Millennials.
I've never bought into the theory that golf takes too long for Millennials and thus, is keeping them away. Yes, it takes too long, but that's more a problem for people in the prime of their careers who are juggling family and demanding job obligations. The writers of some of these stories make it sound as if Millennials can only spare 2.5 hours for golf because they've reserved the other 2.5 for texting and playing angry birds. That's BS.
Another thing to consider is that more and more of the younger generations are moving back to the big cities, where there is no such thing as a quick 4 hours door-to-door or a weeknight 9-holes. For me, in NYC, it can be a 9 hour process for one round. And that's something I can't do anything about, and something I definitely don't always have time for.
-
Now if we could just embark on a strategy to lose a few others, we could be well onto something ;) ;D
I like the way you think.
-
Jim,
You are a Gen Xer. Unfortunately, due to the ugly bedmates of demographics and dollars, you get lost in the shuffle with all the focus on the Baby Boomers.
-
I do not see much in the article about drawbacks of the game that have not existed forever. I suspect the listed decline in Millenials has a more mundane explanation.
The pattern I see in golf participation is that people get hooked as kids or teenagers and play until they have kids. They do not play as much from the time they have children until the children have a drivers' license. After the kid has the freedom to drive, the parents play again.
Assuming Millenials are born between 1980 and 1990 (not sure of the exact definition), I suspect many of them have left the game because they have kids. I also suspect many will come back.
-
What is a Millennial?
Born in this century? Or growing up (like teens and twenties...) in the first decade or two of this century?
I was born in 1974, what am I?
So you are just turning 40. What are you? I'd say f'kd. I'm sure you've seen this movie and would love to know which character is most like you. Paul Rudd with a golf bag?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ3PxAlO3MQ
-
Is it possible that a simple, if drawn out, pull back in the number of golf courses and the expectations of companies looking to "make their (earnings) number" from unrealistic golf participation growth will make the golf market look much more healthy?
In other words, if we had 12,000 golf courses they'd be sold out and if/when the retailers pull back on production their "profits" will improve...then we get to do it all over again.
I hear we're teetering on a housing bubble possibly...after buying my first (and current) home in July 2006 I was told the peak of that last cycle was either June or July 2006. Someone sold me that house at a 75% profit after 5 years...I think these things all go in cycles and the people screaming about golf being dead are well off base. It's just not worried about them hitting their numbers.
-
Don't even have to hit the link...it's the guy in the bicycle costume!
-
Is it possible that a simple, if drawn out, pull back in the number of golf courses and the expectations of companies looking to "make their (earnings) number" from unrealistic golf participation growth will make the golf market look much more healthy?
In other words, if we had 12,000 golf courses they'd be sold out and if/when the retailers pull back on production their "profits" will improve...then we get to do it all over again.
I hear we're teetering on a housing bubble possibly...after buying my first (and current) home in July 2006 I was told the peak of that last cycle was either June or July 2006. Someone sold me that house at a 75% profit after 5 years...I think these things all go in cycles and the people screaming about golf being dead are well off base. It's just not worried about them hitting their numbers.
20 years ago, the geniuses (like the author of the article, though I'm just guessing on that) said we were short on golf courses and that we needed to open something like 1 a week for the next 20 years for there to be room for everyone joining the game.
Most of golf's "problems" can be tied to OPM disease, and its many related maladies...
-
The truth is that unless you play competitively a good set of clubs will last you quite a while. I got fitted for a set a few years back, have tweaked it a bit here and there with the odd rescue, 4 wood or putter, but I can't forsee buying anything more than tees, balls or gloves for the forseeable future. Hell, I play with hickories half the time now. The industry simply got out over it's skis. A Millenial can get the golf bug just as easily as any previous generation. Once they do, their XBox gets mothballed and they start posting obscenely edited photos of them in golf gear at remote locations with a bunch of other bespecled internet trolls in plus fours...
-
Junior golf became junior tours and college recruiting programs.
Junior events became about points earned instead of cheesy trophies and medals. :D
College scholarships for golf, seem to be a status symbol for many now. The pursuit to
earn a scholarship now costs close to the cost of a solid state education at many colleges.
In S California, $60-80 is considered an affordable green fee for a decent course, and tournaments
like JAGS and AJGA are amazingly expensive.
For my part, I charge $125 an hour for golf lessons at the private club I work at.
I did work for 6+ years at a non profit providing lessons for free to kids, but TBH, many have
told me my rate is too low, I just cannot fathom raising it right now, it's already pretty high IMO.
Some of the expectations of money to be made in the game is pretty screwed up.
I've had two close experiences with golf courses out here in Cal.
One, a public course, would raise their prices every time play rates increased. They would lose players,
lower their rates a bit, recapture their customers...rinse, repeat... it was so fucking stupid.
They finally have settled in their price point and are attracting a regular, pretty busy following.
At a private course I dealt with, they make money hand over fist, but seem to always push the envelope trying
to get every penny. A very short term outlook with no long term or back-end gains. There was always an
"acceptable loss" mentality to people they chased away. They hit their tipping point and are struggling now.
WIll be interesting to revisit there next year to see where they are.
My shining example...Goose Creek, MiraLoma, CA.
Built with a great plan, with a long term outlook in maintenance, and giving a product for the right price.
Have executed the original plan fantastically, still provide a great priced product, and are happy making their profits
at the original projections. Never bumped prices to "capitalize" on their spot, have stayed in their sweet spot.
-
Don't even have to hit the link...it's the guy in the bicycle costume!
Cycling is playing a role in the demise of golf. I absolutely love cycling with my wife. The one time I took her to the golf course it was a complete disaster. I honestly thought she would enjoy caddying for me.
-
She should have...
Can't imagine cycling behind you is much of a treat...do you let he lead?
-
Junior golf became junior tours and college recruiting programs.
Junior events became about points earned instead of cheesy trophies and medals. :D
College scholarships for golf, seem to be a status symbol for many now. The pursuit to
earn a scholarship now costs close to the cost of a solid state education at many colleges.
In S California, $60-80 is considered an affordable green fee for a decent course, and tournaments
like JAGS and AJGA are amazingly expensive.
For my part, I charge $125 an hour for golf lessons at the private club I work at.
I did work for 6+ years at a non profit providing lessons for free to kids, but TBH, many have
told me my rate is too low, I just cannot fathom raising it right now, it's already pretty high IMO.
Some of the expectations of money to be made in the game is pretty screwed up.
I've had two close experiences with golf courses out here in Cal.
One, a public course, would raise their prices every time play rates increased. They would lose players,
lower their rates a bit, recapture their customers...rinse, repeat... it was so fucking stupid.
They finally have settled in their price point and are attracting a regular, pretty busy following.
At a private course I dealt with, they make money hand over fist, but seem to always push the envelope trying
to get every penny. A very short term outlook with no long term or back-end gains. There was always an
"acceptable loss" mentality to people they chased away. They hit their tipping point and are struggling now.
WIll be interesting to revisit there next year to see where they are.
My shining example...Goose Creek, MiraLoma, CA.
Built with a great plan, with a long term outlook in maintenance, and giving a product for the right price.
Have executed the original plan fantastically, still provide a great priced product, and are happy making their profits
at the original projections. Never bumped prices to "capitalize" on their spot, have stayed in their sweet spot.
So the pressure is on Mr. Burke. Don't screw up my little girl I sent your way. Keep it fun, nudge her in the right direction... and, oh yeah, make sure she gets a scholarship! ;)
-
What is a Millennial?
Born in this century? Or growing up (like teens and twenties...) in the first decade or two of this century?
I was born in 1974, what am I?
Old
-
She should have...
Can't imagine cycling behind you is much of a treat...do you let he lead?
I guess you don't know much about drafting, they don't call me peloton ass for nothing. Of course my wife doesn't have a clue about aerodynamics which is why I let her lead. She is a great athlete so all things being equal, including my superior technique and keeping a higher pressure in my tires, we are equals. I keep telling her to pump her own tires but she won't listen.
-
Junior golf became junior tours and college recruiting programs.
Junior events became about points earned instead of cheesy trophies and medals. :D
College scholarships for golf, seem to be a status symbol for many now. The pursuit to
earn a scholarship now costs close to the cost of a solid state education at many colleges.
In S California, $60-80 is considered an affordable green fee for a decent course, and tournaments
like JAGS and AJGA are amazingly expensive.
For my part, I charge $125 an hour for golf lessons at the private club I work at.
I did work for 6+ years at a non profit providing lessons for free to kids, but TBH, many have
told me my rate is too low, I just cannot fathom raising it right now, it's already pretty high IMO.
Some of the expectations of money to be made in the game is pretty screwed up.
I've had two close experiences with golf courses out here in Cal.
One, a public course, would raise their prices every time play rates increased. They would lose players,
lower their rates a bit, recapture their customers...rinse, repeat... it was so fucking stupid.
They finally have settled in their price point and are attracting a regular, pretty busy following.
At a private course I dealt with, they make money hand over fist, but seem to always push the envelope trying
to get every penny. A very short term outlook with no long term or back-end gains. There was always an
"acceptable loss" mentality to people they chased away. They hit their tipping point and are struggling now.
WIll be interesting to revisit there next year to see where they are.
My shining example...Goose Creek, MiraLoma, CA.
Built with a great plan, with a long term outlook in maintenance, and giving a product for the right price.
Have executed the original plan fantastically, still provide a great priced product, and are happy making their profits
at the original projections. Never bumped prices to "capitalize" on their spot, have stayed in their sweet spot.
So the pressure is on Mr. Burke. Don't screw up my little girl I sent your way. Keep it fun, nudge her in the right direction... and, oh yeah, make sure she gets a scholarship! ;)
Challenge accepted!!!
-
No point drafting a tugboat hoss...
Was it wrong to load the rain gear and umbrella in my bag when my wife caddied for me?
-
No point drafting a tugboat hoss...
Was it wrong to load the rain gear and umbrella in my bag when my wife caddied for me?
That is a good point which is why cycling with equals is so satisfying. Kind of like golfing with equals...oops.
-
I have a lot of random thoughts on this:
* I never realized ultimate frisbee was the Millenial's sport of choice. 2 weeks after I turned 30, it appears I may suddenly be out of touch. I always thought it was a game for nerdy white guys in Madison, WI who aren't athletic enough to compete in rec-league basketball or football.
* I play golf with a lot of people. I've never met anyone who has played the game for fewer than 5 years who plays by the rules, and only about 3% of people who have played for longer than that follow them. I don't believe that the complexities of the rulebook are chasing away recreational players.
* I'm never quite sure how people my age will react to finding out that I'm an avid golfer. There is a small but vocal group of people from my generation who put it in the same class that I put ultimate frisbee (white and nerdy), and another group that immediately assumes you're a snobby, elitist jackass when they hear "golfer." Of course, I'm all of those things. But I'm also a blue-collar southern kid raised by a single mother and married to a black woman, and the "golfer" stigma doesn't always jibe neatly with the rest of my life.
* I was introduced to the game on pasture courses. I was given four clubs and a ball and I whacked it around as long as I didn't come close to hitting anyone and as long as I kept pace. I didn't learn much about mechanics or etiquette in those early years, but I had fun. When I watch the 3-6 year old kids who get dragged to the driving range at my club today by their parents or grandparents, and listen to their chaperone try to give them instructions in a continuous run-on sentence running through their entire range session like "Buddy, be smooth, don't chop, keep your swing on plane, you got a little vertical on that one and then your hips didn't clear and so you didn't hit it good, buddy you gotta make sure you pivot your spine around its own axis, think of your hips being in a barrel buddy...", I can understand why I don't see many kids on the range between the ages of 7 and 15. They get turned off to the game early by adults who want to do their best Earl Woods impression and live vicariously through the kids.
* Mark may be right about people around my age and younger having fewer legitimate things occupying our time. But the guys who can afford to play golf tend to be pretty upwardly mobile and have busy careers, and we also have more things competing for our attention and more recreational outlets than any generation before. We have no shortage of activities on which to spend our disposable income: Tough Mudders; Color Runs; an endless array of 5ks, 10ks, 15ks, and marathons; regular yoga and hot yoga; countless rec-leagues for sand volleyball, indoor soccer, basketball, football, baseball, and probably even ultimate frisbee; a culture that makes it easier than ever to hop on a road bike and ride... the list goes on almost endlessly. All of those activities are cheaper, faster, and a better workout than golf. They're also activities with a community based on the acceptance of people of all skill levels and backgrounds, as opposed to golf with its perceived culture of exclusion.
George is right. The author of this article is a dope. But the few facts he presents, if true, are still scary, and our game does have a lot of barriers keeping it from appealing to the priorities and culture of a younger generation. Still, I'm optimistic for golf's future simply because I still think there is nothing more fun than smashing a ball with a stick.
-
* Mark may be right about people around my age and younger having fewer legitimate things occupying our time. But the guys who can afford to play golf tend to be pretty upwardly mobile and have busy careers, and we also have more things competing for our attention and more recreational outlets than any generation before. We have no shortage of activities on which to spend our disposable income: Tough Mudders; Color Runs; an endless array of 5ks, 10ks, 15ks, and marathons; regular yoga and hot yoga; countless rec-leagues for sand volleyball, indoor soccer, basketball, football, baseball, and probably even ultimate frisbee; a culture that makes it easier than ever to hop on a road bike and ride... the list goes on almost endlessly. All of those activities are cheaper, faster, and a better workout than golf. They're also activities with a community based on the acceptance of people of all skill levels and backgrounds, as opposed to golf with its perceived culture of exclusion.
True, I was more reacting to the tone of some of these articles that make it seem like teenagers just can't be bothered to put their phones down long enough. I had dozens of Nintendo games growing up, which I was obsessed with, and still would never pass up an opportunity to go play golf (or baseball, or football, or hockey, etc). I'm 35, for what it's worth.
-
My generation ruined junior golf for the kids born from 1980+. I know that I would not be playing today if I had a helicopter mom following me around in the 70's. I learned everything I know about enjoying life from my days of youth golfing with my buds and my mommy would have put a stop to all of it. Sadly, many of these same Millennials end up with a helicopter wife. Golf don't play that game.
I think this is dead-on unfortunately. I'm 37 and single (for better or worse) and can play whenever I want budget permitting. The majority of guys I know in my own age group simply aren't able to play.
-
It's interesting listening to lovers of the game try to figure out why anyone might not love it. Sort of like discussing why people don't think space aliens exist, when attending a UFO conference :)
Talking to folks who don't play, the reasons I've heard seem to match much of what this article talks about.
Takes too long, costs too much, is very difficult to learn (or simply get to the point where one can move the ball around the course or fit in with those who can).
The bit about rules may be referring not to the rulebook, but rather that the rules of protocol and etiquette involved are strange to newcomers (stepping on the putt line, when to not talk, when to play, what to wear, tee times, arriving at the course, etc.)
The post-boomer culture change also seems to play a role. The changed role of a parent/husband/father. The video game / technology mindset on expecting to figure out something new very quickly.
Imagine if you did not already play the game. Do you think that you could (would) pick it up now? I started when I was 5 years old. I'm sure that I would not have the patience to get started with golf today.
-
If you put out a survey that asks people what are the barriers to physical activity generally, they always list the same stuff. No sidewalks, too much traffic, they don't have time, it's not safe, blah, blah, blah. There's a half-dozen or so barriers they always list.
Funny thing is, if you ask them whether they get daily physical activity (walking, jogging, bicycling, that kind of thing) the ones who say YES and the ones who say NO will have always just listed exactly the same barriers. It turns out those are deterrents to everyone whether they exercise anyway or not. It explains nothing about why some people do get physical activity every day and other don't.
Same with asking "What's wrong with golf?". You'll get the usual list of suspects for reasons NOT to play. Golfers play in spite of those things, non-golfers use them as an excuse (if you press them into answering a bunch of questions anyway).
Here's the other thing. Addressing those barriers to regular physical activity has been shown in study after study to have either no effect at all or a marginal, temporary effect on getting people to be regularly active. If you remove some of the barriers, that does not turn out to result in people doing the thing you supposed the barriers were preventing. Go figure, people are funny that way.
-
Dave,
I started playing regularly in my mid 30's, living in NYC with a very demanding career and an infant daughter at home. Used to hit balls into a net upstairs in a small shop on 49th street with an old pro hunched over next to me like Bagger Vance with osteoporosis. Once you make solid contact with that little white pill and watch it rocket majestically down the fairway, everything else recedes into the background- it's socially acceptable heroin, and that hasn't been supplanted by ubiquitous Youporn, cloth diaper delivery or legal weed.
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
+1 to all of that
all those fad followers of the late 90's/early 2000's tried it because they thought they should and that it might be cool
it isn't.................. and takes time at some stage of your life to become competent-if you start at age 25 you're unlikely to stay with it as life gets in the way-never had them to start with and they should've never been counted in the participation/growth numbers as they were doomed to move onto the next cool, instantly gratifying thing.
Certainly wouldn't count me as a bowler........
-
Something that stood out to me in the article was the analysis indicating that millennials are more "inclusive" than older generations. While that conclusion is certainly up for debate -- if it IS true, then I think something that could be done to help grow the game amongst the younger generations is to make golf more of a TEAM SPORT. Encourage kids to play 2-4 man scrambles more, more match play, more Ryder Cup themed events where you can bring 15-20 kids together and it's not just about individual play.
This is something I feel pretty strongly about in general. Younger kids generally speaking prefer team sports, and the best athletes in middle school and high school -- again, generally speaking -- play team sports. So golf and tennis can unfairly be labeled as sports for non-athletes. As a former basketball and baseball player who loves golf, I don't believe that to be true, but the stigma exists for sure.
But I do think the individual nature of the sport can be frustrating to younger players, and even now I still prefer to play in Ryder Cup type formats with scrambles, alternate shot, etc. as opposed to keeping my own score. I suspect others -- especially kids -- feel this way, but little is done to encourage this sort of thing. (On a side note, I'm convinced this is why Europe always thrashes the US in the Ryder Cup -- the Euros seem much more team oriented)
-
For me, it comes down to pace of play. Yes, I might have five hours of time available for golf, but golf at a five hour pace isn't fun. So I find other things to do. If it were easier to play nine, I might do that as well. It can be tough in the southwest, where monsoons on summer afternoons can wreck a lot of plans.
I would play a lot more golf if I could go play with maybe one other and play in three hours.
The cost argument is there too, but less critically. There are plenty of cheap golf options, but you also get what you pay for in most cases.
Part of the issue is that golf became cool to non-golfers because of Tiger Woods and increased media attention. Now that Tiger isn't doing anything that interests non-golfers, they've moved on to something else. Golf is going to suffer for awhile, but the core group is still there and golf businesses that survive will be those that cater to that group.
-
If it were easier to play nine, I might do that as well. It can be tough in the southwest, where monsoons on summer afternoons can wreck a lot of plans.
What are the barriers to playing nine holes? That your friends would rather play 18?
Nine holes twice a week would beat 18 holes once a week in my book.
-
Now if we could just embark on a strategy to lose a few others, we could be well onto something ;) ;D
;D
And John K, don't know what's happened to you but I want whatever you've been prescribed. I can only assume you've had a little holiday and returned with your marbles realigned. Excellent form.
-
And Pat, not that I'm knocking you because it's obviously the going rate in your part of the world, at $125 per hour I want my fictitious little girl to win a bloody major, never mind a scholarship!
-
I find the article accurate.
The comment on inclusion was really important.
What you think and what outsiders to believe about golf are very different.
My son explained the reason why he doesn't play golf anymore (despite being relatively good):
Golf demand me to conform from rules to dress to timing.
Skiing allows me to do everything on my own terms.
That's the problem with "your" sport.
We ski over ten times a year, we almost never play golf anymore.
I've skateboarded with him more than he's played golf with me...
-
I think Jim hit the nail on the head The problem isn't there aren't enough golfers. The problem is there are too many golf courses. All the rest of the talk is secondary because golf has always been difficult, time consuming and relatively expensive compared to the major sports.
Ciao
-
As a millennial, I know the main reason why millennials aren't playing.
It isn't slow play.
It isn't rising prices.
It isn't too many courses.
It isn't the complicated rules.
*It is partially because it is damn hard ;)
Junior golf became junior tours and college recruiting programs.
Junior events became about points earned instead of cheesy trophies and medals. :D
College scholarships for golf, seem to be a status symbol for many now. The pursuit to
earn a scholarship now costs close to the cost of a solid state education at many colleges.
This is the closest anyone has come because it is about recruiting, except not just for golf.
The REAL reason why juniors aren't playing is because of modern athletics. We are told by our parents, coaches, or other guardians that you have to be the best; however, to be the best, you have to practice constantly. The days of playing multiple sports is over. From an age of 10 or so, kids are told to pick just one sport and stick with it, so you focus all of your practice and time to that one sport. Unfortunately, I have seen kids drop golf in order to pursue the other sport. What is even worse is if the coach finds out that you are spending time doing other sports like golf, they will kick you off the team for not trying to be the best at their sport.
Now, why are athletics more strict? It is because of the recruiting mentioned above. I don't know when it happened, but parents, coaches, and other older people now think that if the kid is playing a sport, they want to be a college athlete, a professional, and to be the best. It could stem from athletics being televised more, or the massive amounts a pro is paid. It is like everyone forgot that their child can play sports for fun. It is a shame.
In a one sentence summary: Golf lost the Millennials because the Millennials were peer pressured and chose to drop golf for another sport.
-
If it were easier to play nine, I might do that as well. It can be tough in the southwest, where monsoons on summer afternoons can wreck a lot of plans.
What are the barriers to playing nine holes? That your friends would rather play 18?
Nine holes twice a week would beat 18 holes once a week in my book.
Playing nine after work is tougher in the southwest. At the time of year when daylight is long, it is either 95+ degrees or a storm is going through. Other times of the year, there isn't enough daylight. Even with that, on the nice days the municipal courses are packed so getting out isn't guaranteed. I'm sure I could try harder to find a way, but I don't.
-
Matthew,
Your logic may apply to a segment of the population, but only a small one. Most of those "one-sport" athletes never even get a college scholarship and could easily take golf back up by age 18 if they wanted to. Plenty of avid golfers take up the game later in life after playing another sport as a kid. My Dad played baseball and took up golf at 25.
I don't think this comes down to one reason, even though I gave one specific one for myself. Most of my generation seems to be hammered with debt and golf just isn't a practical hobby except for those with means. To be any good at golf requires some pretty serious effort with lessons, practicing, playing, etc. The financial commitment just isn't possible for a lot of this generation, even if they like the idea of the game. It also isn't a game that can be learned by playing/practicing once every month or even every two weeks. That level of commitment separates those who are golfers from those who play golf. And those in the "play golf" category are leaving in droves.
-
Just being an anal English Major, but saying we lost the Millennials implies that we had them in the first place.
-
Matthew,
Your logic may apply to a segment of the population, but only a small one. Most of those "one-sport" athletes never even get a college scholarship and could easily take golf back up by age 18 if they wanted to. Plenty of avid golfers take up the game later in life after playing another sport as a kid. My Dad played baseball and took up golf at 25.
I don't think this comes down to one reason, even though I gave one specific one for myself. Most of my generation seems to be hammered with debt and golf just isn't a practical hobby except for those with means. To be any good at golf requires some pretty serious effort with lessons, practicing, playing, etc. The financial commitment just isn't possible for a lot of this generation, even if they like the idea of the game. It also isn't a game that can be learned by playing/practicing once every month or even every two weeks. That level of commitment separates those who are golfers from those who play golf. And those in the "play golf" category are leaving in droves.
That is the problem! Why are sporty kids forced to pick one sport when they most likely won't be a college athlete, and if you do become a college athlete, you aren't going pro? By 18, kids don't have the time or the financial support to then pick up the game.
-
Because golf is expensive and many of these milennials have become boomerang kids (college graduates who move back home unemployed or under employed).
-
Go and spend one evening at Topp Golf....in ATL it takes an hour at least to get a spot....they do more in one evening than the average public course will do in a day. Perhaps, just perhaps, this thing will be one of the things that creates interest in the game for the milleniums.
-
There are several excellent posts on this thread that seem to come from different directions, yet all ring true and make sense to me -even though some of the thesis appear to be at odds.
JK and Schmidty's focus on the helicopter Moms and others observations of the amount of sedentary gaming distractions and the completely different process of how young people going into adulthood socialize seem to be big factors that make sense to me. Youngsters simply don't have as easy or naturally conducive of a social environment to form golf FRIENDSHIPS or the need to form the kind of golf friendships that most of us oldsters on this forum take for granted.
I think avid or regular golfers play to enjoy the game with like minded FRIENDS because it is a joyful social activity. I think it is the rare few that pursue the game to compete at a significantly high level apart from socializing. Competition and typical betting among friends is not the same thing as playing to formally compete, and those few who can get good enough to be a competitive factor are <1-2%.
And, I don't see this situation is going to improve. Too many kids sheltered in the family game room, remotely playing video games, or being 'escorted' by the Mom to recreational organized to regimented extremes, or family can't afford to get their kid(s) a multiple play golf pass at an accessible venue, and lost skills in friendship socialization where they can just go out and be fast friends playing a game they discover the joys of on their own with no prodding.
-
Matthew,
Your logic may apply to a segment of the population, but only a small one. Most of those "one-sport" athletes never even get a college scholarship and could easily take golf back up by age 18 if they wanted to. Plenty of avid golfers take up the game later in life after playing another sport as a kid. My Dad played baseball and took up golf at 25.
I don't think this comes down to one reason, even though I gave one specific one for myself. Most of my generation seems to be hammered with debt and golf just isn't a practical hobby except for those with means. To be any good at golf requires some pretty serious effort with lessons, practicing, playing, etc. The financial commitment just isn't possible for a lot of this generation, even if they like the idea of the game. It also isn't a game that can be learned by playing/practicing once every month or even every two weeks. That level of commitment separates those who are golfers from those who play golf. And those in the "play golf" category are leaving in droves.
That is the problem! Why are sporty kids forced to pick one sport when they most likely won't be a college athlete, and if you do become a college athlete, you aren't going pro? By 18, kids don't have the time or the financial support to then pick up the game.
I certainly agree its a silly way to run youth sports. And your last sentence makes me think we agree to a point--it still comes down in large part to time and financial support.
-
She should have...
Can't imagine cycling behind you is much of a treat...do you let he lead?
I guess you don't know much about drafting, they don't call me peloton ass for nothing. Of course my wife doesn't have a clue about aerodynamics which is why I let her lead. She is a great athlete so all things being equal, including my superior technique and keeping a higher pressure in my tires, we are equals. I keep telling her to pump her own tires but she won't listen.
Is "pump her own tires" a euphemism I am not aware of?
-
The helicopter parents and the "one sport athlete" are a symptom of our sports addicted culture. We need to stop living vicariously through our kids and making up for our athletic short comings.
I saw a 10 yr old kid yesterday with a shirt that said "Play me, or Trade me" from Nike. Who buys that?
-
I can't wait to read this article and probably laugh at it.
-
ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/ (http://ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/)
Mike, I had to Google Topp Golf to understand. But sure enough, this looks like it combines the sort of elements thathave otherwise been barriers to youngsters dropping into the golf culture. It has the element of games to match the video gaming mentality; seems quite affordable by comparison to actual 18 hole golf, can be located in accessible population transportation centers and provides a real place to socialize old fashion way... by being with friends. 8) ;D
-
I’m at the tail end of Gen X and into the beginning range of a Millennial; so I feel compelled to reply to this thread.
Random Thoughts…
* I don’t buy the argument on rules being too complicated. Gridiron Football is pretty damn complicated to the novice. Let alone explaining how to attack a Cover 2.
* I think it’s mostly about the Benjamin’s. Yes, this has always been a barrier to entry, but I think it’s more so for people my age. I was lucky to have parents who were well enough off to save money for my college so I came out of undergrad without a dime in debt. I know others aren’t so lucky, especially if they go for post-graduate degrees. Less people my age, especially in major cities, own houses, cars, etc. Heck, a lot of them are going back to live with their parents to save money (as someone mentioned earlier with the boomerang effect).
* I lived on a par 3 golf course in my youth, and hacked around it a few times. Yet, golf never appealed to me. My sports were soccer and cross country. When I had a chance to caddy at the country club down the road, as some of the other kids in my neighborhood did, I passed. It wasn’t until I was 21, on a trip to Kiawah Island with some of my friends; driving past its vast array of golf courses; having lunch at the old Ocean Course clubhouse with its spectacular view; that by the end of the week I said, “Alright, I’ll give this golf thing a try”. Looking back on it, I can’t believe I spent that much money on my first true round of golf. Despite my horrific score, I managed to have fun. Not everyone has that background and opportunity.
* I played a decent amount of golf when it was just my girlfriend (now wife) and I. Weekend 18 and 9 hole weekday golf league. The game has been very frustrating at times, and I often wondered why I even bothered, given the time and expense. I guess it was those few moments when I got my game back that kept me from not playing.
* I have plenty of friends/co-workers my age who play golf at varying levels. I've been able to coordinate schedules exactly once this year. If I’m lucky, I’ll get two more like-rounds in this year. Vacations, kids, other activities. It's been tough finding 5-6 hours for an 18 hole round, considering travel and warm-up time.
* It helps having a friend who's a Golf Digest Top 100 Clubfitter.
* My wife and I both work full-time. She every other Saturday. We have two children under the age of three. I have had to make a very conscious effort to get rounds in this year. I’m pretty much resorted to a weekly, weekday 9 hole round at 6:30AM, a monthly weekend 18, and various rounds during PTO/Vacation. That being said, golf is pretty much my only hobby. I do enjoy watching a good match of footie, but my Columbus Crew season ticket holder days are way behind me (especially given I live 2 hours away in Cincinnati).
* The time thing I only kind of buy. Now that I have (young) kids, I wonder how I spent all that free-time. I honestly don’t remember. I’m not sure what people my age and younger (without kids) are doing in their off-time, but I’m sure there are many activities that take just as long as an 18 hole round of golf; especially a 9 hole round. For example, taking in an NFL game, with tailgate and all, takes much longer than a Sunday round of golf; even at a crowded muni on the weekend.
* My oldest daughter is almost three. I bought her a two club, plastic, Little Tikes set to play with. Even though she holds the club incorrectly and swings the wrong way, I’m doing my best to let her play the way she wants. If she asks me for help, I show her how to hold the club. She’s very proud when he hits the ball, good form or not. For now, that works for me. I need them to enjoy the game if I ever want them to play with me down the road.
...I still think there is nothing more fun than smashing a ball with a stick.
This.
-
How many of us, when we were young, would come home from school, skip homework and go out and play for hours? The sport of that season/day. And during the summer, play all day? Most kids would at least play some sort of sport during school recess and/or lunch. And even if we weren't great (or even good) at a particular sport, we were developing some hand/eye coordination. Now think of today, and how, even after all the years, you can still toss a ball across the room to a waste basket. Or grab something quickly before it falls. You're still enjoying the benefits of those years of youthful exercise. And on a very related note, the surge in youth obesity isn't from diet. Hell, didn't we all just wolf everything? No, it's from a lack of play/movement.
If golf isn't the most demanding sport to learn, it certainly ranks high. And that is with some level of coordination. Think of how a baseball or tennis swing is comparable to a golf swing. Hey, even a hockey slap shot is a nice start.
For many younger people, that hand/eye coordination is on a video stick.
And for the record, played video golf once and shot about a 120. Guess I have the wrong type of coordination
While the article mentioned the decline in golf, it failed to compare those numbers to other sports like tennis, baseball, etc.
You would think that soccer and possibly basketball might be up, but everything else has to be down.
So the real key is getting kids out and active. And make the active fun.
-
The golf course used to be a place where a parent could drop a kid for 4 hours for some peace and quiet away from them. Now, they hover over the kids and it's the kids that want to get away for 4 hours. Simple as that. It's all the parents' fault. 100%.
Drop your kid off at the range and tell 'em you'll see them in 4 hours. AND DO IT!
They'll fall in love with the game in droves.
David - best post of the bunch. I started taking the game seriously in 8th grade. My parents got me a junior season pass at Bethlehem Municipal ($185 March 1st to October 31st unlimited walking) and after my dad taught me what he could, he had been a good player before I was born, he got me lessons from a great pro. My mom would drop me off at 9 or so and I'd play 18 with the retired guys. After a bite and some practice and/or a nap in the locker room I would play 9 more in the after work action with a bunch of serious hard drinking gamblers. Sometimes I would have to hit my mom up for some money if I had a bad night. I spent more time in high school with that gang than with the kids I was in school with. 30 years later I still see more of that bunch than guys I went to school with. I have little doubt that that was a much better upbringing than today's junior golf scene. Other than high school golf and 2 or 3 junior tournaments a year that and playing in the adult tournaments was my junior golf. Today's kids might end up better golfers but their education is not nearly as rounded.
-
It seems like the Dick's article kicked out this theme:
A Game of Golf? Not for Many Millennials
Golf's Retail and Sporting Ends Scramble to Find New Strategy.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-game-of-golf-not-for-many-millennials-1406159228
(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CO087_GOLF_NS_20140723173613.jpg)
-
Today's kids might end up better golfers but their education is not nearly as rounded.
This is so true. When I was 14-15 I played a local upscale daily fee that would let juniors play for $25. I would get paired with random groups nearly everyday, and got myself into a lot of games. It would always start the same. I would introduce myself, and one of the group would be visibly upset they were paired with a kid. They would start talking bets, and I would ask if I could play since they needed a fourth. When they would waiver, I would say, "my mom gave me $50 today" and that would seal the deal. By the turn, the guy who was pissed they were paired with a kid was now pissed the kid was taking his money. I never once lied about my handicap or ability, but you would be shocked at the amount of adults who would refuse to pay a bet. I was paired with three different high school golfers last month at the Florida Publinx, and although they were all better players than I was and a couple of years older than I was at that time, I would doubt they would be able to handle that sort of situation. Two of the three had parents in tow, and seemed somewhat uncomfortable playing with an adult.
If I learned one thing from golf, it is how to interact with all sorts of people. I've never had any issue striking up a conversation with someone 2,3,4 times my age or 1/2 my age, and that is from being paired with strangers while playing golf. I am always amazed at how many people I meet are so uncomfortable speaking with someone outside of their peer group.
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
I totally disagree with that statement. It is ''Medal play'' is so uncool. Golf experiences growth from time to time regardless of what form you are playing. Most people I have known like to try and shoot less from round to round, and love challenging themselves to do better than their prior personal best. They are playing the golf course. A walk in the park, yet they are competing. golf is inner in a way.
-
In general, I do think there are probably too many golf courses around, and that they're causing the corps of golfers to be spread so thin that it looks like the game is suffering when it's really just a bit off its equilibrium. The apparent lower zest for golf among my generation (I'll be 25 this October) and the fact that mine is the first generation that will be broadly worse off financially than the previous generation cannot be mere coincidence.
As Millennials come up in the world and start to take on discretionary income, my guess is that they'll start taking to golf a little later in life. The proliferation of new technology and media has made it the case that people have broader general familiarity with the game. I have to think that will mean people will convert into golfers over time. Its just not going to happen overnight via one of these inane gimmicks like foot-golf or 15-inch cups. And that's fine.
Also, as technology and all that noise continue to ratchet up, there's going to be some desire for the type of peace that golf provides. The most important thing is that golf is going to need to become cheaper, and once the scarcity of water makes it more crucial that golf courses conserve, that should begin to happen. Mark King and his ilk want golf to get more popular because it will make them richer. The truth is, we may need to make them less rich (sorry fellas) if we want golf to take on any significant number of new, permanent players.
-
Matthew,
Your logic may apply to a segment of the population, but only a small one. Most of those "one-sport" athletes never even get a college scholarship and could easily take golf back up by age 18 if they wanted to. Plenty of avid golfers take up the game later in life after playing another sport as a kid. My Dad played baseball and took up golf at 25.
I don't think this comes down to one reason, even though I gave one specific one for myself. Most of my generation seems to be hammered with debt and golf just isn't a practical hobby except for those with means. To be any good at golf requires some pretty serious effort with lessons, practicing, playing, etc. The financial commitment just isn't possible for a lot of this generation, even if they like the idea of the game. It also isn't a game that can be learned by playing/practicing once every month or even every two weeks. That level of commitment separates those who are golfers from those who play golf. And those in the "play golf" category are leaving in droves.
That is the problem! Why are sporty kids forced to pick one sport when they most likely won't be a college athlete, and if you do become a college athlete, you aren't going pro? By 18, kids don't have the time or the financial support to then pick up the game.
I think there's a lot to this. The barriers to picking up the game as a young adult or later on are significant. Kids aren't really being kept away from the game because of dress codes or rules or even that it's hard. But I do think those things create a barrier for the 20-something set who might have played a few times as a kid, maybe gets invited out by friends or co-workers, and just finds it too much hassle. Not only is it hard to learn to play the game, as someone else mentioned, it's hard to learn all of there basic etiquette and how to of golf.
-
Without wishing to dismiss the notion that golf is suffering, and certainly things like Topgolf and Urbangolf are addressing some of those issues, the problem is more one of supply outstripping demand than anything else. Build golf courses in a boom period, courses which have high maintenance costs and therefore require high membership numbers just to break even, and it's only inevitable that many will be forced to close when times are harder.
Economic fluctuations are nothing new, but every village course in Scotland can survive the down times as they only need one man and his dog to turn up in order to break even, making them somewhat recession proof. That's simply not going to happen when your members judge quality by how much money you can throw at preparing a lawn.
-
ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/ (http://ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/)
Mike, I had to Google Topp Golf to understand. But sure enough, this looks like it combines the sort of elements thathave otherwise been barriers to youngsters dropping into the golf culture. It has the element of games to match the video gaming mentality; seems quite affordable by comparison to actual 18 hole golf, can be located in accessible population transportation centers and provides a real place to socialize old fashion way... by being with friends. 8) ;D
Yes, but is 'Top Golf' really golf?
-
ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/ (http://ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/)
Mike, I had to Google Topp Golf to understand. But sure enough, this looks like it combines the sort of elements thathave otherwise been barriers to youngsters dropping into the golf culture. It has the element of games to match the video gaming mentality; seems quite affordable by comparison to actual 18 hole golf, can be located in accessible population transportation centers and provides a real place to socialize old fashion way... by being with friends. 8) ;D
Yes, but is 'Top Golf' really golf?
I'm tempted to answer "Yes, in the same way that 'Frisbee Golf' is golf".
But it's really just a different point on the same continuum that includes all those guys who go to the driving range twice a week and pound balls but only play 10-15 rounds a year with many of those being nine holes. For some people, it's all about hitting a ball with a stick and after a while the golf course isn't strictly necessary.
-
Perhaps a better title is "Why the Millenials abandoned golf."
I'm convinced the millenials are causing a huge cultural and economic shift in this country, not as victims but by design. A re-balancing of priorities if you will.
Bogey
-
ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/ (http://ttp://topgolf.com/us/chicago/pricing/)
Mike, I had to Google Topp Golf to understand. But sure enough, this looks like it combines the sort of elements thathave otherwise been barriers to youngsters dropping into the golf culture. It has the element of games to match the video gaming mentality; seems quite affordable by comparison to actual 18 hole golf, can be located in accessible population transportation centers and provides a real place to socialize old fashion way... by being with friends. 8) ;D
Yes, but is 'Top Golf' really golf?
Of course Topgolf is not really golf. That doesn't matter. Is softball really baseball? The object IMHO is to get people wanting to play golf and topgolf is one way....JMO
-
Although I agree about pace being too slow, I find it ironic that golf takes too long for Millennials, but from my experience, most of the slowest players I run into are Millennials.
I've never bought into the theory that golf takes too long for Millennials and thus, is keeping them away. Yes, it takes too long, but that's more a problem for people in the prime of their careers who are juggling family and demanding job obligations. The writers of some of these stories make it sound as if Millennials can only spare 2.5 hours for golf because they've reserved the other 2.5 for texting and playing angry birds. That's BS.
Another thing to consider is that more and more of the younger generations are moving back to the big cities, where there is no such thing as a quick 4 hours door-to-door or a weeknight 9-holes. For me, in NYC, it can be a 9 hour process for one round. And that's something I can't do anything about, and something I definitely don't always have time for.
I very much agree with all of this. As a "Millenial" myself (born in 1981), pretty much nobody around my age has "left golf"...I would call it more of "golfer on pause." I have always tried to make a balance with work/life/wife/kid(shes 2)/golf...with some failures and some successes, as my wife would be sure to mention. I still have golfer friends who have chosen big cities, intense jobs, working internationally in non-golf areas, or having 3 kids in 5 years, etc. but plan to play a ton when pressures ease.
Like anything, if we value the golf experience, we will try to make it happen. If we value other things more, golf takes a back-burner.
I also think its the next generation after the Millenials that is to worry about golfwise...those are the people for whom technology might REALLY change their lives. I see many people around my age already pulling back from the facebook/online games/texting constantly way of life and looking more for actual life connections.
-
This guy clearly isn't a) a Millennial or b) a golfer
The only applicable section is the expense. I absolutely love golf and even I know golf is too expensive. That is the main barrier to entry and means a lot of millennials never even started. It separates it into the haves and the have nots. There is no "middle-class" of golfer anymore, it's either the die-hard that plays 50+ rounds or the guy that plays in the corporate outing once a year and that means everyone from the 55+ year old that was playing 20 rounds a year to the 20-something just out of school.
I will also say this...a lot of people I know, both golfers and non-golfers alike, are "label-conscious" meaning they want the best stuff, whether that's the new Taylormade SLDR+PROTOTYPE (R)ED EDITION or a new Hugo Boss jacket from Nordstrom. Top quality stuff is always expensive and golf just happens to be even more so. No one is picking up golden bear 1.0s from Wal-Mart to play anymore.
The same goes for courses...no one wants to go play a shit-hole dump of a course for $20 bucks when they could pay $50 for a much nicer course. But that means half as many rounds. So it equates to a $700 set up clubs and $50 each time out.
I'm not saying this is all people or every golfer, but I think it holds true for a good majority. I think a lot of golf's issues can be blamed on society's problem in always wanting the best - and part is golf's problem of always charging the maximum for the best.
-
Also, how much of this is Dick's PR squad trying to blame golfers on them laying of their Pros?
I just find it quite coincidental timing that about 5 of these articles and the HBO study coming out the same week of that announcement.
-
I fall right in the millennial age range. It is too expensive bottom line. I don't see the price point changing and so golf will continue to lose.
-
Golf is like any other business. If I were to build 5 grocery stores in an area that only needed one then there would be a problem even though all of us buy groceries. Some of the best opportunities ever for getting into a golf course are now. There is a lot of BS floating abouthow bad a business golf is. I look at it like this. The population will continue to grow and not many more courses will be built for a long time. If the percentage of people playing drops and yet the population of an area increases then the courses serving that area will be capable of being profitable. Note I say "capable". The clubhouse is more of a problem than the course inmost cases and they have to go....I think back and realize that I did not play much golf from 20-30 years of age and I think that is a common factor we never address. There is a lot of posturing going on out there right now.....
-
Golf is like any other business. If I were to build 5 grocery stores in an area that only needed one then there would be a problem even though all of us buy groceries. Some of the best opportunities ever for getting into a golf course are now. There is a lot of BS floating abouthow bad a business golf is. I look at it like this. The population will continue to grow and not many more courses will be built for a long time. If the percentage of people playing drops and yet the population of an area increases then the courses serving that area will be capable of being profitable. Note I say "capable". The clubhouse is more of a problem than the course inmost cases and they have to go....I think back and realize that I did not play much golf from 20-30 years of age and I think that is a common factor we never address. There is a lot of posturing going on out there right now.....
I agree with you Mike.
One thing about Golf, in my opinion, is that each local market functions pretty much independently to the other thousand(s) of local markets. How does the success or failure of your course impact/predict the success or failure of the folks making a go at LuLu here in my neighborhood? If you create a product that people want, that will have zero carry over to the Philly suburbs, and vice versa.
As always, the equipment guys are small hangers on to the golf culture that really is the foundation of its health and the culture is always developed locally.
I think the negatives are all the result of living through the backside of an oversupply bubble. Courses are open for business, maintenance has never been better, equipment options/liquidity is abundant. Find someone to play with and have fun!
-
There is more romance in developing a golf course than there is in developing a grocery store. Will this pathological behavior continue in the face of highly unfavorable economics? I suspect the answer is "as long as there's capital available."
Right now the spigot's closed. Not sure it will remain so, particularly when every feasibility study will conclude that it's feasible.
Bogey
-
The flip side is there's never been a better time to play great golf or join a great club. Many fabulous clubs that used to have long wait lists do not at the moment. There's never been better public options available. The glass is half full too, boys and girls...
-
The flip side is there's never been a better time to play great golf or join a great club. Many fabulous clubs that used to have long wait lists do not at the moment. There's never been better public options available. The glass is half full too, boys and girls...
Well said. There is tremendous opportunity for those looking for it. And if the current state of the industry results in a reformation of the way the industry is structured here in the US, I don't see that as being a bad thing. I hold out some hope (maybe wildly optimistic) that we will see a gradual trend toward the UK/Australia model of golf clubs.
-
I also think we will move more toward the UK model.
In the US we are so influenced by marketing and advertising and most of what we hear about golf is put out there or promoted by PGA or USGA or even GCSAA and the large management companies. Everyone of those named has a different motive than your local golf course. Using Athens as an example, no one of you would know of the local breakfast hangout like the Mayflower restaurant and yet all know of McDonald's breakfast. Why? The local guy has no need to advertise to the nation nor does he have franchise advertising nor does he need any of it. He has a clientele. Good golf is the same. The hype is coming from groups that need the actual courses across the country in order to survive or provide jobs for their members. The large management companies seem to always be playing musical chairs with Wall St funds and spend so much time with accountants showing the next KK&R that they can produce a 20% return and thus are deserving of another funding. And their leaders get listed as "the most important people in golf" when theri real expertise is musical chairs. Golf is a mom and pop and they don't care to get into all of this hype and marketing. For 25 years peole have tried to create an industry on the backs of the independent owners ( including the NGCOA itself...The groups like NGCOA started as a group for small owners and today they have their own conference for the multicourse owners and even consider many private, non profit, clubs as members. ). The PGA thinks owners should hire their member over a more qualified non member. The equipment companies think they should stock their product while they " consign" the same product to a big box competitor. There is a large SILENT component to this golf industry and they have no reason to enter the fray.
-
Another way to look at it is...if Taylor Made were to flip their production cycle from 4 drivers in one year to 1 driver in 4 years, would anyone leave the game?
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
I totally disagree with that statement. It is ''Medal play'' is so uncool. Golf experiences growth from time to time regardless of what form you are playing. Most people I have known like to try and shoot less from round to round, and love challenging themselves to do better than their prior personal best. They are playing the golf course. A walk in the park, yet they are competing. golf is inner in a way.
what you are saying is convoluted/complicated that you leave no doubt as to why golf is tanking
like I said the concept of actually scoring better in medal play is so self defeating for most people particularly for those I don't know or play golf, why would they play at all??
-
There is more romance in developing a golf course than there is in developing a grocery store. Will this pathological behavior continue in the face of highly unfavorable economics? I suspect the answer is "as long as there's capital available."
Thank God there are still a few rich guys who believe in romance. :) And, there is nothing pathological with wanting to build a better product for consumers, any more than it's pathological to start a new restaurant or a new architecture firm, or become a PGA professional, or whatever. It is just risky, and it's up to the individual whether they want to take that risk.
But, that's always been a small segment of the market. Most of the developers of the last 20 years were in it for the money in the houses; and it's going to be a while before the capital forgets how that turned out. Hopefully, though, when it does return, people will not sign up for a deal that puts all the cash into the developer's pocket while unloading the golf course onto the members with debt and not enough members to maintain the place.
-
I fall right in the millennial age range. It is too expensive bottom line. I don't see the price point changing and so golf will continue to lose.
I don't think golf is too expensive - golf equipment is too expensive and only if you buy into the hype of the manufacturers and feel like you need to have the latest & greatest.
I'm a Gen X'r with several millennial cousins. When I got hooked on the game it was before there were technological "necessities" like iPhones and WiFi to spend money on. They are faced with a disposable budgetary choice now - and the iPhone wins. Something I never had to worry about.
-
There is more romance in developing a golf course than there is in developing a grocery store. Will this pathological behavior continue in the face of highly unfavorable economics? I suspect the answer is "as long as there's capital available."
Hopefully, though, when it does return, people will not sign up for a deal that puts all the cash into the developer's pocket while unloading the golf course onto the members with debt and not enough members to maintain the place.
Amen....if a future developer could build the course for half of the signature constrcution cost and endow the maintenance budget, that model would work...
-
I fall right in the millennial age range. It is too expensive bottom line. I don't see the price point changing and so golf will continue to lose.
I felt that way when I was 25 (and I'm sure part of the issue was I never paid for golf until post college, but could play a lot). I also thought it took too long (living in Chicago and not having much private access). It was just too expensive and time consuming to play a lot. Looking back realistically, I didn't have much problem blowing a couple hundred dollars at bars or Wrigley Field most weekends and sleeping in the next day, so in reality, it just was too expensive and time consuming for my priorities at that time.
I hear the same thing from some friends why they don't join the local club today. Yet, they take one or two family vacations a year that have to run $6k combined, and drive two cars that probably come with $15k of annual car payments. For me, I'd prefer to drive a nice used car and nix one vacation a year for the club membership which we use a lot, but not everyone has the same priorities.
Doesn't mean cost isn't an issue, but if the other issues were removed, I think people are willing to pay for things they like.
I mean, it costs something like $600 to bring a family of 4 to a Cubs game in box seats now, and attendance is still better than when it could be done for $50 in 1982.
-
I also think we will move more toward the UK model.
In the US we are so influenced by marketing and advertising and most of what we hear about golf is put out there or promoted by PGA or USGA or even GCSAA and the large management companies. Everyone of those named has a different motive than your local golf course. Using Athens as an example, no one of you would know of the local breakfast hangout like the Mayflower restaurant and yet all know of McDonald's breakfast. Why? The local guy has no need to advertise to the nation nor does he have franchise advertising nor does he need any of it. He has a clientele. Good golf is the same. The hype is coming from groups that need the actual courses across the country in order to survive or provide jobs for their members. The large management companies seem to always be playing musical chairs with Wall St funds and spend so much time with accountants showing the next KK&R that they can produce a 20% return and thus are deserving of another funding. And their leaders get listed as "the most important people in golf" when theri real expertise is musical chairs. Golf is a mom and pop and they don't care to get into all of this hype and marketing. For 25 years peole have tried to create an industry on the backs of the independent owners ( including the NGCOA itself...The groups like NGCOA started as a group for small owners and today they have their own conference for the multicourse owners and even consider many private, non profit, clubs as members. ). The PGA thinks owners should hire their member over a more qualified non member. The equipment companies think they should stock their product while they " consign" the same product to a big box competitor. There is a large SILENT component to this golf industry and they have no reason to enter the fray.
Love this post.
-
Plus, look at the way many privates go about trying to get members. It's a joke - referral by 3-5 members, meetings with committees, etc...
(I'm not talking about the Pine Valley's of the world here - I'm talking about the huge number of '2nd Tier' clubs)
-
I don't know Dan...not to sound like too much of a douche but look at the places that simply let everyone that can pay for it in. I don't think they're faring all that well...
-
Plus, look at the way many privates go about trying to get members. It's a joke - referral by 3-5 members, meetings with committees, etc...
(I'm not talking about the Pine Valley's of the world here - I'm talking about the huge number of '2nd Tier' clubs)
That's all fake crap used to discriminate against people that they don't want. I remember when a club said that they wanted me and my wife to come in for an interview and I refused because I wasn't telling my wife I was joining they let me in on the spot.
Same thing with this so-called UK model. You can play anywhere you want in the US if you have enough game to make the kind of money it takes to play. If you don't, join the Outpost. How many courses does one golfer need?
-
One reason many of us have lost our desire to see new courses is because the challenge is gone.
-
One reason many of us have lost our desire to see new courses is because the challenge is gone.
And everyone keeps showing up with the same logos!
Of course, maybe the Millennials just don't trust old white guys:
(http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2014/03/SDT-next-america-03-07-2014-0-05.png)
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/03/07/millennials-in-adulthood/
-
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
[/quote]
I really agree with this and feel that if more kids got involved in the game at a young age via match play, scrambles, etc. they would have more fun, improve faster and become more invested in the game as a long-term pursuit. I'm all for individual rounds as well but think that playing solely individual rounds can be counter-productive for the majority of kids learning the game initially.
-
That's all fake crap used to discriminate against people that they don't want. I remember when a club said that they wanted me and my wife to come in for an interview and I refused because I wasn't telling my wife I was joining they let me in on the spot.
Same thing with this so-called UK model. You can play anywhere you want in the US if you have enough game to make the kind of money it takes to play. If you don't, join the Outpost. How many courses does one golfer need?
Awesome post. You not wanting your wife to know was probably WHY THEY LET YOU IN!
As for me, I'm part of Generation TW (ages 11 or so to 17 or so in 1997, otherwise would not have become golfers but saw Tiger dismantle Augusta and took up the game shortly thereafter). For many of us, life is starting to really get in the way of playing the game (kids, jobs, etc.) but not me. I work at a course to accommodate my addiction. Here are some opinions (opinions are like assholes...):
1) I thought the original article would have been impressive if written by a fifth grader but alas they put the old codger's picture up.
2) I believe the game of golf isn't growing, or dying, but is cyclically adjusting. Most leisure industries are very volatile like this (see boat sales).
3) The equipment industry and related have the most to lose and their desperation is really becoming quite pathetic. The LEAD topic of the last "In Play with Jimmy Roberts" was counterfeit equipment! This is July, in the middle of golf season, in between the last two majors, and you come up with COUNTERFEIT GOLF EQUIPMENT as your lead story? That show and any "journalists" involved can be dismissed as a thinly veiled infomercial and shills respectively.
4) Golf course maintenance practices have become absurd. Focusing on the wrong things, wrong philosophy, chasing the wrong look, wasting money, water, etc. etc. This is the industry in which I am currently employed.
5) The coming years will be painful, but golf will certainly survive. What we will be left with may be a better game/industry then we are looking at now. It will have to be. Golf is certainly in a better place than bowling (damning with faint praise?) and my other industry of employment: skiing (growing, but climate issues loom massively).
-
As for me, I'm part of Generation TW (ages 11 or so to 17 or so in 1997, otherwise would not have become golfers but saw Tiger dismantle Augusta and took up the game shortly thereafter). For many of us, life is starting to really get in the way of playing the game (kids, jobs, etc.) but not me. I work at a course to accommodate my addiction. Here are some opinions (opinions are like assholes...):
1) I thought the original article would have been impressive if written by a fifth grader but alas they put the old codger's picture up.
2) I believe the game of golf isn't growing, or dying, but is cyclically adjusting. Most leisure industries are very volatile like this (see boat sales).
3) The equipment industry and related have the most to lose and their desperation is really becoming quite pathetic. The LEAD topic of the last "In Play with Jimmy Roberts" was counterfeit equipment! This is July, in the middle of golf season, in between the last two majors, and you come up with COUNTERFEIT GOLF EQUIPMENT as your lead story? That show and any "journalists" involved can be dismissed as a thinly veiled infomercial and shills respectively.
4) Golf course maintenance practices have become absurd. Focusing on the wrong things, wrong philosophy, chasing the wrong look, wasting money, water, etc. etc. This is the industry in which I am currently employed.
5) The coming years will be painful, but golf will certainly survive. What we will be left with may be a better game/industry then we are looking at now. It will have to be. Golf is certainly in a better place than bowling (damning with faint praise?) and my other industry of employment: skiing (growing, but climate issues loom massively).
Great post Tom, and I agree with everything you said here. Especially the two I've highlighted. People need to realize less people are playing because there are less young people than before. Part of golf's boom period was cause because of the boomer generation.
I mean this in no offense to the people that are doing good in the industry, and I know there are many...but I've never seen an industry where incompetent people are continually put in charge and bad ideas are continually recycled and spewed as genius. If they really wanted the golf industry to get back to booming they'd put some practical changes in place for manufacturers, agronomy, country clubs and all down the line.
-
I agree that the most accurate observation of golf is that it is going through a "cyclical adjustment". Was there even a there, there- when the industry built all those courses in the past 20 years? The same courses closing up now. You have to wonder if the predicted demand was pure wishful thinking. Golf is niche. Those that love it, love it. There is enough of us to maintain the sport, culture, ect... We could give a damn about manufactuer's over heated sales projections falling short.
-
Hey, take it easy on bad-mouthing bowling.
Compared to golf, I find that one can get approximately the same score, while losing fewer balls ;)
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
I totally disagree with that statement. It is ''Medal play'' is so uncool. Golf experiences growth from time to time regardless of what form you are playing. Most people I have known like to try and shoot less from round to round, and love challenging themselves to do better than their prior personal best. They are playing the golf course. A walk in the park, yet they are competing. golf is inner in a way.
what you are saying is convoluted/complicated that you leave no doubt as to why golf is tanking
like I said the concept of actually scoring better in medal play is so self defeating for most people particularly for those I don't know or play golf, why would they play at all??
People try golf for many reasons. It is a difficult sport and people attracted to challenging sports are more prone to try them. If you honestly think whether someone plays match play or Stroke play while there learning is influencing the decline in golf, well that is beyond idiotic. A beginner is trying to get the ball in the air. The whole artificial increase in golf was tied in with the housing market. people weren't working, they were leveraging. Hence more people were playing golf more free time they thought they had. Golf isn't tanking, it is completely fine.
''Well said. There is tremendous opportunity for those looking for it. And if the current state of the industry results in a reformation of the way the industry is structured here in the US, I don't see that as being a bad thing. I hold out some hope (maybe wildly optimistic) that we will see a gradual trend toward the UK/Australia model of golf clubs.''
Amen for common sense!
-
To say something was lost is to assume it was once found. Golf never had them; they view golf as their grand pa's game and they are not impressed with acres and acres of perfect landscaping and uniform green grass, they grew up with that.
15" cups isn't going to get them either. Turn golf into part game, part hike, part exploration, and you'll get some of their attention.
Sort of what is was like before we perfected it.
and golf is not a game of perfect
rarely do you win in golf particularly if play medal play, which in itself is an entirely self defeating concept
if you play match play, like horse in BB, then you have fun, it's an adventure!
the growth of the game via the total score concept was sheer suicide yet we watch the pros play for other peoples money with that concept every week
I totally disagree with that statement. It is ''Medal play'' is so uncool. Golf experiences growth from time to time regardless of what form you are playing. Most people I have known like to try and shoot less from round to round, and love challenging themselves to do better than their prior personal best. They are playing the golf course. A walk in the park, yet they are competing. golf is inner in a way.
what you are saying is convoluted/complicated that you leave no doubt as to why golf is tanking
like I said the concept of actually scoring better in medal play is so self defeating for most people particularly for those I don't know or play golf, why would they play at all??
People try golf for many reasons. It is a difficult sport and people attracted to challenging sports are more prone to try them. If you honestly think whether someone plays match play or Stroke play while there learning is influencing the decline in golf, well that is beyond idiotic. A beginner is trying to get the ball in the air. The whole artificial increase in golf was tied in with the housing market. people weren't working, they were leveraging. Hence more people were playing golf more free time they thought they had. Golf isn't tanking, it is completely fine.
''Well said. There is tremendous opportunity for those looking for it. And if the current state of the industry results in a reformation of the way the industry is structured here in the US, I don't see that as being a bad thing. I hold out some hope (maybe wildly optimistic) that we will see a gradual trend toward the UK/Australia model of golf clubs.''
Amen for common sense!
lol. beyond idiotic, I've reached a new level
-
I have reached Ludicrous Speed myself. I've gone PLAID!
-
The easiest way to get the complete truth on how golf is doing in your area is to ask the Titleist rep in your area if ball sales are up or down and which balls he sells the most. I think ball sales have remained steady or increased even with all the bitching and moaning.... :) :) what does that tell us?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6wOt2iXdc4
-
...
I can't believe you deleted that pile of crap. Who told you David played for Northwestern?
-
I have reached Ludicrous Speed myself. I've gone PLAID!
Best post in this thread ... I'm surrounded by a$@holes..
-
I have reached Ludicrous Speed myself. I've gone PLAID!
Best post in this thread ... I'm surrounded by assholes.
I would like to apologize to Brent, David, and William for my tone and words.
-
It's just a movie quote playing off Brett's movie quote. Funnier in my own mind after my second glass of wine.
-
I have reached Ludicrous Speed myself. I've gone PLAID!
Best post in this thread ... I'm surrounded by assholes.
I would like to apologize to Brent, David, and William for my tone and words.
How generous after deleting you posts.
-
I agree that the most accurate observation of golf is that it is going through a "cyclical adjustment". Was there even a there, there- when the industry built all those courses in the past 20 years? The same courses closing up now. You have to wonder if the predicted demand was pure wishful thinking. Golf is niche. Those that love it, love it. There is enough of us to maintain the sport, culture, ect... We could give a damn about manufactuer's over heated sales projections falling short.
I think there was.
When I was a teenager living in the Denver area in the mid-90s, it was damn near impossible to get a weekend tee time. Any time. Anywhere. The courses were choked.
But since that time, the Denver metro area has added ... I'm not even sure, maybe close to 20 new public course options? There was a need for growth, but it seems like 3 new courses opened for every 1 that was needed. And that was just during the boom time; it's not entirely clear as the game again settles/adjusts that many more courses were needed than existed nationwide prior to that 90s boom.
It's hard to blame people for going for it, and I'm not complaining since it means more places and fewer crowds when I get the rare chance to play, but it was a pretty classic boom time situation. The demand was real, for a time, it was just over served.
-
The easiest way to get the complete truth on how golf is doing in your area is to ask the Titleist rep in your area if ball sales are up or down and which balls he sells the most. I think ball sales have remained steady or increased even with all the bitching and moaning.... :) :) what does that tell us?
The long ball is resulting in more lost balls?
More water and rough on modern courses results in more lost balls?
Ciao
-
"Your logic may apply to a segment of the population, but only a small one. Most of those "one-sport" athletes never even get a college scholarship and could easily take golf back up by age 18 if they wanted to. Plenty of avid golfers take up the game later in life after playing another sport as a kid. My Dad played baseball and took up golf at 25.
I don't think this comes down to one reason, even though I gave one specific one for myself. Most of my generation seems to be hammered with debt and golf just isn't a practical hobby except for those with means. To be any good at golf requires some pretty serious effort with lessons, practicing, playing, etc. The financial commitment just isn't possible for a lot of this generation, even if they like the idea of the game. It also isn't a game that can be learned by playing/practicing once every month or even every two weeks. That level of commitment separates those who are golfers from those who play golf. And those in the "play golf" category are leaving in droves.
That is the problem! Why are sporty kids forced to pick one sport when they most likely won't be a college athlete, and if you do become a college athlete, you aren't going pro? By 18, kids don't have the time or the financial support to then pick up the game.
I think there's a lot to this. The barriers to picking up the game as a young adult or later on are significant. Kids aren't really being kept away from the game because of dress codes or rules or even that it's hard. But I do think those things create a barrier for the 20-something set who might have played a few times as a kid, maybe gets invited out by friends or co-workers, and just finds it too much hassle. Not only is it hard to learn to play the game, as someone else mentioned, it's hard to learn all of there basic etiquette and how to of golf."
Here are my thoughts on the above.
I think this is a great start to an article but importanly missing some information for perspective.
One is a graph (later supplied by someone) showing the numer of participants now vs then - to get a real sense of incline/decline.
Two is the numbers of golfers related to the total number of courses opened. As others have eluded to, just because courses were being built, did not mean that they were necessary.
Three is a chart showing the average age of golfer compared to what age that they began learning/playing the game.
Four is some sort of comparison of golf in urban vs rural areas. I have never seen such a comparison, but now that I live in a city of millions my perception of the game has changed.
Some bits of information about me. Age 33. Currently played 9 rounds this year (Most was about 60-70 while in college to low of 10-15 when busiest. Play golf at public courses 99% of rounds with occasional private round. Started playing at age 15. Hit balls in a country backyard/pasture for first few months before eventually making it to the driving range/course months later and several dozens of golf balls lost. Grew up in country town of about 32000, now in downtown Chicago with population of 2.7 mil depending if you include the whole Chicagoland area.
My thoughts.
One, how is the game tought differently in urban vs rural areas. I grew up hitting balls on/off range in clothes that were appropriate (gym shorts/tennis shoes) and never was reprimanded for doing so. I see very similar things on driving ranges here in the city/suburbs as well. Clothes may be more traditional on course, but certainly not a necessity for play.
Two, learning the on course etiquette cannot be overstated. It may seem so easy to some, but others I have played with did not grow up with the same rules. If you do not have a great mentor teaching you (pro or family member) I think that you are destined to make some mistakes and lose out on the true experience of being on the course.
Three, I grew up learning the game watching my grandparents play charity tournaments. I did not start playing with them right away. Instead learned the basic rules and how to act before I was taken on course. If you do not do this early in life (choose what ever age you think is best) I think you make it more difficult to start. I am not saying that you cannot learn game at 30, just that it become steeper curve to success the later in life you begin.
Four, access to play is a matter of perspective. Growing up getting to a couse was difficult. No car and little means to get there on a regular basis. College was a dream. Make your own schedule and play when you want. For me the most quantity of play as well as some of my best scores ever. Started college barely breaking 100 and best score at graduation +1/72. Currently more difficult again. I live in the inner city. I rarely ever see others with clubs here, with driving ranges hot or miss with people. Ranges in suburbs way busier than those in city. Very few of my downtown friends own cars and get to the suburbs to play frequently if at all.
I love the game yes, but my perspective has changed dramatically over the years. Good or bad I am not sure, just a different view at a game that I grew up loving and continue to currently. If your thoughts on the game have not changed in the past 10 years, then I think you should take a serious look at your own game and the game in general.
-
My dear chap, Mr. Houlihan,
You write "If your thoughts on the game have not changed in the past 10 years, then I think you should take a serious look at your own game and the game in general." My thoughts on the game haven't changed in forty years what am I supposed to do!!
I found it then, and find it now, a captivating and wonderful game and forsee no change in my outlook for the next couple of decades!
I have found it equally fulfilling and exasperating, a comedy and a tragedy, a pleasure and a trial but I won't be turning introspective about my disaster of a game or the game in general any time soon!
I am ever so glad that I don't need to take stock of my parlous game (as my thoughts on it haven't changed) as that might send me into a spiral of despair! Best that I continue on my merry insouciant way… whatcha think!
Chuckling away here,
Colin
-
Colin,
Actually I am glad that you have positive thoughts about this game. My comment points more towards those thinking that "golf should be what it used to be." The games equipment, pace of play, and number of players changes constantly. In the end the game is still the same. Man hits ball, finds ball, and repeats. Some do it walking and smiling, some do it riding and swearing. Losing younger players is certainly not a good thing for the game overall, but will the game fail going forward? I think that has much more to do with multiple factors rather than one age group alone.
-
If your thoughts on the game have not changed in the past 10 years, then I think you should take a serious look at your own game and the game in general.
[/b]
My thoughts on golf are evolutionary coming up on 40 years of hitting a ball not so well.
My current thought is a I am headed to a range, not a golf course, in Connecticut today after a bike ride. The evolution of golf is I suck at golf right now :)
Irons and putting were pretty good this week at Bethpage, but literally can't get off the tee. I am sure there will be others there in a similar position.
"Losing younger players is certainly not a good thing for the game overall, but will the game fail going forward? I think that has much more to do with multiple factors rather than one age group alone."
Fail? Not sure what you mean by this, but golf is not going anywhere other than changing, just like life.....
-
JH,
Ah, young man (said in jest as I'm all of four years older than you ;D), I once thought of the evolution of golf in terms very similar to you, finding the very notion of hickory golf etc to be a nonsense. However, and I'm no hickory player to this day, these older chaps here have taught me a thing or two over the last couple of years and, particularly in view of my architectural education, I've come to realise that the 'progression' of equipment and such like is nothing but a futile exercise in making more equal less. Length, ultimately, is only relative to the size of the field you play in.
But regardless, you make some good points about multiple factors which have afflicted participation levels amongst those under 30, although I reiterate that the supply of golf courses has done much to paint a picture which is nowhere near as bad as people often perceive it to be.
I'm just not convinced however that younger players are so concerned about time constraints or other factors raised, or certainly not to the extent which is often assumed. More than anything, under 30's don't have an imperialist sense of land ownership as they grew up in a world where power was virtual rather than physical. Consequently, there's no draw to manicured flower beds in the way which perhaps there was for the baby boomers. The enjoyment gained from the course is all there is to appraise for these kids and that's no bad thing, unless of course you manage a club which is based on style rather than substance or, to put it another way, an artificially pretty course which actually becomes dull pretty quickly. All of this bodes well for the purist but we can hardly be surprised when those in the industry with a stylised product do everything they can to create a magpie effect around their product. These people will do everything in their power except hire a skilled architect to transform the course. You'll see every trick in the book to promote their package while actually deflecting the light away from the playability of the course.
-
I don't give a flying f$&@ if Fila Korea or Ingersol Rand meet their quarterly projections or if Yuppie Hills Golf & Country Club has to, god forbid!, go public and Biff and Buffy lose their equity downstroke. I'm a golf consumer and all I see ahead of me is 30 years of blue skies and a myriad of interesting, affordable golf. From where I sit, golf has never been better.
-
More than anything, under 30's don't have an imperialist sense of land ownership as they grew up in a world where power was virtual rather than physical. Consequently, there's no draw to manicured flower beds in the way which perhaps there was for the baby boomers.
Really really interesting observation on land ownership vs the virtual world.
Perhaps this is a cause for the decline of private golf. Not sure, but I will be thinking about that when I solve my driver issues at the public range this afternoon.
-
A fair amount of Millienial participation decline is money. Skiing participation overall and by Millienials has dropped even more than golf.
-
A fair amount of Millienial participation decline is money. Skiing participation overall and by Millienials has dropped even more than golf.
I haven't seen any numbers on this. Are you including boarders? From where I sit skiing/boarding have never been so popular although, as mentioned above, climate issues are going to take a toll probably in my lifetime and certainly in my kids' lifetimes.
A Young Adult Premier pass at my local (Snowbasin - a world class ski area that has hosted Olympic downhills) is currently $489. It was about $20 cheaper earlier this month. It includes:
- 2014 Summer Gondola Access, loaded onto winter season pass
- Three days of skiing/riding at Sun Valley Resort, Idaho. Sun Valley tickets will be loaded onto season pass. No blackout dates!
- "New" $99 2 hour private coaching at Snowsports (One offer per passholder, blackout dates apply)
- $159 hotel rate at Sun Valley Lodge or Inn (on a space available basis).
- 15% discount off Winter Repair in Grizzly Center Repair Shop.
- Two 50% off buddy vouchers, can be used any time during 2014-2015 season. (Pass Holder must be present to redeem)
- Discount off Tubing Hill ride tickets. Must be purchased at Ticket Window or Season Pass Desk.
- Powder Alliance – 3 days of access at 11 other Western Resorts (some restrictions).
- Ski Bus Pass (one-time $5 service charge).
- "New" Discounts on room rates at the Grand America & Little America Hotels (on a space available basis).
And, of course, unlimited lift access for the 2014/15 season. Anything like that in golf for Millenials?
-
"Golf" is not missing out, the millesimals are.
-
"Golf" is not missing out, the millesimals are.
Amen
-
Anything like that in golf for Millenials?
Nobody on GCA listens, but Maine golf also throws in the beach club too:
http://www.harrisgolfonline.com/newsletters/nines2014newmemberpacket.pdf
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/theknot.ats.CompanyPhotos/c864d8da-849b-425c-93c8-6639d4961a5b)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/theknot.ats.CompanyPhotos/362ce7f5-86cf-47f4-b034-0e0a50c5a3db)
PS - Not a beef, Snowbasin is a kick ass ski area....
-
"Millennials" would appear to refer to a generation now aged between 15 and 35. Should it really come as a surprise that not many of these people are playing golf?
Most avid golfers I know did not play a lot of golf at this age either. Even those like myself who got a taste for the game as a kid do not generally play much golf through their young adult years; there are just so many factors conspiring against mass participation for this cohort.
Getting a career established, chasing women, serious socialising, etc etc consume all the time available at this age. Golf is a colossal commitment in terms of both time and money; a commitment most young men are just not able or willing to make.
And then the kids come along...
The role of the father in most young families today is unrecognisable from that of only thirty years ago. He is (quite rightly) expected to play a much greater part in parenting his kids than in the past. Disappearing to the golf club for half a day on Saturday and Sunday is just not realistic any more for most young fathers. Neither is justifying £1000+ a year in membership fees plus the same again in equipment and consumables at a time when finances are inevitably stretched.
Those young fathers who do manage to negotiate a weekly dose of sporting activity away from their family are generally playing something else in their twenties and thirties. Here in the UK that means either football (soccer) or rugby. The time to recruit these guys into golf is when their footballing career is nearing an end and they want or need to replace it with something new.
Of course there are exceptions, but in very general terms golf is an activity for middle-aged men.
When the Millennials enter middle-age I see no reason why a sufficient proportion of them will not be bitten by the golf bug. All the game has to do is wait for the twenty and thirty-somethings to grow up and then grab them!
-
Duncan - I think you're onto something.
I've been playing since I was 17 (I'm 54 now). But until I was > 30, played exclusively public/municipal courses and probably wasn't on anyone's golfing radar. I went private (Riverside in Portland, OR) - it cost me a lot, but it was worth it because I could finally play 18 in under 4 hours. Lord knows I didn't join for the dining.
In fact, I think that separating the dining business from the golf business would do nothing but grow the game of golf and attract millenials. Why would one of them want a monthly minimum for average food and slow service?
-
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that there is no place in golf for young guys in their 20s and 30s. I see these people every day at my local driving range or at my own club as paying visitors.
What I do not see is 'millennials' being members of golf clubs. And what I am saying is that if golf clubs see this age group as being vital to the game's future then they are pissing in the wind.
Young guys flirt with golf, and then get serious about it when circumstances allow. That, in this day and age, is when they reach the age of 35 -55.
Interestingly, several former junior members of my club have recently taken up the game again and re-joined after many years absence. Now in their late thirties and early forties, they have not picked up a golf club in twenty years. They are now amongst the keenest players we have and have to a man regained their former single figure handicaps in a matter of weeks.
As juniors all those years ago they almost certainly cost the club money. Only now in early middle age are they contributors.
-
Duncan,
Certainly you're on to something and I was already convinced this was all a storm in a teacup.
Certainly at 37 I fit the category you refer to at your club. I played avidly as a junior, put my clubs down when I moved away to university at 18 and didn't really pick them up again until 4 years ago. Now I've rejoined the club I grew up at and they can finally make some money out of me. Those junior years, while not profitable for the club at the time, cemented the place as 'home.'
-
Duncan,
If we had golf clubs charging $1800 a year in the US, millennials would be lining up in droves to join. More importantly you wouldn't be losing 45-55 year old's as members.
-
Ben,
I thought that was the sort of price you were now looking out???
-
Not sure about the situation in the US, but here in Germany there's another reason why younger people are often not too eager to join a golf club. When you start out in your profession, after school and/or college, you simply have no way to be sure that you will remain with this company in this city for more than a couple of years.
In fact, most young professionals nowadays are expected to be mobile and relocate to other parts of the country, sometimes even when staying with the same company. But for sure when looking for a new professional challenge. However, most clubs aren't too eager to accept new members for 2-3 years and then let them go again.
Initiation fees are the most popular way to ensure that once you join, you stay. But there are other methods, such as unfavorable terms of resignation and social pressure, which all conspire to make it clear that you better know you're in it for the long haul.
Ulrich
-
So are we talking "golf" or "private golf clubs with substantial initiation fees"?
It's funny how many different things the current downturn threatens depending on who you're talking to. Talk to a golf equipment manufacturer or retailers and the decline of "golf" is all about people not buying as many new high-$$$ golf clubs. Talk to people who own or (want to) build golf courses and it's all about there being too many courses out there to support building more. Talk to members of private clubs and its the feared death of "golf" in the form of clubs that costs tens of thousands of dollars to join and thousands more each year in dues.
-
Duncan,
If we had golf clubs charging $1800 a year in the US, millennials would be lining up in droves to join. More importantly you wouldn't be losing 45-55 year old's as members.
But how would we pay for maintenance of our overwatered and over fertilized courses, our oversized clubhouses with huge ballrooms for occasional use, swimming pools and tennis courts and fleets of electric carts?
-
At 37, I play less now than I ever have in my life. Of course, I'm not entirely happy about this. I'm averaging roughly 8-10 rounds a year.
I have two young children to raise, a mortgage, two cars, utility bills, medical bills from their births that I'm still paying off, and countless other things. I have never been a member of a club. I simply don't have the time or the money to play frequently. I won't spend more than $50 on a round unless it's at someplace where the green fee is usually double or triple that.
I'm playing the same set of irons I've had since 1993. I've bought a handful of clubs over that time, always used, usually on ebay. I buy a new pair of golf shoes probably once every 5-7 years and never spend more than $50-60... usually I get something on clearance in the winter.
I've said every year for the past five that I'm going to play more this year and I'm going to finally get some new clubs. And at the end of said year, it never happens. Something always gets in the way, like being laid off, losing insurance benefits, missing extended periods of work through illness while working hourly... having to take my kids out of daycare because I can no longer afford it, etc, etc, etc...
My kids are learning the game anyway.... the oldest one is about to turn 5, and he's very much into learning. He already has a good putting touch, but he's not ready to hit a full shot yet.
If nothing else, golf may become an escape for them when they are struggling to make ends meet, much like I am now.
-
I will add one further reason. Millennials are the first generation where females have been active in sports. This has resulted in sports participation with their boyfriend /spouse. They kayak, play kick ball, bike, volleyball, run, etc. in conjunction with their partners. This does not leave much time for golf.
-
"Millennials" would appear to refer to a generation now aged between 15 and 35. Should it really come as a surprise that not many of these people are playing golf?
Most avid golfers I know did not play a lot of golf at this age either. Even those like myself who got a taste for the game as a kid do not generally play much golf through their young adult years; there are just so many factors conspiring against mass participation for this cohort.
Getting a career established, chasing women, serious socialising, etc etc consume all the time available at this age. Golf is a colossal commitment in terms of both time and money; a commitment most young men are just not able or willing to make.
And then the kids come along...
The role of the father in most young families today is unrecognisable from that of only thirty years ago. He is (quite rightly) expected to play a much greater part in parenting his kids than in the past. Disappearing to the golf club for half a day on Saturday and Sunday is just not realistic any more for most young fathers. Neither is justifying £1000+ a year in membership fees plus the same again in equipment and consumables at a time when finances are inevitably stretched.
Those young fathers who do manage to negotiate a weekly dose of sporting activity away from their family are generally playing something else in their twenties and thirties. Here in the UK that means either football (soccer) or rugby. The time to recruit these guys into golf is when their footballing career is nearing an end and they want or need to replace it with something new.
Of course there are exceptions, but in very general terms golf is an activity for middle-aged men.
When the Millennials enter middle-age I see no reason why a sufficient proportion of them will not be bitten by the golf bug. All the game has to do is wait for the twenty and thirty-somethings to grow up and then grab them!
Duncan, we have some younger members at my club but I'm sure the average age of the members is north of 60. We were out there Friday night for dinner and the average age looked to be closer to 70!
I went through what you describe above and didn't play much from 1971-1983 while my kids were growing. Somehow I was allowed to join a nice club when the oldest was 12 and the youngest 7. It worked out well for 12-year old David, he spent a few entire summers at the club learning to play. The 12 years off pretty much ruined my own game! >:(
-
Not sure about the situation in the US, but here in Germany there's another reason why younger people are often not too eager to join a golf club. When you start out in your profession, after school and/or college, you simply have no way to be sure that you will remain with this company in this city for more than a couple of years.
In fact, most young professionals nowadays are expected to be mobile and relocate to other parts of the country, sometimes even when staying with the same company. But for sure when looking for a new professional challenge. However, most clubs aren't too eager to accept new members for 2-3 years and then let them go again.
Initiation fees are the most popular way to ensure that once you join, you stay. But there are other methods, such as unfavorable terms of resignation and social pressure, which all conspire to make it clear that you better know you're in it for the long haul.
Ulrich
This is an excellent point. I have a friend who is a Dr doing his residency and doesn't know how long he will be in the area he is in. He wants to join a club but doesn't want to invest in one that has an initiation fee. I think Pace of Play drives people away and may have them playing less public golf. One reason to join a private club is the pace of play is much much better.
-
I'm all in favor of adopting the UK club model here in the USA. But one thing that I can't figure out is how a club would be able to handle th influx of new members that would be needed to make that model work? If the focus is more members, and lower overall dues, it means that tee times would be at a premium because there'd be more golfers using the course, which is an absolute necessity for the UK model to be feasible. At a 36 hole club, it's likely not a problem. But what about an 18 hole club? Is it even possible?
-
I'm all in favor of adopting the UK club model here in the USA. But one thing that I can't figure out is how a club would be able to handle th influx of new members that would be needed to make that model work? If the focus is more members, and lower overall dues, it means that tee times would be at a premium because there'd be more golfers using the course, which is an absolute necessity for the UK model to be feasible. At a 36 hole club, it's likely not a problem. But what about an 18 hole club? Is it even possible?
I've no personal experience of playing golf in the US but from what I understand it would indeed be difficult to make the UK club model work there.
Here in the UK a typical local members' club with a decent enough but not architecturally significant course will have maybe 300-500 members each paying around £800 - £1000 per year. Most clubs were established before 1930 and own their property outright with little or no debt. The climate in the UK makes expensive irrigation systems largely unnecessary and most clubs of the kind I refer to manage perfectly well with five or less maintenance crew (greens staff).
Golf clubs here revolve solely around golf; tennis courts, swimming pools etc are unheard of, and while there may be a small annual bar levy to aid cash-flow and to encourage car-park golfers to stay for a drink after their round, dining minimums are unknown. In fact, most clubs have long washed their hands of all catering services and franchise out this 'opportunity' to a self-employed steward.
Initiation fees have disappeared for 90% of clubs - only the 'elite' clubs in any area are able to attract new members willing to pay them. This does not necessarily mean the places with the best courses!
The low-cost model works because clubs keep their costs low. This means almost no 'service'. This entails parking your own car, taking your own clubs out of the trunk, and cleaning your own shoes. Would Americans accept this? ;)
Sadly, the 'UK Club Model' is now not working too well for a lot of UK clubs. Consolidation and casualties are probably inevitable. When visitor green fees become cheaper than the weekly cost of being a member a club will have problems in attracting and retaining members. This is now the case at probably the majority of UK golf clubs.
Believe it or not, the average UK golfer considers annual club fees of £1000 ($1700) to be expensive.
-
The niche that you guys are describing is filled in my home town by semi-private courses, some of which run with staffing and budget akin to the way Duncan describes the majority of UK clubs. They take walk-up daily fee play but also offer subscriptions for anywhere from $70/month to maybe twice that much depending on the quality and location of the course.
One difference is, with debt from initial acquisition still typically in place and being an a warm climate it's not practical to provide good course conditions on a very, very tight budget. So most of them make a club like Duncan's look like Augusta National by comparison, in terms of turf and greens conditions and general upkeep.
Now I know I live in a cheap, smaller metro area. But there's one semi-private that runs about $800/year and another at $1,000/year as well as several others in that price range for which I don't happen to know exact membership fees. The downside is most such places require the use of golf carts (which is where they of course actually generate their revenue from "members" who are required to pay $15-$20 for a cart each time they play).
But the cheapest of the bunch is under $800/year and you can walk all you like, any time, for no additional charge. If you're a cart rider, the same place offers a $1,500 yearly subscription ($1,100 for 60 and older) which covers as many rounds of golf as you like with riding cart. Again no additional charges.
What's interesting about that course is that as Duncan describes, it was built years ago on land that the owner had previously used for farming. So they've never had debt and even at their rock bottom low prices they manage to turn a profit when every other club in town in losing money.
-
But the cheapest of the bunch is under $800/year and you can walk all you like, any time, for no additional charge. What's interesting about that course is that as Duncan describes, it was built years ago on land that the owner had previously used for farming. So they've never had debt
This is essentially the UK model assuming unaccompanied vistors are allowed to play and that it is very common for members to own the course.
Brian, the system works because members accept they cannot have access to the course at all times. Its a tradeoff, dues are kept lower, but the course is more crowded with members (not uncommon for there to be 800-1000 members) and visitors. Each club decides when viistors can play and that varies quite a bit. Generally speaking, the more high profile the club, the more restrictive they can be with visitor times. So for instance it was traditionally for there to be no visitors on weekends. These days, that is becoming less the case as clubs seek additional visitor money to make up for the shortfall of members. Even some big name clubs allow visitors on weekends, usually for a premium fee.
As I understand it, many US clubs have a threshold of outside income to remain a tax free entity. To go the UK model route would take a decision on the part of the club/owner to become a business and pay taxes. Its a big leap into the unknown and I suspect most Mercans don't want to take it. Having an empty course is part of the appeal of a club membership.
Ciao
-
S,
Is a UK club mostly single memberships? Where a guy who's wife doesn't play pays close to half of what a guy who's wife does play.
Sean, many US clubs do have outings on Monday that help lower the dues. What percentage can be taken in by outside play to remain non-profit I don't know.
-
Another major hurdle besides the tax exempt issue- in the UK, folks know how to play in 4 hours. Full tee sheets on this side of the pond means 5 hours. I can get that at any public course.
-
B
Since there are a ton less women members of clubs I think most members are single category. Many clubs do offer Husband/Wife and Family deals though.
Jud
The more crowded courses get the less likely golf will be played in 4 hours. I know clubs talk about 4 hours, but I ahve beed to 2ball clubs which which can barely hold that bar in 4somes when the course is crowded. Of course, much of the time about talk revolves around course difficulty and condition of the rough. Harsh rough can easily add 45 minutes to a game.
Ciao
-
The norm in my area is for all private memberships to be family memberships. Some of the semi-privates I was describing are based on individual memberships (with an optional higher subscription fee for family deals) but the private member owned clubs tend to charge me (as the sole golfer in my family) the same dues as a family in which husband, wife and a couple kids all play.
But honestly, given the high cost of dues to start with I doubt they could get away with asking an extra hundred bucks a month for families.
-
At Reddish Vale children and grandchildren of members get to play free anyway. My wife has just started playing, and to upgrade my membership to family membership was £150 for the year.
-
Duncan - to show how dumb many USA clubs are...
I was married in late 1997 at my own golf club. About six months prior, I go to up my membership to a family so my fiance, Laura, could play. They told me "no" - that only married people could join as a family. I reminded them I was getting married THERE in six months, but they didn't care. I resigned (proudly) not too long after.
Stupid rules like that are driving people away.
-
Many of the posts assume that golf is consumed rather than played. That's consistent with Mike Keiser coining the term "retail golfer." Consumers value products based upon two factors: cost and the benefit. In that event golf is simply a losing proposition in today's world. I don't believe it can be fixed. So what - golf is not required for an abundant life.
We in the treehouse see it differently since we love the game - stated otherwise it's priceless. We learned the game in an era where consumerism had not yet hit full stride.
We're very fortunate.
Mike
-
(Appropriated from Wendy, one of The Motley Fool's most valuable economic contributors. Part of her weekly analysis.)
A new study shows that real median household net worth declined by 30% over the past 10 years.
http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/_media/working_papers/pf...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/business/the-typical-house...
The Typical Household, Now Worth a Third Less
By ANNA BERNASEK, New York Times, JULY 26, 2014
...
For households at the median level of net worth, much of the damage has occurred since the start of the last recession in 2007. Until then, net worth had been rising for the typical household, although at a slower pace than for households in higher wealth brackets. But much of the gain for many typical households came from the rising value of their homes. Exclude that housing wealth and the picture is worse: Median net worth began to decline even earlier.
“The housing bubble basically hid a trend of declining financial wealth at the median that began in 2001...” [end quote]
The 2014 spring real estate season was a disappointment as new homes (an important source of construction employment) barely moved.
The "Millenial" generation, young workers under age 35 in their prime household-forming years, has been particularly hard-hit. Unemployment in the age 20 to 24 cohort is 10%.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNS14000036
My thoughts:
It's pretty clear that the golf business, both the number of courses and the sales of golf equipment, will continue to decline. The most desirable private golf clubs will continue to do well. The rest is unclear, but I'd guess that good golf courses with low greens fees and low maintenance budgets will do OK, while all other golf courses will be insolvent. Golf will experience increasing political unpopularity. I expect 30-50% of all golf courses to be out of business within 25 years. Sorry.
-
(Appropriated from Wendy, one of The Motley Fool's most valuable economic contributors. Part of her weekly analysis.)
A new study shows that real median household net worth declined by 30% over the past 10 years.
http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/_media/working_papers/pf...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/business/the-typical-house...
The Typical Household, Now Worth a Third Less
By ANNA BERNASEK, New York Times, JULY 26, 2014
...
For households at the median level of net worth, much of the damage has occurred since the start of the last recession in 2007. Until then, net worth had been rising for the typical household, although at a slower pace than for households in higher wealth brackets. But much of the gain for many typical households came from the rising value of their homes. Exclude that housing wealth and the picture is worse: Median net worth began to decline even earlier.
“The housing bubble basically hid a trend of declining financial wealth at the median that began in 2001...” [end quote]
The 2014 spring real estate season was a disappointment as new homes (an important source of construction employment) barely moved.
The "Millenial" generation, young workers under age 35 in their prime household-forming years, has been particularly hard-hit. Unemployment in the age 20 to 24 cohort is 10%.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNS14000036
My thoughts:
It's pretty clear that the golf business, both the number of courses and the sales of golf equipment, will continue to decline. The most desirable private golf clubs will continue to do well. The rest is unclear, but I'd guess that good golf courses with low greens fees and low maintenance budgets will do OK, while all other golf courses will be insolvent. Golf will experience increasing political unpopularity. I expect 30-50% of all golf courses to be out of business within 25 years. Sorry.
Unfortunately, I don't think you are too off the mark here John.
-
I'm all in favor of adopting the UK club model here in the USA. But one thing that I can't figure out is how a club would be able to handle th influx of new members that would be needed to make that model work? If the focus is more members, and lower overall dues, it means that tee times would be at a premium because there'd be more golfers using the course, which is an absolute necessity for the UK model to be feasible. At a 36 hole club, it's likely not a problem. But what about an 18 hole club? Is it even possible?
Here in the UK a typical local members' club with a decent enough but not architecturally significant course will have maybe 300-500 members each paying around £800 - £1000 per year. Most clubs were established before 1930 and own their property outright with little or no debt. The climate in the UK makes expensive irrigation systems largely unnecessary and most clubs of the kind I refer to manage perfectly well with five or less maintenance crew (greens staff).
The low-cost model works because clubs keep their costs low. This means almost no 'service'. This entails parking your own car, taking your own clubs out of the trunk, and cleaning your own shoes. Would Americans accept this? ;)
I actually know a lot of clubs like this in rural America. I think there are actually a few clubs like this in the Chicago suburbs that are completely no frills. I do wonder if some of the struggling clubs in urban areas closed off large portions of their clubhouses/etc. they may fair much better.
The pool can be a tricky thing. If done right, it doesn't have to cost much to operate either, and can help attract members. Our pool, with lifeguards for the 3 summer months and simple snack service costs under $25k a year to operate. It can be a slippery slope for sure, but for a group that would like a club to play regularly that is nice, while not elite, I suspect you could almost offer separate pool memberships to the community (I know of a couple clubs where this works).
-
Now I know I live in a cheap, smaller metro area. But there's one semi-private that runs about $800/year and another at $1,000/year as well as several others in that price range for which I don't happen to know exact membership fees. The downside is most such places require the use of golf carts (which is where they of course actually generate their revenue from "members" who are required to pay $15-$20 for a cart each time they play).
I carry a 2nd membership at a semi-private that costs $750 a year ($500 under 35) that has greens that roll very consistent and at 11 for the entire season (May - October), and bent grass fairways that I haven't had more than one or two bad lies in over the last 3 years. The maintenance budget is right about $300k a year.
Now, some of the out of play areas aren't maintained to quite the same standard, but tees/fairways and greens are in really good shape.
-
To add on to John's post, there is this WSJ story about college debt:
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/congatulations-to-class-of-2014-the-most-indebted-ever-1368/
It claims average debt for the class of 2014 is $33,000. Student debt has spiked dramatically over the past 10-15 years and it seems unlikely that is going to change. Obviously there are many students who graduate with much more modest debt totals, but there are lots who rack up debt in the $50K range.
Combine massive debt to go along with a decline in net worth and it isn't totally shocking that golf is cut out of the budget by many.
-
A new study shows that real median household net worth declined by 30% over the past 10 years.
John,
I clicked on your link, but simply got an error. My first question would be, does the study also address the median household net worth over the last 20 years. I could see the median household worth increasing 30% from 1994 - 2004 on the basis of the housing bubble, and simply returning to the norm the last 10 years since the bubble popped.
That's not to say that we don't have a society in for a world of hurt when baby boomers retire and realize they don't have the same pensions as their parents.
-
Andrew,
Try this expanded link. I think this will work.
John
http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/_media/working_papers/pfeffer-danziger-schoeni_wealth-levels.pdf
-
To add on to John's post, there is this WSJ story about college debt:
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/congatulations-to-class-of-2014-the-most-indebted-ever-1368/
It claims average debt for the class of 2014 is $33,000. Student debt has spiked dramatically over the past 10-15 years and it seems unlikely that is going to change. Obviously there are many students who graduate with much more modest debt totals, but there are lots who rack up debt in the $50K range.
Combine massive debt to go along with a decline in net worth and it isn't totally shocking that golf is cut out of the budget by many.
I think this makes to think there are many economic issues potentially facing the country and the reality that economics will hurt the golf industry in the future. I certainly don't see the education model of providing cheap debt for all majors and all institutions to be valuable or sustainable, and I think there are plenty of economic trends at play.
The reality is, the data shows that people spend as much disposable income now as ever on entertainment. This may be a result of both parents working, or increased debt or a million other things. That still doesn't change the fact the MLB attendance is up 65% since 1985, or NFL attendance is up 40% since 1985, despite the fact that both sports have seen ticket prices double in inflation adjusted dollars.
-
The fact of the matter is that golf is a niche market for aficionados, like hockey. I probably spend 25-50% on golf of what I did in the boom years, but I'm a much smarter consumer now. Not in and of itself a bad thing. Guys like Mike Keiser, who get it, are continuing to take market share from those who don't. While we here wring our hands over the state of the game and equipment manufacturers gnash their teeth over revising their sales guidance down, there are great things happening on the margins for those of us who care. I fully anticipate my 15 year old son to call me in 20 years and say that he just played golf with some guys from work and now he's got the bug again. Circle of Life sh&t.
-
My thoughts:
It's pretty clear that the golf business, both the number of courses and the sales of golf equipment, will continue to decline. The most desirable private golf clubs will continue to do well. The rest is unclear, but I'd guess that good golf courses with low greens fees and low maintenance budgets will do OK, while all other golf courses will be insolvent. Golf will experience increasing political unpopularity. I expect 30-50% of all golf courses to be out of business within 25 years. Sorry.
Jeez John, this is like listening to a Jackson Brown song :)
I was sad to recently see that John Riley Golf, my old custom golf guys in Monterrey, closed up. They fitted me before it was trendy.
50% is way too high for course closing in the USA, imo, and I look at this as an opportunity for guys like our friend Mike Young. He was yelling about too many layers in golf, before it was trendy. Guys like Mike will figure out:
Household income/networth <30% = new operators who figure our a pricing model for >30% discount
Your post also seems to focus on the USA market. We are NOT the growth market for golf. On the Moscow tournament thread, people were picking on the number of spectators at the tournament. Reality is someone is investing in golf in Russia as there is no way they made money on that tournament.
In terms of politics, I don't know the numbers overall, but raising money from charity outings have been very good financially and spiritually from a personal perspective. While this group on GCA.com is not the outing type, charity golf outings have been a great way to raise money for mom and pop local charities. This too was probably overplayed in the go-go days but there is no sport like golf for creating different types of bonding experiences ranging from buddy trips, charity, and yes political boondoggles.
(http://images.politico.com/global/politico44/110618_obama_boehner_golf_522_ap_regular.jpg)
Okay, it doesn't always work :D
-
My 30-50% guess for course closures is an opinion of what will happen in the USA. We'll see.
I keep my pessimism, or as I see it, objective analysis, partially hidden from public discussion, but I called the end of the golf course boom in 2007 accurately.
Let's choose Bob Dylan instead. Because I've been thinking about the Ballad Of A Thin Man lately, and the oft-mailgned concept of peak bullshit.
"Because something is happening here, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?"
-
Many of the posts assume that golf is consumed rather than played. That's consistent with Mike Keiser coining the term "retail golfer." Consumers value products based upon two factors: cost and the benefit. In that event golf is simply a losing proposition in today's world. I don't believe it can be fixed. So what - golf is not required for an abundant life.
We in the treehouse see it differently since we love the game - stated otherwise it's priceless. We learned the game in an era where consumerism had not yet hit full stride.
We're very fortunate.
Mike
I wanted to call this out, because this may be the best post in the entire thread. Golf will never be a good investment and only the people that truly love the game are going to be willing to spend money on it. Regardless of age - but especially those with less disposable income.
I think it would behoove the entire industry to remember that at times.
-
Another major hurdle besides the tax exempt issue- in the UK, folks know how to play in 4 hours. Full tee sheets on this side of the pond means 5 hours. I can get that at any public course.
''Full tee sheets on this side of the pond means 5 hours.''
Totally disagree with this statement. The beauty of Golf Clubs is members are more likely to self police others. They are more hard core golfers and hence move with a purpose playing 4 hours or less. Your Social golfers tend to join a CC that is conveniently close to their house, loves the social functions, and plays less rounds.
-
Many of the posts assume that golf is consumed rather than played. That's consistent with Mike Keiser coining the term "retail golfer." Consumers value products based upon two factors: cost and the benefit. In that event golf is simply a losing proposition in today's world. I don't believe it can be fixed. So what - golf is not required for an abundant life.
We in the treehouse see it differently since we love the game - stated otherwise it's priceless. We learned the game in an era where consumerism had not yet hit full stride.
We're very fortunate.
Mike
I wanted to call this out, because this may be the best post in the entire thread. Golf will never be a good investment and only the people that truly love the game are going to be willing to spend money on it. Regardless of age - but especially those with less disposable income.
I think it would behoove the entire industry to remember that at times.
Josh
I think you and Bogey are right, golf is a consumer product that is rented/bought just like anything else. Most golfers would baulk at paying $200 or even $100 a game. Many in the Treehouse don't even consider cost when talking about golf and where to play. Its a different world when a guy is hooked, obsessed and in love with the game...so long as he has means.
Ciao
-
Sean,
You write "Many in the Treehouse don't even consider cost when talking about golf and where to play. Its a different world when a guy is hooked, obsessed and in love with the game...so long as he has means."
I would love to know how true this is. So as an example I am willing to give up a few personal details and I wonder if any others will follow suit and give an idea of what members of this group are repaired to fork out for the "gemme'.
So my joining fee was $7500 and I've been a member for ten years at this club. My annual fee is $3200. By the time I pay for the competition rounds ($7 a game, 100 games a year), pay for my locker and bag storage, golf balls and buy a round after the game I guess that's another $1200. The odd members social shindig/night, Poet's Corner and meals at the club would set me back another $500. Away games in Melbourne, and the coast here in Brisbane about $300. This rounds out at $5950 so lets call it $6000. I probably have another 50 games a year at the Club which costs me nothing.
I am "hooked, obsessed and in love with the game" and it costs me $40 a game. As a percentage of my after tax income this $6000 represents about 12.5%. I reckon my break-even point would be 25% but then I don't have certain (any?!) responsibilities. Now I don't have many overheads … kids away, no mortgage, am retired and have nae vices ( a wee bit o' malt from time to time)!
I can understand if others do not want to divulge the percentage of after tax cost but an honest costing per game would be interesting methinks. I also recognise that this forum is a particularly strange niche but within this group it would still be interesting.The Aussie dollar is as close as doesn't matter for this purpose.
Any takers?
Cheers Colin
-
Sorry to post this in 2 places-
But I think Golf needs more Bunker Hills- a nice 9 hole course in Colorado.
I mean it encouranges walking- its an easy walk- but has carts-has some nice design- the fairways ran pretty quick for how green they were- the greens rolled perfect- it has some short holes and some longer holes so you can use a bunch of different clubs depending how good you are - seems like a course that a good golfer and/ or a beginner could play.
Pace of play for 18 holes - 2 hrs 20 mins walking.
Get this - I paid 18 bucks for the first nine - added additional 11 bucks for back nine, 2 waters and a snickers.
And the money goes to local veterens.
Oh - and friendly service- what a concept!
There is no time issue and no real money issue here either.
-
Colin,
I won't try to come up with a detailed accounting of various expenses arising from golf-at-my-club but I'll say a ballpark figure of $5,000 per year for the stuff that actually shows up on my monthly bill is pretty close. At least over the past couple years. And I play almost just over 100 full rounds per year there, plus another half dozen or so nine-hole visits. So maybe $48-$49 per round on average.
I also play another 20 rounds or so per year either at other local courses or out of town. They probably average quite a bit more per round because a few of them are high-$$$ visitor fees at UK clubs or high-$$$ resort rounds in USA. So I'd guess once those away rounds are factored in my total expenditures are considerably higher and somewhere in the ballpark of you percentage-of-income numbers, give or take a few percentage points.
-
I agree with the notion that my fellow millennials are going to gravitate toward golf later in live. I also agree with the statement that the number of golf courses is going to shrink (but I'm not sure about 30-50%), which hopefully means that the "reset" that develops from now to about 2030 will leave a higher-quality and more efficiently-run corps of courses.
Until then, here's hoping that lots of private clubs will be pragmatic and offer appropriately discounted "Young Executive" memberships to those of us in our 20s and 30s who play golf now and hope to continue. Even if it means annoying some of the blue hairs, it would seem to be in a lot of clubs' interests to just get younger members in the door and prove to them that, down the road, when membership becomes more expensive due to age, it's going to be worth shelling out for. There's also the added theoretical incentive on the young member to make sure he/she does well enough in his/her career to be able to be a member later in life.
I'd be interested to see the average ages of a representative set of private clubs across the geographical and prestige spectrum. How many clubs will see 25% of their members pass away in the next, say, 20 years? Are those clubs doing enough to set up a good pipeline for replacement of those members?
-
Sean,
You write "Many in the Treehouse don't even consider cost when talking about golf and where to play. Its a different world when a guy is hooked, obsessed and in love with the game...so long as he has means."
I would love to know how true this is. So as an example I am willing to give up a few personal details and I wonder if any others will follow suit and give an idea of what members of this group are repaired to fork out for the "gemme'.
So my joining fee was $7500 and I've been a member for ten years at this club. My annual fee is $3200. By the time I pay for the competition rounds ($7 a game, 100 games a year), pay for my locker and bag storage, golf balls and buy a round after the game I guess that's another $1200. The odd members social shindig/night, Poet's Corner and meals at the club would set me back another $500. Away games in Melbourne, and the coast here in Brisbane about $300. This rounds out at $5950 so lets call it $6000. I probably have another 50 games a year at the Club which costs me nothing.
I am "hooked, obsessed and in love with the game" and it costs me $40 a game. As a percentage of my after tax income this $6000 represents about 12.5%. I reckon my break-even point would be 25% but then I don't have certain (any?!) responsibilities. Now I don't have many overheads … kids away, no mortgage, am retired and have nae vices ( a wee bit o' malt from time to time)!
I can understand if others do not want to divulge the percentage of after tax cost but an honest costing per game would be interesting methinks. I also recognise that this forum is a particularly strange niche but within this group it would still be interesting.The Aussie dollar is as close as doesn't matter for this purpose.
Any takers?
Cheers Colin
I'll share. My monthly dues are $375 including tax but there are many fixed add ons. One of my mates spends 4 months each summer at Lake Tahoe. His monthly bill when he's out of town is $650.
I've haven't been playing much at home due to ennui followed by a knee injury. Luckily my lovely wife plays 3-4 times a week!
Golf at American private clubs is not inexpensive.
-
Some interesting stats from home:
- There are approximately 110,000 [A] registered golfers.
- 416,000 people play golf at least once per year. Of these, just over half (213,000 ) play once a month.
Of the casual players (i.e., at least the difference between A and B) 53% of them are aged between 25 - 44.
-
100 rounds played per year????? Seriously? Well, those retired MIGHT play nearly everyday, but a Millennial trying to get established in the work world, start a family, and buy a first home, is NOT going to play 100 rounds per season. If any of you are looking at what is happening in the golf biz world, and reaching conclusions about its future, through the eyes of someone with time and money to play 100-150 rounds per year you are totally missing the boat.
A couple of things....Millennials are not the club "joining" type...Millennials like golf, but they also like music, craft beers, their family and family outings...in other words....golf does not consume them so they are not going to consume golf. And being a member of anything, other than maybe a Neighborhood Watch group or the PTA, is not their thing.
The reality is this...Golf has had several "hay days" and the most recent one brought a lot of course construction along with McMansions lining the fairways....that model is not what it was and won't be that way again anytime soon. It's not just the Millennials that have been lost....I'm in the camp that says golf will further diminish to the point where it is a little "niche" sport.
-
Why the millennials.....I would bet almost none of us played more from 22 to 30 or 35 than we did before or after. The private club model will be forced to change because of them but it also changed because of my generation.
-
Why the millennials.....I would bet almost none of us played more from 22 to 30 or 35 than we did before or after. The private club model will be forced to change because of them but it also changed because of my generation.
Thanks Mike for being one of the few that actually get it. You are the under appreciated golf course owner who keeps the backbone of American Golf going. Being pissed that i was born two generations too late and stuck in the Millennial category, I laugh what others write on this subject. Private Golf is missing out on the 40-55 year old crowd. Avg Club age seems to be getting in the 60+ area at a lot of clubs. Retail golf is helped greatly (imho) due to many being turned off by the Private club model (exclusivity and waste)
-
Name 3 people who can easily afford it but chose to remain public golfers primarily because of exclusivity and waste.
-
Name 3 people who can easily afford it but chose to remain public golfers primarily because of exclusivity and waste.
I would never name 3 people on a public site. :D Have a great day Jud.
-
A couple of things....Millennials are not the club "joining" type...Millennials like golf, but they also like music, craft beers, their family and family outings...in other words....golf does not consume them so they are not going to consume golf. And being a member of anything, other than maybe a Neighborhood Watch group or the PTA, is not their thing.
I guess I need to stay out of the discussion until someone tells me what "golf" is in the phrase "How Golf Lost the Millenials".
"Golf" is not $400/month private clubs.
"Golf" is not Taylor Made meeting its quarterly revenue targets.
"Golf" is not the survival of caddie programs.
"Golf" is not the Bandon Resort.
"Golf" is simply hitting a golf ball with a golf club while traversing a golf course. There have never been 20-year-olds joining high-$$$ private clubs in any great numbers. Or attending high-$$$ resorts frequently. So what are we talking about here?
My point in discussing my 100+ rounds per year at my $400/month private club is that expensive private club memberships can be perfectly sensible IF you play golf 8-10 times a month. Given that very few "Millenials" are going to be looking to play that much golf during their childbearing years (the next decade or two) then high-$$$ private clubs haven't "lost" them, they never would have had them in the first place.
To me the only meaningful question would whether the "Millenials" will be first generation among the last half-dozen or so which does not play the game in significant numbers once they are middle-aged and older. If they arrive at age 50 and still have no interest in playing golf, then indeed "golf" has lost them. If they're just away attending school, starting careers and having soccer-playing sproglets for the next 20 years then nothing has been lost.
-
A couple of things....Millennials are not the club "joining" type...Millennials like golf, but they also like music, craft beers, their family and family outings...in other words....golf does not consume them so they are not going to consume golf. And being a member of anything, other than maybe a Neighborhood Watch group or the PTA, is not their thing.
I guess I need to stay out of the discussion until someone tells me what "golf" is in the phrase "How Golf Lost the Millenials".
"Golf" is not $400/month private clubs.
"Golf" is not Taylor Made meeting its quarterly revenue targets.
"Golf" is not the survival of caddie programs.
"Golf" is not the Bandon Resort.
"Golf" is simply hitting a golf ball with a golf club while traversing a golf course. There have never been 20-year-olds joining high-$$$ private clubs in any great numbers. Or attending high-$$$ resorts frequently. So what are we talking about here?
"Golf" is blaming millenials for all problems, because its easier than actually finding a solution ;D
-
Or waiting for the solution to sort itself out.
It is entirely plausible in my opinion that some percentage (10? 20? 30?) of currently extant courses go under during the next decade or two. And that a couple of higher profile golf equipment companies crash and burn spectacularly (Callaway? Others?). And that the number of "Millenials" playing the game is not sufficient to replace the golfers who will die off between now and when the "Millenials" turn 40. And yes, it's plausible that no great number of new golf courses will be built in USA during that period. Alas.
If that happens, I have to think the most likely result looks a lot like "golf" as it was when I took up the game in the early 1990's. Which did not seem such a bad thing to me at the time, obviously, as I was attracted enough to become a golf obsessive. And I have to purely selfish here and admit that twenty years ago my current club-home was a relatively much more expensive proposition than it is nowadays. There's probably no way I could have belonged to such an excellent club or been playing such an excellent course 100 times a year if the golf boom had continued unabated. We'd be asking $10,000 initiations, have a waiting list and the dues would be half again what they are now. All of which would mean me still playing at semi-private courses of half the quality.
So the crash is not an unalloyed disaster as long as one doesn't expect to make his or her living from the industry...
-
I would have to agree with Mike Y on his state about the millennials. "Why the millennials.....I would bet almost none of us played more from 22 to 30 or 35 than we did before or after." I personally would not have joined a club had there not been a serious reduction in any initiation at my club and never considered joining a club until I was more established in my job, I am 40 and thus not a millennial. I don't think the millennials are truly lost, just not in a position in life to partake in golf on a consistent basis. My own friends who laughed at my playing golf in high school are now 40+ and play golf regularly, though would never have done so in their 20s or even 30s. Golf is never going to overtake football, basketball, soccer or name the streamline sport in your area, as the sport of young people. For one thing most school teams only have 5 varsity golfers, hardly an inclusive sport like others. However, as people lose the ability to play football, etc., they often turn to golf. There are exceptions like most people on this DG as most have enjoyed golf their whole life. IMO the Millennials are not lost, most are just not ripe for golf yet. What does this mean for the golf industry, likley that as with ever generation there will be golfers once they have more time, money, friends who are playing and have lost the ability to partake in other orgznied sports.
-
The problem with the article is that its "facts" are so questionably sourced and poorly stated. It cites a decline in play among Millenials. As some have noted, that decline probably makes sense if it's comparing Millenial participation from 10 years ago (when many were teenagers without responsibilities) to Millenial participation today (when many have jobs, children, and bills that keep them off the course). If that's the decline it's referencing, then it's no big deal. However, if the decline is actually in number of players between the ages of 25 and 40, year over year, and if play among that group has comprised 50% of the total decline in golfers, then it's a huge deal. If participation in golf historically shrinks among people between 25 and 40, but grows among people after the age of 40, then the number of golfers in each age group should be pretty consistent from year to year. If there has actually been a precipitous year over year drop among players from age 25-40, then that's a big problem for the game that would signal that younger people are not interested in the game in the same way that they have been historically.
It would be great if we had data showing the historic growth of the game among players in different age ranges that could validate and help make sense of some of the numbers and anecdotal observations being thrown around. For instance, do people really flock to the game as they reach their late 30s/early 40s? What age range comprises the bulk of golfers? What percentage of golfers are comprised by people between the ages of 25 and 40 historically, and how does that number compare to the current number?
-
The problem with the article is that its "facts" are so questionably sourced and poorly stated. It cites a decline in play among Millenials. As some have noted, that decline probably makes sense if it's comparing Millenial participation from 10 years ago (when many were teenagers without responsibilities) to Millenial participation today (when many have jobs, children, and bills that keep them off the course). If that's the decline it's referencing, then it's no big deal. However, if the decline is actually in number of players between the ages of 25 and 40, year over year, and if play among that group has comprised 50% of the total decline in golfers, then it's a huge deal. If participation in golf historically shrinks among people between 25 and 40, but grows among people after the age of 40, then the number of golfers in each age group should be pretty consistent from year to year. If there has actually been a precipitous year over year drop among players from age 25-40, then that's a big problem for the game that would signal that younger people are not interested in the game in the same way that they have been historically.
It would be great if we had data showing the historic growth of the game among players in different age ranges that could validate and help make sense of some of the numbers and anecdotal observations being thrown around. For instance, do people really flock to the game as they reach their late 30s/early 40s? What age range comprises the bulk of golfers? What percentage of golfers are comprised by people between the ages of 25 and 40 historically, and how does that number compare to the current number?
I would suspect that the window that people are away from regular golf is a little longer today than a generation ago as well. I know the average age of first marriage and average age of first child are 3 - 4 years later than 25 years ago. This gap is likely wider among professionals that are more likely to play golf as well. That said, I don't think people are golfing that much more in the post school/pre marriage phase as they would in the phase when kids are getting older.
-
The problem with the article is that its "facts" are so questionably sourced and poorly stated. It cites a decline in play among Millenials. As some have noted, that decline probably makes sense if it's comparing Millenial participation from 10 years ago (when many were teenagers without responsibilities) to Millenial participation today (when many have jobs, children, and bills that keep them off the course). If that's the decline it's referencing, then it's no big deal. However, if the decline is actually in number of players between the ages of 25 and 40, year over year, and if play among that group has comprised 50% of the total decline in golfers, then it's a huge deal. If participation in golf historically shrinks among people between 25 and 40, but grows among people after the age of 40, then the number of golfers in each age group should be pretty consistent from year to year. If there has actually been a precipitous year over year drop among players from age 25-40, then that's a big problem for the game that would signal that younger people are not interested in the game in the same way that they have been historically.
It would be great if we had data showing the historic growth of the game among players in different age ranges that could validate and help make sense of some of the numbers and anecdotal observations being thrown around. For instance, do people really flock to the game as they reach their late 30s/early 40s? What age range comprises the bulk of golfers? What percentage of golfers are comprised by people between the ages of 25 and 40 historically, and how does that number compare to the current number?
If they're talking simply about the raw number players in the young adult age range or the ratio of millenials playing to boomers, isn't it true that there are simply fewer millennials than there are are boomers? Of course, you've adult play compared to young adult play when the boomers shoved their way into the mainstream is down. It pretty much has to be.
Yup. Would be interesting to know, for every 5- or 10-year period going back a few decades, what the ratio of rounds to population is for various cohorts (25-35, 35-45, 45-55, etc.). All things being equal, if the population is smaller, you'd expect fewer rounds.
-
The problem with the article is that its "facts" are so questionably sourced and poorly stated. It cites a decline in play among Millenials. As some have noted, that decline probably makes sense if it's comparing Millenial participation from 10 years ago (when many were teenagers without responsibilities) to Millenial participation today (when many have jobs, children, and bills that keep them off the course). If that's the decline it's referencing, then it's no big deal. However, if the decline is actually in number of players between the ages of 25 and 40, year over year, and if play among that group has comprised 50% of the total decline in golfers, then it's a huge deal. If participation in golf historically shrinks among people between 25 and 40, but grows among people after the age of 40, then the number of golfers in each age group should be pretty consistent from year to year. If there has actually been a precipitous year over year drop among players from age 25-40, then that's a big problem for the game that would signal that younger people are not interested in the game in the same way that they have been historically.
It would be great if we had data showing the historic growth of the game among players in different age ranges that could validate and help make sense of some of the numbers and anecdotal observations being thrown around. For instance, do people really flock to the game as they reach their late 30s/early 40s? What age range comprises the bulk of golfers? What percentage of golfers are comprised by people between the ages of 25 and 40 historically, and how does that number compare to the current number?
If they're talking simply about the raw number players in the young adult age range or the ratio of millenials playing to boomers, isn't it true that there are simply fewer millennials than there are are boomers? Of course, you've adult play compared to young adult play when the boomers shoved their way into the mainstream is down. It pretty much has to be.
Yup. Would be interesting to know, for every 5- or 10-year period going back a few decades, what the ratio of rounds to population is for various cohorts (25-35, 35-45, 45-55, etc.). All things being equal, if the population is smaller, you'd expect fewer rounds.
Far too nuanced...much better to scream "golf is dying!"
-
. . . .
Yup. Would be interesting to know, for every 5- or 10-year period going back a few decades, what the ratio of rounds to population is for various cohorts (25-35, 35-45, 45-55, etc.). All things being equal, if the population is smaller, you'd expect fewer rounds.
Far too nuanced...much better to scream "golf is dying!"
Agreed 100%. I started a similar post a week or so ago, suggesting it would be nice to know numbers of this sort, and more, but then decided, "Who cares?" and dropped it. I think my experience could play out for many people. I played a little with my dad and my friends at our family country club from ages 12 to 15. After that I didn't seen to have the time, and sometimes, the money. In my early 50s, with kids college paid for and them out on their own, any my own business successful, I decided golf would be a good old-age sport. I joined a golf club 19 years ago, played weekends when a could, and now in retirement, in my early 70s, must play about three days a week, most of the year. Sure, there will be exceptions, but why wouldn't lots of millennial folks work it out the same way?
-
Agreed 100%. I started a similar post a week or so ago, suggesting it would be nice to know numbers of this sort, and more, but then decided, "Who cares?" and dropped it. I think my experience could play out for many people. I played a little with my dad and my friends at our family country club from ages 12 to 15. After that I didn't seen to have the time, and sometimes, the money. In my early 50s, with kids college paid for and them out on their own, any my own business successful, I decided golf would be a good old-age sport. I joined a golf club 19 years ago, played weekends when a could, and now in retirement, in my early 70s, must play about three days a week, most of the year. Sure, there will be exceptions, but why wouldn't lots of millennial folks work it out the same way?
Exactly right, Carl.
I grew up playing golf as a kid with my two grandfathers, both of whom only took up the game when they retired. From the age of around 16 however - when I discovered beer and pussy - I played probably 8 times in 34 years.
On my 50th birthday I bought myself a set of golf clubs and hit the range. Club membership soon followed. Now, four years later, I'm playing 2/3 times a week and am a hopeless addict. My wife has been forced to take up the game if she is ever to see me.
This all seems perfectly normal to me.
Golf is a game for middle aged (and older) men. Sod the millennials. They'll grow old soon enough.
-
Duncan,
Certainly you're on to something and I was already convinced this was all a storm in a teacup.
Certainly at 37 I fit the category you refer to at your club. I played avidly as a junior, put my clubs down when I moved away to university at 18 and didn't really pick them up again until 4 years ago. Now I've rejoined the club I grew up at and they can finally make some money out of me. Those junior years, while not profitable for the club at the time, cemented the place as 'home.'
And again, why the obsession with millennials when our little straw poll suggests golf is a game frequently abandoned by those in their late teens and only rediscovered later in life? Getting into golf as a junior gave me an addiction for life which I was able to put down for 15 years or so. But there's no cure for addiction and once I had another hit or two in my early thirties my drug of choice was back in full effect.
Focusing on the kids is key for long term growth but you have to accept a lose at first. Any self respecting drug dealer will tell you that the young and vulnerable get their first hit for free. ;D
-
The golf course used to be a place where a parent could drop a kid for 4 hours for some peace and quiet away from them. Now, they hover over the kids and it's the kids that want to get away for 4 hours. Simple as that. It's all the parents' fault. 100%.
Drop your kid off at the range and tell 'em you'll see them in 4 hours. AND DO IT!
They'll fall in love with the game in droves.
A+
Children 4-16 have been robbed of their "leisure" - constant and unceasing schedules of activity have hurried children into forgoing one of their assets--that the world moves slowly for them.. And in that newer pace, there is scarcely any time to acquire nuance and process new discoveries...and it also means that there is less time to "compare notes" with peers in private, away from the larger groups and the eyes of adults.
Golf courses and driving ranges...scruffy, knockabout, anachronistic, 9- hole demi-executive courses around here used to be a veritable haven for gangs of 12-16 year old boys...on weekends, sometimes their fathers were playing two hours ahead of them drinking beer. but that's just about gone now.
cheers
vk
-
Note to 2035 self- when you see all the threads about us elderly club members whining about how all these new millennial members don't appreciate the history and ettiquette of the game it's not déjà vu; or is it...
-
David Schmidt is onto something....
I was watching the great hour-long show about Andre Reed's road to the NFL Hall of Fame. He told a story about how his mother would kick the kids out of the house in the morning and yell for them when it was dinner time.
I'm a couple of years older than Reed (honestly), and that's EXACTLY what my neighborhood was like in the 70's. We were NEVER inside when we could be outside. Whether it was riding my bike to play at the muni, spending time in the town swimming pool, or playing endless games of football or road hockey, we were ALWAYS outside.
I don't see many kids outdoors these days, let alone on a golf course (unless they're playing soccer with helicopter parents hovering nearby).
Actually, helicopter parents may be one of the biggest reasons for the golf/Millenial issue. These nut jobs are even trying to integrate themselves into their kid's careers! http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/02/living/cnn-parents-helicopter-parenting-job-search (http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/02/living/cnn-parents-helicopter-parenting-job-search)
-
David Schmidt is onto something....
I was watching the great hour-long show about Andre Reed's road to the NFL Hall of Fame. He told a story about how his mother would kick the kids out of the house in the morning and yell for them when it was dinner time.
I'm a couple of years older than Reed (honestly), and that's EXACTLY what my neighborhood was like in the 70's. We were NEVER inside when we could be outside. Whether it was riding my bike to play at the muni, spending time in the town swimming pool, or playing endless games of football or road hockey, we were ALWAYS outside.
I don't see many kids outdoors these days, let alone on a golf course (unless they're playing soccer with helicopter parents hovering nearby).
Actually, helicopter parents may be one of the biggest reasons for the golf/Millenial issue. These nut jobs are even trying to integrate themselves into their kid's careers! http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/02/living/cnn-parents-helicopter-parenting-job-search (http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/02/living/cnn-parents-helicopter-parenting-job-search)
+1 excellent. Carlin had great bits on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6wOt2iXdc4
-
Yea I thought so. If you lived it 24 hours a day for 20 years, two or three times over, then relate your expertise, otherwise don't think reading articles, and watching CNN qualifies you as an expert.
Yes, the standard "it was better back when I was a kid" answer/argument is silly.
Am I a helicopter parent? Of course I am, I have an Autistic son so I have to be one. Back in my parents generation, kids like my son were institutionalized, other kids were sexually abused by parish priest (and others) and parents were either looking the other way or did not want to confront authoritative, tradition bound institutions.
Think I am exaggerating the other way to make a point? Well the Headmaster of my older son's school was arrested now over 10 years ago for sending underage girls inappropriate messages (none of the girls were from my son's school) - http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/28/nyregion/headmaster-accused-of-seeking-minors-on-the-internet.html
The "helicopter parents" on the Board had him out of there in 24 hours.
It ended up being the best thing for the school, which will open up a new building in Manhattan next year. The recent graduation was almost entirely run by the graduating class and in the boring tradition of graduations, it was a fantastic ceremony.
Not saying there are not parents out there that need to let go, but throwing an entire generation under the bus and blaming their kids for golf's current and future woes is NOT the biggest problem in golf.
Dan,
Andre Reed seems like a great guy, but dig a little deeper. There is probably a reason that he started his foundation. Maybe everything was not so perfect for him:
Mission Statement of The Andre Reed Foundation
Andre Reed FounationThe Andre Reed Foundation was established in 2010 by retired NFL great Andre Reed to help underprivileged children reach their full potential and become responsible contributors to their communities.
https://www.andrereedfoundation.org/about.html
-
a few basic facts:
- i have not read all 8 pages of comments, and only skimmed the forbes article, but i am headstrong in my belief as to why golf is declining.
in my opinion it's that american leisure golf is a failure. the brits/scots can walk 18 holes in 3 hours, yet we have players at public courses using blades, playing the tips and taking practice swings yet they can barely break 90, thus generating rounds that last 4 hours and 45 minutes at best. i'm 28 years old, i picked up a club for the first time before i was 5 thanks to my dad. in the past 10 years, ive been lucky enough to play at a private club annually except for 1 year, when i was living in california and not new york. in that year, in greater LA, i experienced first hand this phenomenon that is ruining the game. people play too damn slowly and are inconisderate. they think their leisurely 18 hole round is like sunday at augusta. golf's lost many of us millelnials b/c it takes too damn long. it's not a cost thing, you can find great clubs for real cheap thanks to the secondary market and also you can play public course on discount too. but it's an ego thing, it's guys who can't break 90 buying big bertha alpha's brand new, and stalking putts etc. try explaining to a serious girlfriend / fiance / wife that youre leaving at 10 am for an 1130 tee time, then you play til unfortunately 430, and then youre home at 630. thats how this game has lost many millenials (though not me). a friend and i 2 weeks ago at our private club zipped around 18 holes in a cart in 2 hours. the fact that whether walking or riding, 18 holes at municipals in crowded metropolitan hours rarely, if ever, have rounds played in under 4 hours is an atrocity. until the pga of america and usga take a page from the other side of the pond and promote fast play, the game will continue to die.
what can be done in my opinion:
-pace of play deposit's of 25% of round cost at public courses.
- ambassadors of the game promoting fast play,
- forget tee it forward inititiave. make people show handicap cards to starters in order to play tees from certain lengths. 5.0's and better only at 7k, 10.0s and better only at 6500 and so forth. don't have a handicap? tough luck youre playing the whites, or go spend the $30 bucks it takes to get one. disappointed you can't play the tees you paid for b/c youre index isn't low enough? tough luck, get better.
- work with people to learn their distances, and to also understand nobody ever died when a ball rolled up onto a green. 15 handicaps shouldn't be waiting from 200 yards out to hit the green, as an example. you roll a ball up on the group in front of you? go up and apologize and tell them you hit a career shot. as i said, nobody ever died from a ball rolling onto a green, or even much less a 1 bouncer ( though that's significantly worse).
- stress how abominable american pace of play is compared to our counterparts in the british isles, and stress how tiring and useless practice swings are.
in short, i think so so much can be done to increase the pace of play, even if it means being a bit snippy/short to a stranger you get paired up with, or 1 of your friends. i passionatley feel that its an epidemic that is slowly killing golf. tournaments are one thing, but leisure rounds at municipalities need to be conducted in 4 hours at worst, else the game will continue to lose players and loyalists alike.
rant over.
-
I do not think the ills of golf will be solved by all of us being "snippy or short" with every person we meet on the course who are failing to meet out own standards of pace. I see no future in that approach whatsoever.
-
I do not think the ills of golf will be solved by all of us being "snippy or short" with every person we meet on the course who are failing to meet out own standards of pace. I see no future in that approach whatsoever.
It's not how, it's how long. Nobody plays golf anymore because the tee sheets are too full.
-
JK is spot on!
So golf is too slow at public courses because of heavy play, so we need to get more people into the game.
Got it!
-
I am a Gen Xer, my wife and I played golf avidly after picking it up in the early 30s. 10 years later, we play maybe a few rounds a year. The biggest reason is time. Golf takes 5+ hours door to door (if we are lucky) and there are only so many weekends in a year. I rather play with my kids tennis, soccer, basketball etc. and it wont change until my two boys both play golf well. However, if I could play 9 holes, I probably would play a lot more golf. 2.5-3 hours is manageable, 5+ hours is just too big part of the day. Even when both kids start playing golf, I bet we would play more if we could play nine holes anytime of the day.
We took up skiing when my eldest was 4 years old. We all ski together now. The Ski industry has got it right that the way to keep parents at the hill is to make it fun for the kids and also train them at the ski school. It brings the whole family to the hill, but also ensure their future when the kids grow up. Whether its the private club or the public course or the vast majority of golfers, they are not as friendly to young kids on a course. Always wondered what a golf industry could do, if they allow nine holes throughput the day and offered two hour lessons for the kids (the way the ski school operates) while the parents played.
-
a few basic facts:
- i have not read all 8 pages of comments, and only skimmed the forbes article, but i am headstrong in my belief as to why golf is declining.
in my opinion it's that american leisure golf is a failure. the brits/scots can walk 18 holes in 3 hours, yet we have players at public courses using blades, playing the tips and taking practice swings yet they can barely break 90, thus generating rounds that last 4 hours and 45 minutes at best. i'm 28 years old, i picked up a club for the first time before i was 5 thanks to my dad. in the past 10 years, ive been lucky enough to play at a private club annually except for 1 year, when i was living in california and not new york. in that year, in greater LA, i experienced first hand this phenomenon that is ruining the game. people play too damn slowly and are inconisderate. they think their leisurely 18 hole round is like sunday at augusta. golf's lost many of us millelnials b/c it takes too damn long. it's not a cost thing, you can find great clubs for real cheap thanks to the secondary market and also you can play public course on discount too. but it's an ego thing, it's guys who can't break 90 buying big bertha alpha's brand new, and stalking putts etc. try explaining to a serious girlfriend / fiance / wife that youre leaving at 10 am for an 1130 tee time, then you play til unfortunately 430, and then youre home at 630. thats how this game has lost many millenials (though not me). a friend and i 2 weeks ago at our private club zipped around 18 holes in a cart in 2 hours. the fact that whether walking or riding, 18 holes at municipals in crowded metropolitan hours rarely, if ever, have rounds played in under 4 hours is an atrocity. until the pga of america and usga take a page from the other side of the pond and promote fast play, the game will continue to die.
what can be done in my opinion:
-pace of play deposit's of 25% of round cost at public courses.
- ambassadors of the game promoting fast play,
- forget tee it forward inititiave. make people show handicap cards to starters in order to play tees from certain lengths. 5.0's and better only at 7k, 10.0s and better only at 6500 and so forth. don't have a handicap? tough luck youre playing the whites, or go spend the $30 bucks it takes to get one. disappointed you can't play the tees you paid for b/c youre index isn't low enough? tough luck, get better.
- work with people to learn their distances, and to also understand nobody ever died when a ball rolled up onto a green. 15 handicaps shouldn't be waiting from 200 yards out to hit the green, as an example. you roll a ball up on the group in front of you? go up and apologize and tell them you hit a career shot. as i said, nobody ever died from a ball rolling onto a green, or even much less a 1 bouncer ( though that's significantly worse).
- stress how abominable american pace of play is compared to our counterparts in the british isles, and stress how tiring and useless practice swings are.
in short, i think so so much can be done to increase the pace of play, even if it means being a bit snippy/short to a stranger you get paired up with, or 1 of your friends. i passionatley feel that its an epidemic that is slowly killing golf. tournaments are one thing, but leisure rounds at municipalities need to be conducted in 4 hours at worst, else the game will continue to lose players and loyalists alike.
rant over.
This is a really great post and I can relate to everything you say.
I just got back from a week of golf at Hilton Head with my wife. . The place we stayed was beautiful, the courses were beautiful, the food was great, but have little interest in ever going back, at least to play golf. Most of the rounds we played was not golf, it was some aberration. Sit and wait, sit and wait.
We had several rounds that were well over 5 hours and many that were over 4 1/2. One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments. We also had a round where we were paired up with a couple and the lady would take 3 practice swings, go away from the ball, and then do 3 more, and then freeze over the ball and finally hit, the cycle took two minutes each time. This simply is not fun, it is nerve wracking. I consider myself very patient and understanding, but after a while it just becomes too much. Every day it was extremely hot and humid, when I am moving it is barley noticeable, but when you are sitting and sitting and waiting and waiting, , it gets very uncomfortable.
The two rounds I played at some exclusive private clubs I booked through my club, the rounds were all under 4 hours, and one was just under 3. The round at Harbor Town was superb, they had us spaced well from the other groups, and even though the couple that we were paired with was clearly getting hot and tired by mid round, and started hitting really poorly, the caddies kept us moving.
I am everything but a stuffy individual, they do not come more down to earth, but I am pretty much done with public and resort golf. If I do go to a resort, it will be a place where there are mostly serious golfers, like Pinehurst, Sea Island, or Kiawah. And yes, there might be some rude and slow playesr there too, at least there will be less of a chance. I am a club golfer, not to say that there are not rude and slow golfers at private clubs, but there is definitely more courtesy and etiquette. The little time I get off, I can't afford to spend it with such stupidity. Waiting and waiting to hit each shot, and having to deal with incredibly slow play and rude behaviors, is not worth it and there are other things I can be doing in my leisure time. So I am just one person, but with a few exceptions, I am done with public and resort golf. Multiply that by thousands who feel the same way.
Golf won't police itself. It takes just one or two people to back up an entire course and ruin the experience for countless dozens. Rangers are incredibly timid, everyone is afraid of upsetting the consumer, because rounds are indeed down and God forbid you upset someone, you lose another potential customer. I can see where people who have families and work a lot of hours have walked away. I have many friends and acquaintances that have walked away. Because time is a precious asset. And many of us already have stress on our jobs and families, why engage in an activity that should NOT be stressful, but ends up being incredibly stressful because of the inconsideration of others. And then on top of that, paying for all this. There are so many other things you can be do.
-
Eric,
Any excellent post. There are a few practical realities which come with splitting up a group of various handicaps but to hear a younger American golfer essential hit the nail on the head is music to my ears.
Just be prepared for a life time of frustration with people continually telling you they've paid their money and they'll do as they please, ignoring the traffic jam behind them. A disproportionate percentage of golfers are used to getting their own way in life.
-
Golf won't police itself.
Got lost on a different thread, here is a suggestion:
How many people on a cool August day on a busy Friday played the USGA Rules of Golf yesterday at Yale Golf Course? My guess is 10-20%. Let's stop having one set of rules that don't get followed in recreational golf.
The USGA can't get pace of play under control with the existing set of rules. The rules need to be bi-furcated into at least 3 sets of rules:
* traditional/tournament
* club golf using the David Elvins replacement for stroke and distance, lost ball
* 3 hour golf rules
There can be a weighting for each of the 3 sets of rules for the overall handicap, and tee times can be slotted/arranged to maximize on course logistics and pace of play.
You really want 3 hour golf? Give them the first 2 hours of the day, charge them more, and give them a set of rules where they can still post a handicap for when they want to play club golf and tournament golf.
-
I just got back from a week of golf at Hilton Head with my wife. . The place we stayed was beautiful, the courses were beautiful, the food was great, but have little interest in ever going back, at least to play golf. Most of the rounds we played was not golf, it was some aberration. Sit and wait, sit and wait.
We had several rounds that were well over 5 hours and many that were over 4 1/2. One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments. We also had a round where we were paired up with a couple and the lady would take 3 practice swings, go away from the ball, and then do 3 more, and then freeze over the ball and finally hit, the cycle took two minutes each time. This simply is not fun, it is nerve wracking. I consider myself very patient and understanding, but after a while it just becomes too much. Every day it was extremely hot and humid, when I am moving it is barley noticeable, but when you are sitting and sitting and waiting and waiting, , it gets very uncomfortable.
Eric:
You seem to be saying that golf would be tolerable if everyone who wasn't as good as you would just quit the game. No wonder beginners feel intimidated!
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
-
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
Tom,
This post reminds me of the interview that Jim Nantz did yesterday with the PGA President and they talked about PGA's http://www.pga.com/play-golf-america and it all sounds great. Next put in "06902" into the website (which did not exist 40 years ago), and a hodge podge of ranges and public courses 20-30 miles away come up in a densely populated area. This PGA program really adds nothing to the conversation.
Now as a guy who has made millions of dollars designing courses, maybe you could be constructive when people are discussing how to better utilize the courses that you have built? Eric's post made me look for the Streamsong walking post/policy that has been put in place for next season. Saying 40 years ago that there was no discussion group to complain about the Doak family re-establishes you as the King of Double Standards when NOBODY on the discussion group has made more money off of golf than you!
-
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
Now as a guy who has made millions of dollars designing courses, maybe you could be constructive when people are discussing how to better utilize the courses that you have built? Eric's post made me look for the Streamsong walking post/policy that has been put in place for next season. Saying 40 years ago that there was no discussion group to complain about the Doak family re-establishes you as the King of Double Standards when NOBODY on the discussion group has made more money off of golf than you!
Mike:
I'm not one of those industry types who want to grow the game so I can keep getting paid. You know better. But I do think when guys start complaining about beginners being in the way, they should at least try to remember when they were beginners -- and give others a chance to fall in love with the game, instead of running them out of it. I think we've been constructive in building facilities like the Kids' course at Common Ground and the Midnight Golf facility at Marygrove -- so maybe I've also done more about the problem in my spare time than most of the people on the discussion group.
Slow play is indeed a problem in America and in other places as well. As an architect there is only so much I can do about it; I'm not on the front lines. But the portion of Eric's post that bothered me highlighted a different problem for golf, the fact that many good golfers are intolerant of beginners and kids and casual players, even at a resort that caters to the latter group.
Golf clubs and resorts should do a better job of accommodating casual players and beginners, and encourage them to play far enough forward that they can get around the course. Perhaps they should give them certain times of the day when they can play and not feel they are in the way, but when? Even late in the afternoon, they will hold up Eric when he wants to get out for a quick nine or 18 before dark.
-
I don't want to speak for Eric, but I think he'd be quick to tell you that he's no elite player. If I recall correctly, he was a mid teens handicap when we played together at Black Creek earlier this year. He's also an excellent playing partner and would really be an ideal person to pair with a beginner, as he has a relaxed attitude, plays quickly, and his etiquette is excellent. We walked a pretty big course that day and still finished in under four hours, and I don't know that anyone in our group legitimately broke 90 (there was a lot of winter rust on display). If we did it on that day and on that course, there's no reason for a resort round to take any longer.
On the other hand, I hear that his wife is an excellent player and it's good to hear that she's back out and playing again.
-
It seems like the Dick's article kicked out this theme:
A Game of Golf? Not for Many Millennials
Golf's Retail and Sporting Ends Scramble to Find New Strategy.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-game-of-golf-not-for-many-millennials-1406159228
(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CO087_GOLF_NS_20140723173613.jpg)
That picture/graph is pretty funny. Yoga? Jogging? What this points to is what all of us over 40 already know...kids don't want or feel the need to compete. They are now choosing things that don't involve failing. When I was a kid, we pitched, now coaches do it. Tee ball? That was for 5 year olds. Soccer? That was for kids that didn't have the coordination to play the main-line sports. And yes, in the late 70's-early 80's golf was a 'sissy' sport. I didn't learn until my college baseball career ceased at 19 years old.
Now golf is 'cool', but kids don't play? The last few issues of golf digest trying to pander with stories of weed and lifestyle articles is even more of a stretch.
Kids today have 2k MacBooks, iPhones with $120 bills, triple the school debt. They wouldn't be caught dead in a used car like I drove around in for 10 years. They also won't live in a house the size my grandparents lived in. They buy $3 cups of coffee, $5 snob beer. They eat out every meal.
My first set of clubs came from Wal-mart. They were Dunlops. If ebay existed back then, I could have bought the equivalent of a set of Callaway x-16's or Taylor Made r7's for about the same money. Golfnow was called walking. Golf courses rarely discounted their rounds.
The kids that focus on one sport at my club (golf) are gentlemen and a breath of fresh air. They play EVERY DAY in the summer. Several work as cart boys or on the Green crew. They call me Mr. and they love the game. This is the core group coming up that closely resembles what many have already spoke of (positively)...not these flat-billed, 25-35's that don't attempt to understand the rules, dress like clowns, eat wraps for lunch and play no competitive events.
We don't need to conform to them, but clubs do and have already...and most have huge churn.
-
The rake and runners are driving me from the game. Yesterday my foresome teed off at 8:10 and were followed by a twosome whose tee time was 8:20. At 8:19 we had to step back from our putts to let them play through on the first green. They simply play for exercise.
The time before that I played a twosome decided to start on 10 and began their day with hands on hips giving us the evil eye. I waved them on and it took each of them three strokes to reach our drives. By the time we could hit our approach there were two more groups on the tee.
I understand that playing on one of the most difficult courses in the world while putting everything out is no longer allowed in this culture of run and rake. The only defense I have left is the Joshua theorem. I'm done until the fair weather non golfers put their clubs up for winter.
Exactly what golf needs, more people like me quitting who enjoy spending seven to eight hours a day at the club.
-
I just got back from a week of golf at Hilton Head with my wife. . The place we stayed was beautiful, the courses were beautiful, the food was great, but have little interest in ever going back, at least to play golf. Most of the rounds we played was not golf, it was some aberration. Sit and wait, sit and wait.
We had several rounds that were well over 5 hours and many that were over 4 1/2. One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments. We also had a round where we were paired up with a couple and the lady would take 3 practice swings, go away from the ball, and then do 3 more, and then freeze over the ball and finally hit, the cycle took two minutes each time. This simply is not fun, it is nerve wracking. I consider myself very patient and understanding, but after a while it just becomes too much. Every day it was extremely hot and humid, when I am moving it is barley noticeable, but when you are sitting and sitting and waiting and waiting, , it gets very uncomfortable.
Eric:
You seem to be saying that golf would be tolerable if everyone who wasn't as good as you would just quit the game. No wonder beginners feel intimidated!
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
Tom,
I think what Eric was trying to say was...when he learned to play, he went to a driving range first, he let more proficient players play through, and rangers actually had the cojones to tell people hitting worm burners to pick it up or let others go ahead. Playing a 5 hour round of 120 yard ground balls, totally oblivious to those around you, rarely hooks newbies.
-
The rake and runners are driving me from the game. Yesterday my foresome teed off at 8:10 and were followed by a twosome whose tee time was 8:20. At 8:19 we had to step back from our putts to let them play through on the first green. They simply play for exercise.
The time before that I played a twosome decided to start on 10 and began their day with hands on hips giving us the evil eye. I waved them on and it took each of them three strokes to reach our drives. By the time we could hit our approach there were two more groups on the tee.
I understand that playing on one of the most difficult courses in the world while putting everything out is no longer allowed in this culture of run and rake. The only defense I have left is the Joshua theorem. I'm done until the fair weather non golfers put their clubs up for winter.
Exactly what golf needs, more people like me quitting who enjoy spending seven to eight hours a day at the club.
What was your pro doing letting a twosome out at 8:20am on a Sat morning? Twosome are suppose to have no standing, especially during prime tee times. Letting a 2some go off on a weekend morning seems like lunacy.
-
The guy is a heart surgeon who gets off rounds and comes out to play. I am the one at fault because my foresome will take more than four hours, guaranteed. This guy didn't create the rake and run culture, he just likes to stay fit while golfing a ball.
-
I just got back from a week of golf at Hilton Head with my wife. . The place we stayed was beautiful, the courses were beautiful, the food was great, but have little interest in ever going back, at least to play golf. Most of the rounds we played was not golf, it was some aberration. Sit and wait, sit and wait.
We had several rounds that were well over 5 hours and many that were over 4 1/2. One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments. We also had a round where we were paired up with a couple and the lady would take 3 practice swings, go away from the ball, and then do 3 more, and then freeze over the ball and finally hit, the cycle took two minutes each time. This simply is not fun, it is nerve wracking. I consider myself very patient and understanding, but after a while it just becomes too much. Every day it was extremely hot and humid, when I am moving it is barley noticeable, but when you are sitting and sitting and waiting and waiting, , it gets very uncomfortable.
Eric:
You seem to be saying that golf would be tolerable if everyone who wasn't as good as you would just quit the game. No wonder beginners feel intimidated!
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
I am sorry my post struck a nerve, boo hoo hoo and where did I say the game would be tolerable if everyone who wasn't as good as me would just quit the game. Where have I ever said I am "good" anyway, I am but a humble 18 hcp but I know consideration and respect for others, the golf course is a community, and I do my best to respect the playing field and I feel no shame in picking up when I have to if I am holding others up, because it is not about me. Read the post again please, because your interpretation is incredibly off the wall. Are you having a bad day or something?
First, I mentioned a father teaching his son the game. That is great. But is a championship length course with water and sand everywhere is not the the place to do it, and with a 9am tee time, which is peak time. How about that father going to one of the executive courses in the area, there is a great one in nearby Okatie, or if he feels compelled to do a championship length course, how about later in the day or when the tee time was made, asking the office when a good time for a newbie to go out.
Secondly, I talked about another player taking endless practice swings. Does that make any sense and is that fair to the rest of the foursome or to those playing behind.
Third, I talked about taking long breaks at the turn to get sandwiches, drinks, whatever. How is that considerate to those who do not need to take long breaks, and how is that considerate to the group behind that does not want to take a break and now has a potentially long wait when they were moving before.
Forth, we had a few rounds that were well over 5 hours. Is that acceptable under any circumstances, especially for a casual game? Is this conducive for players to want to return to that venue or to the game at all if they are on the fence?
It comes down to consideration of others and one of the reason people are leaving the game is because of slow play. It you sit at each tee box for 5 minutes, that is 90 minutes of doing nothing. If you wait for each shot for another 2 minutes, that is 36 minutes of doing nothing. That is two hours of wasted time. And then we add stops for the beverage cart and incessant texts and phone calls by some, and people taking seemingly forever to line up their putts, and you begin to wonder have we all gone crazy and why am I even out there. The issue then becomes is this a good return on investment time wise, when there are so many other things you could be doing for leisure and entertainment , and that is why people are leaving the game.
-
I just got back from a week of golf at Hilton Head with my wife. . The place we stayed was beautiful, the courses were beautiful, the food was great, but have little interest in ever going back, at least to play golf. Most of the rounds we played was not golf, it was some aberration. Sit and wait, sit and wait.
We had several rounds that were well over 5 hours and many that were over 4 1/2. One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments. We also had a round where we were paired up with a couple and the lady would take 3 practice swings, go away from the ball, and then do 3 more, and then freeze over the ball and finally hit, the cycle took two minutes each time. This simply is not fun, it is nerve wracking. I consider myself very patient and understanding, but after a while it just becomes too much. Every day it was extremely hot and humid, when I am moving it is barley noticeable, but when you are sitting and sitting and waiting and waiting, , it gets very uncomfortable.
Eric:
You seem to be saying that golf would be tolerable if everyone who wasn't as good as you would just quit the game. No wonder beginners feel intimidated!
Your post struck a nerve because my first exposure to golf [other than trips to the driving range] was playing with my family on a vacation to Hilton Head. I'd guess we probably held up somebody, too, but in 1970 they didn't have an internet discussion board to complain about it, the poor people.
Tom,
I think what Eric was trying to say was...when he learned to play, he went to a driving range first, he let more proficient players play through, and rangers actually had the cojones to tell people hitting worm burners to pick it up or let others go ahead. Playing a 5 hour round of 120 yard ground balls, totally oblivious to those around you, rarely hooks newbies.
Joe,
I have been playing golf since my early teens, and was taught proper etiquette very early. My dad would take me to a really run down 9 hole course, it was the most basic of golf, and we went from there. He had no problem telling me to move faster or pickup if I was holding up others. I played that course for several years, it was a big thrill when I stepped up to 18 holes. To start someone on a championship level course in Hilton Head during a peak time of 9am is not conducive to learning the game, and not fair to anyone else. It is just plain stupid and inconsiderate.
And I remember rangers that indeed had cojones and told you to speed it up or even pick up and go to the next hole. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as it is done in a civil manner. But everything today is about correctness and God forbid not hurting someones feelings. This is just not with golf, but with everything today. Nothing gets better when you talk around problems or ignore them. Golf courses are closing all over, many of the clubs where I live are heavily discounting, golf stores are closing. The days of build it or sell it and they will come are over. The industry does not get it.
-
One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments.
Eric:
Actually, I'm having a good day. It was the above parts of your post that I commented on. There were three straight types of player who bothered you: a couple, a brother in law, and a father teaching his son. Maybe that was not representative of your whole post, or your worldview, but it came across to me as not being tolerant of beginners.
Golf needs beginners, and we need them to have a good time. If they feel like they are pissing off the other golfers, they will go home and never play again. [That's why all those golf stores are closing.] My wife seldom goes along to play golf with me, for just that reason, and that's why I don't play as much golf as I used to. When we do play, we'll play alternate shots, and we don't hold up anybody for very long ... but occasionally we will play somewhere that guys race up behind us in their cart and then are pissed off about waiting on us, even when we are playing at a very reasonable pace.
You are right that there are too many "championship courses" in resort areas, and not enough that are playable and fun. You are right that people take too many practice swings, and generally aren't in any hurry to play. Many people would be happier playing nine holes instead of 18, and the only reason they don't think of it is because the golf courses want to sell them the full green fee.
-
It seems like the Dick's article kicked out this theme:
A Game of Golf? Not for Many Millennials
Golf's Retail and Sporting Ends Scramble to Find New Strategy.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-game-of-golf-not-for-many-millennials-1406159228
(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CO087_GOLF_NS_20140723173613.jpg)
That picture/graph is pretty funny. Yoga? Jogging? What this points to is what all of us over 40 already know...kids don't want or feel the need to compete. They are now choosing things that don't involve failing. When I was a kid, we pitched, now coaches do it. Tee ball? That was for 5 year olds. Soccer? That was for kids that didn't have the coordination to play the main-line sports. And yes, in the late 70's-early 80's golf was a 'sissy' sport. I didn't learn until my college baseball career ceased at 19 years old.
Now golf is 'cool', but kids don't play? The last few issues of golf digest trying to pander with stories of weed and lifestyle articles is even more of a stretch.
Kids today have 2k MacBooks, iPhones with $120 bills, triple the school debt. They wouldn't be caught dead in a used car like I drove around in for 10 years. They also won't live in a house the size my grandparents lived in. They buy $3 cups of coffee, $5 snob beer. They eat out every meal.
My first set of clubs came from Wal-mart. They were Dunlops. If ebay existed back then, I could have bought the equivalent of a set of Callaway x-16's or Taylor Made r7's for about the same money. Golfnow was called walking. Golf courses rarely discounted their rounds.
The kids that focus on one sport at my club (golf) are gentlemen and a breath of fresh air. They play EVERY DAY in the summer. Several work as cart boys or on the Green crew. They call me Mr. and they love the game. This is the core group coming up that closely resembles what many have already spoke of (positively)...not these flat-billed, 25-35's that don't attempt to understand the rules, dress like clowns, eat wraps for lunch and play no competitive events.
We don't need to conform to them, but clubs do and have already...and most have huge churn.
Great Joe.
Now the PGA will come out with their new slogan.
Golf....at least we're not bowling!"
-
Likely Port Royal, Sea Pines Resort or Palmetto Dunes Resort. These places are family resorts and will always cater to all golfers, beginners or otherwise. Live with it or stay home.
-
One morning we were with a couple that had not played in seven years, the timeshare they stayed comped them the round so they said why not. Another round, I was paired with a decent player, but his brother in law never played. Another round, a father was teaching his son while we were playing. The kid had no idea of basic etiquette or rules, he had no idea what clubs to use, and he dug up the fairways. For two rounds, our partners disappeared at the turn, taking forever to get nourishments.
Eric:
Actually, I'm having a good day. It was the above parts of your post that I commented on. There were three straight types of player who bothered you: a couple, a brother in law, and a father teaching his son. Maybe that was not representative of your whole post, or your worldview, but it came across to me as not being tolerant of beginners.
Golf needs beginners, and we need them to have a good time. If they feel like they are pissing off the other golfers, they will go home and never play again. [That's why all those golf stores are closing.] My wife seldom goes along to play golf with me, for just that reason, and that's why I don't play as much golf as I used to. When we do play, we'll play alternate shots, and we don't hold up anybody for very long ... but occasionally we will play somewhere that guys race up behind us in their cart and then are pissed off about waiting on us, even when we are playing at a very reasonable pace.
You are right that there are too many "championship courses" in resort areas, and not enough that are playable and fun. You are right that people take too many practice swings, and generally aren't in any hurry to play. Many people would be happier playing nine holes instead of 18, and the only reason they don't think of it is because the golf courses want to sell them the full green fee.
Tom
I want you to read the original post again. No where was I expressing intolerance for beginners.
I was just relating my experience with slow play. And why people are leaving the game.
I am all for beginners and people learning the game, and while I am not a great golfer, I have introduced a few to the game. I know many who can't break 110, but can get done in 4 hours. It is not whether you are a novice or journeyman, it all comes down to consideration of others. Making good judgements is also important. A 9am tee time on a course full of water, sand, and forced carries is not a good time to be teaching your child.
Enough said on this, if you still don't comprehend what I was trying to relate so be it.
-
Eric S,
I don't think Strulowitz is asking that they tee off after 3 pm, but I have had the same thought playing in Myrtle on multiple trips for years.
Courses don't have the guts to say, "Mr. So and So, we really appreciate you choosing to play Water Hazard National, in the interest of all of our guests, we ask you to get around the course in 4:10. You may see some of our course assistants from time to time...if they see that another group is holding you up or vice versa, they may ask you to pick up the pace. We hope you enjoy...blah blah blah...".
...and back on topic, tennis isn't lowering nets. Basketball leagues aren't lowering the goals or making hoops bigger. Baseball isn't trying to pull more kids in by making aluminum versions of Fat Albert bats. I realize golf is a business for many and participation matters, but rarely have I seen where we lower the bar and keep a small group that wants the rest of the established members to cater to them.
Lots of courses need to close before the game will take its core golfer serious again. In politics, they say the best way to win elections isn't trying to get the undecided's converted, it is playing to your base.
-
Courses don't have the guts to say, "Mr. So and So, we really appreciate you choosing to play Water Hazard National, in the interest of all of our guests, we ask you to get around the course in 4:10. You may see some of our course assistants from time to time...if they see that another group is holding you up or vice versa, they may ask you to pick up the pace. We hope you enjoy...blah blah blah...".
Sooner or later, some courses in competitive markets/resort areas will ask a simple question:
What pace of play do you prefer?
- our 3:30 pace players tees off at 7-9 for $100
- our 4:00 pace tees off at 9-11, for $75
- our 4:30 pace tees off at noon for $65
If that does not fit, we can accommodate your group at our sister course here at Hilton Head National on the Atlantic Ocean!
Parking garages, hotels, plane seats all trade according to a variety of demand factors. My guess is that some some courses in the middle will make the adjustment. Golf is THE most inefficient hard asset based industry that I can think of.
-
Eric S,
I don't think Strulowitz is asking that they tee off after 3 pm, but I have had the same thought playing in Myrtle on multiple trips for years.
Courses don't have the guts to say, "Mr. So and So, we really appreciate you choosing to play Water Hazard National, in the interest of all of our guests, we ask you to get around the course in 4:10. You may see some of our course assistants from time to time...if they see that another group is holding you up or vice versa, they may ask you to pick up the pace. We hope you enjoy...blah blah blah...".
...and back on topic, tennis isn't lowering nets. Basketball leagues aren't lowering the goals or making hoops bigger. Baseball isn't trying to pull more kids in by making aluminum versions of Fat Albert bats. I realize golf is a business for many and participation matters, but rarely have I seen where we lower the bar and keep a small group that wants the rest of the established members to cater to them.
Lots of courses need to close before the game will take its core golfer serious again. In politics, they say the best way to win elections isn't trying to get the undecided's converted, it is playing to your base.
That would work if you also did not allow anyone to play in less than 4 hours. Anyone playing at a pace of 4:10 is going to be run up upon by rake and runners who quickly let you know the burden that you are to their lives. I was on a three hour pace when we let the twosome through yesterday while on one green. The genie is out of the bottle. Golf is now a game of angry men.
When was the last time someone on this site boasted of a great round where they didn't also include pace of play. I don't have time for this crap.
-
When was the last time someone on this site boasted of a great round where they didn't also include pace of play. I don't have time for this crap.
August 3, 2014, and I complemented the Super too :)
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46112.25.html
-
After a week of discussion with my aged golfing cohorts we have come to the conclusion that golf has not lost the millenials anymore than they lost the hippies. We all agreed we rarely played in our 20's. :)
-
Courses don't have the guts to say, "Mr. So and So, we really appreciate you choosing to play Water Hazard National, in the interest of all of our guests, we ask you to get around the course in 4:10. You may see some of our course assistants from time to time...if they see that another group is holding you up or vice versa, they may ask you to pick up the pace. We hope you enjoy...blah blah blah...".
Sooner or later, some courses in competitive markets/resort areas will ask a simple question:
What pace of play do you prefer?
- our 3:30 pace players tees off at 7-9 for $100
- our 4:00 pace tees off at 9-11, for $75
- our 4:30 pace tees off at noon for $65
If that does not fit, we can accommodate your group at our sister course here at Hilton Head National on the Atlantic Ocean!
Parking garages, hotels, plane seats all trade according to a variety of demand factors. My guess is that some some courses in the middle will make the adjustment. Golf is THE most inefficient hard asset based industry that I can think of.
Mike,
I love that...and I'm not the fastest player in the world!
-
Mike,
Small problem, faster players should pay less not more.
Nice write up on your cheap, walkable with a trolley course, btw.
-
Tom,
A little harsh regarding Eric. I suspect you're actually both on the same page.
John,
I have no idea how many times I've mentioned this but take as long as you like for your round. All anyone can reasonably ask is that you call through EACH AND EVERY group that you would otherwise inconvenience. Let them play at their pace and you can play at yours. It worked for years without any problems until the western world decided to abandon collective responsibility.
-
Golf courses need speed limits. Yesterday I let through a twosome on the first hole while we were on the green 9 minutes after our tee time. I had no choice, they had just hit to within 20 yds of the green and were running at us. Last year I let through a twosome on the 14th tee that had already gone through 7 other groups. They didn't even bother to putt on the preceding hole just so they could catch us on the tee. I do not go to golf to gallery people who can not find playing partners nor have the time to enjoy a game with the friends they do have.
I do not understand why purposely tailgating a group in front of you is not considered rude.
-
Mike,
Small problem, faster players should pay less not more.
John,
This is like a scene from Moneyball, and you are the old scout talking about ugly girlfriends.
(http://veryaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Moneyball-6.jpg)
Faster players should pay what the market demands. In my view of the world, golf needs a huge shift in mentality. The industry is selling memberships and tee times when it should be selling access to golf styles and experiences.
Want to get around in 3 hours at Yale? Okay there is no way a foursome can get around Yale in 3 hours. Thus you sell threesomes for access to the first tee from 7-9 am for $600. Foursomes from 9-11 that play in 4 hours at $500, and the rest of the day is $100 per person.
This is the GolfNow model. Now you bitch and moan about the GolfNow model, but the only problem is the clubs are letting an outside entity determine their model.
If I was the manager at your private club, I would set up a points system. If the twosome chooses to tee off as a twosome after foursomes have started, they have to pay a premium to play through and disturb groups such as yours. Maybe it is $$ fees, maybe it is $$ contributions to the local kids program or a charity the club supports. Can be varied according to the culture of the club.
PS - Just for the record, I had some hot girlfriends before my wife, and I am often told that I married up ;)
-
Golf courses need speed limits. Yesterday I let through a twosome on the first hole while we were on the green 9 minutes after our tee time. I had no choice, they had just hit to within 20 yds of the green and were running at us. Last year I let through a twosome on the 14th tee that had already gone through 7 other groups. They didn't even bother to putt on the preceding hole just so they could catch us on the tee. I do not go to golf to gallery people who can not find playing partners nor have the time to enjoy a game with the friends they do have.
I do not understand why purposely tailgating a group in front of you is not considered rude.
It is one of the real problems in golf.
a foursome playing at a three forty five pace can have their day ruined by allowing 7 two balls thru, each adding 2-5 minutes to the fourball's round-each play thru delay leaving them suceptible to the next following speed group.
A group playing on a relatively full course has to as John says, follow a speed limit,play early or during less crowded times, or at least use good judgement about who and when to play through.-good management should control this.
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
-
I have no problem with waiting in a traffic jam. Traffic is traffic. Equally, there is zero chance of me ever sitting on the tail of a learner driver. I do however have a problem when I find myself sitting behind someone going slowly in the outside lane on a motorway whilst not allowing me to pass. And so it applies to golf.
-
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
Easy, at a course like The Vineyard Club which supports multiple charities on the island, the group that is disturbed could designate the premium to their favorite charity:
http://www.vineyardgolf.com/past-recipients
Turn it into a positive event rather than a negative. Have a dinner towards the end of the year where the disturbers and disturbees come together with the charities and have a fun night.
It creates an environment where people talk it out rather than bottle it up inside like Jaka ;)
-
Golf courses need speed limits. Yesterday I let through a twosome on the first hole while we were on the green 9 minutes after our tee time. I had no choice, they had just hit to within 20 yds of the green and were running at us. Last year I let through a twosome on the 14th tee that had already gone through 7 other groups. They didn't even bother to putt on the preceding hole just so they could catch us on the tee. I do not go to golf to gallery people who can not find playing partners nor have the time to enjoy a game with the friends they do have.
I do not understand why purposely tailgating a group in front of you is not considered rude.
It is one of the real problems in golf.
a foursome playing at a three forty five pace can have their day ruined by allowing 7 two balls thru, each adding 2-5 minutes to the fourball's round-each play thru delay leaving them suceptible to the next following speed group.
A group playing on a relatively full course has to as John says, follow a speed limit,play early or during less crowded times, or at least use good judgement about who and when to play through.-good management should control this.
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
Jeff
The problem with your scenario is its always 4ball time. I think the only real solution for private clubs who have members not willing to recognize the habits of the membership is to create 2 ball times. Say 7-9 is 2ball time. You want four guys out then, play 4somes. Same for right after lunch, 12:30-1:00, 2ball time. If 4balls are allowed out at all times, when do 2balls get a slot? I also think its always a great idea for tee time clubs to leave one time open per hour for walk ups.
Ciao
-
Jeff
The problem with your scenario is its always 4ball time. I think the only real solution for private clubs who have members not willing to recognize the habits of the membership is to create 2 ball times. Say 7-9 is 2ball time. You want four guys out then, play 4somes. Same for right after lunch, 12:30-1:00, 2ball time. If 4balls are allowed out at all times, when do 2balls get a slot? I also think its always a great idea for tee time clubs to leave one time open per hour for walk ups.
Ciao
At Mountain Lake, it is 2ball for the first hour or two in the winter so that people can get 36 in during winter light. Afternoon round is 4 ball, and it is lighter play, so 2balls are typically fine in the afternoon.
-
Golf courses need speed limits. Yesterday I let through a twosome on the first hole while we were on the green 9 minutes after our tee time. I had no choice, they had just hit to within 20 yds of the green and were running at us. Last year I let through a twosome on the 14th tee that had already gone through 7 other groups. They didn't even bother to putt on the preceding hole just so they could catch us on the tee. I do not go to golf to gallery people who can not find playing partners nor have the time to enjoy a game with the friends they do have.
I do not understand why purposely tailgating a group in front of you is not considered rude.
It is one of the real problems in golf.
a foursome playing at a three forty five pace can have their day ruined by allowing 7 two balls thru, each adding 2-5 minutes to the fourball's round-each play thru delay leaving them suceptible to the next following speed group.
A group playing on a relatively full course has to as John says, follow a speed limit,play early or during less crowded times, or at least use good judgement about who and when to play through.-good management should control this.
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
Jeff
The problem with your scenario is its always 4ball time. I think the only real solution for private clubs who have members not willing to recognize the habits of the membership is to create 2 ball times. Say 7-9 is 2ball time. You want four guys out then, play 4somes. Same for right after lunch, 12:30-1:00, 2ball time. If 4balls are allowed out at all times, when do 2balls get a slot? I also think its always a great idea for tee time clubs to leave one time open per hour for walk ups.
Ciao
absolutely-we manage it-and provide multiple options for 2 ball play-including a 2 ball speed slot in the morning
many other clubs don't-
-
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
My take is that it's meant to be a disincentive so you'll be disturbed less often.
-
double post
-
Golf courses need speed limits. Yesterday I let through a twosome on the first hole while we were on the green 9 minutes after our tee time. I had no choice, they had just hit to within 20 yds of the green and were running at us. Last year I let through a twosome on the 14th tee that had already gone through 7 other groups. They didn't even bother to putt on the preceding hole just so they could catch us on the tee. I do not go to golf to gallery people who can not find playing partners nor have the time to enjoy a game with the friends they do have.
I do not understand why purposely tailgating a group in front of you is not considered rude.
It is one of the real problems in golf.
a foursome playing at a three forty five pace can have their day ruined by allowing 7 two balls thru, each adding 2-5 minutes to the fourball's round-each play thru delay leaving them suceptible to the next following speed group.
A group playing on a relatively full course has to as John says, follow a speed limit,play early or during less crowded times, or at least use good judgement about who and when to play through.-good management should control this.
Mike if a group with no friends playing a two ball (at a busy four ball time) pays a premium and disturbs my fourball and others, how does them paying more money not piss me off?
As with everything, it requires common sense. If a 4-some is in the 7:00 AM first group of the day, while a twosome is at 7:10 and they can't mutually agree to flip spots someone is being an ass.
If a anyone shows up at a peak time when pace of play dictates 4:00 hours and expects to play in 3:00, they are at fault.
If I show up at the Club on a Wednesday afternoon and there are two groups, a foursome that is in the 4th fairway, and me on the first tee, and I walk up to the 6th tee as they are finishing hitting their tee shots and they don't acknowledge me, well, I'm going to have the urge to tailgate them, although I'll likely just skip around (since the course is empty).
-
Golf won't police itself. It takes just one or two people to back up an entire course and ruin the experience for countless dozens. Rangers are incredibly timid, everyone is afraid of upsetting the consumer, because rounds are indeed down and God forbid you upset someone, you lose another potential customer. I can see where people who have families and work a lot of hours have walked away. I have many friends and acquaintances that have walked away. Because time is a precious asset. And many of us already have stress on our jobs and families, why engage in an activity that should NOT be stressful, but ends up being incredibly stressful because of the inconsideration of others. And then on top of that, paying for all this. There are so many other things you can be do.
I disagree with your premise. Golf can and must police itself.
In fact out here in Minnesota, there are two upscale public courses (one of which measures over 7000 yards) which do an exceptional job of policing pace of play. If you get 5 minutes behind time par, there is an assistant out there moving things along. When you go there, you know your round won't last more than 4:15. This is one reason why there are always full despite being priced over the market.
The challenge with resort courses is that they have little repeat business. This strongly disincents policing anything and most of my least pleasurable rounds have been at resort-type courses. In fact, I can only remember one resorty courses that actively discussed time par.
-
And you have the other end. Our member-only times end at 10AM on the weekend. Laura and I teed-off at 9:40 (last group without a member). We were putting out on 18 and the group behind us were nowhere to be found (they weren't up to 15 yet, at least).
One thing we really need to do, by the way, is offer a "class" for new members to help them understand some of the time-saving hints we long-timers have discovered. For example, it's a lot quicker to walk on the "secret" path through the woods on #3 than to use the more established path.
-
...
If I was the manager at your private club, I would set up a points system. If the twosome chooses to tee off as a twosome after foursomes have started, they have to pay a premium to play through and disturb groups such as yours. Maybe it is $$ fees, maybe it is $$ contributions to the local kids program or a charity the club supports. Can be varied according to the culture of the club.
...
Better yet, put the foursomes that insist on playing in over four hours out in the afternoon.
-
...
If I was the manager at your private club, I would set up a points system. If the twosome chooses to tee off as a twosome after foursomes have started, they have to pay a premium to play through and disturb groups such as yours. Maybe it is $$ fees, maybe it is $$ contributions to the local kids program or a charity the club supports. Can be varied according to the culture of the club.
...
Better yet, put the foursomes that insist on playing in over four hours out in the afternoon.
Part of this "issue" is easily resolved if golfers showed some proper etiquette. It shouldn't take long before a 4ball runs into lost ball trouble (in my experience - ths is the biggest problem with slowing down the game with 4balls). If they have a 2ball on their backside the gentlemanly thing to do is either don't look for the ball or let the group through as soon as its obvious the ball won't be easily found. It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
-
It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
My father did not play so I learned from friends on muni courses from friends who had fathers that played on private courses. The fathers and sons were not afraid to educate me on etiquette. Today it is a different game and people seem to start at driving ranges, and then take their game to the for-profit public course.
There is no system in place from the PGA or USGA to teach rules or etiquette, and this is where leadership in golf is non-exixtant. Ok, the USGA creates a "while were young" campaign, but there is no way for the average person to understand what that means on the golf course.
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
- Want to play before 11 am? You have to have a handicap of 21 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro
- After 11 am, open golf
The PGA and USGA need to create a rewards system and that will also mean adjusting the rules for non-tournament play. How many rules get broken on average when a group plays through? Does anyone putt out?
Having rules in place that people don't follow creates a soulless game. There is tournament golf and then there is everything else.
-
Mike,
You must be thinking of some hypothetical world in which public, for-profit courses don't care about getting every possible green fee from anyone who cares to purchase one. If a typical 15-rounds-a-year golfer called up his local public course and was treated to a 10-minute dissertation on all the rules and categories and stuff you describe he'd hang up the phone after the first 30 seconds.
Golf at its root is about hitting a ball with a club, finding it, hitting it again. By the time you get to reserving tee times for groups of some certain number of people with some specific handicap you're so far afield from the basic nature of the game nobody but an anal-retentive headcase would be intersted.
-
Mike,
You must be thinking of some hypothetical world in which public, for-profit courses don't care about getting every possible green fee from anyone who cares to purchase one. If a typical 15-rounds-a-year golfer called up his local public course and was treated to a 10-minute dissertation on all the rules and categories and stuff you describe he'd hang up the phone after the first 30 seconds.
Golf at its root is about hitting a ball with a club, finding it, hitting it again. By the time you get to reserving tee times for groups of some certain number of people with some specific handicap you're so far afield from the basic nature of the game nobody but an anal-retentive headcase would be intersted.
+1
But it's all good in fantasy utopia ;) ;D
-
It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
My father did not play so I learned from friends on muni courses from friends who had fathers that played on private courses. The fathers and sons were not afraid to educate me on etiquette. Today it is a different game and people seem to start at driving ranges, and then take their game to the for-profit public course.
There is no system in place from the PGA or USGA to teach rules or etiquette, and this is where leadership in golf is non-exixtant. Ok, the USGA creates a "while were young" campaign, but there is no way for the average person to understand what that means on the golf course.
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
- Want to play before 11 am? You have to have a handicap of 21 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro
- After 11 am, open golf
The PGA and USGA need to create a rewards system and that will also mean adjusting the rules for non-tournament play. How many rules get broken on average when a group plays through? Does anyone putt out?
Having rules in place that people don't follow creates a soulless game. There is tournament golf and then there is everything else.
Or, the bloody ranger does his job :D. The value of a good ranger with people skills can go a long way to having more satisfied customers. For private clubs, I think a discrete word with the guy in charge of tee sheets/course managment would work most of the time.
Mike - stop looking to the USGA to solve your problems. You have the power ;D
Ciao
-
Mike - stop looking to the USGA to solve your problems. You have the power ;D
Ciao
I am serious when I say that I look for tour operators and golf course operators like Mike Young and Sean Arble to make the changes.
-
It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
My father did not play so I learned from friends on muni courses from friends who had fathers that played on private courses. The fathers and sons were not afraid to educate me on etiquette. Today it is a different game and people seem to start at driving ranges, and then take their game to the for-profit public course.
There is no system in place from the PGA or USGA to teach rules or etiquette, and this is where leadership in golf is non-exixtant. Ok, the USGA creates a "while were young" campaign, but there is no way for the average person to understand what that means on the golf course.
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
- Want to play before 11 am? You have to have a handicap of 21 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro
- After 11 am, open golf
The PGA and USGA need to create a rewards system and that will also mean adjusting the rules for non-tournament play. How many rules get broken on average when a group plays through? Does anyone putt out?
Having rules in place that people don't follow creates a soulless game. There is tournament golf and then there is everything else.
Or, the bloody ranger does his job :D. The value of a good ranger with people skills can go a long way to having more satisfied customers. For private clubs, I think a discrete word with the guy in charge of tee sheets/course managment would work most of the time.
or to take that a step farther, the "bloody" starter does his job.
You can't send two two balls, followed by a single, after 6 consecutive 4 balls have teed off on a busy, full golf course.
the Starter has to either
A. pair groups
B. Temper expectations-many two balls are fine fine playing at a 4 ball pace if informed of what the situation is or may simply be that slow and that's why they play as a 2 ball
C. Educate smaller (or larger) groups on when the ideal time for their size or pace group to play at their ideal pace (speed slots, less crowded times)
Mike is right when he suggests the onus is on golf course operators
-
Mike is right when he suggests the onus is on golf course operators
It is also complicated, so I don't want to come across as a know it all.
Yale Golf Course is there for students, staff, alumni, and the rest of us. How would they rate me, a non-alumni player against an undergrad who wants to try the course or an alumni who writes a big check? Complicated for sure.
I rarely see any Yale students on the weekend, but reality is, it is there for them not me, and their parents (most, not all) pay "heavy dues". The staff runs PE courses for students and they do many clinics with local kids before they go on the course.
The starters are very active and they will send me off on holes 1-4 and #10 depending on logistics of the day. They try to monitor some slow play choke points at #10 and #13, but it is not perfect. They are trying, and that effort is appreciated. Perfection is down the road....
-
It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
My father did not play so I learned from friends on muni courses from friends who had fathers that played on private courses. The fathers and sons were not afraid to educate me on etiquette. Today it is a different game and people seem to start at driving ranges, and then take their game to the for-profit public course.
There is no system in place from the PGA or USGA to teach rules or etiquette, and this is where leadership in golf is non-exixtant. Ok, the USGA creates a "while were young" campaign, but there is no way for the average person to understand what that means on the golf course.
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
- Want to play before 11 am? You have to have a handicap of 21 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro
- After 11 am, open golf
The PGA and USGA need to create a rewards system and that will also mean adjusting the rules for non-tournament play. How many rules get broken on average when a group plays through? Does anyone putt out?
Having rules in place that people don't follow creates a soulless game. There is tournament golf and then there is everything else.
This sort of caste system will only drive more people away. You are not going to mandate etiquette in a game that doesn't faintly resemble what you grew up with. Your intention is honorable but ill conceived in 2014.
-
And you have the other end. Our member-only times end at 10AM on the weekend. Laura and I teed-off at 9:40 (last group without a member). We were putting out on 18 and the group behind us were nowhere to be found (they weren't up to 15 yet, at least).
One thing we really need to do, by the way, is offer a "class" for new members to help them understand some of the time-saving hints we long-timers have discovered. For example, it's a lot quicker to walk on the "secret" path through the woods on #3 than to use the more established path.
Dan,
I agree with all that you said. So your club is a restricted public play semi-private club? I think that model is undeserved in the US and could be very profitable. If you play after member times is the pace of play much slower on average than during member blocked times?
-
This sort of caste system will only drive more people away. You are not going to mandate etiquette in a game that doesn't faintly resemble what you grew up with. Your intention is honorable but ill conceived in 2014.
It is already being done and middle tier private courses are converting now. This is already happening at Outpost Club and a number of other online private golf sites such as box groove - https://www.boxgroove.com/ (yes a weird name)
The game will get stronger when it shrinks and each course creates unique playing models. Basically the USA is catching up to Europe, and adding a technology element to the process.
-
It seems the culture of allowing people thru in this situation is dying for some reason. Why is that, especially when its a 2ball waiting (not that this should matter)?
Ciao
My father did not play so I learned from friends on muni courses from friends who had fathers that played on private courses. The fathers and sons were not afraid to educate me on etiquette. Today it is a different game and people seem to start at driving ranges, and then take their game to the for-profit public course.
There is no system in place from the PGA or USGA to teach rules or etiquette, and this is where leadership in golf is non-exixtant. Ok, the USGA creates a "while were young" campaign, but there is no way for the average person to understand what that means on the golf course.
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
- Want to play before 11 am? You have to have a handicap of 21 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro
- After 11 am, open golf
The PGA and USGA need to create a rewards system and that will also mean adjusting the rules for non-tournament play. How many rules get broken on average when a group plays through? Does anyone putt out?
Having rules in place that people don't follow creates a soulless game. There is tournament golf and then there is everything else.
This sort of caste system will only drive more people away. You are not going to mandate etiquette in a game that doesn't faintly resemble what you grew up with. Your intention is honorable but ill conceived in 2014.
It wont if done right.
The issue courses are facing right now is how to serve the loyal and irregular customers at the same time.
Filling tee times on the weekend before 11 and on Friday afternoons is not the issue. Go to any established course and I bet you cant get anything other than a single tee time for this Saturday morning. (And if you can, there is a bigger issue.)
The challenge is the filling up the rest of the tee sheet. This is where courses need to be creative to get beginners on the course. This is also potentially the most profitable time as well since early morning players rarely drink or stay at the course after their round.
I have no issues with "certifying" players to play earlier or have a players card like many public courses do which give preferred tee time access. (I don't think doing it on handicap makes sense for several reasons, the biggest being that it discriminates against women).
-
This sort of caste system will only drive more people away. You are not going to mandate etiquette in a game that doesn't faintly resemble what you grew up with. Your intention is honorable but ill conceived in 2014.
It is already being done and middle tier private courses are converting now. This is already happening at Outpost Club and a number of other online private golf sites such as box groove - https://www.boxgroove.com/ (yes a weird name)
The game will get stronger when it shrinks and each course creates unique playing models. Basically the USA is catching up to Europe, and adding a technology element to the process.
Do you really think that Outpost Club is representative of the general golfing population? What clubs are using the handicap system to regulate tee times?
-
Do you really think that Outpost Club is representative of the general golfing population? What clubs are using the handicap system to regulate tee times?
I have posted on GCA.com which Mike Young would say means "Sweeney is a golf geek/dork and knows nothing about the "general golfing population". "
Mike Young is smart!
1. The entire value proposition of the Outpost Club, as I understand it as I am not a member, is that it IS segmented away from the general golfing population, and I support that.
2. The handicap system with a reliance on the current rules of golf does not work. As mentioned before, there needs to Tournament rules, and then other sets of rules for casual play.
-
My friend and I were playing a late afternoon quick 18 here in CT and we arrive on the 11th tee to find a threesome of guys about our age (24/25), with untucked shirts and music playing from one of their carts.
You might be thinking that this is a bad story but, nope, never has a group so politely and quickly allowed another to play through. They were MUCH cooler about it than 95% of the older folk I've/we've encountered over the years. I left feeling better about the state of the game in the hands of my generation, because that wasn't the first time I've seen a group of players my age who were markedly more courteous than older players. Finally, the abiding self-consciousness for which people like to deride Millennials does some good! ;D
Later on the back side, we had to skip a hole because the foursome (with older people than us) in front of us was playing as if it was a U.S. Open (at 7 pm early in the back nine on a public course) and looked back at us repeatedly without waving us through. After bypassing them, we encountered no one else the rest of the round.
-
My friend and I were playing a late afternoon quick 18 here in CT and we arrive on the 11th tee to find a threesome of guys about our age (24/25), with untucked shirts and music playing from one of their carts.
You might be thinking that this is a bad story but, nope, never has a group so politely and quickly allowed another to play through. They were MUCH cooler about it than 95% of the older folk I've/we've encountered over the years. I left feeling better about the state of the game in the hands of my generation, because that wasn't the first time I've seen a group of players my age who were markedly more courteous than older players. Finally, the abiding self-consciousness for which people like to deride Millennials does some good! ;D
Later on the back side, we had to skip a hole because the foursome (with older people than us) in front of us was playing as if it was a U.S. Open (at 7 pm early in the back nine on a public course) and looked back at us repeatedly without waving us through. After bypassing them, we encountered no one else the rest of the round.
Tim, where in CT can you play a quick 18?
-
...
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
...
Go take a hike!
-
...
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
...
Go take a hike!
If the rules were a 5 handicap, I would go take a bike ride and then tee off at 9am. Or I could find a course has a slower pace of play. There are 15,000 courses in the USA, so there is no reason for them all to have the same basic model.
The reality is better players want to play with better players, Jaka wants to play at his pace os play, so why not find a system that can work better for both?
-
It seems like the Dick's article kicked out this theme:
A Game of Golf? Not for Many Millennials
Golf's Retail and Sporting Ends Scramble to Find New Strategy.
i actually think amongst millenials this has nothing to do w/ a lack of competition but just the burdeoning fitness craze in america (juice places, tough mudders, cross fit etc) thats paired w/ the vanity of social media. people want to look good (yes i know they always have) but now w/ instagram/facebook you can show off your progress and all your athletic accomplishments of marathons/spartan races and things of that ilk when you couldn't 10+ years ago.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-game-of-golf-not-for-many-millennials-1406159228
(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CO087_GOLF_NS_20140723173613.jpg)
That picture/graph is pretty funny. Yoga? Jogging? What this points to is what all of us over 40 already know...kids don't want or feel the need to compete. They are now choosing things that don't involve failing. When I was a kid, we pitched, now coaches do it. Tee ball? That was for 5 year olds. Soccer? That was for kids that didn't have the coordination to play the main-line sports. And yes, in the late 70's-early 80's golf was a 'sissy' sport. I didn't learn until my college baseball career ceased at 19 years old.
Now golf is 'cool', but kids don't play? The last few issues of golf digest trying to pander with stories of weed and lifestyle articles is even more of a stretch.
Kids today have 2k MacBooks, iPhones with $120 bills, triple the school debt. They wouldn't be caught dead in a used car like I drove around in for 10 years. They also won't live in a house the size my grandparents lived in. They buy $3 cups of coffee, $5 snob beer. They eat out every meal.
My first set of clubs came from Wal-mart. They were Dunlops. If ebay existed back then, I could have bought the equivalent of a set of Callaway x-16's or Taylor Made r7's for about the same money. Golfnow was called walking. Golf courses rarely discounted their rounds.
The kids that focus on one sport at my club (golf) are gentlemen and a breath of fresh air. They play EVERY DAY in the summer. Several work as cart boys or on the Green crew. They call me Mr. and they love the game. This is the core group coming up that closely resembles what many have already spoke of (positively)...not these flat-billed, 25-35's that don't attempt to understand the rules, dress like clowns, eat wraps for lunch and play no competitive events.
We don't need to conform to them, but clubs do and have already...and most have huge churn.
-
John - After reading this post below i suppose it's obvious you and i don't see eye to eye, but that's also okay. what i don't get is why you have an issue with people playing quickly. maybe that 2 some doesn't have the benefit of spending 6+ hours at the club. i don't know what club/course youre playing at, but i don't think it's fair at all to disparage those of us that like to play quickly... and i wonder at what age does walking the course, carrying or w/ a caddie, is deemed exercise. at 28, it does nothing for me in terms of producing results, even if its a near 4 mile walk.
i hate to say it, but i tend to side with aforementioned "rake & runners" or the evil eye givers. if we were all considerate to 1 another on the course in terms of pace of play, it'd be more enjoyable for all. and if you feel that taking more than 30 seconds to execute a shot is okay in a friendly round, or even in a 20 dollar nassau, then i guess we'd be at an impasse. club championships and tournaments are one thing, the friendly saturday round for lunch is another, and this is coming from a highly competitive individual. i blame the tour mostly for setting an abhorrent example for pace of play.
The rake and runners are driving me from the game. Yesterday my foresome teed off at 8:10 and were followed by a twosome whose tee time was 8:20. At 8:19 we had to step back from our putts to let them play through on the first green. They simply play for exercise.
The time before that I played a twosome decided to start on 10 and began their day with hands on hips giving us the evil eye. I waved them on and it took each of them three strokes to reach our drives. By the time we could hit our approach there were two more groups on the tee.
I understand that playing on one of the most difficult courses in the world while putting everything out is no longer allowed in this culture of run and rake. The only defense I have left is the Joshua theorem. I'm done until the fair weather non golfers put their clubs up for winter.
Exactly what golf needs, more people like me quitting who enjoy spending seven to eight hours a day at the club.
-
John - After reading this post below i suppose it's obvious you and i don't see eye to eye, but that's also okay. what i don't get is why you have an issue with people playing quickly. maybe that 2 some doesn't have the benefit of spending 6+ hours at the club. i don't know what club/course youre playing at, but i don't think it's fair at all to disparage those of us that like to play quickly... and i wonder at what age does walking the course, carrying or w/ a caddie, is deemed exercise. at 28, it does nothing for me in terms of producing results, even if its a near 4 mile walk.
I can certainly attest that in my 30's, walking and carrying (it's actually about 5.5 miles) and burning the near 1,000 calories make about the same difference for me as if I spend 45 minutes doing cardio.
-
A perfect example is to let a group reach the green on the first hole of the day before you tee off. There are as many fast play etiquette rules as slow play ones. I have actually been on a full course with no where to go where a member of the group behind us has walked up on the green while we are putting.
All I want is for my first encounter of the day with a group behind me is for it to be courteous. I'm going to let you go through, not because I have to, because I want to. Body language is rarely an accident.
Neither of us are bad people yet the group in front is seen as a burden. With this rhetoric I am trying to get people to understand that it is a two way street. The finish of the PGA and the reaction after was my golfing highlight of the year. Faster isn't always better.
-
John - After reading this post below i suppose it's obvious you and i don't see eye to eye, but that's also okay. what i don't get is why you have an issue with people playing quickly. maybe that 2 some doesn't have the benefit of spending 6+ hours at the club. i don't know what club/course youre playing at, but i don't think it's fair at all to disparage those of us that like to play quickly...
i hate to say it, but i tend to side with aforementioned "rake & runners" or the evil eye givers. if we were all considerate to 1 another on the course in terms of pace of play, it'd be more enjoyable for all. and if you feel that taking more than 30 seconds to execute a shot is okay in a friendly round, or even in a 20 dollar nassau, then i guess we'd be at an impasse.
John may be a lunatic with an aversion to great romantic comedies, but he's always been exactly right on the topic of pace of play. The only way to solve the pace of play issue is for everyone to play at the same pace. The rake and run guys who want to play in 2 1/2 hours on a weekend morning are just as much a part of the problem as the wannabe pros who take 5 hours to get around the course.
I love to play quickly, drink to excess, and have sex with my wife. It would be nice to do any of those things anytime I want, but that's not how it works. Life got a lot easier when I learned that I can do one of those things on weekend mornings, one of them over a weekday lunch, and one of them in the evening. It would suit me just fine if I could play through the golf course in 2 1/2 hours any time I wanted, and it would suit me just fine if I could play through the bedroom in 2 1/2 minutes. Sometimes life is about playing at the pace of others instead of just making sure that I finish in an amount of time that lets me keep my schedule while leaving others feeling tense, dissatisfied, and inconsequential.
-
This Goes out to Everyone who's contributed since my post led to Eric Strulowitz (i totally just butchered the spelling of your last name, i apologize):
First, I absolutely adore this topic, it is wonderful to discuss and here the differing opinions/takes on. One thing I think we've lost sight of is that the point that I was making, and then Eric echoed on, was about slow play at courses accessible to the public. Slow play at a private club should NEVER be a problem, and if a few foursomes/players are notoriously slow, elevate it to the clubs governing board / pro shop. At the same time, at a private club, if said slow players are also excellent self gardeners of the course (divots and ballmark repairs) then they should deserve a pass.
And while I love this concept of dynamic pricing / 3somes vs 4 somes / diff time of day, the optimist in me thinks that we need to convert golf into a 3-4 hour 18 hole activity at ANY time of the day, beginners/ladies/seniors/scratches/drunk players be damned. People just do not know, or learn how to play ready golf any more. They take far too long to execute a shot. They don't read putts from the other side while their playing partners are putting out. It's absolutely a domino effect, as someone mentioned, it only takes 1 or 2 groups to slow down an entire course. That is why I am a strong believer in my idea of a pace of play security deposit. To reiterate or expand, When municipal national takes its $60 dollar greens fees in either cash or credit, it takes an additional fully refundable $30 pace of play deposit from you too (i like the idea of a deposit being 50% of the greens fee). As soon as a group begins to fall behind its pace of play, which to me should be 3:45 but i could live w/ 4:15, a ranger is sent out to warn them and let them know hey you're on the verge of pissing away another $30 bucks, pick it up. If they don't pick it up and lose theyre deposit, well then theres nothing you can do. The key is though you only penalize the FIRST group to fall behind, b/c it's not fair to penalize groups behind them for keeping up with the group in front of them. Point being, i can't imagine many people out there willing to pay $90 for a $60 course. Of course, this takes some organization and effort from the pro shop, not to mention the employment of a couple rangers, but it also means you could improve the pace of play and enjoyment of your patrons.
As it was echoed earlier, waiting sucks and at least IMO, it can throw off your game, at least it does to mine. I become irritable, impatient and nearly pissed off when I have to wait all the time, ESPECIALLY if i'm not expecting it. When i play bethpage black, i know its going to be a 5 hour ordeal, but i also know that i'm walking a 4+ mile course that's brutal tee to green and is a special place.
its nearly all other munis, espeically those w/ carts that we have a problem. golf cannot continue to be an activity where a guy in his late 20s to early 40s who's engaged/married/married w/ kids has to disappear for 6+ hours on a weekend in order to get a round in. We need to shorten the time that has to be spent on a course, or we'll continue to lose players.
@John I saw your post regarding letting the group in front of you reach the green on the 1st tee. I tend to agree, but it depends on the course. At a public course where multiple groups congregate around the 1st tee (as in groups in the hole or even 3rd up), it creates a bad look to see a guy wait until a group is 350 yards out and then hit it a drive no better than 225. At private clubs, i've stupidly seen pros/assistant pros encourage you to hit as soon as the group in front is out of range, even if the group in front contains a notoriously slow guy. But yes regarding the 1st hole / letting people reach the green, at private clubs, this should become rule/doctrine and not preference. i 100% agree with you there.
@Andrew - that's interesting, I'm just curious where you get its 5.5 miles? that comes out to 9680 yards, seems like a lot to say youre walking nearly 150% more yards than the average course.
@Jason, i love the humor, and agree to an extent. if you want to play in 2.5 hours on a sat/sun morning, tee off before 7:30 am. then it's appropriate. having said that, i think we need to encourage EVERYONE to play as fast as possible, as i said above.
-
@Andrew - that's interesting, I'm just curious where you get its 5.5 miles? that comes out to 9680 yards, seems like a lot to say youre walking nearly 150% more yards than the average course.
We have about a 250 yard walk from parking lot to 1 and 18 greens, about 40 yards on average (some shorter, some longer, but 40 yards isn't that far) between tees so that's an extra 1,500 yards on top the 6,900 the course plays. On top of that I'm not always down the middle ;D
http://www.insidegolf.com.au/news/how-far-do-you-really-walk-during-18-holes/
According to the above article, the guys tested this on a 5700 M, (6,300 yard) course and averaged 9.5km (including from parking lot) or 5.9 miles.
-
...
- Want to play before 9 am? You have to have a handicap of 15 or better, have completed a free rules and etiquette lesson with a PGA pro, and have been rated a 4 hour or less player by our staff
...
Go take a hike!
If the rules were a 5 handicap, I would go take a bike ride and then tee off at 9am. Or I could find a course has a slower pace of play. There are 15,000 courses in the USA, so there is no reason for them all to have the same basic model.
The reality is better players want to play with better players, Jaka wants to play at his pace os play, so why not find a system that can work better for both?
If the rules were a 5 handicap, then the course would be backed up all day, because it seems to me that to high of a percentage of those players take too long to play. I got in a round with both the men's and women's club champions at my club this summer. Talk about boringly slow! Grinding to maintain a low single digit handicap is not pleasant.
Jaka wants to play at his pace of play, so I have no problem with a system that puts him on the course with others that play that slow.
It has nothing to do with handicap.
-
Exactly.
Unless there's someone holding them up or pushing them from behind, any golfer will take about as long to play as he thinks it's supposed to take. Some people think a round of golf takes 2-1/2 hours. Others think it takes 5 hours.
A slow golfer doesn't play faster if his handicap drops five strokes and a fast golfer doesn't play slower if he suddenly starts shooting 85 instead of 80.
Now in theory, a totally raw beginner who can't finish any hole in less than 8 or 10 strokes would be forced to play slowly. Except I recall when I was at that stage and I'd go play after work with my buddy (who was a single-digit handicapper yet for some reason seemed to enjoy playing with me) we'd play nine holes in about an hour forty minutes as a twosome.
Apparently, my mental image of how long a round should take was formed by playing with that guy and absorbing by osmosis his own preferred pace of play. Even years later when he was a 3-4 handicap and I was shooting in the low 90's we'd still tend to take an hour and a half or a bit longer for our nine-hole weekday rounds. Left unobstructed on a golf course today I still am most comfortable at a similar pace.
-
I'm really not sure where this discussion is going. We wax philosophical about semi-private clubs with 6000 yard F&F courses where one can play in 3 hours with a pushcart. Either join a golf club that doesn't have tee times on weekends, move to the UK or get a life. I used to routinely play 36 in a cart in under 3 hours at my old club. I got to play so much golf that I realized the course's design and maintenance shortcomings all that much sooner. Be careful what you wish for.
-
Brent Hutto nailed it, it's all about what your expectations are. I'll never forget hearing at the impressionable age of 9 or 10, at a sports summer camp that had some golf, the comment of 1 of the counselors who came from the UK. he told us all over there that the Brits expect 4 somes to walk 18 holes in 3 hours, so even as struggling juniors, we ought to be ashamed if 9 holes takes longer than 2 hours. it's a goal i've strived to complete forever.
there are so many little tricks that people don't employ to pick up pace. E.G. if you are walking, when you see a sprinkler head / yardage marker that's on the way to your ball, start walking off the distance so that by the time you put your bag down or by the time the caddie gets to you, you know your yardage measurement to the middle of the green. similar things can be done with carts, though its obviously a bit more difficult.
@Jud_T - i think golf losing the millenials is more unique to the USA, thus we are discussing reasons as to why it's occured. as such, there's a sentiment building, one that i champion, that this is in large part to golf taking too long to play. hence all the talk about pace of play.
-
BR,
2 local public courses come to mind. One is a very nice track, but they have tee times every 7 minutes and it's 5 1/2 hours on the weekend. Another, also a nice track, has Marshals that could have worked for the SS in another life and will literally stop you from getting a dog and a beer at the turn if you're 1/2 second behind the required 4:15 pace and keeping up with the group in front of you. Neither is a pleasant experience...
-
BRoss
You won't find me handing over an extra $30 and be asked to "earn" it back when I am at the mercy of other golfers or management representatives. I suspect not many other people would be keen on the idea.
Ciao
-
BRoss
You won't find me handing over an extra $30 and be asked to "earn" it back when I am at the mercy of other golfers or management representatives. I suspect not many other people would be keen on the idea.
Ciao
Like I said earlier, golf needs to get smaller to get stronger. If we lose Arble to Red Wings re-runs, golf will be stronger :)
-
BRoss
You won't find me handing over an extra $30 and be asked to "earn" it back when I am at the mercy of other golfers or management representatives. I suspect not many other people would be keen on the idea.
Ciao
Like I said earlier, golf needs to get smaller to get stronger. If we lose Arble to Red Wings re-runs, golf will be stronger :)
Well, golf will definitely get smaller if golfers have to pay deposits based on speed of play :o The thing is, who would volunteer $30 up front in the hope of getting it back if everybody else behaves and the management sees things your way? I think its a loopy idea which uses negative reinforcement. If money is going to be a stick, make it positive reinforcement. Give $5 back or free beer (or whatever) if they play in less than 4 hours during busy times.
Ciao
-
there are so many little tricks that people don't employ to pick up pace. E.G. if you are walking, when you see a sprinkler head / yardage marker that's on the way to your ball, start walking off the distance so that by the time you put your bag down or by the time the caddie gets to you, you know your yardage measurement to the middle of the green. similar things can be done with carts, though its obviously a bit more difficult.
Please share more, if you have them!
-
This is an extremely good read and one that touches on a lot of subjects in this thread...although mainly being about GCAs favorite lightning rod.
http://deadspin.com/what-happens-to-golf-after-tiger-1621609188?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
-
How Golf Lost the Millennials (seemingly in America):
Supposedly educated golfers on this site can go on for over 11 pages arguing about whether one should or shouldn't be courteous enough to allow a quicker group to play a round in under four hours. Does that sound appealing? ::)
-
Golf is social and fun for 99% of us. Yet most everyone on this site is grinding all day. Who wants to grind? Bring out the Millennials and show them a good time. My son is 32 and plays 20 rounds a year. The 10 rounds he plays at the Rock each year brings him back. No grinding and a full, rich Lagavulin upon completion. Let's make golf fun and social again.
-
I am one of the lost generation that this tread speaks of. The main thing for me and my friends is the cost of a round of golf. Time is not really the problem we have no complaints about spending time on a golf course. But $50 to play 18 hole vs the fact that we can play some local short 9's for $30 is a factor. One of the other major things that I have noticed as well is that when me and my friends who a majority have played the game for a good amount of time. Go to play a better public golf course or a semi-private facility is the amount of time they spend with us on expectations about pace of play and etiquette. When they very rarely do this to people over the age of 30 or 40. It lead us to feel singled out. Making us want to play at these facilities less. Therefore spending less time and money on golf. The industry seams to in one moment want us and in the other say maybe not yet. I do not want golf course to implement youth nights or other promotions all I am asking for is parity. If they want to put in a youth rate from 18-25 that would be nice but unnecessary unless they would do the same for other groups that golf is seaming to court such as women. But as the point of this tread was lost long ago I will leave on this note. Golf did not lose the younger generation we are just going to play a more simple game until the rest of you get on board.
-
.
-
It's not cool to try and fail. Beat your ball and chase it in circles like a three legged rescue. Hipster golf, that's gonna work.
-
i must have done a poor job of making myself clear. my idea was you only punish the group that starts the slow play at the course, and the groups behind them dont get punished merely for keeping up but playing slowly. the idea is that if the 8:20 4 some is on a 5 hour pace, they lose their deposit, but the groups after 8:20 do not. i admit to it being a very out there idea.
BRoss
You won't find me handing over an extra $30 and be asked to "earn" it back when I am at the mercy of other golfers or management representatives. I suspect not many other people would be keen on the idea.
Ciao
Like I said earlier, golf needs to get smaller to get stronger. If we lose Arble to Red Wings re-runs, golf will be stronger :)
Well, golf will definitely get smaller if golfers have to pay deposits based on speed of play :o The thing is, who would volunteer $30 up front in the hope of getting it back if everybody else behaves and the management sees things your way? I think its a loopy idea which uses negative reinforcement. If money is going to be a stick, make it positive reinforcement. Give $5 back or free beer (or whatever) if they play in less than 4 hours during busy times.
Ciao
-
i must have done a poor job of making myself clear. my idea was you only punish the group that starts the slow play at the course, and the groups behind them dont get punished merely for keeping up but playing slowly. the idea is that if the 8:20 4 some is on a 5 hour pace, they lose their deposit, but the groups after 8:20 do not. i admit to it being a very out there idea.
BRoss
You won't find me handing over an extra $30 and be asked to "earn" it back when I am at the mercy of other golfers or management representatives. I suspect not many other people would be keen on the idea.
Ciao
Like I said earlier, golf needs to get smaller to get stronger. If we lose Arble to Red Wings re-runs, golf will be stronger :)
Well, golf will definitely get smaller if golfers have to pay deposits based on speed of play :o The thing is, who would volunteer $30 up front in the hope of getting it back if everybody else behaves and the management sees things your way? I think its a loopy idea which uses negative reinforcement. If money is going to be a stick, make it positive reinforcement. Give $5 back or free beer (or whatever) if they play in less than 4 hours during busy times.
Ciao
But this will take a savvy marshall (I suspect many marshalls) to identify all the problem people and keep the clean guys out of trouble. Bottom line, I wouldn't loan $30 to a stranger so why would I trust a marshall to get my $30 back? I know I have never been the cause of a 5 hour round so there is no need for me to gamble to break even.
Ciao
-
It takes one marshal to identify the slow player(s) in the group with an empty hole in front of them. Why not install an emergency "slow play number" that anyone waiting on the group in front can call from his cell phone, which will bring out the marshal in a cart to check who's ultimately responsible for the backup?
Ulrich
-
It takes one marshal to identify the slow player(s) in the group with an empty hole in front of them. Why not install an emergency "slow play number" that anyone waiting on the group in front can call from his cell phone, which will bring out the marshal in a cart to check who's ultimately responsible for the backup?
Ulrich
Now you want me to be a nark ;) I just wanna play golf in a reasonable time so I will choose places that accomodate my wishes. The last thing I want is to have to earn my money back or be a police informant when I am trying to hit a straight drive :o.
Ciao
-
because this topic won't (and shouldn't die) in watching in play w/ jimmy roberts last night, i learned of something that fascinated me that occurs at ted bishop's the legends club in Indiana.
they let golfers pay per minute. They didn't say what the charge was, and how that differs from a 9/18 hole round, but talk about a way to speed up play or a way to bring back the millenials.
i think this is absolutely brilliant. imagine youre out there slogging through what's going to be a 5 hour 18 hole round, but you don't feel right walking off after 14 holes because you've already spent your $80 on cart and greens fees. well what if instead you got to play for $25 cents per minute, so then you can walk off after how many minutes or hours you'd like, and you'd damn well try and play as fast as possible.
i'd love to see this idea brought to public facilities in the greater NYC and also the south florida areas, so i could experience it for myself.
has anyone heard of another place that does pay per minute? has anyone played anywhere that does pay per minute?
more importantly to this topic - does anyone see any fault in a pay per minute system w/r/t improving pace of play?
-
because this topic won't (and shouldn't die) in watching in play w/ jimmy roberts last night, i learned of something that fascinated me that occurs at ted bishop's the legends club in Indiana.
they let golfers pay per minute. They didn't say what the charge was, and how that differs from a 9/18 hole round, but talk about a way to speed up play or a way to bring back the millenials.
i think this is absolutely brilliant. imagine youre out there slogging through what's going to be a 5 hour 18 hole round, but you don't feel right walking off after 14 holes because you've already spent your $80 on cart and greens fees. well what if instead you got to play for $25 cents per minute, so then you can walk off after how many minutes or hours you'd like, and you'd damn well try and play as fast as possible.
i'd love to see this idea brought to public facilities in the greater NYC and also the south florida areas, so i could experience it for myself.
has anyone heard of another place that does pay per minute? has anyone played anywhere that does pay per minute?
more importantly to this topic - does anyone see any fault in a pay per minute system w/r/t improving pace of play?
There ought to be an app for that. One that measures your actual playing time while in a foursome. That way you wouldn't pay for the slow players in your group.
-
.
-
I'd join a 1$per minute club in a second if you had to play by the rules and pay $100 for every stroke you shot over par. The sweetness of silence would be worth every penny.
-
more importantly to this topic - does anyone see any fault in a pay per minute system w/r/t improving pace of play?
Per minute might be a little too much, but with 15,000 course in the USA, certainly 15 could give by the hour a shot and lets see how it works.
Somehow I think the thought that the slow group will be costing the faster group behind them money is not going to work out so well. We already have road rage shootings when folks are only losing time.
-
To many angry golfers want to change how the game is played to fit their lives rather than change their lives to fit the game.
-
To many angry golfers want to change how the game is played to fit their lives rather than change their lives to fit the game.
i don't think this could be further from the truth. if that's the case how come they've been playing golf in less than 4 hours across the pond for decades, where the 5 hour US round is a thing of the past 25-30 years? that's what i can't fathom here, the inventors of the sport play it quickly yet we are making excuses state side to keep the 4.5 hour + round alive. non sensical to me.
-
B,
I think you are engaging in a fair bit of wishful thinking and romanticizing the whole "inventors of the sport" idea. A lot of your second-hand impression of really brisk play in the UK is at a handful of specific, high-end clubs with a longstanding culture of playing quickly. Go to the English or Scottish equivalent of your typical $40/round inland USA course and I'd reckon you'd find the pace of play quicker but not hugely so, on average, in the UK.
There are plenty of guys right this minute traipsing around an uncrowded, elite private course somewhere in Pennsylvania or New York who will finish their rounds in 3-1/2 hours or less. And at the same moment there's someone slogging around a crowded pay-and-play course in Scotland in 4-1/2 hours. The "inventors of the sport" have been dead for several hundred years, you know.
-
To many angry golfers want to change how the game is played to fit their lives rather than change their lives to fit the game.
i don't think this could be further from the truth. if that's the case how come they've been playing golf in less than 4 hours across the pond for decades, where the 5 hour US round is a thing of the past 25-30 years? that's what i can't fathom here, the inventors of the sport play it quickly yet we are making excuses state side to keep the 4.5 hour + round alive. non sensical to me.
I'm guessing JK is talking about more than just pace of play.
-
The genie is out of the bottle. Golf is now a game of angry men.
I think it was the summers of 1983 and 1984 when my dad taught me (by example) how to deal with slow groups: you start by standing with hands on hips in the fairway, then you do a little yelling, and then you hit into them.
I don't think this is a new phenomenon. And as much as I don't like truly slow play, thankfully I unlearned those lessons.
-
The genie is out of the bottle. Golf is now a game of angry men.
I think it was the summers of 1983 and 1984 when my dad taught me (by example) how to deal with slow groups: you start by standing with hands on hips in the fairway, then you do a little yelling, and then you hit into them.
I don't think this is a new phenomenon. And as much as I don't like truly slow play, thankfully I unlearned those lessons.
I remember the church pastor hitting into the group in front in the 60s, because of their slow play.
-
I played in 2:00 today in the dreaded US of A. Fortunately I didn't have to play through any Millenials...
-
I played in 2:00 today in the dreaded US of A. Fortunately I didn't have to play through any Millenials...
Walking or riding?
-
I played in 2:00 today in the dreaded US of A. Fortunately I didn't have to play through any Millenials...
Walking or riding?
Riding. Even if I actually had game I don't think I could comfortably walk Kingsley in that time at my age and weight. I believe the guys who did the Hundred Hole Hike did though.
-
All this talk about FootGolf, Top Golf, and the 15" holes and little is said about SpeedGolf. Given all the complaints about timing and more demanding and exciting alternatives (5k's, etc), it seems like SpeedGolf would be an easy way to keep millennials in the game throughout the busiest times in their lives. Even the busy young executive with a growing family can afford to sneak away for an hour or two to workout on the golf course just as they would otherwise do in the gym. I know SpeedGolf is fairly popular in the northwest but I am curious why it hasn't expanded beyond there and much more curious why golf course operators and other industry leaders have ignored it and focused on the novelty alternatives that are not going to bring actual golfers back to the golf course to play an actual game of golf.
Sure the scoring and thus the objective is slightly different, but SpeedGolf is very much "golf" while FootGolf and Top Golf are at best only partially within that category.
-
All this talk about FootGolf, Top Golf, and the 15" holes and little is said about SpeedGolf. Given all the complaints about timing and more demanding and exciting alternatives (5k's, etc), it seems like SpeedGolf would be an easy way to keep millennials in the game throughout the busiest times in their lives. Even the busy young executive with a growing family can afford to sneak away for an hour or two to workout on the golf course just as they would otherwise do in the gym. I know SpeedGolf is fairly popular in the northwest but I am curious why it hasn't expanded beyond there and much more curious why golf course operators and other industry leaders have ignored it and focused on the novelty alternatives that are not going to bring actual golfers back to the golf course to play an actual game of golf.
Sure the scoring and thus the objective is slightly different, but SpeedGolf is very much "golf" while FootGolf and Top Golf are at best only partially within that category.
I do not disagree with your thought....BUT.
EVERY move to "grow the game" seems to be about making it easier.
Do we really think having to actually be in decent shape is going to attract more??
How is everyone going to get a trophy then?
???
-
To many angry golfers want to change how the game is played to fit their lives rather than change their lives to fit the game.
Restore John, not change. And restore manners at that.
-
??? ::)
Some clubs are doing a great job recruiting younger players . Philly Cricket seems to have a model program for a private club . Lots of good players enjoy it there and recruit others . It seems they are pretty serious golfers in general , and its not just a family thing. Price and quality of product seems to drive their business model. They aren't afraid to give them a good value.
As to pace of play , it has to be a culture thing , and certain designs lend themselves to quicker play . Subtle difficulties around the greens don't slow down the less talented players like water and lost balls . Lots of the older classics play fast due to this ! It's hard to move anyone on a penal design .
-
"The wealth and earning power of the Millennial generation, also known as Generation Y, is eroding day by day during the Obama presidency. The magnitude of this erosion is nothing short of startling for those Americans born in 1983 or later.
A lackluster at best job market is making for scarce opportunities for many Millennial college graduates. This, in turn, is pushing back their opportunities to earn and subsequently save, while at the same time increasing their debt load -- a lethal financial concoction, indeed."
Could it be as simple as that? (No money = no golf)
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/10/the_millennials_an_economically_lost_generation.html#ixzz3BR8yqJSR
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
-
This discussion brought up the point about golf being good exercise. I recently had to get a new running watch which included a HRM built into the watch strap. I decided to test it on the course for 9 holes, I was unusually wayward to start, but I found it quite interesting that i walked 4.15km on a course that only measures just over 3100 for the 9 i played. Apart from a couple of holes green to next tee walking is minimal.
http://www.mapmyfitness.com/workout/796933913
Mat