[Jari Rasinkangas]

Golf is loosing players because it takes too long to play a round and it is too expensive.

The following article makes a proposal to make 12 hole courses: http://www.golfdom.com/golfdom/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=143715

What is your solution to fix these problems?

Jari

[astavrides]

i didnt read your link, but i think 12 hole courses are a great idea.  saves time and money.  

[Lou_Duran]

Then wy not just play nine and go home?

I have an acquaintance in Canada that has been doing nicely in the business with a very nice short 9-holer.  But, even he admits that the serious golfer is not his normal client.

[Ken Fry]

People have been coming up with innovative ideas, whether at traditional 9 holes courses, 12 holes courses, executive courses, etc.  It seems despite the need for these new ideas, the negative stigma attached to them defeats their potential benefits.

Does the problem lie just with time, or are other factors like money and enjoyment, issues not showing up in surveys, also part of the problem?

Ken

[Matt_Ward]

In covering the PGA Show this week in Orlando the main topic of coversation is how to turn around the slumping golf market.

Clearly, the game needs to address slow play because people in today's hectic 24/7 world do not have much availability to go with 5+ plus hour golf and that's not counting the transport time to and from the course.

Golf needs to demonstrate a clear awareness that today's active professional doesn't want to waste that much time when other more fulfilling options are available.

The other issue dovetails with the time element -- the escalating costs to play. Here too there must be some awareness that the ever-increasing costs need to deal with why so many groups are moving into other sports.

The future is not a promising one until those withint he industry understand that the free-fall of players had not abated thus far.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I am a nine hole guy most of the year at home. I do not have time during the week for 18. I think the daily fee courses should look at that more seriously.

[Adam_F_Collins]

What are the strongest current trends in development? Are we seeing an increase in shorter courses?

[Steve Lang]

 

Trends?? for whom?

Time is critical, but moreso is decompression time required in this too hectic world, made more so by "24/7" concepts now foisted on people by trendy forces.. people aren't clocks and computers like IBM!!??

Club players have always had the option to fit the game into whatever time was available.. play 4 or x hole loops or just hit some balls on the range or pop into the locker room for some golftalk, drinks etc..  and as much as some complain, 4-5 hours on the course, especially away from electronic connections are better for you than many activiites..

Publinx issues are surely a different world, cause if you pay per go, you want your money's worth.. the whole bucket, rain sleet or snow, the game must deliver!?!?!

The crisis I see is too many people trying to get rich quick in golf or people not willing to invest the time, focus, and hard work necessary to reap the rewards the game offers..

[Tom_Doak]

Let's keep this in perspective.

Golf is not in crisis.  There are millions of golfers all over the world who love the sport.

The crisis is being pronounced by people in the golf industry who make their living at golf, and who are concerned that the game is not continuing to expand rapidly so they can make more money at it.

On the other hand, a genuine interest in making the sport appeal to more people benefits everyone.  Twelve-hole courses aren't going to have anything to do with that; playing nine is still an option at more than half the courses in the world, and the game isn't growing.

Taking your kids out to play would help.  One of the cooler things we're working on is a short "barefoot" course for our new project in Mexico, to take the family out on after their day at the beach.  I'm envisioning something like the children's course at North Berwick, with a few cactus to dodge around for added interest.  Sad to say, though, this will be at a very expensive resort instead of in my own back yard.      

[Michael Whitaker]

I can see possibilities for public courses that are built as three six-hole loops instead of two nines... if (and this is a BIG IF) the cost to play six or 12 holes is "fair" compared to the 18-hole rate.

It seems most public courses I'm familiar with charge around 2/3 of the 18-hole fee for a nine hole game. Is this the case all over? This kind of pricing tends to discourage nine hole business (which I think is the point). But, casual golfers might come out more often for a quick nine if it only cost 1/2 the 18-hole fee.

[Craig Sweet]

I think Mr. Doak is right on!

There really isn't a "crisis".  However, I think golf courses have become way to long and fast, and everyone...everyone...stands over the ball and goes through a ritual that even Tiger would find embarassing...thus a round takes forever.

[Rick Shefchik]

It's about mindset. The only golf Americans (and the rest of the world, for the most part) ever see is televised tournament golf, which couldn't be farther from the game they actually play.

Somehow we've got to convince the average player that the game is more about the fun, the exersize, the beauty and the friendship than it is about the score.

I need to keep reminding myself of that every time I tee it up, but as a lower handicap player, there are times when it IS aboutt he score. Separating those times is probably the challenge most of us on this site face.

For most golfers, however, they've simply got to be convinced to cut down on the practice swings and the expectations, to just aim and swing, go find it and do it again with undue delay because there are people behind them who want to use the hole they're on. Pick up the ball after 8 or 9 blows, unless there's no one behind you. Ball in the knee-high weeds? Let it go.

Once we erradicate the pro tour mentality from the recreational golfer's mind, we'll be where we want to be. Will that ever happen? I wish I could be optimistic.

[Matt_Ward]

Denial of where things stand today is the fastest and most surest way to deflect from what is at hand now and in the years ahead.

Golf is supported by a very small percentage of players who consume and put forward a disproportionate amount of the dollars. The industry has failed to move beyond this "inner" group.

If memory serves -- I believe 20% of the "core" golfers (those playing 25+ rounds per year) actually put in roughly 50-60 percent of the money into the game thru greens fees and equipment purchases. This number has been constant and doesn't reflect any real movement forward.

The amount of women entering the game is up, but when you balance that out against the loss of female players per year you find a general inattention to the other side of the gender aisle.

Golf takes too much time to play -- when you calculate 5-6 hours and the transport time necessary to play the net effect is a time loss that many people can't buy into for the long haul. Clearly, not when it sacrifices other key elements of their lives. Let's not also forget the associated costs.

The industry has embraced the "First Tee" component but beyond the "feel good" PR you have to assess if golf is really moving beyond the margins it has occupied for quite some time. Minorities do not embrace golf -- save for the Asian community. Tiger was supposed to have some impact but it hasn't been anywhere near being meaningful.

Unfortunately, much of the industry simply focuses on securing $$ from those who have it and that narrow approach fosters an inertia preventing a pro-active program that courts others.

Until those within the industry really delve into the why's the likelihood -- I should change that to the certainty -- will be a smaller and smaller game played only by those who are much older than the median average and clearly with the deepest pockets.

That's not a future -- it's an obituary.

P.S. Tom D -- the imprint I suggest is not simply the self interested few screaming in the golf industry. The numbers --not the ones suggested by the NGF -- speak for themselves.

[Michael Whitaker]

Tom - You are correct about taking kids out to play golf! Like Rick says, we have to get Americans thinking about golf as a game. To that end, the SC Junior Golf Association has started a very interesting project that can be best described as "little league" golf. In talking with kids and parents the SCJGA learned that lots of kids don't take up golf because there is no "team" aspect to the game like they enjoy with soccer, swimming, football, etc. In response, the SCJGA is developing "little leagues" around the state in which kids can play the "GAME" of golf in a Stableford team format that allows beginners to participate without being embarrassed by their lack of skill. It's all about fun and sportsmanship, in a non-intimidating way. I really think they are on to something very BIG!

[Don Dinkmeyer]

This is an interesting thread on the eternal question...

I came to golf at 47, athletic background, etc. Can't play soccer or basketball anymore (teams). I love golf and have the means and time to pursue it.

The sport has inherent challenges  --  in comparison to --  other options for youth, me, everyone.

1. I can play a fairly fulfilling basketball "game" by myself, in my driveway, with a ball and the basket that doesn't change shape, cost, etc every year. If i've got a half an hour, go out back and work up a sweat, solo if necessary.

2. Anytime i want to play or practice golf, short of putting on my carpet, its an hour minimum to get to, use, and from the facility. Which in many locations is of questionable quality

3. If i want to play, its the hours noted above. That's not going to change even if you play 9 or 12, its 2-4 hours. Thats a huge amount of time for anyone, in any situation. If you do 2-4 hours or more of something in a day, its going to be work or sleep, maybe golf!

If we get 50% of income from 20% of the players, it reflects 4 of 5 who even "agree" to embark on the golf journey do not or cannot embrace it fully. I suggest thats due to the inherent nature of the sport - you can't change what you are, or who you are. If I like to sail, i gotta have at least a raft and water...

If we got to 2005 with these assumptions and realities, I bet we'll make it to 2050 with the same sport that some pursue passionately and many more have a passing acquaintance...

[A.G._Crockett]

I have proposed this theory here before, but here goes (again):

The golf boom, and now the leveling off of that boom, is a demographic phenomenon of the baby boomers.  As the boomers fled tennis and other activities of their (our  ) youth, plus were at our peak in disposable incomes, golf boomed.

Now, as our kids go through college, and as the first wave of the boomers move toward retirement with smaller generations following, the boom is leveling.  Not a crisis, just the reality of one of the really significant demographic anomalies in U.S. economic history.

I would be cautious of "fixes" to whatever perceived problems there are in the golf industry that don't adequately account for this reality.

[Mark_Fine]

Two rounds of golf (two foursomes) in the Orlando area during the The Golf Industry Show at two different coures - $1480  

Full day passes for the same group at Disney World - A lot less  

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom Doak beat me to it as well. And with all that travel too, go figure

Golf has sustained for hundreds and hundreds of years. Perhaps it's not growing at a rate that those today who desire to make $$$$$$ from the game would like. But that happens to be the brakes at present.

Golf is golf. And always will be golf. Even if the "powers-that-be" continue to allow the game to fundamentally change for all the wrong reasons.

[Don Dinkmeyer]

Two rounds of golf (two foursomes) in the Orlando area during the The Golf Industry Show at two different coures - $1480  

Full day passes for the same group at Disney World - A lot less  

Holy Expense Account, Batman!

That's what's wrong with this whole equasion - I wasnt in either of these groups...  

[Doug Siebert]

The people who build golf courses seem to have a "Field of Dreams" mentality, that if they build it, the golfers will come.  They aren't doing any target marketing beyond deciding whether they want to be a private club, semi private, CCFAD or lower end daily fee.  They seem to be so intent on figuring out how to extract the most money per visitor they ignore that revenue also depends greatly on the number of visitors.  Obviously there are exceptions, like Keiser's "core golfer" market at Bandon, but I think I'm right for the vast majority of courses built these days.

If you enforce fast play, and I mean really enforce by kicking off the slow players, I think in any major market where there are more than a half dozen courses to choose from you'll have the people who don't have lots of free time or just plain prefer quick play flocking to your joint.  Maybe I'm wrong, since I don't own a course, but I don't see why owners are so afraid of doing anything to potentially drive off some of their customer base but potentially gaining more customers (and getting more play per day if they move more quickly)  Its no different than a restaurant deciding to ban all smoking and figuring that the revenue they lose from smokers not coming in will be more than made up by having nonsmokers prefer it over the smoky place down the street.

The PGA Tour and the networks bear a lot of responsibility for this.  The Tour because they don't do crap about the insanely slow pace these guys play at -- a twosome should not take 4.5 hours when they don't ever have to look for balls and take only 60-70 full shots between them for a round!  The networks because their asinine commentators encourage this by telling the viewers how smart a player was to step away from the ball twice before he putted, or changing clubs three times while tossing grass up each time when they give their spiel about how viewers can learn from this why they should never play a stroke until they are comfortable and can commit to the shot!  Talking about the importance of a preshot routine while a guy waggles for 10 seconds before pulling the trigger, that sort of thing.  Just shutting up about it would be fine, you don't need fast play propaganda, but they are essentially telling viewers at home that the reason they suck is because they don't play slow enough!!

[Cory Lewis]

Kicking people off the course for slow play is never going to happen. You have to remember that pretty much every course that wants to make a profit is about making customers happy.  A customer who feels angry about being bugged for slow play will not only not come back, but they will tell five people about the poor experience they had at your golf course.  The simple fact is that individuals who have bad experiences on a golf course will tell three times more people about it than the person who has a good experience.  No matter how good a reputation for pace of play you have, you will never be able to make up for the play you lose making people mad.  And this is just for public courses.  Have you ever tried to tell somebody on the Board of Directors of a private club that they are playing slow?  I don't think so.  People who pay a lot of money to join a private club expect certain things and being bugged about slow play is not one of them.   So you do what we do where I work, you hire rangers who stay on top of things, you put time cards in the carts, You have the starter give them a speech about slow play.  When it does get really bad, you apologize to the people who were slowed up, you give them free or discounted rounds and you hope they don't tell alot of people about the experience.  

[Lloyd_Cole]

Surely if we're building golf courses in deserts and swamps there are too many people wanting to play golf.. only the golf industry would suffer if we lost a few golfers over the next few years. Why does the first tee exist? not for the benefit of minorities, so that they may learn our beloved game, but so the industry can widen it's demographic..

[Dan Herrmann]

Cory - just expanding on your point - it only takes a couple of people to really slow things down.

I'd like the pitch the idea of getting out of the medal play mentality and stress match play.  Personally, I think match play goes a lot faster and is more fun.  Unfortunately, US public golf courses seldom see match play on a regular basis.

[Brad Klein]

I agree with Doak in most respects but would rephrase it slightly for emphasis. The only dilemma (not a crisis) in the game is the one that overzealous owners and developers now find themselves in, having overbuilt the market for 10 years. Now, ambitious initiatives are needed to create market demand for the surplus of courses they created. But that's not to be mistaken for an industry wide crisis - more like a malaise. Technically, I'm not even sure it's a slump, in Matt Ward's parlance (above) - more like slower growth rates than most people would like to see.

[PThomas]

I also agree with Mr. Doak that "crisis" is too strong-- but of course there are things that should be happening..his family course he is building is a great idea....I have three daughters, ages 12, 10 and 7, and I really don't think I'd be welcome to bring them out even to the little par-65 muni that is near me

cost is definitely a factor, I also feel...I think that could be lowered in some/many cases  if we lower the "perfect"/aka "Augusta National" standards that many golfers seem to expect....the "must-be green" mentality is something I just cannot figure out....didn't Hogan say that he didin't care what the fairways and tees were like , just give him good greens....continuing this demand for perfection, I understand, is that the First Tee facilities are built to very high standards....I grew up playing a City of Chicago run 9-hole course (we used to take our clubs on the bus to get there!) that was really poorly maintained -- yet I came to love the game without playing on immaculate grounds...also, if you start kids out with impeccably-groomed facilities, as they get older they will continue to expect such, which only coontinues the vicious cycle

speading of First Tee, I wonder how good of a job it is doing bringing kids to play (AND maintaing their interest)...I don't know of any First Tee facilities where I live in suburban CHicago (they might be , but I don't follow much of the USGA's internal workings because I strongly disagree with much of what they do)

are the rich and powerful like the PGA and the USGA doing enough, I wonder?  are there enough places where kids can play for nothing/next to nothing, get (almost) free clubs, and get a SERIES (not just one, because the game is damn hard when you are just starting out -- and sometimes even when you are 43 years old!) of very cheap lessons...I always read about courses where people grew up where they could play all day for 1 small fee:  do these programs still exist and, if they do, are there enough of them?  what do these groups do with all that money anyway??

the increasing length of courses due to the lack of control of the ball also comes into play here, I feel...Longer courses+ more money for Maintenance=higher green fees+longer rounds...this situation also requires more land use and more water, etc.....

my wife does play a bit, and of course I'm wishing very badly that my girls take up the game....we go to the driving range and play minature golf, but "the bug" hasn't bit any of them yet...perhaps the main reason for that is that they have so many recreation options...they all play several sports like soccer, basketball and volleyball...maybe that's the best sign that golf needs to do a much better job of competing for kids' interest

pt

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()