Would the Muirfield model work at elite courses in the US?

[Darren_Kilfara]

Muirfield, as most here will know, allows guest play on certain weekdays under very strict conditions, with a formal application process in place to allow unaccompanied visitors to petition for tee times in advance. Are there any elite private courses in the US for which this model might make sense, both in terms of being open to a wider audience and also possibly to increase incoming revenue? (For that matter, and without necessarily naming names, is this model already effectively in place - albeit unadvertised - at certain clubs?)

I'm thinking that it would surely work at many courses which experience relatively minimal play to have one half-day or a couple of two-hour slots during the week in which (carefully screened?) guests could pay to play without necessarily knowing a member. Whether or not any Top 20 or Top 50-type private club would ever take the step from "it would work" to "let's try to make it work" is another story, of course, although as this approach seems to work perfectly well throughout the UK - a country where class barriers are arguably even stronger than they are in the US - I can't see why the exclusive model should be so firmly entrenched at private American golf clubs across the board.

Cheers,
Darren

[Chris Kane]

Darren, aren't there tax issues associated with "private club" status which would preclude top American clubs from doing it?

[ForkaB]

Chris (and Darren)

That has been the party line whenever this topic has been brought up.  I must admit, however, I was never fully convinced by the argument.

My guess is that most clubs just do not want the riff-raff around, no matter how polite they are or how tastefully they are dressed.  Even if, say, NGLA, could sell 2000 slots a year at $300/slot, do you think the 300 or so members would trade a reduction of $2,000 in annual fees for the hassle of not being able to play when they wanted to?

[Rob_Waldron]

I have seen several "Top Rated" courses opening the gates to limited outside play for a hefty F$$. One route has been pemitting unaccompanied guests with all charges going on a member account and the other has been to set aside a limited number of off peak starting times under the guise of a "reciprical " program for members of out of town clubs. Either way everyone wins. The club makes a few extra bucks and access is provided for those willing to pay the price.

[Steve Lapper]

All,

   I love the idea, but unfortunately, it will never work.There are a considerably greater number of issues (local, state, and federal law & code, along with associated business practices) that serve to prevent a "Muirfield" model from successfully working.

   Assuming the tax-related issues could be hurdled, issues of liability, handicap-access, zoning, associated membership entry issues (gender, race, religion, etc...) all would conspire to exclude most of the US Top 100 ultra-private courses from participation. The best that is going to happen is further expansion of charity-related outings and membership-sponsored unaccompanied play. Current memberships can regulate and fine-tune such access through those channels and maintain firm control.

   Only with a concerted lobbying effort at the federal or state level (and I can't see that happening in our lifetime) will public access change.

  Darren,

  You went to Harvard, and if you made varsity for them, you played the Country Club and maybe an occasional round at  Myopia Hunt...could you see the memberships at any of those places alowing anyone labeled John Q. Public onto their greens?

[John Kavanaugh]

If a course has national memberships and open slots make the carpetbaggers join.  The simple solution is not to allow unaccompanied play ever, ever, ever.  If the pro wants to do someone he thinks is worthy a favor stick an assistant in the group.  Anytime you charge someone twice a normal fee their attitude changes to the detriment of everyone at the course, members and employees.  I have never had a problem with comped visitors and have never not had a problem with people who feel they are overpaying.  note:  We ended the program of allowing unaccompained play at $250 a head plus mandatory caddies after seeing the money took in did not equal the emotions coming out.

How many times is it worth having a bad day at your club for a 2% reduction in dues.  I don't think a captain at a US club can rule with an iron fist in quite the same way you see overseas...Lawsuits would soon fly.  I'd be all for unaccompanied play if I could be in charge of sending people home if I simply did not like how they presented themselves.

[Mike_Sweeney]

I'd be all for unaccompanied play if I could be in charge of sending people home if I simply did not like how they presented themselves.

Would I make the cut?

[Steve Lapper]

The simple solution is not to allow unaccompanied play ever, ever, ever.  If the pro wants to do someone he thinks is worthy a favor stick an assistant in the group.  
  We ended the program of allowing unaccompained play at $250 a head plus mandatory caddies after seeing the money took in did not equal the emotions coming out.
How many times is it worth having a bad day at your club for a 2% reduction in dues.  I don't think a captain at a US club can rule with an iron fist in quite the same way you see overseas...Lawsuits would soon fly.  I'd be all for unaccompanied play if I could be in charge of sending people home if I simply did not like how they presented themselves.

Add this in (which is by no means atypical for most desirable private courses in the US) and I rest my case

Mike Sweeney,

   NO!! You are still too funny looking!

[ForkaB]

One of the differences here is that members of posh US clubs think they are superior human beings.  The members at posh UK clubs know they are superior human beings.

[Darren_Kilfara]

 You went to Harvard, and if you made varsity for them, you played the Country Club and maybe an occasional round at  Myopia Hunt...could you see the memberships at any of those places alowing anyone labeled John Q. Public onto their greens?

Steve - I did, and I did, but I hardly envisioned Brookline as the sort of course at which this policy might work. (No "old money" club worthy of the name would countenance such an idea in a thousand years, I'm sure.) I'm thinking more about the Sand Hills and Ballyneals of the world, where excess play presumably isn't an issue and the travel/logistics involved will rule out all but the most dedicated golfers anyway.

Cheers,
Darren

[Chris Kane]

Rich, the tax thing is the common "excuse" on here, but you're right: I suspect that if clubs were determined to allow more non-members onto their courses, they would find a way to make it work.

I was down at Prestwick last week, one of the most exclusive clubs in Scotland.  But the impression I got from the members I spoke to is that they view their course as a resource to be shared with others, notwithstanding the enormous revenue they generate from them!  They've been having problems with members of the public using their practice fairway, and are still struggling with how to tell them that its a private facility without making them feel unwelcome!

A club of similar stature in America would have tall fences all the way round it, an escape from the outside world.  

Darren, the class issue you raise is an interesting one - class barriers in the UK may be stronger, but if anything they are more  crippling in America, if we cite the golf example.  My initial guess is that the concept of noblesse oblige has not developed to the same extent in America than it has in the UK, which could be explained by America's relative youth.

Provided they have the $$$, an unconnected golfer could play most of Britain's top courses - a golf trip to America without good connections would not be anywhere near as fruitful (a friend of mine posted a thread a couple of years ago enquiring about an ideal itinerary for two weeks of golf in America - the responses he got indicated that it wouldn't be worth the effort).

[Darren_Kilfara]

By the way, John, I'm not talking about "a bad day", i.e. turning a club completely over to societies and other riff-raff. I'm talking about having even a few hours once a week reserved for guest play. It kills me that Muirfield often gets tagged as being snooty for its guest policy by members of private American clubs with greatly inferior golf courses and much more exclusionary access practices!

[John Kavanaugh]

I'd be all for unaccompanied play if I could be in charge of sending people home if I simply did not like how they presented themselves.

Would I make the cut?

I am biased in favor of tall people who always smile who attended Catholic institutions...I doubt if you would even pay.  I told my daughter last night that she could go to Boston College if she gets accepted and it fits what she really wants.  Do you know anybody..

[Steve Lapper]

Darren & Chris,

   As for the "told-money type" of club and the references to class differences being more "crippling" in the US you both make, thats 100% spot on. Alone, those differentials conspire to prevent any shared access.

   Interestingly, Sand Hills (and Ballyneal, I think?) appear to allow for an occasional accomodation to a letter-writing of sincere desire. Sand Hills represents a very different mentality within the US. They see themselves as a protector of the spirit of the game and beacon of light for it's simple pleasures. Many other clubs, especially the older more genteel types, see themselves as protectors of their turf and status more than guardians of the game. That, for me, is the fundamental and underlying difference abroad. Great private clubs in Scotland, Ireland, Australia, NZ, and elsewhere take immeasurable pride in guiding themselves as stewards of the game and it's traditions. America appears to remain still too immature to reflect that.

[John Kavanaugh]

By the way, John, I'm not talking about "a bad day", i.e. turning a club completely over to societies and other riff-raff. I'm talking about having even a few hours once a week reserved for guest play. It kills me that Muirfield often gets tagged as being snooty for its guest policy by members of private American clubs with greatly inferior golf courses and much more exclusionary access practices!

How do you tell who is a society or not without first meeting the person.  I could see being on a committee where people applied for unaccompanied play and having them come in for an interview.  Now that would be fun.  Honestly, if you want to play somewhere all you need is patience and do good deeds...do enough charity work and you will soon make friends with members of clubs you never dreamed.  Thanksgiving is coming up and there are many hungry shut-ins out there in need of a meal and a few kind words.  Steer the coversation to golf and who knows...that son that ignores where he came from might just be your ticket.

[John Kavanaugh]

One advantage you Europeans have is that you don't have to live with pretentious baby boomer Americans day in and day out...Sure they and their money are fine on a very short term basis..take it and send them back home.  Ask any pro at a great European club that has been there for 20 years and he will tell you that we ain't what we used to be.

I imagine that there are few pros in the US that would not make sure a golf lover form Scotland that wrote a letter saying he was in the states and wanted to play wouldn't bend over backwards to get the guy a game.  The members would fight for the privilege of hosting the guy.  It's cute hosting people from different countries.

[John Kavanaugh]

Darren,

I'm curious, if you lead a successful and fruitful life full of kindness and generosity what courses in the US do you think you won't eventually play.  People without the patience to wait may just not deserve or really want to play a given course.  I believe every course in this country is open to every being on this planet...in due time.

[John Kavanaugh]

Sean,

Remember that $50 I sent you to play Pinehurst #2...I have received 100 times that in comps since.  This stuff works.

[Dan Kelly]

One of the differences here is that members of posh US clubs think they are superior human beings.  The members at posh UK clubs know they are superior human beings.

And, therefore, the members at posh UK clubs are not threatened by the occasional appearance of an unwashed lesser in their midst -- whereas members of posh US clubs are fearful, somewhere deep within, that if they associate with their alleged inferiors, their alleged superiority will be revealed as the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.

Am I interpreting you correctly?

If the Muirfield model can't work in the U.S. (and I'm pretty sure it never will, even if it could), it's a damned shame. Every day of every year, I drive past a wonderful private golf course -- and, even on many of the most beautiful days, there is no one out there playing.

Repeat this experience at private clubs from sea to shining sea. What a waste of assets!

I imagine that, even if the tax and other legal hurdles could be surmounted, the members at such clubs would decide that the benefits of "sharing" their course would not justify risking the possibility that Al Czervik would show up once in a while.

None of my business, though, of course.

[Geoffrey Childs]

I'd be all for unaccompanied play if I could be in charge of sending people home if I simply did not like how they presented themselves.

Would I make the cut?

I told my daughter last night that she could go to Boston College if she gets accepted and it fits what she really wants.  Do you know anybody..

John

There are probably more then a few young Catholic Kennedy's waiting for your daughter in Massachusetts.    I would not wish that on you.

[Bob_Huntley]

Darren & Chris,
Many other clubs, especially the older more gentile types, see themselves as protectors of their turf and status more than guardians of the game.

Steve,

Do you mean 'genteel' or 'gentile'?'

Bob

[ForkaB]

One of the differences here is that members of posh US clubs think they are superior human beings.  The members at posh UK clubs know they are superior human beings.

And, therefore, the members at posh UK clubs are not threatened by the occasional appearance of an unwashed lesser in their midst -- whereas members of posh US clubs are fearful, somewhere deep within, that if they associate with their alleged inferiors, their alleged superiority will be revealed as the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.

Am I interpreting you correctly?

If the Muirfield model can't work in the U.S. (and I'm pretty sure it never will, even if it could), it's a damned shame. Every day of every year, I drive past a wonderful private golf course -- and, even on many of the most beautiful days, there is no one out there playing.

Repeat this experience at private clubs from sea to shining sea. What a waste of assets!

I imagine that, even if the tax and other legal hurdles could be surmounted, the members at such clubs would decide that the benefits of "sharing" their course would not justify risking the possibility that Al Czervik would show up once in a while.

None of my business, though, of course.

Dan

As usual, you interpret exquisitely!

I would add that the UK toffs are really no better or worse than the US toffs, they just have much less self-doubt.  This is probably because while both sets of people have descended from some form of Al Czervik, in the UK this happened 500 years ago whilst in the US it was just a generation or two ago, if that.

My guess is that Al Jr. is a plastic surgeon and the President of Bushwood CC now and silently going "nyah! nyah!" at you when you forlornly drive past "his" gates.......

[Steve Lapper]

Darren & Chris,
Many other clubs, especially the older more gentile types, see themselves as protectors of their turf and status more than guardians of the game.

Steve,

Do you mean 'genteel' or 'gentile'?'

Bob

Bob,

   Oops!!   The former, thanks! I 'll go back and change it.

[John Kavanaugh]

One of the differences here is that members of posh US clubs think they are superior human beings.  The members at posh UK clubs know they are superior human beings.

 Every day of every year, I drive past a wonderful private golf course -- and, even on many of the most beautiful days, there is no one out there playing.

Repeat this experience at private clubs from sea to shining sea. What a waste of assets!

But Dan..Who will fill the publics if the privates are no longer empty.  It is better to give revenue to tax supported venues than private playgrounds...You need to quit taking such a selfish view and consider the needs of the non golfers in society.

[Dan Kelly]

You need to quit taking such a selfish view and consider the needs of the non golfers in society.

I'll do what I can -- just as soon as I can stop laughing at Rich's depiction of Al Czervik, Jr.!