The Venue, or The Game?

[Tom Huckaby]

On JK's thread about what one learned playing famous courses, Kalen Braley said:

I learned that when playing said course, it took awhile to get stoked about playing my home muni again.

Its like driving a rental cadillac for a week with all the extras on a trip, and then going home and realizing its back to the ol Dodge Neon...it takes a couple of weeks to get adjusted back!!

This intrigues me... and although I am pretty certain the issue has been discussed in here before, well... what hasn't?

So I am curious as to how others feel about this.

I believe that feeling does happen to most of us, for sure.

I just also believe that where people differ is in how long the feeling lasts... and I think that shows how much one loves playing the game v. how important the venue is.

I know when I've returned from places like Scotland or Bandon or the like, the local Santa Teresas seemed pretty mundane, and I didn't really want to play much.  But play I did... and the feeling left me once I got involved in a match, or had a score to try to achieve, or anything like that.  That is, it typically left in the middle of the very next round!

I know others, though, for whom the feeling NEVER leaves.  I believe I can cite my friend Ed Getka, who tends to play nothing but great courses, saving his time for such.  Though he does enjoy meeting up with friends and playing wherever required for that, he does not seek out playing the game outside of great venues.

Whereas while I sure do love playing great courses, I will play the game anywhere and everywhere, however things get worked out - the playing of the game means more to me than the venue.

So where do the rest of you fall on this?

I'm guessing there are more like Ed, but at least a few like me... but I could be wrong too.

TH

[John Kavanaugh]

I think it is common on chat boards but what people need are real world friends to play golf with.  That is where the fun in the game lies, not hit and running while getting your ass kissed by assistant pros and supers.

[Rick Shefchik]

I fall somewhere in between. I like my home course a lot, so I'm never going to be disappointed to play it, no matter where my last round was. But I never play well on crappy courses, no matter how easy they should be. I feel no inspiration.

Ultimately, the game matters more to me, but it depends on how I'm playing. I can shoot 100 and have a great time on a great track, but I don't like golf very much when I'm playing poorly on a course that doesn't excite me.

[Tom Huckaby]

I think that's pretty darn well said, John.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Rick:

That's well said also.  (And I swear I won't jump in and comment on every post!).

It is a lot easier to be inspired on a good course than a bad course.  And it's tough for the game to be too much fun when one is playing below one's standards, especially if it is an an uninspiring course.

But I've managed to achieve some fun even in those circumstances... either through a match, a bet, or just the old trite "it's better than work" thought.  

[Rich Goodale]

First time around any course, the venue.  Every subsequent play, the game.  One of Dante's circles of Hell consists of playing a great golf course you know and love only with newbies.

[Sean_A]

The importance of the venue has increased with my age.  I used to be willing to tee it up just about anywhere.  That isn't the case anymore - especially if more than a routine round trip is involved.  It would have to be someone fairly special I want to see for me to drive a distance for a course I don't care about.  The trick to this attitude is having an open mind about what is worthwhile to play.  

I just went through this tough decision in dropping the membership of my local club.  Now my local is 1.5 hours away.  We shall see how it works out.  The hope is that I will play less golf AND get calls from mates.  So far it has worked well.  Philip Gawith texted me for a game on New Year's day - it would have been churlish of me to decline!

Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

I'm not sure I ever get that feeling.  On returning from any golf trip I'm pretty keen to get back out and play.  It's the game first, venue second for me.

[Tom Huckaby]

I'd concur with Rich's circles of hell - that too was very well said.

And Sean too brings up an interesting point; I guess though what plays into that is the choices one has.  Often times I have little choice in the venue; that is, I play where I can get a freakin' tee time or where someone else has set up a game.  And I am always happy to play, wherever it is.  Of course if I do have greater choice - time to plan ahead, I'm in charge, etc., then yes I too have become more discerning.  But I think that's obvious and we all must be like that for the most part.

My intrigue is more about REFUSING to play unless the course is great... or to put it another way, not enjoying it at all unless the course is great.

Are there any here who take it that far, besides my friend Ed?  And I don't mean to put him on the spot, and also realize I am stretching his take way beyond its real limit... I just do continue to wonder if there are any for whom venue is the be all and end all.

TH

[Kevin_Reilly]

The "venue" feeling is fleeting.  I remember playing some local courses after Sand Hills and feeling much like I did after I got home from a charity kitchen tour...jeez our kitchen looked small and shabby.  But that feeling vaporized quickly.

I get more fun out of my regular Sat morning game at simple old Tilden than at any other local course, including all the luminaries.  We have a 6:57 time tomorrow at Tilden and I'm bummed to miss it b/c of the bad weather...I was supposed to play one of the "luminaries" today, and I'm completely indifferent about the rainout.

[Tom Huckaby]

Value for money plays into this for sure - for most of us, anyway.  That being said, I'd guess even you splurge from time to time, Sean.  I guess where people are going to differ is on their splurge level, and frequency of doing that.  For me, again I don't like to waste money, and I do seek out good values and avoid things that are overpriced, but I have also said "what the hell" and paid more than I wanted to, just to play the game, way too many times.

But again that goes back to my bias and life situation... getting the hall pass to play is the hardest part of the equation.  If the hall pass has been secured, neither price nor quality of venue will KEEP me from playing.

I guess the people I want to hear from - if they are willing to address this (and I'd sure understand if they don't want to discuss this publicly) are members of truly great clubs.  How often do you leave and play elsewhere?  If you do, is it a let-down compared to the greatness found at home?

It reminds me of something I heard at MPCC - someone asked a member there "you have two great courses there, why would you ever leave?"  The reply:  "we don't."  Which of course might be true to some extent, but my assumption was the reply was meant to be pithy more than absolute.

TH

[Lloyd_Cole]

Some well made points gents.

I think it also has a lot to do with what kind of golf you learned the game on, or grew up on. If you have the privilege of that course being a Doak 6 or up, I think it must be hard to accept much less, full stop (period). But if, like me you learned the game on a Doak 1.5 pretty much any good course is a treat and we don't eat treats for all our meals do we?
Or do we?

I have only refused games on a regular basis if it was mandatory cart, and there is more than self interest involved there - you don't want to play with me if if I'm driving a cart.

[Tom Huckaby]

The "venue" feeling is fleeting.  I remember playing some local courses after Sand Hills and feeling much like I did after I got home from a charity kitchen tour...jeez our kitchen looked small and shabby.  But that feeling vaporized quickly.

I get more fun out of my regular Sat morning game at simple old Tilden than at any other local course, including all the luminaries.  We have a 6:57 time tomorrow at Tilden and I'm bummed to miss it b/c of the bad weather...I was supposed to play one of the "luminaries" today, and I'm completely indifferent about the rainout.

PERFECT!  More great thoughts.  Just do understand that the luminary is more of a "normal" thing for you, Kevin.  Hopefully you can understand that if the roles were reversed, well I'd be bummed about BOTH rainouts but more bummed about missing the luminary than any regular game at Santa Teresa.  

And we still have no one on the Getka side... oh well.

TH

[Jason Topp]

Tom:

I have been thinking about this same topic recently.  

Even though I travel to see a lot of courses, the game is far more important to me than venue.  

I do not think I enjoy golf at my country club, which I believe has a very good course and good people, all that much more than the muni I used to play, which is probably a Doak 3 with a lot of fun characters.  I just get home at 11 am instead of 2 pm despite leaving the house at 6:30 am for both courses.

[Tom Huckaby]

Ah yes, TIME factors into this for sure!

If I had a choice of joining a club near me, I surely would, if only for the time savings Jason indicates.  In fact that's the sole and only reason I'd join a club near me, as none of the privates are very good courses.  But if I could scrape up the money, I'd do it just for the time saving, and ease of tee times.  The assumed good group of regulars would be icing on the cake.

[Kalen Braley]

Well Tom,

I see your up to your old tricks and stealing all my ideas for new threads    

Just to give a little more clarification on the context of where I was coming from.  This was a one time only deal that I felt this way.  Its just that when you play an amazing course, it sorts of sticks with you, and in my case I found myself actively thinking about it for several weeks afterwards.  That to me is the ultimate definition of a great course because it stays on the forefront of your thoughts.  And for those who say you have to play well for such fond memories, I didn't break 90 that day.

And for the record I was out playing a much lesser course the next day.   But it didn't mean that I wasn't still pining to play the original course again.  

[TEPaul]

I'm sure I love and appreciate great courses and architecture as much as most but to me the thing I loved more was just hitting a golf ball.

It's probably why I practiced so much. And I probably played as much golf alone while practicing on the course as I did recreational golf with others.

That's what's so cool about golf, in my opinion----it really is so personal and what might turn you on about it the next guy may not care about at all.

[Tom Zeni]

Dante's inferno didn't had golf in mind, but maybe in the modern day he would include that.

Being here in the East, and then playing at Monterey on 3 separate occasions, the feeling has never left me. After playing on the grand venues of the west, I came home to my home club, not able to even contemplate playing for over a month.  and then, one year later, after 15 years of membership, I quit.

The company and the game was grand regardless if I played in NorCal or SoCal, but the venues, I have never gotten over the feeling.

[Phil Benedict]

I think I'm with Tom Paul:  I love to hit the ball.

Sometimes when I've played a great course (eg Quaker Ridge) I've wondered what it must be like to belong to a place like that.  What percentage of the members of that or any other great course realize what a privilege it is?

Huck should give some thought to changing the spelling of his last name after last night.

[George Pazin]

First time around any course, the venue.  Every subsequent play, the game.  One of Dante's circles of Hell consists of playing a great golf course you know and love only with newbies.

I don't think I understand this at all.

Back when I actually played somewhat regularly - well, okay, one particular summer when I played regularly, I would go out every Saturday morning to my local muni, which I love for play reasons, not really architecture reasons. I went there almost always as a single and I truly enjoyed meeting 3 new people every weekend. Sure, some were boors, but most left indelible positive memories.

As for Ed, if I had to guess, I'd say he may not play as much regular golf because he has other things that are a higher priority to him. In other words, if you only have X amount of time and/or money to spend on golf, might as well maximize the enjoyment of it. I doubt he avoids playing locally because he feels the venues are inferior.

Maybe I'll call Ed, he's always fun to speak with about golf and life.

-----

I love hitting the ball, but what I most love is getting out and walking a course for a few hours. I'd give up playing before I gave up walking courses, unless I had a medical problem, of course.

[Jed Peters]

I hate to be a snob, but if I have a club I can go to for free (okay, membership dues), I won't pay to play somewhere that's either not (must have one or a combination):

1. Some significance architectually/good course
2. Cheap
3. With Family/Friends that have set something up there

I've paid way too much too many times to play a shitty golf course. Of course, it depends on the company at times, though....

[Jeff Spittel]

Perhaps it's a function of having only played 3 of the top 100 courses, but it's always about the game and the company for me.

As much a pleasure as it must be to play the greatest courses in the world, I would die a happy man if I could only play munis with my friends and family the rest of my life.  

[Jim Sweeney]

Old haunts, 100% game.

Special places I'm revisiting, 50/50.

New but not special, 80/20

New and special. 40/60

[Mark Smolens]

Though I've had the privilege and joy of playing several courses in the so-called Top 100, and a couple that I believe (without actually knowing) have high Doak-ratings, I must confess that I would only play a rat-muni on a day that ends in "Y".

[Jordan Wall]

Tom,

Perhaps that feeling is part of the essence of all great courses.