How would you react?

[Jim Franklin]

It is a labor of love. I know I spend way more money than most playing golf because I travel to a lot of places in the search for the next hidden gem. I may get free golf (most of the time), but hotels aren't free, gas isn't free, rental cars aren't free, and in order to support the pros' and their shops, my closet full of shirts are not free either. I understand there are some panelists that only want free golf, do not travel, and will never buy a shirt/hat/whatever because they are cheap. They give good, caring panelists a bad name.

Mr Hurricane,

Somebody has to call you out on this one!

Hidden Gems?

Big Guy, did someone put away your Big Trophy Hunting Gun?  

On the original premise, come on. This is no "Top 100" course looking for raters. This is a course that IS a staple of the Big Trophy  Club. On an average week, how many of the 1000+ raters from Golf Digest, Golf Week and Golf Magazine are calling this pro for access? Listen I am no saint here, but come on, I embrace the insanity of my Top 10itis (no Top 100itis for me).

Mike -

Did I say that I only looked for "Hidden Gems"? No, not at all. How do you know what course I am referring to? I have not named any names. Were you there? No.

As for "Hidden Gems", when was the last time you were in Duluth Minnesota on your own dime? I am heading to Idaho/Montana in a few weeks again on my own dime. I have played golf in nearly every state in the Union, and no one is paying for my travel, room, car, except me. So yes I say it is a labor of love. I enjoy seeing good designs and learning from the masters of their craft. I am not saying I do not like to play Top 100 courses, who doesn't for crying out loud. This thread has NOTHING to do with playing top courses, hidden gems, or whatever, this thread was about being treated like a second class citizen by a golf professional, his staff, and a few members.

[Brent Hutto]

By this point in the history of the forum and certainly by this point in this thread, surely no one can doubt that Jim and Gib really, really, really like going around and rating courses. We get it. You spend a bunch of your own money, copious amounts of your free time and have dedicated countless hours of loving attention to rating courses. Obviously you truly love doing it. Sounds a lot like the way I feel about actually playing golf.

The problem is, you guys seem to think anyone else on the planet gives a shit. We don't. And there's no surprise that once in a while, some person or persons at some golf club somewhere will needle, insult, provoke or otherwise disrespect you in response to your special pleading. I'd think you would be able to take that in stride. You've come to expect extra attention when you go to rate a course and it sounds like the majority of the time you get it. Some times apparently you don't.

And it still isn't clear to me from the initial description or any followups (not that I've read every word of the thread) exactly what comprised this grievous mistreatment that Jim feels he received. But maybe as a non-rater I just don't understand.

[Jim Franklin]

Tom D -

I would never expect a pro to come see me on his day off. I understand there are plenty of courses that do not need GD, GM, GW, or GCA to let the world know they are great. I was a history major in college so this stuff intrigues me and I enjoy it. This thread was about being treated with respect. No one in that proshop knew we were panelists. We wanted to introduce ourselves to the pro since we had told him we were going to be there a few weeks before.

Carl -

Let me know how you would feel if you were with a group of unknowns and they started playing where's x, have you seen x, blah blah blah. It is not in my nature to belittle someone asking a question. I usually go out of my way to help not try and embarrass with some sort of juvenile game.

[Jim Franklin]

Brent -

Trust me, in the long list of grievous mistreatment, this is nowhere near the top. I just asked how people would react to the initial situation. That's it. And trust me, if I was the member and witnessed my pro and assistant pros doing this schtick, they would be brought in front of the Board. I thought it was total BS and not the way to treat anyone (rater or not). That's all. I have not lost any sleep over this, it was brought back up to me again recently and I remembered what a joke it was to be treated like that. No big deal. This has nothing to do with being a rater at all.

[Tim Bert]

It doesn't seem like you are playing the role of the "bigger man" by posting the details of this situation on a public forum foir the golfing wirld to see. I doubt you willk earn brownie points for calling these guys out. Take the higher road. Private and professional reconiliation generally proves to be more effective in resolving a misunderstanding.

[Brent Hutto]

I just asked how people would react to the initial situation. That's it. And trust me, if I was the member and witnessed my pro and assistant pros doing this schtick, they would be brought in front of the Board. I thought it was total BS and not the way to treat anyone (rater or not).

Well in that case my answer is that I would, in all seriousness, totally ignore the provocation. Just smile and ask a question about the golf course or something.

[Jim Franklin]

Tim -

I have not named any names and have been asked by several what club and I will NOT mention the club. So people can feel free to guess all they want, I am not saying. I just wanted to know how others would react if in the same situation. In addition, I have tried to locate a moderator to delete this thread, but I have been unable to.

On another note, when are you coming down to play BCC?

[Jim Franklin]

I just asked how people would react to the initial situation. That's it. And trust me, if I was the member and witnessed my pro and assistant pros doing this schtick, they would be brought in front of the Board. I thought it was total BS and not the way to treat anyone (rater or not).

Well in that case my answer is that I would, in all seriousness, totally ignore the provocation. Just smile and ask a question about the golf course or something.

Thanks BRent, that is basically what I did.

[Tim Bert]

Jim

My point was that if I were the pro in question and happened upon this there would be no doubt you were referring to me.

My guess is that the pro would feel equally uncomfortable reading comments about his actions as you were made to feel at the course.

I will let you know if I am in the area. Unfortunately lots of travel these days and none of it is there. 

[Jim Franklin]

Tim -

Let me know if you make it here. I have a ton more Mike Schmidt memorabelia you might like to see .

I don't think this pro even recalls the day. I completely forgot about it until a friend brought it back up. It is what it is. It just reminded me that I was po that day and wanted to see if anyone else ever was treated like that. I forgot about it. Also, how do yo delete a thread if you cannot contact a moderator? I don't know.

[Mark Pritchett]

JC Jones raises an interesting point: when you've played tons of comped rounds already in your life, how in the world could one more possibily sway you?

I never really thought about that, but even if I put rating aside, when I look back at the past 25-30 years of my golf-life, I've played for free WAY more often than I've paid. As a kid, I never paid - dad paid.  And that was every day, all day, all summer.

Then, for 4 years straight, I never had to pay.

We're talking about thousands of rounds from age 12 to 21. Usually 36 a day.

And even if you consider tournament entry fees to be "paying", (A) I didn't pay them and (B) I didn't pay them.

And what about all those free range balls? 

So, OK, that's college and that's different, but even as a adult, when I think about it, it's amazing how many times you don't pay:  charity events your firm sends you to, playing with your friends who happen to be pros, client golf, "thank you" rounds, last-minute calls to fill in on so-and-so's scramble team, and plain ol' invites where the host won't even consider letting you pay (and gets pissed at you when you try to sneak a C-Note into his shoes when they come back from the shoe shine guy). It all adds up to a ton of comped golf - rater or no rater.

When JC said that getting comped couldn't possibly affect his rating, I believe him 100 percent. At a certain point, there's just no way it CAN because you're basically just immune to it.

 

   

I agree another free round for most people is not a big deal, the bigger issue is a person's take on a course/club when they have the gall to charge you.

[Jim Franklin]

JC Jones raises an interesting point: when you've played tons of comped rounds already in your life, how in the world could one more possibily sway you?

I never really thought about that, but even if I put rating aside, when I look back at the past 25-30 years of my golf-life, I've played for free WAY more often than I've paid. As a kid, I never paid - dad paid.  And that was every day, all day, all summer.

Then, for 4 years straight, I never had to pay.

We're talking about thousands of rounds from age 12 to 21. Usually 36 a day.

And even if you consider tournament entry fees to be "paying", (A) I didn't pay them and (B) I didn't pay them.

And what about all those free range balls? 

So, OK, that's college and that's different, but even as a adult, when I think about it, it's amazing how many times you don't pay:  charity events your firm sends you to, playing with your friends who happen to be pros, client golf, "thank you" rounds, last-minute calls to fill in on so-and-so's scramble team, and plain ol' invites where the host won't even consider letting you pay (and gets pissed at you when you try to sneak a C-Note into his shoes when they come back from the shoe shine guy). It all adds up to a ton of comped golf - rater or no rater.

When JC said that getting comped couldn't possibly affect his rating, I believe him 100 percent. At a certain point, there's just no way it CAN because you're basically just immune to it.

 

   

I agree another free round for most people is not a big deal, the bigger issue is a person's take on a course/club when they have the gall to charge you.

Mark -

Again, this is not the point of the thread, but to answer your question, it doesn't bother me at all. People have to make a living, it is business. I understand. If I let the fact that I was comped or not comped affect my decision, then I am a shallow individual. But I will say, there are plenty of them out there, which is a shame.

[Rob_Waldron]

I cannot help throwing in my two cents on this topic. I have always contacted the Professional Staff when planning to play a course on the rating list. I politely ask the club policy with respect to accomodating panelist. If the Pro offers to comp my round I would be a fool not to accept it. Occasionally access is only permitted in the company of a member. I always prefer to play with a member or a member of the professional staff if possible in an effort to gain as much insight to the course as possible. If neither is offered by the Pro I typically attempt to use my network of golf industry contacts to identify a member to join me. I always send a thank you note to all staff who I meet (Pro, GM, Super) as well as the member.

Since I work in the golf industry, as a courtesy I always make it a point to contact at least the Golf Professional whenever I visit a course. During a recent visit to Merion (for lunch, no golf) I ended up spending about 45 minutes discussing the state of the golf industry with Scott Nye the Head Golf Professional.

[Gib_Papazian]

Shivas is absolutely correct on this point. I have been playing golf for 42 years and whether I pay or not has absolutely no bearing on my opinion of a golf course. Further, how I played is completely irrelevant because I am so busy examining all the elements when I am out there, most of the time I lose track of where I stand. Oddly, I tend to hit the ball far better when completely disinterested in mechanics or score and concentrating on the architecture.

Brent Hutto,
If you do not "give a sh*t," there are 50 other threads on which you may inflict your cavalier resentment. You might start by opining to Moriarty and MacWood that you "don't give a sh*t" who routed Merion.

I think we can all agree there are a few raters with a regal sense of upper crust entitlement, but the egregious behavior I have witnessed by the CCFAD public at large pales in comparison.

  

[Greg Tallman]

Greg,

Thank you for the invitation, I hope you were not too badly scalded by my hyperbolic repartee. I've never been to Cabo and it is a long shot I'll ever end up down there. However, if you make it to San Francisco, I would be more than happy to host you out at Olympic.

The website seems to be getting more and more deadly serious, where tongue-in-cheek rants that used to be taken with a grain of salt are now picked apart with tweezers like that ridiculous Merion thread. The sad part is that with the exception of MacWood, all of those guys once had a sense of humor.

I've had insane games of literary ping pong on there over the years, but until now nobody took anything to heart. Just so you know, I sit at my desk and roar with laughter after writing some of this stuff and never get pissed about anything.

What I said about my philosophy of rating was 100% truthful and you are absolutely right that there are a few couthless panelists I have wanted to slap across the face after watching their sheer arrogance and entitlement on display.

However, they are the very rare exception. I've got quite a few close friends on both panels and the level of comportment and courteousness - even when paying - is almost over-the-top. Believe me, the vast majority of those who have come far enough to obtain a card on either panel are hyper-aware that we represent the magazine and would rather eat glass than be anything but a pleasure to have at the golf course.

BTW, as an example, at one course this last weekend (114 degrees), the last tee time booked was ours at 8:50am due to the heat. The tee sheet was empty until later in the afternoon. I paid for my cart and my two friends slapped down the plastic at full price. By the time we were done with breakfast, lunch, green fees, carts, executive beverages and yardage books, the three of us put more than $300 in the till. Not a bad haul for a new golf course struggling for business under scorching skies.

It goes both ways - which was the starting point of this thread. One time years ago, I was in Scottsdale with some friends as the guest of the G.M. The golf course is an unbelievably high tone club and although two of us had rated the course the previous year, the G.M. insisted that we come back because he sent a group of his members to me at Olympic.

While we had lunch, he mentioned a brand new public golf course (green fees $42) about 40 minutes away that had some wildly interesting architectural features. The designer was a complete unknown and his description had "hidden gem" written all over it in capital letters.

Naturally, I wanted to be the one to discover the next Stevinson Ranch and called the golf shop the minute we finished play. The response from the head pro was shiveringly cold. He was not interested in any panelists coming to rate his golf course and that was that. I explained that we were happy to pay the green fees and whatever else because I had been told it was something to check out.

I was tersely told there were no tee times available for the next two days - which was hard to believe because the temperature was well into the 90's and the Spring Baseball crowd was gone. Okay, I thought, we had to catch an airplane the next night, so I called the pro back and asked if I could rent a cart and just drive around and look at the golf course. "We do not rent carts to non-players and our policy is that we do not allow walkers or spectators on the golf course if that is your next question."

I gave up. Maybe I pressed it too hard, but finding a brand new Rustic Canyon in the middle of nowhere with cheap fees is worth investigating.

The end of the story is that this pro - who did not last long at the facility - took the time to make a series of phone calls to complain and accuse me of "trying to force myself and a group onto the golf course for a free round."

It was a deliberate attempt to try and hurt and embarrass me because this pro obviously hates panelists for some reason. It resulted in a falling out with someone I greatly respect and a lot of hard feelings. The point is that some of these Directors of Golf and G.M.'s have a chip on their shoulder and act like ayatollahs just for the sheer joy of being nasty.

Yet all I was trying to do was be the first to discover something interesting - which would bring more people to their fledgling operation. Isn't that the point of a rating panel? Doak's comment about Crystal Downs is irrelevant because I cannot imagine Golf Digest would ever specifically assign a rater to go there unless it had been remodeled. I've been friends with Tom a long time, but he is all wet on this one.

Much of his success can be attributed to adoring panelists who seek out his creations every chance they get. Would Bandon have been as successful if not for massive publicity - much from panelists who trekked up there? In some ways, we are a conduit to the general public and serve much the same purpose (and add value) as movie critics.

Does anybody call out Roger Ebert because he sees movies for free?    

Gib,

No worries, I can take more than that and still manage a chuckle. It is too bad that you encountered a professional like the one you mention. Obviously nothing to be gained by alienating someone though I would also offer that while I hope I treated them better than what you describe I do have a few names that are not exactly welcome back, regardless of what they are willing to pay. While we are flattered as to our position in the latest ratings from GD it does not mean that I will allow any panelist to show up, demonstrate a sense of entitlement and proceed to mistreat staff. If dealing with such an occurrence in a professional yet stern manner costs our facility, so be it. 

There will always be a few bad apples but wouldn't developing and distributing a standard protocol to panelists and courses alike solve the problem to a large degree? 

[Tom Huckaby]

Greg - distributing protocols to panelists is sure not the issue... we get all sorts of literature and training about that.  So no that doesn't seem to solve all issues.  People are indeed people, and yep, there will always be bad apples.

[Jim_Kennedy]

........trust me, if I was the member and witnessed my pro and assistant pros doing this schtick, they would be brought in front of the Board.

This is a pretty obnoxious remark, I feel sorry for Pros who have to deal with this type of attitude.

Hasn't anyone ever told you that you only get picked on if your likeable?

[Sean_A]

Im not sure "incognito" matters or not.  I am not a rater, I have played lots of free golf in my day having worked in the business and I have payed for a lot of golf in my day.  In no way, at the end of the round, did whether or not I paid have any effect on what I thought of the course.

Sure, it played into discussions of "value" or how nice the staff was or whatever, but it has no bearing on the discussion of the course itself.  I think that rater has a duty to be objective regardless of whether he has paid for the golf, gotten access to a club, etc. 

I also think it is presumptuous to assume a rater who gets "comped" immediately sheds their ability/duty to be objective.  Perhaps some do, but I'm not sure  that a few bad apples can spoil the bushel. 

JC

The point is that raters should not even be tempted with free stuff as at the very least it appears as if they could be compromised.  All this stuff about travel and other incidental costs are irrelevant.  If magazines were serious about rating they would foot the bill and raters are incognito - it is as simple as that.  Any system where the rater is known and given the rated object/service for free is a compromised system and this should come as no surprise to anybody.  Whether or not the compromise of a golf rating system is terribly important I don't know.  It doesn't matter much to me because I could care less how a faceless group of low cappers rate a course.  It has no bearing on my decision making.   

Ciao

How is a rater supposed to rate a new, private, golf course while being "incognito"?  Do they not have to give their identity to gain access to a club they would not otherwise be granted access to?

JC

You wait for an invite of course.  Its not like you do this rating stuff for a living.

Folks are still not getting the point about comped games when they are putting opinion to print.  I wouldn't have thought the concept is that difficult to grasp, but apparently I am wrong.  None the less, unless I know the chap, in which case being a rater would have no bearing on me giving weight to his opinions, I am going to be suspect of anybody who opines about a course when he plays for free while those reading his opinion pay.

So far as money effecting how I feel about a course it depends on what I am looking at and why.  No manner of money ever effects the actual design, but then so what?  There are thousands of good courses and and several hundred great courses.  What separates them is not a question a of design quality otherwise courses would always be seen as of similar quality in different rankings.  What separates courses are our experiences and how we perceive these experiences.  I am not interested in what Tom, Dick and Harry thought about the quality of a course once I am convinced the course is good - which often times doesn't require any panel of raters.  I am interested in the nuances that ratings can't give.  In other words, the quality of the day out and if that club offers a value or not - because believe it or not, plenty of good to great golf can still be had a value prices. 

Ciao 

[Ulrich Mayring]

I am going to be suspect of anybody who opines about a course when he plays for free while those reading his opinion pay

Apparently we are talking private clubs here, where those reading the opinion will not get on anyway, no matter whether they want to pay or not. So in that case it seems moot whether the rater paid or not.

As a general note: I don't quite get it why courses, where it is hard to get on, are even rated? What would the benefit of the magazine readers be in that case?

Ulrich

[Sean_A]

I am going to be suspect of anybody who opines about a course when he plays for free while those reading his opinion pay

Apparently we are talking private clubs here, where those reading the opinion will not get on anyway, no matter whether they want to pay or not. So in that case it seems moot whether the rater paid or not.

As a general note: I don't quite get it why courses, where it is hard to get on, are even rated? What would the benefit of the magazine readers be in that case?

Ulrich

Ulrich

There are plenty of privates I am not interested in paying to play and that I can get on.  I am not saying its easy to get on US privates, but a great many aren't that difficult to access.

The ratings game is to large degree dopey, but many enjoy them and why not?  I spose some good write ups on courses can be generated from a rating, but these seem to be far and few between.  In any case, its all a bit of fun that shouldn't be taken seriously.  

Ciao  

[Carl Johnson]

I'm curious.  We've got 158 (or about that) posts so far on this discussion.  I have read only a hand(s)ful.  Apparently some of the posters are raters, or know a lot about the ratings game.  Golfweek does ratings.  Golf Digest does, too.  Other mags and orgs probably do.  What are the procedures for each of the "significant" ratings publications?  How does it work, in detail?  Also, how much is driven and paid for by the mags and their editors?  Is it top down driven, or bottom up driven?  This may have been discussed (to death) already on this site (or elsewhere).  If so, I'd appreciate the links from someone more into this issue than I've been to date.  Thanks in advance for your help.

[Mike Benham]

 He also compiles all the data about all the different types of play (members, guests, pros, raters, etc.) into a spread sheet which is sent around monthly.

Sent to whom?  The staff?  The Greens Committee?  The General Manager?  The Membership?

[Gib_Papazian]

Sean,

Newspaper and magazine writers who wax poetic because they obtained a free round of golf from some smarmy marketing hustler instantaneously induces an outbreak of Armenian Tourette's - which manifests itself as an unstoppable fire hose of shrieking profanity and vicious accusations of fraud.

I am uniquely qualified to adjudge leeches of their ilk because I used to be one. Except that with one exception, I declined every "press day" invitation at a new golf course and instead opted to visit on a normal day. For years I wrote lengthy reviews of courses (some new, some not) for my readership as part of a series to identify good "road trip" destinations.

Attending any event where a group of sports writers are provided (read: bribed) with free booze and finger food is like watching a stampede of cloven-hoofed swine with swollen snouts race towards the slop trough. The carnage is indescribable and after reading article after article from these gin-soaked leeches trumpeting the latest housing-driven abomination as "Truly Great," it was all I could do to clean the excrement off my spikes and vow never to soil myself in their presence again.

The difference was that my readership wanted to know the details, the cost and what I thought of the condition and strategic interest of the golf course. If they disagreed - well, let's just say I used to get more mail than the writers who covered football. Most of the 19 handicap part-time golf scribes wouldn't know a Redan from Granny Clark's Wynd and couldn't find St. Andrews on a map with Google search.

There is an enormous difference between a trained rater with a depth of knowledge and a bunch of chain smoking beat writers who don't even know what they are looking at - let alone possess the integrity to let their readership know exactly what they are spending their hard earned money to play.      

  
  

[Lou_Duran]

I would like to know if Mr. Tallman identifies himself as a manager of a golf club when he travels to play golf, and if so, the nature of his motivations.  Is it a matter of professional courtesy?  Are raters considered to be part of the industry and worthy of the customary benefits?

It is remarkable that something so many don't "give a shit" about generates so much discussion and angst.  I get it.  There is a potential conflict of interest.  No one should shed crocodile tears for those hard-working, well-motivated, mostly objective course raters.  And while they may not do God's work, they must be doing something that gets everyone up in a lather three or four times every year.

As to freebies, give me a freaking break!  I've been around to a number of site gatherings over the years and have found realtively few quick draws when it comes to the wallet.  I can think of a few guys who have been very critical of raters and their free golf, yet they had no qualms accepting comp rounds as my guests.  What's good for the goose is not always so for the gander, apparently.

How would I react in a similar situation as described?  I would explain succinctly, but completely and honestly to my host, and apologize for any confusion and discomfort I had inadvertantly caused.  Hopefully this will be sufficient.  As a former rater with a national publication, I ALWAYS wrote or called the GM, DoG, or HP well in advance of a planned visit to ask for permission to play and rate the course.  I typically got the name of the contact person at the club for my round, and normally asked for that person very discretely.  One of my goals when viisiting a private club was to be as invisible to the members and staff as possible, though I ALWAYS checked in briefly afterwards to thank them, and followed up again with a personal note of appreciation.     

[Gib_Papazian]

Lou has hit upon something that most of my former notepad-scribbling brethren never quite understood: The enormous importance of making a special effort to seek out the head professional after your round and thank him for allowing you to use the facility. The reality is that much of the time on a high-tone new (public or private) golf course, tee times are at a premium - even in the late afternoon if the golf course has generated some traction.

I ALWAYS return to the pro shop - even if in a hideous rush - and make a special effort to thank the "powers that be" - including and especially the assistant golf professional because it is very likely he was the one who had to figure out a place to get me off the tee while making a pittance of a salary with a crowd of demanding patrons or members tugging at his sleeve.

Always be nice to the assistant because he is not going to be a serf forever . . . . . there are several former golf professionals once at the bottom of the totem pole who I count as friends for whom no favor they ask of me is too large. The reverse is true, although I am usually too proud or shy to call in a chip. Such is the way of life, yet if one of them takes a position at a particularly overblown, over-hyped cartball mess with a membership full of hedge fund quick-change artists, my opinion of their strategically vacant golf course will not change until somebody comes in and pays more attention to the arrangement of hazards than selection of scotch in the 10 million dollar clubhouse.

Lou, most guys who travel in those circles identify themselves because they invariably have an intellectual and business interest in how the facility operates and always always pick the brain of the G.M. (if possible) over a beer or three to talk shop. Raters are lucky enough to be considered members of the fraternity - even those who cannot manage their own checking account let alone figure out green fee or merchandise margins.