[Jeff_Brauer]

This thought is less well formed than a bowel movement after eating oatmeal, but here goes......

While out for my morning walk, I got to thinking about the "ideals" most of us discuss here vs. the "reality" of where we actually play golf. Only a few of us here are members at some of the pretigious clubs we discuss.  More, but still a minority have really played the great public venues available, at least more than once.  So, in our real, non internet lives, where do we compromise?

I am aware that most rounds of golf in the USA are played for cost and convenience reasons - the closest, cheapest venue, perhaps also influenced by where your friends play.

As a gca student, what influences where you play on a regular basis?  Are you the same as most golfers, or are there any gca factors?  Given that a top 100 course isn't likely down the street from you, what do you compromise architecturally or maintenance or experience wise when you decide to go play, given the options available to you?

For the record, my play seems to be mostly on my own courses, where I can call up and they gladly squeeze me and friends out there (and usually for free!)  where I can review my own work.  Then, I go out of my way when I have the chance to play highly thought of courses that I haven't seen, having played (depending on whose list you use) about 75 of the top 100 courses and a lot more. I don't play a lot of golf on "in between courses" just going out to play.  In other words, for me, its all about seeing the course and learning, while I shoot in the mid 80's (or above)

In short, what drives your decision about where to play?

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

Not too far off from what you said.

I like my golf like I like my Thai food selection.  Whichever one makes the best curries, with the best flavors, at the most reasonable price is going to get my business.  And thankfully one such exists just 1.5 miles down the road.

As for public golf in the SLC area..I've got at least 10-15 quality layouts all within 45 minutes of where I live that fit this "same" criteria.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Jeff - On a mass basis, closeness must be the biggest influence. The UK pattern is that about 80% of your membership will come from with a 20 minute drive time. We seemed programmed that 30 minutes is too far, I know this is not the case in the states.
If a group were playing on an away day, society outing, the pattern seems more they are out to enjoy themselves for 'the day' and the reverse is almost true, wherby golfers want to experience courses not nearer than 30 minutes and possibly up to 90 minutes away.

[Bill_McBride]

Personally?  I play most of my golf at my local private club, which had become soggy and boring a few years ago when a hurricane did us the favor of pretty much destroying it.  Now we have a very challenging and interesting course designed by member Jerry Pate's design company and built by Jerry's brother Scott's golf construction company.

So I have a course to play regularly that is of GCA interest.  Otherwise there is a vacuum around here.

Still, I don't play too much here in the summer, more couples golf, because it's too damned hot.

Most of my fun golf is played at GCA.com events or on trips with people I've met through GCA.com.  Sad but true.

If it weren't for GCA.com and my strong local club, I'd be lost in the wilderness of mediocrity.  I'd be playing whatever was cheap and close, echoing the thoughts above that cheap and close is what drives most golf decisions.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Adrian,

I asked how you made YOUR decision!  That said, the time limit varies across the US. I once did a course in a rural area and while only 20 minutes from the largest city, you had to go through three little mail stops to get there, and surveys said it was "too far out."  In a big city, going past there other suburbs to get where you are going is no big whup.

Kalen,

I think I will have Thai food today!  

It sounds like gca isn't very distinguished where you are.  That leads to the question again as to whether gca really influences most people.  If not on this site, then where would it influence anyone?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian,

I asked how you made YOUR decision!  That said, the time limit varies across the US. I once did a course in a rural area and while only 20 minutes from the largest city, you had to go through three little mail stops to get there, and surveys said it was "too far out."  In a big city, going past there other suburbs to get where you are going is no big whup.

Kalen,

I think I will have Thai food today!  

It sounds like gca isn't very distinguished where you are.  That leads to the question again as to whether gca really influences most people.  If not on this site, then where would it influence anyone?

Jeff- I would pretty much join the closest, close being anything within 20 minutes.

[Kalen Braley]

Adrian,

I asked how you made YOUR decision!  That said, the time limit varies across the US. I once did a course in a rural area and while only 20 minutes from the largest city, you had to go through three little mail stops to get there, and surveys said it was "too far out."  In a big city, going past there other suburbs to get where you are going is no big whup.

Kalen,

I think I will have Thai food today!  

It sounds like gca isn't very distinguished where you are.  That leads to the question again as to whether gca really influences most people.  If not on this site, then where would it influence anyone?

Jeff,

While the "man" isn't "distinguished" the variety is plentiful and good quality.

We have mountain courses, links-ish courses, parklands, rolling hill style, older sporty tracks, even a few water/marshy courses. 

And while SLC may not compete with a place like the bay area, CA in the private upper end arena, it blows it away on the public side in terms of inexpensive, easy to access, quality layouts.

[Peter Pallotta]

I can tell you what I won't compromise on or accept  -- architectural mistakes. Especially if the designer was able and willing to move a lot of earth and if the owner has decided to charge mid-to-high prices for a round.  I grant that, in my case at least, it's a subjective call, a judgement call, and maybe a relatively un-informed one. But while I may not know a lot, I know some things -- and, for example, if you present me off the tee with a classic risk-reward situation, and I choose to take the riskiest option, and I manage to pull it off only to get to my ball and discover that there's no reward at all, that's a mistake. I don't see it very often, and I know that none of the architects here would make this mistake -- but there are a few courses out there that force me to conclude that the architect thinks the average golfer is dumb and/or has no interest in golf course architecture.   Fine, route the damn thing so that I have to take a cart, spend millions re-shaping the landscape, put mounding all over the freaking place so that it looks ugly and unnatural -- but if you're going to do that, you can't make a mistake. There's no justification for it except laziness or contempt.

Peter

[David Stamm]

I cannot play for the sake of playing. For me, getting into golf arch is like the scene in Matrix, blue or red pill? There are a handfull, and I mean a small handfull, of courses that I play within 30-40 minutes of where I live because they provide the most interest. I have courses within 2 miles that I refuse to play even though they are fairly popluar with locals because the courses are poorly designed. Conditions play a role to a point, but I would rather play a course with a more interesting design than one that may have better condtions, but is boring or contrived.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jeff,
Mainly it's a combination of architecture I enjoy, no crowds, roads I like to drive on, diners I like to eat at, all within 2-3 hours of my home.  

I favor older courses, and we have a lot of them in NE, but I also enjoy newer stuff if it's good, like Paul Cowley's Orchard Creek in Altamont, NY.

That's my SOP for my days off, evenings I'm content to knock it around for nine or more at my 'home' course, or down the road at a friend's course.

[C. Sturges]

Jeff,
Good post.  I used to play most of my golf at Bandon Dunes and was very spoiled!  But there was not allot of other good and interesting golf close by.  I now live in Northern Ohio that is blessed with good to great golf all over the place.  I try to play the better courses, but there are so many old courses to go and explore.  I find it very interesting to play courses by the same arch. to see how they deal with the different property and also to see how the club has treated the course over the years.  I have been trying to play all the courses by one arch. and it has been very interesting because most of his courses are now overgrown with trees that where there then and all the trees that have been planted.  Many of these courses my friends think are strange to want to play because they are not the Top 100, but many of them you can learn just as much.  I love an old course that has severe greens even if the course is short from todays standard.  If I am going to travel more than a couple of hours though, I want to make sure I play a very good course and my ideal is to play a couple on one trip.
A question to the tree house when traveling, do you want to play a couple courses or would you rather play one course a couple of times?  I normally play more courses just once.
Have a great weekend and get out and play!

[Sean_A]

Mr B

I don't really compromise on architecture as I pretty much only play courses that interest me.  Where I compromise is for return visits.  The course has to be affordable - meaning after about £50 I really have to want to revisit and this is rare and hence the reason for the Winter Tour - tee hee.  Many is the time I turned down games with friends because I don't like the course and hence don't think its worth spending money there.  There is one exception, my old club, but I would never pay the visitor fee, only guest fees.  

Ciao  

[TEPaul]

"This thought is less well formed than a bowel movement after eating oatmeal, but here goes......"



Mr Jeffrey, Sir:


I'm going to nominate that thread lead-in as the single most eye-catching and descriptive in the ten year history of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com!

Good show!

[Ronald Montesano]

Fall and Spring weekdays...nine-hole rounds with boys and girls high school teams that I coach.  Courses range from local privates (CCB, Crag Burn, Cherry Hill) to local publics (Diamond Hawk, Harvest Hill, Brighton, Sheridan) in western New York.

Annual visit to brother-in-law in Middletown, CT.  Try to play 2-3 courses up that way...venturing into southern CT and Mass, since we've played all the local ones at least once.

Annual pilgrimage somewhere with golfing buds...Koehler, northern Michigan, Sandhills...

Once a decade trip to Bandon (did the three courses for my 40th, will hopefully play the four plus Crossings for my 50th in six years)

Family junkets where I manage to sneak in golf (Poconos, Myrtle, Orlando)...best story ever...my wife and mother in law had to inform me four years ago that the family trip was being moved from the Outer Banks in N.C. to Myrtle Beach, and that I probably wouldn't be able to golf as much...I believe I blew snot out my nose, laughing so hard.  They didn't find it quite as funny...I did end up playing four rounds, starting at 7 every morning.

Some people get the same rush (not the proper word, but I'm in a hurry) out of playing an unknown, lesser, mom-and-pop course, calling it "golf as it was meant to be."  I don't!!  I work ten times as hard to play a great one as I would one of those earthy courses.  The way I look at it, even if it's a cookie-cutter course with all the attributes that many on GCA.Com hate, SOMEONE went to the great effort to create it, so I can try to find that spirit during my brief 18 holes there.

[Dan Herrmann]

Jeff,
Great question.

I can tell you the moment I decided to join French Creek GC, a Gil Hanse design opened in late 2003.

I was a year out from resigning from my old Philly-area club.  I was really disliking the huge number of trees, the number of exposed roots in the rough, and the odd social scene there.   So, after 9/11, I decided to play public.

I liked it for a while, and frequented Beechtree (NLE), Wyncote, Links at Gettysburg, and others in east-central PA, and MD.  But I missed the "Norm!" factor - having friends playing the course, giving each other the business.  And I missed the sub-4 hour round!

Anyway, Laura and I are hitting range balls out at a place called Irish Oaks.  Just on a whim, I drove back on PA 82 to PA 345 and decided to stop into the double-wide trailer and check out this French Creek place.

Here's the moment.  The course is in the final phases of construction, and I'm driving an ATV out there and come across the 9th green.  It's an elevated punch-bowl green with some great surrounds and devilish bunkering.  But it looked different somehow.  Then it hit me - this felt just like Bandon Dunes sans the Pacific Ocean.  So I took more time and saw more really wonderful architectural features.

Here are some pics of the 9th green complex, courtesy of Joe Bausch:




Best of all, it's a course that's never the same.  It always provides fun and variety.  Sometimes I just chuckle to myself and smile, for I can't believe that I can play this gem anytime I want.

No - it's not a Top-100, and it's not the best in Philly (duh!), but it suits me just fine!

[Kirk Gill]

I live right between two private clubs that have  been discussed on occasion here on GCA. I can see one from my backyard. However, I don't belong to either club. They taunt me, almost daily (not their fault !)

There are decent options within driving distance, and it is my opinion regarding the quality of architecture at each course that helps me make most of my playing decisions. If I'm playing with my sons that's less of a concern - price becomes paramount (amazing how few courses offer junior rates).

I will say that one of my favorite local publics (Murphy Creek) also happens to have a nice junior rate, which means that's the place that gets the majority of my dosh.

If I'm really traveling to play golf, then it's either the presence of good friends or the chance to play a course of high repute, historical interest, or one that satisfies some curiosity sparked by one of you-all.

One thing that your post made me think about, Peter, is whether risk/reward should be a simple formula. Should every play near a fairway bunker make  your subsequent shot an easier/better one? Is not designing a hole to specifically reward risk-taking always a mistake?

[Kyle Harris]

This is a very good question, and one I ask myself often - especially since I tend to evaluate courses based on Opportunity Cost moreso than anything.

My compromise is probably best exemplified by the fact that I will drive 1.5+ hours to play Reading Country Club or Galen Hall CC while passing newer courses like Raven's Claw and Turtle Creek.

I'll play anywhere once - from there it becomes a question of opportunity cost. My "zero" course is almost always Jeffersonville GC, where I play frequently. The cost is usually around $25 with weekend's tipping out at $35 for me. The course is usually in serviceable shape with some firmness and the green speed kept on this side of sanity with some bold contouring. I think the bunker maintenance shows the ideal signs of neglect that the hazards should show.

Either way, when the freight creeps north of $60 I begin to ask myself whether or not the course is actually worth two rounds at Jeffersonville. Only on rare occasions is yes the answer.

Architecturally, I need and like a course where my round is like a story. Most of the moderns in the area aren't compelling enough for me to feel like I'm "crafting" a score from the course but instead simply hitting a series of shots more akin to a physical challenge than a game.

For example, with about 5 different ways for me to play the tee shot on the first hole at Jeffersonville I can set the tenor for the next few holes based on the success of my strategy on that one shot. For me to consider moving away, I need a similar set of circumstances. A course like Raven's Claw falls more into the hit the ball straight and high, rinse, repeat category where no flow or decisions are influenced by previous or future play.

I don't necessarily mind conditioning.

I almost always refuse to play a golf course during mandatory cart times, or where the cart is included in the green fee. The rare exception is when I play a course for the first time, and even then I'll usually walk unless compelled to move faster on the second nine - where I'll grab a cart.

So, to answer in summary:

Opportunity Cost
Conditioning for golf
Cart and business policies

[Brian Laurent]

I was just thinking about this topic while I was out on my morning stroll.  I prefer older courses with tree lined fairways instead of homes on both sides...

BUT...I'm a die hard fan of the game of golf and playing courses with interesting architecture is just a bonus.  Give me a mom and pop golf course with good friends and I'll enjoy it just the same.  Was thinking this morning what a shame it would be to get to the point where I started to decline offers to play golf with my buddies just because the course was not up to my standards architecturally.  If this happens, hopefully someone just throws my clubs in the middle of a lake somewhere.

[Ken Fry]

Ironic timing for Jeff's question as I'm battling myself with this exact situation.

I live directly across the street from a 36 hole private golf facility.  I've never cared much for it but in hopes of enticing my girls to play with me and the ability to play a few holes in the late evening seemed an ok compromise, so we joined.

I recently completed play in the club championship.  Unfortunately, I was overwhelmed with the feeling that I officially hate the place.  The courses are flat out terrible.  I've played other courses by this "architect" and they too are terrible.  I do not use this term lightly but on the Doak scale this facility could rate between 0-1.  (Yes I know on Doak's scale there is nothing below a 1.)

I like belonging to a private club for flexibility and availability.  Lost Dunes and Point 'O Woods are out of my price range and too far away.  The Warren Course is very active making a stop for a few holes too tough.  There is a sweet little George O'Neil club in town which is typically great but it's 30 minutes from my house and dealing with water issues caused by the Midwest's weird rainfall totals.  I can get access to any course in the area due to professional courtesy but I ask my friends for this favor on very rare occasions.

My final mindset is this:  I'm required to fulfill a two year commitment at the current facility.  I will honor the final year.  But golf is meant to be fun!  What is fun for me is the package of challenge and playability.  We have some great gca in our area and I don't plan on wasting valuable time and money at facilities that provide neither.

Ken

[Dan Herrmann]

Ken,
You're now officially the GCA.com poster boy for 2010

[Ross Tuddenham]

I have to admit here and it isn’t going to look good for any sort of GCA credentials I may aspire to, but I enjoy golf no matter how bad the course (well almost).  If I am playing then I will enjoy playing golf as I class myself as primarily a fan of playing the game.  Good GCA can add to this but it is not single reason I play the game. 

This of course does not mean I do not seek to play the great courses and learn about them it just means I joined a club to play golf as often as I want and as close to my home as possible.  I much prefer a round on the better courses but would this superior architecture make up for less play day to day?

 I live in Edinburgh so could have sought out a club in east Lothian but then realistically that would have meant weekend play only with the occasional mid week game.  So it would seem I have compromised on GCA to ensure more play.

What I am trying to say is I would not compromise the amount of golf I could play by ruling out a club in terms of GCA alone.

But then can I take this luxury because I am lucky to live in an area where within a two hour drive you have the whole of fife and east Lothian.  So whenever I want to play on better courses it is no problem finding one.

So to conclude; for day to day play I would make a big compromise but for a day out to another course then yes I only seek to play courses with superior architectural merit.

Of course when the days comes i can afford to live Somewhere close to a great course there will of course be no compromise.

[Tim Taylor]

Convenience is #1. I belong to a  club with a typical mid 1960s Ed Ault course. They are all over MD, PA, and Northern VA. It's 10 minutes from home and one stoplight from work. It is a good group of guys. The facilities are family friendly. The downside is that it's corporate owned and we don't much of a say in anything. The upside is no assessments.

One thing I will say - hidden architectural merits reveal themselves over time even on seemingly mundane courses. There are little spots around the course that you don't notice right away like the way a well struck draw down the right side of the 5th fairway will propel the ball to a flat spot which is really the only "go" zone for getting home in two.

As far as playing elsewhere - I'll seek out interesting courses when ever I can, usually while traveling. Places like Cuscowilla, Pasatiempo, Mauna Kea, Banff Springs. It's also great fun to find courses off the beaten path. Southern Dunes in Florida was one for me. Another Smyers course outside Indianapolis, Heartland Crossing, was fun with lots of interesting GCA. I had a great time at Pilgrim's Oak in PA.

The bottom line for me, though, is I love playing golf and will play just about anywhere. I don't let GCA get in the way of playing the game and having fun.

Tim

[Ronald Montesano]

In answer to Ken, I wish you well on the "enticing girls to play."  I have one son and three daughters and, though they play at the game, they have never taken to it.  That's great.  I much prefer learning about their self-discovered interests than something handed down from Dad.  I do hope that your girls take to it, so that you and they have something else beloved to share.

We live on an island in the Niagara River.  We have a fine Desmond Muirhead course there, where initiation is zero and annual dues are $2K.  If and when the kids are out of college and I stop doing so much writing and photography, I intend to join and spend my remaining golfing days playing its holes.  It is interesting, challenging and five minutes from my house.

[RJ_Daley]

Ron, that River Oaks looks to be a very straight up solid golf course.  I can't see a single DEs-like 'symbolism' sort of theme to it on the aerial.  Although even on aerial, greens seem to have nice contouring.  The spacing of holes looks OK for the walk as well.

I make my compromises by cost of both the golf, and the trip if necessary to get there.  I'll pay both golf cost if under $150 and trip costs once or so a year, IF I am relatively certain that people I know (as in those on GCA.com that I know and respect their thoughts) really give a highly favorable review.  But, like Kyle, I can't help but think all the while that I could have played (X) rounds at my home course or Wild Horse, for the big bucks, and had twice or more fun. 

I'll go to a lesser architectural merit course once in a while to enjoy company of friends.  But, there is a limit to that as well, no matter how cheap that course is.  I don't enjoy really lousy architecture and over watered mud holes, and it gets even worse when I see lousy courses, and I start complaining to my golf friends of how truly lousy the design or soft conditions are, and where the archie or super are missing the boat.  It get worse that way because I usually get blank stares from those social golf friends that don't care and don't know anything about the subjects and just want to go bat it around a field of golf holes. 

And, my high end compromise is that I will not pay north of $200 for any round of golf on any highly acclaimed course unless it is an all day sucker of unlimitted holes played, or includes lodging.  I don't care if I got a guided golf tour with Tom Doak himself at Pac Dunes. In my financial league, "a man's gots to know his limitations".

[Ken Fry]

Ken,
You're now officially the GCA.com poster boy for 2010

Boy that doesn't sound good.....

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()