David Fay on Opening of Masterpieces to Non-Members

[Mark Chaplin]

Pat last time I was a Pine Valley there were clearly "rangers" on the course, they may not have had a cart saying ranger but discrete words were had with hosts to keep the pace of play.

From a recent post concerning injury to a caddie not everyone who is a member of a US top club is a gentleman. At one top club I played where they average 6-8 fourballs a day I'm sure if 4 tee times were sold each weekday between 11-12 the members wouldn't even know there were paying visitors.

[corey miller]

In this time of OWS protests. and a political class that supports them, do you really think a board would be acting appropriately in allowing unfettered access to private grounds owned by the dreaded 1% who have attained such station in life on the backs of others?  I think not, it could very well create a very dangerous situation.

[JC Jones]

  Why would non-members have the power to say anything about how a club operates its business?

Jealousy and entitlement.  Non-members have absolutely no right to play private courses.  They play them because of the generosity of the members.

I will also say that I agree with Sheehy in that I wonder how many people actually are egregious with their behavior and how many break some rule of which they are unaware and was not communicated.  Then again, non-members should all have an understanding of some of the basics, i.e. remove hats indoors, don't use cell phone, dress appropriately, etc. 

[Tim Martin]

It seems to boil down to culture both in terms of the cost to belong to the elite U.S. clubs and and the percieved exclusivity that member`s feel is due them as a result of writing the check(s). It is great to hear of the positive responses of the foreign posters when visiting US clubs.

[Ronald Montesano]

Patrick writes "Ron, Tell me the last time you saw a ranger at Seminole, NGLA, GCGC, WFW, Fishers Island, CPC, PV, or any other "Target Icon" club ?"

Patrick, a precious response! Sorry to say that I've never set foot on any of those courses, so I cannot answer your question with experience nor authority. If you would like me to conduct a case study and get back to you, I'm happy to (sigh) oblige...

Let me ask you this, Mr. Mucci. What do "Target Icon" clubs do on days when they host an outing for charitable reasons? Does the outing happen with no security, no rangering/escorting/assisting?

[George Pazin]

It's likely not a large number, but let's face it, with the dollar amounts involved, if it's one it's a problem most don't want to deal with. Couple that with the tax issues, the public accommodation issues, and the never ending streams of protestors and you have our current situation.

I'm always saddened by how many posters are willing to openly generalize and stereotype negatively about American culture. There's more than 300 million of us here and most are pretty decent people, many of whom have offered quite a bit to the world.

-----

Sean A, I'd argue that the compromise already exists and is functioning rather well. Look how many posters on here have shared their courses, in many cases inviting people sight unseen tremendous opportunities, just to name one small example. And many of my friends not on here have managed to play just about every course in the country, save a notable exception or two.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick writes "Ron, Tell me the last time you saw a ranger at Seminole, NGLA, GCGC, WFW, Fishers Island, CPC, PV, or any other "Target Icon" club ?"

Patrick, a precious response! Sorry to say that I've never set foot on any of those courses, so I cannot answer your question with experience nor authority. If you would like me to conduct a case study and get back to you, I'm happy to (sigh) oblige...

That was obvious.

Let me ask you this, Mr. Mucci. What do "Target Icon" clubs do on days when they host an outing for charitable reasons? Does the outing happen with no security, no rangering/escorting/assisting?

That is correct.

Obviously, you don't understand how the charity gets approved for the outing.
Or, do you think they hire the local swat team to help out ?

[Tom Birkert]

There are some courses in the UK which limit the number of times a visitor can play as a guest of a member. At Sunningdale it is 6 times in a year, but that does not include society days, charity events etc. I would guess the reason for this is financial, there is a huge difference in cost when playing as a visitor compared to playing as a guest of a member.

[Sean_A]

It's likely not a large number, but let's face it, with the dollar amounts involved, if it's one it's a problem most don't want to deal with. Couple that with the tax issues, the public accommodation issues, and the never ending streams of protestors and you have our current situation.

I'm always saddened by how many posters are willing to openly generalize and stereotype negatively about American culture. There's more than 300 million of us here and most are pretty decent people, many of whom have offered quite a bit to the world.

-----

Sean A, I'd argue that the compromise already exists and is functioning rather well. Look how many posters on here have shared their courses, in many cases inviting people sight unseen tremendous opportunities, just to name one small example. And many of my friends not on here have managed to play just about every course in the country, save a notable exception or two.

George

Of course you are right, there are a lot of very generous folks on this site and involved generally in golf - lets face it, golfers are generally are good lot.  But, other than the obvious of those who may be connected having to wait for an invite (rather than say picking up a phone), I was thinking more of the unconnected folks - which is the vast majority of golfers.  I understand there are always ways and means of getting what one wants, but it is often true that nice guys are left in the dust unless they push themselves forward.  Just using myself as an example, I wouldn't have the balls to ask Joe Bloggs, a guy I know only from this site and haven't met yet (maybe more than once!), to have a go at his course.  I know many (much nicer and more deserving than myself) who feel the same.  But this isn't really about folks in my shoes, I am connected enough to not take up most of the offers that come my way.  My point was about the unconnected.  

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat last time I was a Pine Valley there were clearly "rangers" on the course, they may not have had a cart saying ranger but discrete words were had with hosts to keep the pace of play.

When was that ?

There are no rangers at PV.
Sometimes Charlie or an assistant pro will ride out if there's a perceived problem or sometimes just randomly.

From a recent post concerning injury to a caddie not everyone who is a member of a US top club is a gentleman.

That's not the issue or topic of this thread.

At one top club I played where they average 6-8 fourballs a day I'm sure if 4 tee times were sold each weekday between 11-12 the members wouldn't even know there were paying visitors.

I wouldn't bet on that if I were you.

[Ed Brzezowski]

That was an excellent point about the tax consequences. Also ADA law makes going  "public" costly. Our club does the normal wedding and funtion activity. We had a nice local hotel ask about getting 1-2 foursomes a weekend. That action would cost us over 45 k in ADA upgrades and cost us our not for profit status.

I guess tax laws are different across the pond.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Chris K- I agree with your assessment.  Interesting- it's the UK and Aussie folks who, in my American opinion, have the more clear eyed assessment of American culture than most of our American posters.  Not a surprise, Americans are not very good at admitting our shortcomings. 

Most of us on this board would agree with the statement:  UK has a better golfing culture than the US.  UK= walking, links, match play. US=carts, indifferent design, stroke play, slow play. 

While in both the UK and US, it was the upper classes of both countries that nurtured the game in it's formative years- the UK clubs were less concerned with exclusivity and, therefore, set a better example and had a greater positive influence on the game as it expanded.

In the US, the icon clubs used golf as a measuring stick of wealth and exclusivity. 

Horseshit.
Most Icon clubs are "cheap" to get into and have low to moderate dues.

What you and others don't understand is the legal and tax ramifications that U.S. clubs are subjected to that clubs in the U.K. aren't subjected to.
However, those considerations don't seem to stop you from making flawed comparisons.

For Ron's and Chris's edification, Clubs, particularly "icon" clubs have ceased allowing charity auctions of unaccompanied foursomes because of the problems encountered when four strangers put forth the winning bid and conduct themselves improperly.
How does the club seek recourse ?  How can they prevent unpleasant/unfortunate situations from occuring in the future ?
Simple, prohibit unaccompanied foursomes, which ruins it for members and staff who host unaccompanied foursomes.

I believe this attitude contributed to an indifference to the games' progress outside of these exclusive clubs- and allowed golf in the US to be turned into a vehicle to sell real estate and golf cart fees.

That's just more horseshit.
Would you tell me how Sebonack, Easthampton and Friar's Head fit your absurd mold ? 

[Jud_T]

Seems to me that we're lumping a bunch of different economic models into one large bowl and ending up with a fruit salad.  GB&I aside, comparing a club on Long Island's East end which is on property now worth tens of millions of dollars and if they quietly mentioned at the local pub that they were having a membership drive they'd have 500 BMW's in the lot by sunset each with cashier's checks in hand to clubs that aren't in such tony neighborhoods yet have great golf with regards to unaccompanied play is a bit silly.  Particularly in these economic times, all but a couple dozen courses can generally be accessed or joined for that matter.  If the most important thing in your life is getting on Augusta National, you might want to reconsider your priorities.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat, you mentioned GCA folk not conducting themselves properly? I don't get what you mean by this? I really can't see anyone who posts on this site misbehaving on a course...maybe I'm being naive.

To a degree, yes.

Usually, when I (or anyone else who I have ever played with) play golf, I show up, change in the locker room, play golf, come in, have a shower, order some food and drink, then go home.

Brian, that's how you conduct yourself, but others don't hold the same values.

What did these folks do to embarrass his host?  

Showing up in a bathing suit and going to the first tee might be a good start.
The guest, who was with the son of a member, who wasn't a member, knew better, but, in this age of the "me" generation, felt he could dress any way he wanted to.

A group of 16, who had been cleared by the board to play, showed up over two hours early and demanded to play, since they had played at that time in previous years.  However, they had been told that the rules had changed and that tee off had to be after 12:00 noon.
Still, some of the group insisted on playing at 10:00 because THEY had other engagements later that day.
In addition, this group substituted golfers without informing the host or the club staff, and one of the substitutions had had a previous incident at that club and was persona non grata.
Lastly, some berated the club staff for not permitting them to play when they arrived.

Driving carts on newly seeded areas that were clearly marked and roped off.

Need I go further.

Now all of these incidents happened at the same club, so why would that club want to continue to accomodate unaccompanied guests, even though they were sponsored by a member, let alone, allow play by unaccompanied guests that have no sponsorship ?

I just can't imagine what it could be.

See the above

Part of me wonders if it is because there is so much protocol involved with playing golf at a private club, that these folk did not adhere some of it purely because they were unsure what was expected of them?

There is NOT that much protocol involved.
Know the clubs rules before arriving, use common sense and conduct yourself as a gentleman golfer.
That's pretty simple, yet, the abuses are legion.

IS tipping allowed? if so, what's appropriate? Who gets a tip and who doesn't? If you tip more than your host are you embarrassing him?
As a guest, that's information you should ascertain before arriving, thus removing any possibility of a misunderstanding.

You can't pay for your food and beverage there as it's all on account, but is it vulgar to offer money to your host?

Usually, the gesture to pay for caddies is appreciated, but, some hosts will indicate that the caddies and everyone else have been taken care of.

All of these are dilemmas for a UK golfers playing golf at private clubs - and it can be stressful as you don't want to upset anyone / want to be a good guest and want a good vibe to surround your day out. I think Americans coming to the UK love not having to worry about protocol - besides basically being friendly, polite and adhering to the dress code...

As the saying goes, a rotten apple spoils it for the basket.
Clubs don't want to attract these problems, hence, unsponsored outside play is almost non-existant

[Paul_Turner]

Man, Fay's article is "yesterday's papers". 

[Cliff Hamm]

I applaud Mr. Fay in this effort.  I hope that he has been vocal at the clubs at which he is a member....also, agree that American clubs would charge an exorbitant amount as to make it meaningless...

Finally, what does it say when one wants to avoid not being able to discriminate? 

[Mark Johnson]

I applaud Mr. Fay in this effort.  I hope that he has been vocal at the clubs at which he is a member....also, agree that American clubs would charge an exorbitant amount as to make it meaningless...

Finally, what does it say when one wants to avoid not being able to discriminate? 

Great Point.   If David is this serious about this -- next GCA outing at Fishers Island !!! (where he is a member)

[Tim Bert]

Not only do I want access to all of the great private clubs in the country, but I want to be able to invite myself to anyone's house and also play baseball with my kids on all of the MLB fields.

[Ted Cahill]

Pat- I'm taking about the US icon clubs for 1900-1930- they should have been the example setters and leaders for how golf progressed in the US. They abdicated that responsibility. Their clubs preserved the game as it was played in the UK- but they failed to influence the game as it expanded in the 20th century.

Their very clubs were established because UK golf leaders took their responsibility serious and spread the game to the US east coast. The American members of these clubs benefitted from the golf evangelism of UK leaders, but felt no responsibility to advance the golf evangelism.  Therefore, the US golf culture detotiorated badly without leadership.  Frankly, MacDonald set the baton down and the first one to pick it up was Mike Keiser.  I'm sorry if that history angers you. 

[Peter Pallotta]

Nothing against David Fay, but I wish one of these David Fay types (whether in politics or science or the arts) would every once in a while come out and say something when its actually useful and interesting (i.e contrary to the prevailing/conventional wisdom and practice of the day) instead of waiting to take a stand and make a point only after the train has left the station.  But it seems that the David Fays of the world don't get to be David Fays by bucking the conventional wisdom or by speaking out too soon and when they're the only ones doing so.  What's next, I wonder - an essay about preserving our great old courses in the face of runaway technology?

Peter

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat- I'm taking about the US icon clubs for 1900-1930- they should have been the example setters and leaders for how golf progressed in the US. They abdicated that responsibility. How so ?


Their clubs preserved the game as it was played in the UK- but they failed to influence the game as it expanded in the 20th century.
How so ?

Their very clubs were established because UK golf leaders took their responsibility serious and spread the game to the US east coast. The American members of these clubs benefitted from the golf evangelism of UK leaders, but felt no responsibility to advance the golf evangelism. 

How do you know that ?
Could you cite a specific club and cite how that Club's members failed to advance golf evangelism ?

Therefore, the US golf culture detotiorated badly without leadership. 
Frankly, MacDonald set the baton down and the first one to pick it up was Mike Keiser. 

So Fownes, Crump, Wilson, the Tufts family, Dick Youngscap, lowell Schulman, Ken Bakst,, Jack Lupton, and others didn't continue to carry the baton ? ?  ?

There appears to be a huge, factual gap in your premise

I'm sorry if that history angers you. 

Why would an erroneous, seriously flawed  account of history anger me ?

[David_Elvins]

If Private Clubs have a duty to share their course, as Mr Fay, suggests, what would be wrong with the following?

These exclusive great courses open to the public 1-2 days a year with a ballot to determine the field.  You must have a registered handicap under 27 to go in the ballot, you can only be successful in the ballot once in your lifetime, and all money raised goes to charity.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

If Private Clubs have a duty to share their course, as Mr Fay, suggests, what would be wrong with the following?

These exclusive great courses open to the public 1-2 days a year with a ballot to determine the field.  You must have a registered handicap under 27 to go in the ballot, you can only be successful in the ballot once in your lifetime, and all money raised goes to charity.  


David,

Which days ? Specifically ?
Let's assume it's a Boston, NY or Philly area club. ?

What about the legal liabilities ?

What about the costs to keep the club open on those days ?

What if one of the successful balloters is a registered sex offender ?
A convicted felon ?

WHY would club want to displace it's dues paying members in favor of total strangers ?  Complete unknowns ?


 

[David_Elvins]

What if one of the successful balloters is a registered sex offender ?
A convicted felon ?

Pat,

Just out of curiousity, what do you imagine happens to a golf course if it is played by a registered sex offender? 

[David_Elvins]

Which days ? Specifically ?

Monday 26th March 2012

Let's assume it's a Boston, NY or Philly area club. ?

Sure, why not.  (You don't actually need to write that, Patrick.  After 11 years I am well aware that you only post in realtion to Boston, NY or Philly area private clubs. )

What about the legal liabilities ?

There are none.

What about the costs to keep the club open on those days ?

The club does this because it feels obligated for the betterment of the game and service to the community by raising money for charity.

WHY would club want to displace it's dues paying members in favor of total strangers ?  Complete unknowns ?

As above, because they felt an obligation to sharing their course with the greater golfing public in the interest of golf.

Please note, I am not saying a course should want to do this. But if they did want to open themselves up to some outside play, this may be the way to do it that provides least disruption to members or the status of the club.