[PCCraig]

If it got decent Golf Digest ratings and/or held some minor tournaments, then no.  Never underestimate a man's primordial desire to pull out the ruler and whip it out.  

Exhibit A is Butler National. In peak summer condition it's about as hard of a golf course as you can find, exponentially so for higher handicappers, but as far as I know they have never had trouble attracting members.

[Mike Hendren]

I don't think so.  However, perhaps a golf can be too difficult to retain members.  Older members have likely shaped or embraced a club's culture and likely frequent/sustain the club during the week - golf, lunch, card games - while the younger members are earning a living. 

Just a thought.

Bogey

[Tim Gavrich]

I definitely think this is possible.  I'm curious to see if we can isolate any examples where the club did everything that successful clubs do but did not end up succeeding as a private club because its golf course is just too hard to support a membership of a normal range of golfers' handicaps.  Now, a place like Whisper Rock in AZ or Champions GC in Houston doesn't need to worry, since their memberships are skewed very far to the lower handicap range.

An interesting counter-case is Bulls Bay, which has a much lower average handicap among its membership, but I don't think I'd classify it as an extremely difficult golf course by a long way.

As an aside, I wish golf courses in the US were able to do what a lot of UK courses do: force visitors to have a handicap of, say, 24 or better before being allowed to play.  But golf is in such a state that courses are content to let anyone who can pay the greens fee play.  Thus, we have a lot of slow play.

[Greg Holland]

I think there are examples.  There is a course here in my town by a very well known architect that I have heard has struggled for members for the last 20 years.  It is difficult, with a high cr and slope and a premium on GIR.  It stagnated, got bought out and renovated, but still has not attracted a larger membership.  Have heard many say they like playing it once or twice a year, but would not want to play it every week.

Another course in this region, which was once in the top 100, has also struggled to attract members.  It is very difficult.  When it recently offered very attractive membership options, I know of several good golfers that live in the area of the course who said they did not want to join because it was too hard and beats you up everytime you play.

[Keith OHalloran]

Tim, when golf courses limit the play to people that have a handicap under 24, what does that do to growth of the game, and getting kids involved? It seems that people have to start somewhere.

[jeffwarne]

I agree with Mark in regard to effect that ratings can have. If Bethpage Black was private, I would not want to join. I get beaten up when I play the course. It is a long walk, it is a mandatory walk, and there really are limited options to go out late and play a few holes, unless you want to play only 5 holes, and that would have hole 15 as your second of the day. However, I am certain that based on its status, the Black course would not hurt for members.

+1

The Black course, if it were private, could cut the hay 10-15 yards on both sides of the fairways.
Playing the appropriate tees,there's nothing that difficult at The Black other than the daily setup, which has been particularly brutal since the 2002 US Open.
The Black would be a better COURSE for it .

Come to think of it, it'd better if they'd do that now...

[Ken Moum]

Being out here in flyover country, I think difficulty can hurt a club's chances of getting members if it isn't the "A" club in town.

I live in Topeka, KS, where we once had 4 country clubs.  Now, there's really only one, and it's the least enjoyable course in town.  Although it was designed by Perry Maxwell, now it has really, really narrow fairways, lined with thick rough and hundreds (thousands?) of mature trees that were planted some time in the 1940s as near as I can tell. But they're still doing OK for membership.

Where I play, the course is much more difficult--especially from the forward tees and "men's" tees--than the two courses operated by the county.  And since we've been the "B" private club for some time, we struggled to maintain membership numbers.  I know a number of people who could have easily handled the paltry $100/month dues, but found no fun to play because of narrow fairways and tall rough.

They all found the two public courses more fun to play, without even thinking about the fact that they are wider, have lower rough, and are 400+ yards shorter from the red tees and white tees respectively.

Hutchinson, KS is another place where there's a hard course that's the "AAAAAA" course doing pretty well.  There's also a "B" course that is actually more difficult for most golfers, and it's barely scraping by.  (Imagine PD with 25-yard wide fairways and trees in the rough, and you'll get an idea of what Highlands is like.)

K

[archie_struthers]

 

Absolutely , particularly as golfer age it becomes important to them to score well to enjoy the game.  Americans particularly are score conscious, so good operators are smart enough to soften some hazards and make sure the pins and tees are propertly placed . Really good ones take inot accont th ewind on busy days and set it up relative to direction.

Examples of benign yet good golf courses in our area where the old Atlantic City vs say Galloway. Both excelllent courses , but ACCC having a huge edge in attracting and maintaining members. In lower Cape May County Avalon Golf Club is a sporty , fun little golf course that the members love . It also is really benign yet still offers some challenge for the good player. Stone Harbor would be its corresponding too tough neighbor.

[Lou Cutolo]

St. Mellon’s Golf Club most likely has a hard time attracting members.

During the Battle of Britain early in the Second World War, the St.
Mellon's Golf and Country Club, located in Monmouthshire, adopted a set of
unusual rules for unusual circumstances.

Written by B. L. Edsell, the club secretary, they read:

1 - Players are asked to collect the bomb and shrapnel splinters to
prevent their causing damage to the mowing machines.

2- In competition, during gunfire or while bombs are falling, players may
take shelter without penalty for ceasing play.

3 - The positions of known delayed-actions bombs are marked by red flags
at a reasonable by not guaranteed safe distance therefrom.

4 - Shrapnel and/or bomb splinters on the fairways or in bunkers within a
club's length of a ball may be moved without penalty, and no penalty shall
be incurred if a ball is thereby caused to be moved accidentally.

5 - A ball moved by enemy action may be replaced, or if lost or destroyed,
a ball may be dropped without penalty, not nearer the hole.

6 - A ball lying in a crater may be lifted and dropped not nearer the
hole, preserving the line to the hole, without penalty.

7 - A player whose stroke is affected by the simultaneous explosion of a
bomb may play another ball under penalty of one stroke.

[Philippe Binette]

5 - A ball moved by enemy action may be replaced, or if lost or destroyed,
a ball may be dropped without penalty, not nearer the hole.


that's the greatest rule in the history of the game

[Bruce Katona]

6. " A ball moved by enemy action is ruled a holed", in my local rule !

[Jeff_Brauer]

I am sure it can.

I mentioned not too long ago that I have evidence on the public side that easier courses get more rounds than hard ones.  Not sure why it would be different at private clubs, except for the "1%" who want the real challenge.  And really, I believe its "1%" that want it.   Even then, they might join the tough club as a second club.

Even if I wanted challenge, if I was in a club to entertain clients, I would be wary of having them (or the wife, or the kids) have a miserable time.

Random question, I think most of us love the once a year trek to some famous, yet difficult course as a change of pace.  It is typical for members of a tough course to go play an easy one for change of pace?

[ChipOat]

There's a course on Oahu on the other side of the Pali Tunnel (name escapes me); written up in both Golf and GD when it opened as being the "hardest in the world".

Nobody played it more than once or twice - too hard to be any fun.

It's still there, but it's been significantly de-fanged.

[Mark Saltzman]

There's a course on Oahu on the other side of the Pali Tunnel (name escapes me); written up in both Golf and GD when it opened as being the "hardest in the world".

Nobody played it more than once or twice - too hard to be any fun.

It's still there, but it's been significantly de-fanged.

Ko'olau I think. Played it once just cuz. Not desire to play it again any time soon.

[Ulrich Mayring]

There are very few golf courses that I found too hard for everyday play. Nevertheless, there are such beasts: beautiful, strategic, diverse - but also mentally draining. A prime example is Ronald Fream's Saturnia in Italy. I loved the place, the scenery is stunning, it is relatively walkable and there is hardly any traffic on the course. But the golf itself is strenous. Almost every single shot on the course needs to be picture perfect, otherwise something or other will happen. You're continually in recovery mode and that ceases to be fun at some point.

I don't know about their member situation, but it is a resort course next to a luxury hotel in the middle of nowhere, so I guess local play does not figure prominently in the business plan.



If you drove to this spot, like I did, you may have to pitch up to the gap (there's a ditch there, so no running options) or hit a 9 iron over the trees. Both not very fun second shots on a par 5. Any aggressive option is super-risky here, so no matter what you decide, you're going to be out of your comfort zone. Which is fun here and there, but for an entire course it can overwhelm.

Ulrich

[ChipOat]

Mark,

That's it!  Mahalo.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()