News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Howard Riefs

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #100 on: April 04, 2012, 11:00:21 AM »
"Golf fans in Chicago, even those neutral on the gender issue, would love to see Butler National open its doors to women. The club represents the city's best chance - maybe its only chance - to land a U.S. Open. And it's centrally located in Oak Brook."


It would be rich if the USGA first awarded Butler a Women's US Open.

I kid, I kid... *


* Anti-smiley face
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke

John McCarthy

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #101 on: April 04, 2012, 11:25:49 AM »
1.  Butler lies on a flood plain.  It used to flood regularly.  Short of digging Deep Tunnel out to Oak Brook it will always remain vulnerable to flood. 

2.  Sometimes it rains in June. 

3.  Will the USGA really allow the US Open to be shortened or played on the public course next door like in 1987?  That would be an enormous risk. 

4.  It seems like in Mr. Greenstein's mind the motive force behind changing the policy is to get the US Open.  Who says the USGA would give it? 

5.  There seems to be the belief that the old guard is dying off and new members would vote to change the policy.  If you are a new member you have put down more than $100k in initiation fees plus annual dues for an all-male club that you know does not allow women.  When one pays a tremendous amount of money to join a club when there are multiple co-ed clubs within a short drive (Butterfield, Chicago Highlands, Hinsdale, Ruth Lake et al) it seems to me that one would be fine with the policy as-is. 

(I used to work at Butler as a youth as a caddy and asst. caddymaster.  I don't know well anyone currently a member or employee.  Just my two cents worth without any special insight.)
The only way of really finding out a man's true character is to play golf with him. In no other walk of life does the cloven hoof so quickly display itself.
 PG Wodehouse

Phil McDade

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #102 on: April 04, 2012, 12:06:52 PM »

4.  It seems like in Mr. Greenstein's mind the motive force behind changing the policy is to get the US Open.  Who says the USGA would give it? 


I don't know what or if there is a motivation on the part of Butler, but the USGA would go there in a heartbeat for the US Open. The Chicago market is too big and important for the USGA to ignore/bypass, and for a variety of reasons outlined elsewhere, the other candidates -- Medinah, Olympia Fields North -- aren't in the running. (That may change after Doak's reworking at Medinah, though regular posters here have much better insights into Medinah than I.) Butler would immediately jump to the front of the line of Chicago-area courses on the USGA's dream list of US Open courses.

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #103 on: April 04, 2012, 12:36:46 PM »
Phil,

Tom's renovating Medinah #1, not #3.  The issue their is the PGA has them locked up for the Ryder Cup.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Phil McDade

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #104 on: April 04, 2012, 12:44:44 PM »
Phil,

Tom's renovating Medinah #1, not #3.  The issue their is the PGA has them locked up for the Ryder Cup.

Jud:

I was probably too much into my steak at the Erie Cafe dinner to remember Ryan's discourses, but I was under the impression Doak might be doing some work/consulting on #3 as well. I know they are locked into the Ryder Cup -- but I was thinking 10-20 years out.

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #105 on: April 04, 2012, 12:47:46 PM »
Maybe I'm the one that was buried in a bottle of wine!  ::)
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

SL_Solow

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #106 on: April 06, 2012, 11:49:27 PM »
No Doak work contemplated on #3

Jim Nugent

Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #107 on: April 07, 2012, 12:52:37 AM »

3.  Will the USGA really allow the US Open to be shortened or played on the public course next door like in 1987? 


What happened in 1987? 

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #108 on: April 07, 2012, 07:40:59 PM »
Teddy G. on XM radio today (I'm paraphrasing):  "Well if it were a 2/3rds majority needed perhaps but 75% is a pretty high hurdle.  But maybe if they sit down with the membership and say "You can have a U.S. Open in the next 10 years and secure the club's financial future""..
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #109 on: April 07, 2012, 07:47:46 PM »
A US Open wouldn't secure Butler's future but it would fulfill the club's mission in a big way. All of the members have been informed of the activity of the club in this regard via a letter from the president. I don't have any sense of what the vote would be but money won't be a driving factor in the decision that's for sure. The club would be lucky to net $2 million from an Open. That's their annual grounds budget.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #110 on: April 08, 2012, 07:52:44 AM »
Terry,

I think he was referring to additional revenue from new members as opposed to simply the revenue from the tournament.  Surely the club's stature would be raised if they held a successful Open or two. 
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #111 on: May 31, 2012, 11:02:40 PM »
Update!  Looks like 'ole Shiv may have been right on this one after all....

I was out for a drink after work today and ran into an old business acquaintance of mine who is a very well connected, high profile Butler member.  When asked about this issue he laughed and said it never even got past the board to be put to the membership for a vote.  He also reiterated that this story comes out every year as he tried not to guffaw while choking down his cocktail.  In Chicago, we do things a bit differently, as the Judge ought to know all too well by now....
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Howard Riefs

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #112 on: November 20, 2012, 03:29:36 PM »
Admitting women members was brought to a vote and soundly defeated. Less than 40% voted in favor of the change.

Our friend Teddy at the Tribune also reports that "the decision puts the club in a precarious financial state. A membership decline, in part due to business executives resigning because of the all-male stigma, means the club will have to increase annual dues and perhaps lower initiation fees for national members. 'We're in a death spiral,' said one member of the club's future."

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-11-19/sports/ct-spt-1120-butler-golf—20121120_1_private-clubs-shoal-creek-controversy-host-events

« Last Edit: November 20, 2012, 07:42:28 PM by Howard Riefs »
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke

Sven Nilsen

  • Total Karma: 2
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #113 on: November 20, 2012, 04:14:02 PM »
Whatever respect I had for TG as a journalist went out the window when I saw him sidling into the picture during the post-round interviews on Sunday evening at the Ryder Cup.  Let me know when the focus is more on sports and less on self-promotion and maybe I'll give his writing another chance.

Until then, he's Steven A. Greenstein to me.
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #115 on: April 07, 2013, 09:47:38 AM »
Terry,

You have to be a subscriber to read it.  I'm definitely on his side, but Teddy's agenda makes Martha Burke look like a wallflower at this point!  Shivas, white courtesy phone...
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #116 on: April 07, 2013, 09:59:21 AM »
Bottom line, Shivas/Ghost/Dave was dead wrong about virtually everything in this story. A simple apology or admission would appear to be in order. Not holding my breath.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Mark Saltzman

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #117 on: April 07, 2013, 10:01:47 AM »
What does the story say?

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #118 on: April 07, 2013, 10:11:20 AM »
What does the story say?

Essentially, it said everything last year's story said. The club looked into changing its all male policy. It hired a firm to survey members on the issue and there wasn't enough interest to merit a vote, in the eyes of those in charge. My friend Bob Clifford, widely regarded as the top lawyer in town was a prime source. So was Mike Keiser. Each is a former member, with Clifford resigning a few months ago, having tired of the inability to have open dialogue on the subject at the club. A current member is quoted anonymously.

As for the writer's agenda, he is trying to shine a light on why the only potential Open site in town won't change it's policy despite the fact that it was built to host big pro events. Nothing pernicious in that.

Here is an excerpt:
The resignation letter sat on his secretary's desk for weeks.

"I was torn about pulling the trigger," renowned Chicago trial lawyer Bob Clifford said.

Clifford joined Butler National in 1984. He recently had formed Clifford Law Offices and viewed the club as Chicago's premier golf facility and "a terrific venue" for entertaining clients.

His two daughters did not protest, nor did his wife. She belongs to the Women's Athletic Club, a 115-year-old Michigan Avenue institution "by ladies for ladies," according to its website.

Clifford spent part of the 1990s on Butler National's Board of Governors and, at times, sought to spark a debate regarding the club's no-women-allowed stance. He never got the chance.

"When members of the board would speak their mind in a way that was not accepted by the people who wanted to keep Butler as it always has been … fine, you can disagree," Clifford said. "But you don't have to be disagreeable. And they were."

Clifford obtained a $75 million settlement for victims of a 2002 scaffolding collapse at the John Hancock Center and has appeared on "Oprah" and "Good Morning America."

A debater by nature, he disapproved of the club's handling of last fall's survey vote, which was conducted by a third party and done via email.

"How about we have an honest and transparent discussion first?" he said.

Internally divided on what to do, he considered the friendships he formed over nearly three decades, saying: "I like Butler National and think all good things about it. I did not want to quit."

But in December, he did just that.

"How does this policy stand at a club that was designed to host events?" he asked. "Somehow Butler got stuck in the 1980s. It's regrettable."

Clifford remains a member at Bob O'Link, perhaps the manliest place on the North Shore. It's a men's club where members such as Mike Ditka revel in the freedom to take meals while wearing a towel. To add a woman would be akin to The Chicago Chop House creating a vegan menu.

"I'm not hung up in the moral side of this," he said. "Butler, in my mind, was built to be a place where the business community could come and mingle for casual or serious discussion. To do that, it has to bring women with it.

"Women will become increasingly dominant in the leadership of our business community. There will come a time when a female CEO will say to her male CFO: 'You cannot belong to this club.' "

'Let them play'

Course owner and developer Mike Keiser was speaking with Mike Davis several years ago, and the USGA executive told Keiser that the group was hard-pressed to find a U.S. Open site in the Chicago area.

"I said, 'If Butler had women, how would that be?' " Keiser recalled. "He said: 'It would be about perfect.' "

Keiser already has done remarkable things for the game.

As laid out in a recent Golf World magazine profile, he brought links golf to America and Canada with Bandon Dunes in Oregon and Cabot Links in Nova Scotia. His wide fairways with ocean views arouse the senses of players, who have discovered the joys of walking with a caddie.

In the piece, two-time Masters champion and course designer Ben Crenshaw called him "a visionary."

From his apartment overlooking the Diversey Harbor Lagoon, Keiser articulated his vision for championship golf in Chicago.

"Butler has the proximity, the parking and the tent opportunities," he said. "It can handle a big crowd. It is this great, iconic, difficult monster, built primarily for tour pros. Let them play."

Keiser speaks as an insider in more ways than one.

He joined Butler in the mid-'80s because he loved golf and could afford it.

"It was purely a selfish choice," he said, "and my wife, Lindy, gave me some heat, but in a nice way."

When he created the private, nine-hole Dunes Club in New Buffalo, Mich., in 1988, he insisted on a non-exclusionary membership policy.

"I wasn't against men's clubs, but they struck me as dinosaurs," he said. "Why would a new club exclude half the people? And what about little girls, like my little girls? I want to take them. I want them to play golf."

Keiser left Butler in the early '90s and joined Shoreacres, in Lake Bluff. He also is a member at Chicago Golf Club and Old Elm, a men's club in Highland Park with, he said, a "fuddy duddy" membership.

Old Elm could add half the LPGA Tour and not get a major. Butler National, at 7,523 yards and rated the nation's 11th-toughest course by Golf Digest, is a different story.

"Let's think of (Butler National creator) Paul Butler," Keiser said. "Let's listen to Tom Fazio. Let's think of the good of golf and, frankly, what's good for Chicago."

In the 1987 book titled "Butler National Golf Club — The First Twenty-Five Years," author Cal Brown writes that Butler "resisted" an all-male membership "partly because of his daughter, Jorie, who was supervising the family interests in Oak Brook, partly out of his considerable admiration for the fairer sex and partly because he thought it more practical to build a family club."

But friends convinced him that with so many "family" clubs already in the western suburbs, an all-male membership would attract more applicants. Plus, as the book states, men "would be less likely to complain about a rugged, demanding golf course."

Jorie Butler Kent, the vice chairman at luxury travel company Abercrombie & Kent, said in a telephone interview: "When Dad developed the concept of Butler National, he wanted to have a championship course. He took the lead from the very famous and prestigious Augusta National. I know in my heart that in this day and age, (an all-male membership) is not something my father would embrace."
« Last Edit: April 07, 2013, 10:19:49 AM by Terry Lavin »
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Jud_T

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #119 on: April 07, 2013, 10:23:02 AM »
The only reason it's the "only potential Open site in town" is because they don't want to lower themselves to using the same venue as the PGA (Medinah), the scoring at Olympia Fields in less than ideal conditions wasn't deemed suitably high enough for their arbitrary standards and, oh don't get me started on Cog Hill.  How about focusing on the golf instead of the $$$'s and having it at Chicago Golf Club with limited spectators bussed in?  Oh sorry, that was a pipe dream...
« Last Edit: April 07, 2013, 10:26:16 AM by Jud T »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #120 on: April 07, 2013, 11:20:10 AM »
Terry,

 So the motives behind the movement are that non-members want a Chicago area club to acquire a U.S Open or PGA and Butler is the only game in town ?

How do the Butler members feel about hosting a U.S. Open or PGA ?

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #121 on: April 07, 2013, 12:26:54 PM »
Patrick,

This story reflects quite the opposite of movement. This is country club stasis. It's their club, but it seems a shame that the only reason the club won't fulfill it's designed mission is this policy.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #122 on: April 07, 2013, 03:37:47 PM »
Shivas, are you implying that the media is trying to create a story and influence an outcome ? ;D

This sounds familiar.

Terry Lavin

  • Total Karma: -1
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #123 on: April 07, 2013, 04:09:36 PM »
One last thing: I think it's downright comical the way the Tribune keeps tickling this story up.  Every time they write about it, they just embarass themselves at this point.  But that won't stop them from trying to force this issue again in the future.   Sad.  Truly sad... What the Tribune has resorted to to foist this story on us all.   There was NEVER any there there, and anybody who knows anything in this town knew it. 

Take a look in the mirror. There's no "there" there. You denied there was any truth to the club looking into changing this policy. You said Greenstein was fabricating sources, making the story up. Now you claim you're vindicated?  Outed as a phony, disclosed as a defamer is more like it.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Jim Nugent

  • Total Karma: 0
Re: Butler and women members?
« Reply #124 on: April 08, 2013, 04:29:41 AM »
[
] Bottom line, Shivas/Ghost/Dave was dead wrong about virtually everything in this story.

Except the real point of the article, where Dave was 100% right, and you were dead wrong. 

Terry Lavin, February 11, 2012:  "It's going to happen... It's a smart business decision and one that will be made within the next year or so."

Dave Schmidt, also February 11, 2012:  " I think that's just wishful thinking from the Honourable One.  I don't see this ever happening, and what's more, I don't even believe they're doing a study, to be honest.  The Tribune has lost ALL credibility with this never-ending attempt of theirs to apply media pressure to Butler to sway them into going co-ed.  This story runs every February.  And every February they insinuate some sort of inside knowledge of what Butler is considering or what Butler is doing.  And NONE of it is ever TRUE!"

Dave was right, and you were wrong.  Butler is NOT admitting women.  The vote wasn't close: more than 60% against.  The study and anonymous sources you guys argued over so much, are peripheral to the main issue, which is Butler accepting women members. 

The vote makes it sound to me like Dave was also right in saying this was never much on the table, and that the Trib was trying to create news rather than report it.