[Wayne_Kozun]

 And, I've said this before, and been dumped on, so I expect that will happen again - but get away from the "what's your/my handicap" mentality as a measure of success in golf.  The measure of success should be how much fun you're having.

I don't disagree with you but what is described here is very much like a general trend in society.  Life keeps becoming more structured and less fun.  Kids no longer play pickup games of hockey/basketball/baseball/football as everything is organized into leagues and practices.  Golf is no different from these other games.

[Brent Hutto]

Carl has hit upon the gist of my opinion on this topic (the fun part, not the China part).

I play an awful lot of solo rounds but for me golf really comes alive when playing some sort of game. Ideally, a head to head or 4BBB match. But most often for me it's a blind-draw Stableford type "dogfight" or similar. Realistically if I'm not playing a game (which for me entails an opponent) then I'm either just practicing or I'm out of a relaxing walk and hitting golf shots while I'm out there.

When I started playing 20 years ago I was very fortunate to quickly move beyond the no doubt well intentioned advice that seemed ubiquitous as a beginner. It was all about "testing yourself against the course" and "improving" and a bunch of other high-minded claptrap that made it seem like every hour spent on a golf course was akin to an hour spent in a remedial summer school class so that you can advance to the next grade on schedule.

But as Carl points out, if all you knew about golf was what you see on televised PGA Tour coverage you'd think it was some incredible feat of endurance and mental toughness where the goal was to play 72 holes while totally eliminating every possible bad shot and grinding out emotionally draining fractions of a stroke against incredible odds.

And if all you knew about golf was from the commercials on television you'd be convinced that golf was a game of driving the ball 300+ yards and dressing in immaculately tailored name-brand clothing while wearing squeaky-clean $200 golf shoes.

I get it that some people won't go to the golf course if they can't hang around the bar until they are staggering drunk and then drive home unmolested by the police. And I get it that in some parts of the country there really, truly is no such thing as an affordable and convenient way for a middle-class or working-class person to play 50+ rounds a year.

But 20 years ago I played golf with plenty of shirt-untucked, K-mart club wielding enthusiastic weekend hackers who not wealthy and leisured but who worked 50 hour weeks to make their mortgage payment and considered a $40 green fee to be a significant leisure expenditure. Today when I step away from the confines of my usual Country Club setting I see a bunch of enthusiastic weekend hackers who might well be the same guys I saw in 1994 except for balder, paunchier and now they've got a four-year-old Taylormade adjustable driver instead of a K-mart Dunlop whatever.

In the end it comes back to what Mike Young seems to be "keeper of the wisdom" for. There is a whole world of Golf out there consisting of courses ranging from basic to pretty darned crummy (by wealthy leisured golfer standards), run by people working their ass off to keep their head above water and played by a cross-section of humanity whose only real common element is that "enthusiastic weekend hacker" thing. There's no wonderfully photographed and evocatively worded Ran writeup on those $30 green fee courses. Most of the people who play there don't post on this forum. The guys blathering on TV and the magazines and web sites trying to sell golf PRODUCTS are talking mostly right over their heads trying to reach us suckers who think dumping a thousand dollars a year on new clubs and many thousands on playing high-$$$ resorts is a perfectly reasonable way to feed our golf obsession.

Maybe it will all come crashing down over the next decade or two. But there's been worse shit come down the pipe at many times over the past couple centuries than what we're dealing with right now economics-wise and demographics-wise. Yet golf has endured and I personally can't see any qualitative changes in who is playing the game over these last 20 years. Quantity of golfers and quantity of rounds played seems down but it's more of an across-the-board thing. Not a seismic shift in the game's underlying appeal and accessibility. Not in my opinion, anyways.

[Carl Johnson]

 And, I've said this before, and been dumped on, so I expect that will happen again - but get away from the "what's your/my handicap" mentality as a measure of success in golf.  The measure of success should be how much fun you're having.

I don't disagree with you but what is described here is very much like a general trend in society.  Life keeps becoming more structured and less fun.  Kids no longer play pickup games of hockey/basketball/baseball/football as everything is organized into leagues and practices.  Golf is no different from these other games.

Wayne, I can't disagree with your observation either.  Carl

[Steve_ Shaffer]

 From Matt Brennan's excellent article:

 Economics are important, and upswings or downturns in three key sectors— employment, home values, and investment portfolios—are an indicator of golf's success, Mona told me. In this, he echoed the USGA's Jerris, who emphasized that the sport's fortunes have fluctuated with the broader economy since the Roaring Twenties gave way to the Great Depression.

"Here's what we know from 100 years of data about golf," he said. "The only real metric that matters in determining participation in the game is household income."

While Jerris, Mona, and Ted Bishop, president of the PGA of America, all described golf's exclusivity as a "misperception"—80% of golf courses in the United States are accessible to the public, and the median green fee is an affordable $26—income, and therefore class status, is a workable proxy if you're trying to determine whether golf appeals to someone. This may explain why the sport's rarefied image remains so tenacious, even among regular players.

http://deadspin.com/what-happens-to-golf-after-tiger-1621609188

[Frank Giordano]

It's encouraging to see the replies here that recognize the essential conflict between the GAME of golf -- which is eternally satisfying and enjoyable -- and the business of golf, which, historically in America, was the preserve of the wealthy and leisure classes, and which today is driving the fun and vast numbers of players out of the game altogether.  The economic conditions today and global environmental and climatic trends suggest that the privilege of being able to enjoy the GAME, the FUN of golf, may soon revert again to the same small class who originally developed our game here.  That may be a healthy economic development, but what a pity that a game of the people, as originally developed in Scotland, may be pricing the people out of a healthy, enjoyable, life-altering avocation.

It's interesting to see many of you commenting on how costs of playing can be minimized, by purchasing older clubs and used equipment generally,  trading in equipment, and seeking out good deals at local munis.  Ironically, when liquidating a friend's golf equipment after his spouse died,  I tried to consign his equipment at a local, very reputable golf shop.  Only the latest brand names, and only 5 of about 250 clubs, were deemed sellable.  Whole iron sets -- Titleists, Wilson Staffs, Rams -- and early metal woods -- Big Bertha, Founders Clubs, Orlimars, Tight Lies -- and entirely playable Hogan SpeedSlots, Toney Pennas, and MacGregor Tourney woods were turned away.  And when I consulted eBay about selling the stuff there, they brought virtually nothing in return or, when priced above $10-15, never sold.  I couldn't even give most of the stuff to the First Tee, as our kids can't or won't play those old clubs!  So much for the marketplace for used equipment, in a country that believes the latest and the longest are the only way to go.  Those ad men are good!

But what of the future of golf, for the ordinary guys and gals and kids?  If we want them to have a shot at the GAME we all love so, what ways and means are there for creating access to a GAME that is within the means of ordinary people.  By "means" I mean cost and time and playability factors.  What are you doing in your clubs or communities?  What ideas that are working for your community can be exported or practiced in America at large?

[Jim_Coleman]

      Lots of hand wringing here over not much, me thinks.  Golf has always been perceived a a rich man's sport.  And it has always been played by the rich at their clubs, and by some of the masses at the places they can play.  I was one of the masses when I was young, and played at the Boston public courses.  Those courses are still there, and still hosting the same people they hosted before.
     The architecture "boom" of the 80's and '90's was born of two bubbles - economic and retirees.  Now the facilities for those retirees have been more built out, so there's no new demand.  If golf is not as popular for the young as it once was (and I'm not sure that's true), it's not because golf isn't fun any more due to poor architecture or high costs.  It's always been expensive, and there's always been options to pay less.  It's because many young people either don't have the time or prefer to not to spend the time to play golf.  And building courses that can be played quicker (or changing the game) will make no difference.  The state of the game is not "fixable" by some marketing strategy, or some architectural metamorphosis.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I don't think I can add anything to the economic debate.
However, I can share direct experience.

I have two children - girl, 21, and boy, 18.
My daughter just has no interest in the game. Fine, I get it.

However, my son is a very good athlete, plays competitive hockey and all of his friends play golf to some degree. He has access to a wonderful golf course in the suburbs of Chicago as do many of his friends. He leaves for college on Wednesday and we discussed just last night how he and I did not play once this summer for the first time in almost 10 years.

"Why is that?", his mother asked.
"It just takes too long, people play way too slowly."

I was grinning and laughing.

"Are you taking your clubs to school with you?"
"No way! Too much else going on."

[BCowan]

"It just takes too long, people play way too slowly."

Ian,

   Your son seems to have a lot of common sense.

[Garland Bayley]

$200


$1000


Methinks Veblen.

Methinks that if the Titleist blades were reduced to $200, Michael would be buying Miura.

[Michael Moore]

GJ -

I clearly mentioned typography.

[Wayne_Kozun]

It's interesting to see many of you commenting on how costs of playing can be minimized, by purchasing older clubs and used equipment generally,  trading in equipment, and seeking out good deals at local munis.  Ironically, when liquidating a friend's golf equipment after his spouse died,  I tried to consign his equipment at a local, very reputable golf shop.  Only the latest brand names, and only 5 of about 250 clubs, were deemed sellable.  Whole iron sets -- Titleists, Wilson Staffs, Rams -- and early metal woods -- Big Bertha, Founders Clubs, Orlimars, Tight Lies -- and entirely playable Hogan SpeedSlots, Toney Pennas, and MacGregor Tourney woods were turned away.  And when I consulted eBay about selling the stuff there, they brought virtually nothing in return or, when priced above $10-15, never sold.  I couldn't even give most of the stuff to the First Tee, as our kids can't or won't play those old clubs!  So much for the marketplace for used equipment, in a country that believes the latest and the longest are the only way to go.  Those ad men are good!

Doesn't that just confirm that it is a buyer's market for used goods?  That's a good thing to reduce the cost of entry into the game.  

But it is not surprising that equipment more than 5 years old has no value, except for very unique stuff like Eye2s.  That is at least until it becomes old enough to have antique value.  If those irons were Tom Stewart irons they would be quite valuable.

[Garland Bayley]

Playing a back and forth match with a friend or friends is fun.
Trying to shoot low in medal play for posting scores and maintaining a handicap tends towards watching paint dry.

Buda, KP, Dixie Cup, etc. all are get togethers to have match play competitions. I believe that they would not be happening if they were get togethers to shoot the lowest team net totals. The stories that come out of them are about the winning of individual holes, not about the low 18 hole totals (for the most part).

Sandman wouldn't be Sandman in a medal competition, he would he BalloonScoreMan.

The people responsible at courses (typically the pro) should be trying to get people to play match play, not organizing yet another medal play event.

[Garland Bayley]

GJ -

I clearly mentioned typography.

Veblen good theory clearly mentions price reduction or inflation.
I don't see any mention of typography in writings on the theory.

[Jason Thurman]

Devolving into? When was it ever anything else?

Jim Coleman is right. True high end clubs still appeal to the same people to whom they've always appealed. Public golf for the masses still does just fine too. Just four days ago I played a $25 w/ cart city-owned public course that doesn't even stretch to 6000 yards and it was packed with the same combination of no frills golfers and bros drinking something called Burger Beer (http://www.burgerbeer.com/) that have been its core constituency since it opened in the 1920s. The weather was great, the course was full beyond capacity, the round took almost six hours, we nearly got killed by at least a dozen Top Flites and Pinnacles, and the regulars (including my drunk cousins who hosted me and lost roughly 30 balls apiece) couldn't have been friendlier or have enjoyed themselves any more. Even the group I accidentally drove into when I hit the green on what the scorecard called a "345 yard" par 4 while they were putting just thanked me for gracing them with the opportunity to see such a great shot. It was a delight.

Meanwhile, another residential course just a few miles from my house with a website full of lines like "nestled in the rolling hills," "surrounded by majestic trees, panoramic river views, and abundant wildlife," and "gives the golfer a feeling not found anywhere else in the country" announced that it will close for good in November. They probably still expect Jim Nantz to show up teary-eyed on their final day while Dave Loggins directs a string quartet through a rewritten-for-them version of "Augusta" as the band slowly drowns in the irrigation pond while standing on the deck of a sinking Toro mower.

Taylormade has apparently just realized that their four-month product cycle is destroying their business, so they've put out a bunch of panicked propaganda that has convinced a lot of people that golf is on its death bed. The number of rounds played, meanwhile, continues to ebb and flow in direct correlation with the economy just as it always has. Don't believe the propaganda. Golf is going to be just fine once it finishes purging all the courses and manufacturers that believe they're the show, and gets back to the game itself being the show.

[Garland Bayley]

Devolving into? When was it ever anything else?

..

When city fathers (e.g., such as those in Philadelphia in the golden age) felt it was a good thing to build quality municipal courses for the masses.

Unfortunately, people now think it is the unalienable right for entrepreneurs to build CCFDs and that governments shouldn't be cutting into their income by building affordable alternatives.

[Michael Moore]

The people responsible at courses (typically the pro) should be trying to get people to play match play, not organizing yet another medal play event.

GJ -

Every Saturday and Sunday at my course we have sixty or seventy people playing sweeps. Gross, net, a gross and net two-ball with and against every combination in your group and everyone else, skins, even the dreaded "points". On a good day you can get your name in the paper and win close to a hundred dollars in credit. If you want to give up on a hole you have only lost a single two-dollar bet. Everyone gets a thrill competing against such a large group of people and there is a five-hour window in which to tee off.

Is this really a problem for the game of golf?

[Garland Bayley]

Michael,

I see the words "skins" and "If you want to give up on a hole you have only lost a single two-dollar bet." in your post. It seems to me that you are playing match play with medal play mixed in too.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Garland,

$200 ? Aren't you forgetting the $27.00 steel shaft, the $10.00 grip, the $1.00 ferrule, and the cost to have someone build them for you? Roughly, you'll have  $450.00 to $500.00 invested in components, and that's a stainless steel casting, not a carbon steel forging.

No comparison, if 'you' don't want to spend $1,000 on a new set of Titleist MB's 'you' can find a used set in ex. condition on Ebay for $500 -  about what 'you'd' pay for all the necessary components 'you'll' need to build 'your' set of MDC's.  


- We've been as busy as we've ever been these past 3 months, a bit from the wealthy leisure class, but mostly from all the other sectors.

  


  

[Brent Hutto]

Garland,

1996 just called and wants its "custom component" clubs back.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

$200 ? Aren't you forgetting the $27.00 steel shaft, the $10.00 grip, the $1.00 ferrule, and the cost to have someone build them for you? Roughly, you'll have  $450.00 to $500.00 invested in components, and that's a stainless steel casting, not a carbon steel forging.

No comparison, if 'you' don't want to spend $1,000 on a new set of Titleist MB's 'you' can find a used set in ex. condition on Ebay for $500 -  about what 'you'd' pay for all the necessary components 'you'll' need to build 'your' set of MDC's. 


- We've been as busy as we've ever been these past 3 months, a bit from the wealthy leisure class, but mostly from all the other sectors.

 


 

So you want to know the "real" cost. $12 head, $10 shaft, $2 grip and ferrule, under $200 until you add build cost by someone else at $10 then it gets near $280.
And, that's only because I splurged on shafts from the True Temper company instead of Apollo.

Forging vs. Casting has no effect on the playability. Many people play forged simply for the Veblen effect.

[Paul Gray]

At the risk of being shouted down, could we return to the game of golf, rather than the equipment?

A sensible and considered discussion has borken out here for the first time in a while and it would seem a shame to lose track. Sorry.

[Sean_A]

As this conversation is really about the US, I find it remarkable that folks could complain about cost.  Just from my experience in Michigan, which is probably one of the centres of muni/cheap public golf, golf must be as cheap now as ever.  There are loads of courses out there which haven't really raised their green fees 15 years.  Sure, they can be the not so attractive venues, but I think a fair number do offer decent golf at a fair price.  That said, I can't speak for the pace of play because I don't tend to play these courses anymore.  My point is if golf is too expensive now then it will be forever.  For a huge percentage of courses, I can't see how green fees can come down much more with owners having any expectations to make a decent living.  Remember, for the owner, golf is a business, not a god given right for golfers.  In terms of cost, golfers in the US are spoiled rotten.  It may not be perfect, but the incredible diversity of quality and quantity of courses and price points of public access golf is unparalleled.  The grass is always greener elsewhere it seems. 

The fun aspect of golf is another question.  I don't think there is a solution for this because everybody has a different idea as to what fun is.  There is no one way for the best way.  I guess that is one main reason folks join clubs, to associate with like-minded people.   

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Divide the amount of £$ you spend on golf p/a by the amount of hours you spend on the course p/a. If you play a lot of golf, you might be surprised at the number. If you don't play much, you might not want to even do the calculation!
atb

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

1996 just called and wants its "custom component" clubs back.

"In fact, while I mildly regret Dick’s and most other OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) suffering from a significant downturn in their golf equipment sales, professional clubfitters and established custom clubmaking equipment design companies like Tom Wishon Golf Technology are holding steady and showing realistic signs of growth."

Tom Wishon, in today's e-newsletter

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

I see the decline in golf more through the Bowling Alone prism.  There are fewer clubs of any sort nowadays that meet in real life.  Elks, Kiwanis, etc. People don't drink as much and fear the consequences of drinking and driving...those Wednesday night golf, bowling or softball leagues have all taken a hit.  Women nowadays don't like their husbands being gone three nights a week especially when she works as much or more than her husband.

John,

All valid points.
Add in the fact that kids just don't go out and play until the street lights come on.
There's more structure in everything for youngsters.
The "shared responsibility" factor is enormous and influences utilization patterns at clubs significantly.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()