[Marc Haring]

I like National Golf Links of America - https://www.natgolflinks.org/Home.aspx

Very simple with a few neat pictures along with a little about club history, address and phone number.

I would probably say that is exactly what not to do and typical about a GCA view versus best practice.
That is the very worst golf club website I have seen.

They aren't really touting for green fee business though

Yes! Probably perfect for NGLA. One step below Queenwood where even the guests have to get a login code. http://www.queenwood.co.uk/

And one step above Queenwood would be Swinley Forest who really couldn't be bothered with that sort of thing. 

[Thomas Dai]

Ryan,

A couple more thoughts.

A webcam located on an appropriate high spot, like say the clubhouse roof, and either immediately visible on or linked via the websites opening page is a nice feature. RND/Westward Ho! and Bristol & Clifton have webcams, so do a few other clubs. Some club websites even have views from more than one webcam available.

Adrian's point regarding specifying the course status - open/closed, any temp greens, any comps or fixtures booked, are buggies/trolleys permitted today is very valid, especially in a variable winter climate like GB. Ought to save a few 'phone calls.

A Head Green-keepers blog linked to the website is nice. The Cruden Bay one is pretty good. Any recent agronomists reports, if the club use such services, also linked to the website site tends to promote openness/confidence, although some inclined to defensiveness or denial may not like this approach!

Atb

[Joe Bausch]

The Erin Hills web page is chock full of info:

http://erinhills.com/

[Paul Gray]

I'd reiterate the need for a hole by hole tour. Personally I prefer pictures and a strokesaver as opposed to a flyby but either make me far more likely to give the place a visit. I'm actually suspicious of any course which wants to hide behind a few chosen shots in a gallery, rather than actually show off the individual holes.

And access to the diary is another key point. I'm never quite sure why any club would feel the need to be secretive about the date and time of the Sir Arthur Shufflebottom Memorial Fourball.

[Ryan Coles]

Ryan,

A couple more thoughts.

A webcam located on an appropriate high spot, like say the clubhouse roof, and either immediately visible on or linked via the websites opening page is a nice feature. RND/Westward Ho! and Bristol & Clifton have webcams, so do a few other clubs. Some club websites even have views from more than one webcam available.

Adrian's point regarding specifying the course status - open/closed, any temp greens, any comps or fixtures booked, are buggies/trolleys permitted today is very valid, especially in a variable winter climate like GB. Ought to save a few 'phone calls.

A Head Green-keepers blog linked to the website is nice. The Cruden Bay one is pretty good. Any recent agronomists reports, if the club use such services, also linked to the website site tends to promote openness/confidence, although some inclined to defensiveness or denial may not like this approach!

Atb

Never been a fan of webcams generally. Bit of a vanity exercise/waste of £ and they're forever freezing/breaking. Brora would be an exception. Agree re greenkeepers blog. Bearwood Lakes used to have a really good one. Too many though become moaning stations for the greenkeeper.

Virtual tours of the Clubhouse are good I think. Lots of clubs rely on functions etc yet show little beyond an empty table. Troon does this particularly well, not that anyone is getting married there anytime soon.

I thought the wilmslow videos looked great and with a good voice over is the way to go. Gives an instant attractive snapshot.

[Paul Gray]

Thoroughly disappointed to discover that the Sandford Springs club tour with none other than 80's ITV sports presenter Dixie Davies has seemingly gone. It was hilarious. Alan Partridge eat your heart out!

[Marc Haring]

Thoroughly disappointed to discover that the Sandford Springs club tour with none other than 80's ITV sports presenter Dixie Davies has seemingly gone. It was hilarious. Alan Partridge eat your heart out!

Hate to be picky Paul, but was that not Dickie Davies, he of the hair modelled on a badger?

[Paul Gray]

Thoroughly disappointed to discover that the Sandford Springs club tour with none other than 80's ITV sports presenter Dixie Davies has seemingly gone. It was hilarious. Alan Partridge eat your heart out!

Hate to be picky Paul, but was that not Dickie Davies, he of the hair modelled on a badger?

 

Bloody auto correct! You are absolutely right.

[Paul Jones]

I like National Golf Links of America - https://www.natgolflinks.org/Home.aspx

Very simple with a few neat pictures along with a little about club history, address and phone number.

I would probably say that is exactly what not to do and typical about a GCA view versus best practice.
That is the very worst golf club website I have seen.

Adrian,

I agree from a GCA view, that is terrible.  However, I try not to read or view photo tours of a golf course that I have not played (but plan on or scheduled to).  Now sometimes I plan on playing a course because of a write up or photo tour.

Then after I play the course, I will go look at reviews from Ran and photo tours to compare notes.

[Matt Frey, PGA]

Bandon Dunes' newly designed website is pretty special and has some very cool videos: http://www.bandondunesgolf.com/

[Niall C]

The two things I want to see when browsing a club website, are a note of the green fees/when visitors are allowed to play, and secondly some decent pictures of the course. I don't need a full photo tour, in fact that's best to be avoided, but enough to get a flavour of the course. What I don't want to see is pictures of the clubhouse. For some reason a lot of clubs seem to think this important which baffles me.

Niall

[Darragh Garrahy]

Some nice footage of Walker Cup '91 on Portmarnocks website:

http://www.portmarnockgolfclub.ie/championships/3-the-walker-cup

[Aaron Marks]

One of my favorite things on the internet is the Bandon Dunes resort info page interactive map - http://www.bandondunesgolf.com/resort/resort-info .  Those hole overlays drawn onto the map are brilliant.  I would love to see the images from the course hole-by-hole tour pinned to the map, so I could see where a picture was taken, and what direction it is taken from. 





Ballyneal also has a better than average course tour page:  https://www.ballyneal.com/golf/course-tour/  That hole image thumbnail carousel is sexy.  I'm guessing there aren't too many courses that could show small thumbnails of each hole and have it look so right, but Ballyneal is quite photogenic and it works. 

[David Harshbarger]

Having looked at well over 1,000 course web sites in the course of mapping photo tours, I developed the "inverse website-exclusivity doctrine" that states that:


The more exclusive the club, the less content their website.


At the top of the list, places like Pine Valley, Seminole, San Francisco GC, Chicago GC, Indian Creek... have no website.  If you need to ask....  (SFGC's e-blackout I particularly admire as an FU to the Silicon Valley crowd).


The next tier, places like National Golf Links, offer limited but useful information like directions (which would be sooo hard to find). 


The next tier, like the Exmoors of the world (not to pick on anyone), provide useful guest information, like that club's specific cell phone restrictions and guidance on baseball cap protocol.


Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

[Bill Brightly]

Saucon Valley (Bethlehem, PA) has a great one for guests. If you guys want to spend some time, you can look at photos of all three course. Sauconvalleycc.org  Click on a course, then "layout."

[BCowan]

Having looked at well over 1,000 course web sites in the course of mapping photo tours, I developed the "inverse website-exclusivity doctrine" that states that:


The more exclusive the club, the less content their website.


At the top of the list, places like Pine Valley, Seminole, San Francisco GC, Chicago GC, Indian Creek... have no website.  If you need to ask....  (SFGC's e-blackout I particularly admire as an FU to the Silicon Valley crowd).


The next tier, places like National Golf Links, offer limited but useful information like directions (which would be sooo hard to find). 


The next tier, like the Exmoors of the world (not to pick on anyone), provide useful guest information, like that club's specific cell phone restrictions and guidance on baseball cap protocol.


Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

This post has bothered me for a couple of days now and particularly this statement.  Outside of the GCA whore house there is this thing called the big world.  People may crave an Art Hills course or a Fazio course.  Also there are many great courses that even GCAers crave to play that have a website presence and don't give off the blue blood society image.  I crave to play a Belvedere and Lawsonia as much as I crave to play an Old Elm or Franklin Hills.  Do you realize how many top 100 clubs have a website?  I take it that you basically crave exclusivity. 

[Tim Gallant]

It has been mentioned, but from a web design POV, Portmarnock and Burnham & Berrrow set the standard in the UK.


Royal Melbourne is a good website on desktop, but falls down on mobile, something that happens a fair amount on golf websites. With 30% + of all web traffic coming from mobile (depending on industry), this should be a consideration from the start (not an after-thought).


If I had to re-develop one site, it would be Cruden Bay. Nothing wrong per say, but with such a stunning setting, larger images could make the site sing. 

[David Harshbarger]

Having looked at well over 1,000 course web sites in the course of mapping photo tours, I developed the "inverse website-exclusivity doctrine" that states that:


The more exclusive the club, the less content their website.


At the top of the list, places like Pine Valley, Seminole, San Francisco GC, Chicago GC, Indian Creek... have no website.  If you need to ask....  (SFGC's e-blackout I particularly admire as an FU to the Silicon Valley crowd).


The next tier, places like National Golf Links, offer limited but useful information like directions (which would be sooo hard to find). 


The next tier, like the Exmoors of the world (not to pick on anyone), provide useful guest information, like that club's specific cell phone restrictions and guidance on baseball cap protocol.


Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

This post has bothered me for a couple of days now and particularly this statement.  Outside of the GCA whore house there is this thing called the big world.  People may crave an Art Hills course or a Fazio course.  Also there are many great courses that even GCAers crave to play that have a website presence and don't give off the blue blood society image.  I crave to play a Belvedere and Lawsonia as much as I crave to play an Old Elm or Franklin Hills.  Do you realize how many top 100 clubs have a website?  I take it that you basically crave exclusivity.

Ben,  Thanks for thinking about my post.  I'd look forward to meeting you someday as you've been putting up good thoughtful posts.

Here's my recent list of clubs to play.  Many have websites.  Not all without are too hard to get on.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,56871.msg1322890.html#msg1322890

[Mike_Young]

Real simple:    http://www.thefieldsgolfclub.com/

[Aaron Marks]

It has been mentioned, but from a web design POV, Portmarnock and Burnham & Berrrow set the standard in the UK.

Burnham & Berrow has a great tour page.  Quite a photogenic course.  Thanks for pointing it out! 

[BCowan]

Having looked at well over 1,000 course web sites in the course of mapping photo tours, I developed the "inverse website-exclusivity doctrine" that states that:


The more exclusive the club, the less content their website.


At the top of the list, places like Pine Valley, Seminole, San Francisco GC, Chicago GC, Indian Creek... have no website.  If you need to ask....  (SFGC's e-blackout I particularly admire as an FU to the Silicon Valley crowd).


The next tier, places like National Golf Links, offer limited but useful information like directions (which would be sooo hard to find). 


The next tier, like the Exmoors of the world (not to pick on anyone), provide useful guest information, like that club's specific cell phone restrictions and guidance on baseball cap protocol.


Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

Finally you get to clubs that actually have a web presence.  These, obviously, you don't crave to play.

This post has bothered me for a couple of days now and particularly this statement.  Outside of the GCA whore house there is this thing called the big world.  People may crave an Art Hills course or a Fazio course.  Also there are many great courses that even GCAers crave to play that have a website presence and don't give off the blue blood society image.  I crave to play a Belvedere and Lawsonia as much as I crave to play an Old Elm or Franklin Hills.  Do you realize how many top 100 clubs have a website?  I take it that you basically crave exclusivity.

Ben,  Thanks for thinking about my post.  I'd look forward to meeting you someday as you've been putting up good thoughtful posts.

Here's my recent list of clubs to play.  Many have websites.  Not all without are too hard to get on.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,56871.msg1322890.html#msg1322890

   David,  I looked over your list.  Just including Jon Wigget's course alone makes it a pass for me  .

Your prior post doesn't express your list well IMO.  Here is a public course website that I like.  Haven't played the course but want to due to the website being good.  The fact that Peter Kessler does the narrative is Gold. 

http://www.mistwoodgc.com/golf/course-tour

[Sam Andrews]

New Zealand's always gives me a laugh. http://www.nzgc.org been like that for years!

[Matt Frey, PGA]

Casa de Campo has some impressive drone footage on their homepage: http://www.casadecampo.com.do/

[Dunlop_White]

We have an updated website at Old Town.
Comes with course photography by Larry Lambrecht and drone specialist Eric Kiel.
There's a slideshow, video and quotes by yours truly (Ran) and Bill Coore. There are several golf pages in the menu including:
  -- Guest Information Page
  -- Golf Course Archives Page (articles, drawings, photos and videos -- most all documentation)
  -- Home of Wake Forest Golf Page
  -- Professional Staff Page
  -- Golf Simulator Room Page


https://www.oldtownclub.org

[Mike Sweeney]

We have an updated website at Old Town.
Comes with course photography by Larry Lambrecht and drone specialist Eric Kiel.
There's a slideshow, video and quotes by yours truly (Ran) and Bill Coore. There are several golf pages in the menu including:
  -- Guest Information Page
  -- Golf Course Archives Page (articles, drawings, photos and videos -- most all documentation)
  -- Home of Wake Forest Golf Page
  -- Professional Staff Page
  -- Golf Simulator Room Page


https://www.oldtownclub.org

1) This is awesome, and is pretty much the total encapsulation of this website in one PDF - http://oldtownclub.clubsoftlinks.com/upload/rteUpload/tiV3eTx-_k4qw.pdf


2) The twitter and instagram links on your main corporate website at the bottom are broken links. Facebook is fine.


Beautiful work.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()