Learning the game in the Modern Era

[Joe Sponcia]

Pretend you were born in 1995.  Your family raised you in a house off the 8th fairway of a neighborhood golf course.  The course, which was built five years earlier, meanders through various streets named after famous venues like Augusta, Prestwick, Aronimink, and Olympic.  Your Dad was (and is) an avid player and always hoped you would share his enthusiasm for the game.  You live in the perfect place for it - a neighborhood built around the game, but the game never ‘took’.  For one, the course is quite hilly with several long walks between holes and only in recent years were you allowed to drive a cart by yourself.  On top of that, the course is quite narrow with lots of water, and on the perimeter of many holes are out of bound stakes. 

When you hear your Dad talk about being dropped off in the Summers growing up and playing with his friends at the old Country Club (which is twenty-five minutes away in the less desirable part of town), you say, “I just don’t like the game like Dad did (even though you have secretly romanticized about growing up in Dad’s era).

Part of the appeal of what we all seem to love so much about the older designs: the width, pace (due to the intimate routing), architecture, and character…is what many of the younger generation have rarely if ever experienced first hand in the light of my fictional example.  I don’t want this to turn into a ‘cart-ball vs. walking’ debate, plenty of those to choose from already, but more to the tragedy that is the modern state of many towns as it relates to golf course choices:

1. Neighborhood courses siphon members from otherwise healthy, established clubs and both suffer.
2. Too many courses exist period. 
3. Poor architecture (I’m generalizing here) and routings due to the need to maximize home sales with golf course views over designing what we might deem a 'timeless classic'.

I believe the game is less expensive than it has ever been with eBay for equipment and cheap tee times on our phones, but I don’t see a groundswell of kids taking up the game.  I wonder aloud if a good portion of the reason may be the course they were forced to learn on, and not the game itself?  Thoughts?

[Brett_Morrissy]

Hi Joe,

Are you wanting to discuss kids that are good at golf, or just kids that want to play golf?
Perhaps a different world down under, many of our kids if they are any good, are directed to college in the US.

But, most of the young guns I know came from cheaper municipal type golf courses, or modest country courses, what gets any of these kids to love the game - is they are good at it! They find something they are good at, or want to be good at, so dedicate time to improvement.

Whereas, if you are talking about kids that just want to play golf, then I think they need to get through their teens with exposure to golf - playing and seeing some different golf courses and watching some tournament golf - but not necessarily playing all the time - because they are all drawn to sports and pastimes that they friends do - playing football or cricket or basketball/netball or tennis or golf or swimming or sailing or surfing - sometimes that is golf, with potential for that to be stronger for kids that have friends that live on golf courses. access to cheap golf (range or course) in holidays is good to.

So I think kids need to find a way to achieve some competency, and then have some supporters to develop a passion for the game - parents, grandparents, family, or mates.

[Joe Zucker]

This is a really interesting question.  I learned the game in the modern era (born in 1988) in a way similar to your fictional father.  I played Big Met Golf Course in Cleveland about 50 times per year with a bunch of kids.  Some of us turned into pretty good players, some only average, but it was a lot of fun.  There is a nearby club that is the epitome of your modern course description.  I'm not sure how many kids learned the game on this course, but I do know that this club turned out about 5 elite college golfers in about an 7 year span.  These kids went to play D-I golf at the highest level and were all considerably better than the muni boys.

I wonder if the modern course is better at creating top players than the muni?  After all it, it is much tougher and I'm sure they had more instruction than I did as a kid.  Granted this is a small sample, but I would be curious if modern courses create better golfers at the expense of making the game fun for a larger group.  It is still possible to learn the game like our fathers, but it is certainly harder.

Also, as an aside, kids "specialize" in a sport so early these days that it is tough to develop a competency as a golfer when you have basketball practice 7 days a week.  In your story, the fictional father would play basketball in the winter, baseball in the summer, golf in the evenings.  Now days, all sports are year round activities and golf suffers because of this specialization.   Now that I'm 26, I'm seeing more of my friends turn to the game and I would guess this will continue to happen over the next 10 years.  Unfortunately, without learning the game as a kid, it is unlikely they will become avid players who will grow the game (and they all like to ride  ).

[jeffwarne]

Also, as an aside, kids "specialize" in a sport so early these days that it is tough to develop a competency as a golfer when you have basketball practice 7 days a week.  In your story, the fictional father would play basketball in the winter, baseball in the summer, golf in the evenings.  Now days, all sports are year round activities and golf suffers because of this specialization.  

Golf has less coaches insisting(threatening playing time) that the participant play His/her sport year round.
Specialization in sports is a joke-until perhaps late in high school, and even then should only be in rare cases.
Give me the kid who's good at whatever sport is in season any day.
He will eventually gravitate to what he likes most, and develop a passion, as opposed to having it thrust upon him, and developing a dread

[Thomas Dai]

When their young, make it fun. When their a bit older, make it a bit more competitive, not just junior comps but pairs/team events with parents/grandparents/adults. Keep it relaxed, no pressure, pressure can be a big put-off. Matches against other club sections like seniors, ladies and other clubs with juniors are excellent. In the holidays have a junior roll-up time, when the course is quite, same time each day if possible. For older/rowdyish teenagers, have more competitions - behaviour improves with a card and pencil and a prize!

Those who take to golf (passion) will most likely stay with it, those that are not so sure will drift away. That's the way things go. Even if they give the game up there's a good chance they'll come back to it later in life.

An organiser/pro/assistant with a bit of enthusiasm/charisma, the sort of person who 'makes things happen', is key. Watch out for the olde phartes "bloody junior's" brigade, there are always a few around, and they're not always olde. A clubhouse that's both junior and parent friendly helps, there's a lot of waiting around by parents.

Not sure about the standard of course or the course architecture. Location is maybe more important initially when parents are giving lifts. A really good short game practice area is vital however, juniors spend hundreds of hours around one.

Just some thoughts from an ex-junior and long-term junior organiser with one son who still plays and one who tried the game but decided he enjoys other things more.

atb

[Joe Sponcia]

This is a really interesting question.  I learned the game in the modern era (born in 1988) in a way similar to your fictional father.  I played Big Met Golf Course in Cleveland about 50 times per year with a bunch of kids.  Some of us turned into pretty good players, some only average, but it was a lot of fun.  There is a nearby club that is the epitome of your modern course description.  I'm not sure how many kids learned the game on this course, but I do know that this club turned out about 5 elite college golfers in about an 7 year span.  These kids went to play D-I golf at the highest level and were all considerably better than the muni boys.

I wonder if the modern course is better at creating top players than the muni?  After all it, it is much tougher and I'm sure they had more instruction than I did as a kid.  Granted this is a small sample, but I would be curious if modern courses create better golfers at the expense of making the game fun for a larger group.  It is still possible to learn the game like our fathers, but it is certainly harder.

Also, as an aside, kids "specialize" in a sport so early these days that it is tough to develop a competency as a golfer when you have basketball practice 7 days a week.  In your story, the fictional father would play basketball in the winter, baseball in the summer, golf in the evenings.  Now days, all sports are year round activities and golf suffers because of this specialization.   Now that I'm 26, I'm seeing more of my friends turn to the game and I would guess this will continue to happen over the next 10 years.  Unfortunately, without learning the game as a kid, it is unlikely they will become avid players who will grow the game (and they all like to ride  ).

Joe,

I have seen the same thing happen in my area as well.  The question was architecture-based.  I do think kids that learn on the narrow course with lots of ob either get really good or quit.  With many of these courses being a pain to walk, I wonder how much this deters playing vs. beating balls.  That seems to be the 'trend' I see now with kids, they hit balls on the range for hours but avoid playing.  If the 4th hole or 14th is the furthest point from the clubhouse vs. swinging back, it is no wonder many don't walk a few holes in the evening?