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.


Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Is there an outline intimation here that maybe those courses that upgraded from 9-holes to 18-holes a few decades ago and then lengthened themselves by building new tees further back made the wrong move?


Out of interest, have any 18-holers downsized to 9-holes?


Is there a market for 9-hole pitch 'n' putt courses with say a driving range as well?


Are any grants available to build courses for kids?


Atb


In my opinion, the move to 9-holes as a viable golf experience has nothing to do with infrastructure. It will be more about product differentiation and marketing.

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Correct
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
You need to move to Sweden Ben. The only place in the world I have seen large numbers of young women playing golf. And to make things even better, these are _Swedish_ women!


What other kind of women do you get in Sweden ?

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
You need to move to Sweden Ben. The only place in the world I have seen large numbers of young women playing golf. And to make things even better, these are _Swedish_ women!


What other kind of women do you get in Sweden ?


Visiting ones? But that wasn't quite the point of my admittedly lecherous comment
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Adrian


You honestly think the difference between 4 and 3.5 rounds is a serious roadblock to getting new folks into golf? I don't buy that theory at all....otherwise course owners would be clamoring to build 6000 yard easy to walk courses without tons of rough and hazards...that is not a trend I see anywhere..  I can see older golfers dropping out because of 4+ hour rounds on top of steep rises in dues and a poor economy shrinking their pension. 


The irony of your argument is that the more golfers you recruit the slower golf will become.  If you think its bad now...what would it be like with full memberships everywhere?  The fact is, newer golfers to the game are generally slower players than the older generation, not least because 4ball play is now immensely popular.  Older folks (again in general) seem to get on with it much more and hence I can see the irritation with an obvious slow down in the game...to the point where they think about walking away or reducing membership.   


Ciao
Sean - Something is dramatically amiss with your reading. I did not mention new golfers. People are turning away because they don't have the time.


Adrian


Be that as it may, I find it hard to believe that the difference between 5 hours or 5.5 hours (with travel and drinks included) for a game of golf is a deal breaker to recruiting golfers...though I can see old timers walking away...but the time for a game would only be one of the factors involved.  As I say, if clubs really were concerned about reducing the time to play golf they would solve the problem.  Right now, there isn't sufficient reason to get after the problem or at least not a big enough reason to risk alienating some golfers.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
In terms of 9 hole golf, I don't see many Clubs offering 9 hole greenfees. Probably through fear that the green fee payers play 18 having paid for 9.

9 holes, rightly or wrongly is seen as a 'privilege' of membership.

Jason Way

  • Karma: +0/-0
Edwin Roald's Why 18 Holes campaign www.why18holes.com is on the right track I think. We need to revise our thinking -- and our handicapping systems -- to regard any number of holes (perhaps over a small minimum, three say) as a round of golf.


How did I not know about Edwin Roald before now?  I love this dude.  Thanks for sharing this Adam.
"Golf is a science, the study of a lifetime, in which you can exhaust yourself but never your subject." - David Forgan

Duncan Cheslett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Clubs in general depend for their survival on their members, not visitors. Enhancing the benefits of club membership for existing members and making it more attractive to potential new members is the main priority IMO.

Visitor income can play a useful role in keeping annual subscriptions affordable and so attracting and retaining members, but no more than that.

The typical 25-45 year-old guy has a full-time job, a mortgage, and a young family. In all probability he can manage to play golf for half a day per weekend - any more than that and he will be deemed to be taking the piss and is destined for a painful divorce. In this, golf is little different from any other sport; hubby will be allowed his half day to play football or rugby, go to a football game, play cricket, etc. The other three-quarters of the weekend he is (quite rightly) expected to spend with his family.

The problem with this is that golf club membership is just not an attractive proposition for most people playing once a week for maybe 35 weeks a year. A relative newcomer to golf needs to play more often than that to see any meaningful improvement in his game, meaning that disenchantment is likely, and 35 rounds a year works out at upwards of £30 a round. Good but not great value for money.

I see no reason to change the traditional 18 hole competition format at weekends. The difference between a 3 hour round and a 4 hour round on a Saturday morning is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

Where imaginative thinking needs to come in is in offering members  the opportunity for EXTRA golf midweek, and more specifically in the evenings.

Just as those guys who play football on a Saturday afternoon will reasonably be "allowed" to attend training sessions on maybe a Tuesday and/or Thursday evening after work, so golfers have the clear opportunity to negotiate with their loved one a little extra golfing time without compromising family life.

For six months of the year there is a clear two-hour plus window of opportunity from 5.30/6.00pm for a game of golf. If clubs could lay on some kind of organised competitive structure over an appropriate number of holes on a Tuesday or Thursday evening I am sure it would prove very popular with many of the "once a week"  guys described above.

It could just tip the balance for some guys between making club membership an attractive proposition and it not being so.   

It would also help if rounds of other than 9 or 18 holes could count towards a CONGU handicap. The maths can't be that difficult, particularly if we're talking 12 holes. Gaining a proper handicap is probably the biggest attraction of being a club member rather than an itinerant golfer.

« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 04:21:59 AM by Duncan Cheslett »

Michael Graham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Clubs in general depend for their survival on their members, not visitors. Enhancing the benefits of club membership for existing members and making it more attractive to potential new members is the main priority IMO.

Visitor income can play a useful role in keeping annual subscriptions affordable and so attracting and retaining members, but no more than that.

The typical 25-45 year-old guy has a full-time job, a mortgage, and a young family. In all probability he can manage to play golf for half a day per weekend - any more than that and he will be deemed to be taking the piss and is destined for a painful divorce. In this, golf is little different from any other sport; hubby will be allowed his half day to play football or rugby, go to a football game, play cricket, etc. The other three-quarters of the weekend he is (quite rightly) expected to spend with his family.

The problem with this is that golf club membership is just not an attractive proposition for most people playing once a week for maybe 35 weeks a year. A relative newcomer to golf needs to play more often than that to see any meaningful improvement in his game, meaning that disenchantment is likely, and 35 rounds a year works out at upwards of £30 a round. Good but not great value for money.

I see no reason to change the traditional 18 hole competition format at weekends. The difference between a 3 hour round and a 4 hour round on a Saturday morning is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

Where imaginative thinking needs to come in is in offering members  the opportunity for EXTRA golf midweek, and more specifically in the evenings.

Just as those guys who play football on a Saturday afternoon will reasonably be "allowed" to attend training sessions on maybe a Tuesday and/or Thursday evening after work, so golfers have the clear opportunity to negotiate with their loved one a little extra golfing time without compromising family life.

For six months of the year there is a clear two-hour plus window of opportunity from 5.30/6.00pm for a game of golf. If clubs could lay on some kind of organised competitive structure over an appropriate number of holes on a Tuesday or Thursday evening I am sure it would prove very popular with many of the "once a week"  guys described above.

It could just tip the balance for some guys between making club membership an attractive proposition and it not being so.   

It would also help if rounds of other than 9 or 18 holes could count towards a CONGU handicap. The maths can't be that difficult, particularly if we're talking 12 holes. Gaining a proper handicap is probably the biggest attraction of being a club member rather than an itinerant golfer.


Duncan,


Excellent post. As someone who falls into the 25-45 age group you mentioned I absolutely agree with what you wrote. My wife of a year is probably more understanding that most when it comes to me buggering off for hours at at time. We don't have any children but even then she has her limits. One round a weekend, either a medal on a Saturday or a bounce game early on a Sunday morning and I can be home by lunchtime. The long summer evenings in Edinburgh means I can usually also get out for one midweek round after work for a Wednesday medal.


At most I'm likely to play twice a week during the season. There are a lot of guys in my age group who couldn't/wouldn't want to spend that much time away from home. I'm happy to pay my subscription fees and can easily justify it to myself (and more importantly my wife) but again there are a lot of guys my age who either pay visitors' green-fees at clubs or give up the game altogether. My club, like many others recently introduced a 'young adult' membership category. I believe it's been very successful and has brought in a lot of new blood to the club. That still, however, feels like putting a sticking plaster on a gun shot wound.


Michael






Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Some suggestions posted above seem to have considerable merit, some examples, and there are others, include -

Play when ready (except in matchplay) - tick
Flag in when putting - tick
No penalty for striking another ball when putting - tick
Late in the day 9-hole greenfee - tick
9-hole evening club competitions - tick

One point I'd make about speed of play and time spent at the club/course though, is that some (sad?) folks go to the club/course to get away from their families! :)

Atb