[Bill Brightly]

I often equate golf architecture criticism to wine appreciation--both require individuals to develop their own way to sort preferences, which can be easily influenced by outside opinion and easily short-circuited by labels and brands.  (NB:  I personally don't have the innate palate or desire to learn what makes a $500 bottle.)  Tests to become a sommelier are notoriously hard, so being able to discern what's "good" just through experience (taste, smell, etc.) is difficult.  But any yahoo can plunk down a high-limit credit card and buy a bottle of Stags Leap or Silver Oak, decant, swirl, and impress their friends without knowing a thing.   


So, too with golf courses.  The prestige of hosting a US Open or a PGA Tour event provides bragging rights for courses and players of those courses.  Golf Digest rankings give people a list to check off.  "XYZ Golf Club has a $100 K initiation fee--it must be good!"  None of these things tell me anything about the architecture as I will experience it while playing, but they allow for the appearance of refined taste when talking with buddies at "the club". 



I've always thought this site and this discussion group as a resource to learn a common vocabulary and place discuss something deeply personal--taste in golf courses.  That said, there is an underlying shared value system that comes from the early days of this site.  It is built around strategic interest, walkability, fun--things we read and write about here.  This shared ethos allows for fun discussion ("which Redan is better--CC of C or Yeaman's?") due to what we believe to be subtleties of good taste.  It also has enabled me to make up my own mind when playing a new course that I know nothing about--the equivalent of finding the $10 bottle that tastes like $100.  There's an evangelism that comes with this, and what evangelism is complete without heathens? 


So, public opinion matters, but not to me and people I respect.  There's always a market for luxury goods of poor quality but revered brand (try blind tasting vodka some time--COME AT ME!); spend your money how you like, but it seems a bit superficial, no?  I strive to understand not only what I like, but why I like it.  This allows me to enjoy high quality products that deliver value without brand recognition.  How lovely to have a place to share those finds...

+1. Really well-written.

[Joe_Tucholski]

In the age of Social Media there is less experience arbitrage. Get your overseas membership soon the No Laying Up army is coming.

Can someone explain what this is about? ^^^


If Rustic Canyon, Lawsonia and Wild Horse were to host multiple Majors or an regular PGA tour event they would receive the same treatment as Bethpage Black, Torrey Pines South and Pebble.

Exposure from a Major is an advertising expense well worth the cost for the resort courses.  I'm not really sure why some of the privates are interested in hosting.

[Mike_Young]

I often equate golf architecture criticism to wine appreciation--both require individuals to develop their own way to sort preferences, which can be easily influenced by outside opinion and easily short-circuited by labels and brands.  (NB:  I personally don't have the innate palate or desire to learn what makes a $500 bottle.)  Tests to become a sommelier are notoriously hard, so being able to discern what's "good" just through experience (taste, smell, etc.) is difficult.  But any yahoo can plunk down a high-limit credit card and buy a bottle of Stags Leap or Silver Oak, decant, swirl, and impress their friends without knowing a thing.   


So, too with golf courses.  The prestige of hosting a US Open or a PGA Tour event provides bragging rights for courses and players of those courses.  Golf Digest rankings give people a list to check off.  "XYZ Golf Club has a $100 K initiation fee--it must be good!"  None of these things tell me anything about the architecture as I will experience it while playing, but they allow for the appearance of refined taste when talking with buddies at "the club". 



I've always thought this site and this discussion group as a resource to learn a common vocabulary and place discuss something deeply personal--taste in golf courses.  That said, there is an underlying shared value system that comes from the early days of this site.  It is built around strategic interest, walkability, fun--things we read and write about here.  This shared ethos allows for fun discussion ("which Redan is better--CC of C or Yeaman's?") due to what we believe to be subtleties of good taste.  It also has enabled me to make up my own mind when playing a new course that I know nothing about--the equivalent of finding the $10 bottle that tastes like $100.  There's an evangelism that comes with this, and what evangelism is complete without heathens? 


So, public opinion matters, but not to me and people I respect.  There's always a market for luxury goods of poor quality but revered brand (try blind tasting vodka some time--COME AT ME!); spend your money how you like, but it seems a bit superficial, no?  I strive to understand not only what I like, but why I like it.  This allows me to enjoy high quality products that deliver value without brand recognition.  How lovely to have a place to share those finds...

This is one of the best explanations I have heard on this site...nice...

[John Kavanaugh]

Is it possible for a course that has been around 20 years to charge a $100,000 initiation fee and not be good?

[JESII]

Sure...in the Philly suburbs, there are a couple very mediocre courses with great social activity that charge significant initiation fees. Don't know the exact numbers, but they would be among the healthiest clubs in the region and far from the best courses.

[BCrosby]

Ditto Atlanta. It might come as a surprise to some here, but most people join a golf club because of the club. The quality of its golf course, while not irrelevant, is a secondary consideration.


Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

I've never been all in on the myth of the butterface golf club. If a course fits the demographic of a club it is most likely a great design.

[Mike_Young]

JK asked about "course" not "club".There are clubs out there with course I would consider not good design but they have superb maintenance and landscaping conditions and they can charge whatever.  But I don't think there are many that have what I would consider very good designs with mediocre maintenance that can charge the larger initiation fees.I conclude maintenance dollars and not design dictate initiation fees for many.

[Jeff Loh]

JK
Was that a rhetorical question??
If not....see HUDSON NATIONAL

[V. Kmetz]

JK
Was that a rhetorical question??
If not....see HUDSON NATIONAL

THE TRUEST POST EVER

[John Kavanaugh]

This guy likes it as I'm sure me would too.


https://breakingeighty.com/hudson-national-golf-club


Built in 96 so the new is worn off. Is it still full and if so, why?

[Peter Pallotta]

Shivas once had a thread positing Art Hills as the greatest gca of all time, for the same reason. Sure: you can ask whether a gca/golf course can ever serve both god and mammon; but you could also point out that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and wonder whether a tree that falls in an unpopulated forest has ever made a sound. And sure: capitalism is rooted in the practice of lending money at interest, which until the Industrial Revolution (itself born out of that same practice) was considered a sin in the Judeo-Christian tradition; but on the other hand, I'm still waiting for a communist to design/fund a top-flight golf course.
(Socialists seem pretty good at it though...)

[Jeff Loh]

Some people think Kendall Jackson Chardonnay is the finest white wine in the world.
But they've never had a LeFlaive Puligny-Montrachet...

[V. Kmetz]

This guy likes it as I'm sure me would too. (No carts without medical dispensation, not just fat guys... have you ever seen that property)

https://breakingeighty.com/hudson-national-golf-club

Built in 96 so the new is worn off. Is it still full and if so, why?

23 years old...(you did say 20...)


Reason? They basically had a fire sale 5-6 years ago... special deals to get mass in the door (Ex: 50k in 2013)...also a tumultuous change from properitor model to member-equity model caused a reset before that.

[Jeff Loh]

Review guy said 18 at Hudson (brutal way to end. Not fun) reminded him of other "great finishing holes."
Like Bethpage Black!?!?


Nuff said...

[John Kavanaugh]

If Hudson National had to let in Walmart members during a fire sale I would say they do not meet the greatness through capitalism requirements.

[V. Kmetz]

If Hudson National had to let in Walmart members during a fire sale I would say they do not meet the greatness through capitalism requirements.

I wouldn't say Walmart exactly...you must recognize that Hudson is (for about 40% of the members currently) a second club, it doesn't have other club amenities, few women/spouse members and only a perfunctory junior program.


I know a member who joined for $50 k on a Tuesday ...won the Hudson Bowl the following Sunday and thus, was in effect, actually paid multi-K to join.

[Garland Bayley]

Does the fact that courses like Bethpage Black, Torrey Pines South and Pebble have full tee sheets at premium prices prove that in the eyes of the golfing public they are great courses? In the opposite vein does the fact that Rustic Canyon, Lawdonia and Wild Horse are bargains reveal some flaw in their execution?

As usual you are just wasting our time. 

[John Kavanaugh]

All I know is that I pay the most for the clubs I think are the best. And the least for all the others.

[Edward Glidewell]

Ditto Atlanta. It might come as a surprise to some here, but most people join a golf club because of the club. The quality of its golf course, while not irrelevant, is a secondary consideration.


Bob

The initiation fees in Atlanta are crazy. I'd love to join somewhere, but courses that I wouldn't even want to play cost $50k+ to join.


With that said, they obviously have people willing to pay those prices to join, so more power to them.

[John Kavanaugh]

Ed,


What about Rivermont?

[Tim Martin]

Ed,


What about Rivermont?

Ed-Of course with John being one of the great minds in golf he is right again. Rivermont is a blast.

[Lou_Duran]

Ditto Atlanta. It might come as a surprise to some here, but most people join a golf club because of the club. The quality of its golf course, while not irrelevant, is a secondary consideration.

If I was going to found a club with a course which adheres closely to the preferences expressed on this site repeatedly I would have to do it with somebody else's money.  The ROW has a decidedly different opinion on what constitutes greatness and often it has a lot less to do with whether an ODG designed the course than the club's heritage, reputation, location, and, sorry to say, exclusivity.


Probably the hardest ticket in Dallas is Dallas CC.  Its course, aka "The Cage" has a reputation for being just "okay", though in excellent condition and typically lightly played.  I am told that a "qualified" individual just to become a social member through normal means could very well wait a decade or two.  Supply and demand.  Capitalism at its best? 

[Edward Glidewell]

I've kicked around the idea of joining Rivermont but it's a 30-40 minute drive from where I live without traffic. That basically means I'd only be able to go there on weekends due to Atlanta weekday traffic; I wouldn't be able to play 9 holes in the late afternoon/evening after work. Still may pull the trigger, though.

[Tim Martin]

I've kicked around the idea of joining Rivermont but it's a 30-40 minute drive from where I live without traffic. That basically means I'd only be able to go there on weekends due to Atlanta weekday traffic; I wouldn't be able to play 9 holes in the late afternoon/evening after work. Still may pull the trigger, though.

Ed-Chris Cupit is a great guy and does a wonderful job of running the club.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()