[Garland Bayley]

Top 100 Value Courses in the U.S.: The best courses you can play for $150 or less
At golf.com

[Mark Kiely]

Took me about two seconds to find your answer. Tee times for this weekend are $175. The article says the max you'll ever pay at these courses is $150.


And with all due respect to the guy in the byline (whose name sounds familiar for some reason), the prices they listed are very poorly fact checked when it comes to courses in Southern California.

[Garland Bayley]

Took me about two seconds to find your answer. Tee times for this weekend are $175. The article says the max you'll ever pay at these courses is $150.


And with all due respect to the guy in the byline (whose name sounds familiar for some reason), the prices they listed are very poorly fact checked when it comes to courses in Southern California.

So the long title of the article was just click bait!

[Sean_A]

Well, a top price of $150 courses being blagged as value really shows where golf is these days. We have the talking heads go on about growing the game, using less inputs etc and then use $150 as the cutoff...talk about mixed messages.

But if we are willing to call $150 golf good value, where is Lulu and U of Michigan on the list?

Ciao

[Tom_Doak]

Well, a top price of $150 courses being blagged as value really shows where golf is these days. We have the talking heads go on about growing the game, using less inputs etc and then use $150 as the cutoff...talk about mixed messages.

But if we are willing to call $150 golf good value, where is Lulu and U of Michigan on the list?

Sean:


I tried to help Ran with this list, but pretty much every suggestion I made was over $150 in some circumstances.  I did a double take at many of the prices.


As an example:  U of M weekend rate for outsiders is now $160 !

[Dan_Callahan]

It's a terrible list if they were actually intending on ranking the courses based on architectural merit and how much fun they are to play. Crumpin Fox at 25 is absurd. The finishing 3 holes at Crump are truly awful. Sunday River at 36 is crazy. It's also insane that those courses are ranked above Keney Park, Newport National, Mt. Washington, Red Tail, and Shennecosett. And then to leave off places like Wachusett and Bretwood, both of which I would play over Crump and SR. I'd even take Connecticut National over those, because at least the cost is dirt cheap. This list would be easier to take if it didn't pretend to be a ranking, but instead was simply a dump of 100 courses that (sometimes) cost less than $150 to play.

[Sean_A]

Well, a top price of $150 courses being blagged as value really shows where golf is these days. We have the talking heads go on about growing the game, using less inputs etc and then use $150 as the cutoff...talk about mixed messages.

But if we are willing to call $150 golf good value, where is Lulu and U of Michigan on the list?

Sean:


I tried to help Ran with this list, but pretty much every suggestion I made was over $150 in some circumstances.  I did a double take at many of the prices.


As an example:  U of M weekend rate for outsiders is now $160 !

Wow, prices have really shot up. It wasn't that long ago that outsiders were allowed to play for about $100. I wonder if LuLu has done the same.

Ciao

[Bill Seitz]

They may also want to go back and edit the piece so that Jeff Brauer's name is spelled correctly, unless Giant's Ridge was actually built by Jeff Breuer. 


Two other strange things: 1) Spring Valley makes the list, but not Kankakee Elks.  They're so comparable with one another it's hard to imagine recommending one and not the other.  2) I'm still not sure how anyone distinguishes between Port and Starboard when it comes to Harborside, aside from the anchor shaped green, I suppose.  They're both 13-14 of fake links holes, and 4-5 holes along the lake.  I wish they had split up the nines and made one links course and one lake course. 

[Tim Martin]

It's a terrible list if they were actually intending on ranking the courses based on architectural merit and how much fun they are to play. Crumpin Fox at 25 is absurd. The finishing 3 holes at Crump are truly awful. Sunday River at 36 is crazy. It's also insane that those courses are ranked above Keney Park, Newport National, Mt. Washington, Red Tail, and Shennecosett. And then to leave off places like Wachusett and Bretwood, both of which I would play over Crump and SR. I'd even take Connecticut National over those, because at least the cost is dirt cheap. This list would be easier to take if it didn't pretend to be a ranking, but instead was simply a dump of 100 courses that (sometimes) cost less than $150 to play.

Dan-I never understood the infatuation with Crumpin Fox and would rather play Brattleboro CC a little father north and for way cheaper.

[Scott Weersing]

I am not sure the price for out of towners for Memorial Park in Houston was listed correctly on the list.


What does it cost for walk up, no tee time reservations, for non-residents?

[Tom_Doak]

I am not sure the price for out of towners for Memorial Park in Houston was listed correctly on the list.


What does it cost for walk up, no tee time reservations, for non-residents?

The quoted price is correct, according to their web site.  I had heard rumors of a significantly higher green fee for out of town players, but if they've done it, they didn't list it.


From what I've heard, walking up without a reservation is not going to be successful a lot of the time.




To your point, though, I do wonder about the qualifying prices used. 
It seems like golf.com's focus is on travelers, but isn't the real definition of value what the regulars have to pay to play?

[Dan_Callahan]

A quick look on Sunday River's website shows some Saturday tee times at $162. Which further supports the perception that this list is a joke that involved no thought or even basic research.

[Kalen Braley]

With a thoughtful restoration, I think Indian Canyon in Spokane could easily be on this list.  Its a gem that needs some tree pruning/clearing and other TLC, but just a nice set of short and longer holes that play thru several large swales with fantastic greens.

[Sean_A]

I am not sure the price for out of towners for Memorial Park in Houston was listed correctly on the list.

What does it cost for walk up, no tee time reservations, for non-residents?

The quoted price is correct, according to their web site.  I had heard rumors of a significantly higher green fee for out of town players, but if they've done it, they didn't list it.

From what I've heard, walking up without a reservation is not going to be successful a lot of the time.

To your point, though, I do wonder about the qualifying prices used. 
It seems like golf.com's focus is on travelers, but isn't the real definition of value what the regulars have to pay to play?

The focus should be on travellers or its like singing to the choir. The problem with a true value list is that most people will remain unconvinced to travel. Extend the price range and of course a $150 course is worth travelling to see 🤷. To me, this is an issue of credibility. It takes an awful lot of ground work to list 100 true value crackers. I say list what you know and build the list up with credibility rather than compromise on what value really means. The creators of this list should be very disappointed and dissatisfied.

Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

An aside:
several years ago I exchanged views with Brad Klein about the lack of longer-form essays/thought pieces in the major magazines. His point was: editors look at the online numbers/data and decide that they don't want any more than a high-concept 300 word snapshot; my point was, maybe the data is a self-fulfilling prophecy, ie you give readers nothing more than high-concept 500 word snapshots and when they stop reading after 300 words you decide that this will be the new word count -- instead of considering the possibility that they've stopped reading precisely because they're tired of high-concept snapshots of ANY length, and are hungering for something real to sink their teeth into.
Which is to say: this is an important topic, the 'affordable' $150 green fee -- an issue that I believe a LOT of average golfers would like to have insightfully explored and unpacked in all its nuances.
Ran is a bright man, and a good writer himself -- why not give a Sean A or Tom D or Kyle H or Gib P etc a chance at 1500-2000 words to explore the topic and start a meaningful conversation about the pros/cons/future of the new normal in quality golf?
In the hands of a good writer, and without the usual click-bait bs, I'd bet that very few readers would check out after only 300 words. Readers know when a topic/issue actually MEANS something, and when an essay writer is honestly and genuinely grappling with it.

[Sean_A]

Pietro

At $150 I am looking for something far more than good value.  I want a very good course. Jeepers, that is over 100 quid. I generally don't pay anything close to that for a round of golf. I can imagine that it is a low percentage of golfers who are willing to pay that sort of dosh. We are in an unrealistic bubble on this site. Honestly, $150 as guideline for good value? That is laughable.

Ciao

[Dan_Callahan]

Interesting ...


A new list just showed up on golf.com, with the value courses ranked according to price. And yet ... it has Sunday River at #41, with a price of $76. And yet I'm looking at the Sunday River website, with tee times this Saturday for $162. Lazy, lazy factchecking.

[Tim Martin]

Any intel on Links at Union Vale which is on the list?

[David Kelly]

So the long title of the article was just click bait!

EVERYTHING is just click bait now.

[Garland Bayley]

So the long title of the article was just click bait!

EVERYTHING is just click bait now.

Concur

[Pete_Pittock]

even on Golf Club Atlas

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()