“The greens are rated among the most challenging and fastest in Connecticut”

[Tim Martin]

A private Golden Age course recently completed an extensive restoration project. The club’s website uses the above language as part of their marketing effort to attract new members. I’m wondering if “fastest” still carries the cache that it used to across the board or does it actually act as a deterrent to a segment of the prospective market? The debate rages on about fast/fastest/too fast although it’s obviously still deemed a badge of honor at many courses/clubs.

[Matt Schoolfield]

If the club is using that language, it’s clear that it’s a “restoration” not a restoration. Nobody seems to want to restore the greens to how they used to be.



Why a badge of honor? Fast greens are expensive, hard to create, take work and expense to maintain, and emulate professional golf. It’s a conspicuous demonstration of access to abundance, which mirrors a lot of the historical themes of country club culture.

I’m actually shocked and very pleased at the amount of pushback we now have about how nonsensical some green speed have gotten.

[Tim Martin]

I’m actually shocked and very pleased at the amount of pushback we now have about how nonsensical some green speed have gotten.

Matt-I agree and it’s the reason for starting the thread.

[jeffwarne]

A private Golden Age course recently completed an extensive restoration project. The club’s website uses the above language as part of their marketing effort to attract new members. I’m wondering if “fastest” still carries the cache that it used to across the board or does it actually act as a deterrent to a segment of the prospective market? The debate rages on about fast/fastest/too fast although it’s obviously still deemed a badge of honor at many courses/clubs.

Of course it does carry cache amongst the majority-at least amongst new club shoppers.
Someone educated enough to know design is more important than absolute speed probably isn't out looking for a new club.


Less so amongst the GCA crowd, but "fast" is what 90% of people mean by "good".
And even though the pendulum has swung a bit, greens have only gotten faster day in and day out, so an "acceptable" less fast pace is still pretty absolute fast(kind've like the proposed ball rollback in 2026, which will take us back to 2020 levels-lol)
 

[Tom_Doak]

Fast greens are how clubs compete for attention when the architecture is second-rate.  And by definition, the majority of golf architecture is second-rate.

[Jason Thurman]

I think Tim could be onto something. "Fast" is definitely a good thing to the average prospective member. But I'm not sure "fastest" is quite as ideal.


I played on greens running 14+ a couple years ago. When I mention that Stimp number to other golfers, most of them shake their head and go "That's just too fast that can't be fun." And they're mostly not wrong.

[Kalen Braley]

This may just be the latest and greatest marketing catchphrase in comparison to the 80s and 90s when courses declared themselves as "championship caliber" to attract the flies.

I guess if it works, why not??