[Matt Schoolfield]

I have this conversation with friends pretty regularly. I would rather play one great course five times in a row instead of play five different courses, because I like to "get to know" a course. This seems to be a pretty minority view for my friends, who are trying to play all the best courses they can, and would much rather play five different great courses.

I think there is a difference in a visitor's experience, a resort experience, and a member's experience. I just want to know if you all see a difference between these, and if so, what attributes do you want in each type of course experience?

[Ben Sims]

I have this conversation with friends pretty regularly. I would rather play one great course five times in a row instead of play five different courses, because I like to "get to know" a course. This seems to be a pretty minority view for my friends, who are trying to play all the best courses they can, and would much rather play five different great courses.

I think there is a difference in a visitor's experience, a resort experience, and a member's experience. I just want to know if you all see a difference between these, and if so, what attributes do you want in each type of course experience?

A good friend and I talked about this very thing this morning. I’ll take it a step further and talk about your local course vs one you visit or join as a national/intl member.


In my local course I’m much more apt to want something demure, gentle, and subtle. I can learn it over time and it doesn’t beat me up if I don’t. In a national or international club, if I’m getting in a plane to see it, it better be cool. It better have bigger features and more variance from the small and big moments.


As far as the specific example in your OP, it’s really hard to change people’s mind, but I agree with you. The reason it’s hard to change people’s mind is because they may not ever return to Scotland or Oregon or Wisconsin. So they have to see it all. I’d much rather be an intl member and play four or five rounds at a place in lieu of playing five different courses. Hard to explain that logic to people but yeah, I agree.

[Joe_Tucholski]

I have this conversation with friends pretty regularly. I would rather play one great course five times in a row instead of play five different courses, because I like to "get to know" a course. This seems to be a pretty minority view for my friends, who are trying to play all the best courses they can, and would much rather play five different great courses.

I think there is a difference in a visitor's experience, a resort experience, and a member's experience. I just want to know if you all see a difference between these, and if so, what attributes do you want in each type of course experience?

Not accounting for reality (cost and ability) if given the option to play NGLA, Shinnecock, Sebonack, Friarshead and Maidstone vs five rounds on one of them I'm picking the five different courses vs one 5x.  I totally agree that playing one course multiple times is likely a better experience, but the reality is I've never played, and probably never will play a single one of those courses so the chance to play 5 is something I don't think I could pass up.  When going to the UK/Ireland my trips now include playing one course a number of times with just a few other one offs, but that's because I've made the trips circling the islands playing a new course or two every day.


To answer the question since I have limited time, resources and connections the factors I utilize to decide where I'm playing are who with, proximity, value, quality, pace of play and does it provide the ability to detach from the daily grind.


When playing with a friend I rarely see the course doesn't matter very much (I don't have friends who would be willing to pay $500+ for a round of golf).


For a home course I need to be able to play early on the weekends, walk at a reasonable pace and it needs to provide a setting that I can detach from the daily grind.  Other things that matter are proximity to home, quality and value.


For an away course quality and value are the things that I use to make my decision on where to play.


Admittedly quality is a hard thing to assess before visiting and value is hard thing to quantify.

[Brian Finn]

I have this conversation with friends pretty regularly. I would rather play one great course five times in a row instead of play five different courses, because I like to "get to know" a course. This seems to be a pretty minority view for my friends, who are trying to play all the best courses they can, and would much rather play five different great courses.

For some of us, this is an evolution from the 'many 1 time' to the '1 many times.'  I have spent much of my adult life trying to see many different courses, first where I lived (NY-CA-OH-NC), then where I vacationed, and ultimately in targeted areas, most notably GB&I.  I've never gone so far as to set a specific goal of seeing X number of courses, or even simply maximizing the number, but variety (and most of the time, quality) was (and to some extent still is) the goal.  I love seeing great courses that are new to me.

Like so many here, I had numerous experiences where I wish I had at least one more round on certain courses, so I started to build in 2 to 4 rounds on certain courses as part of my trip planning (whenever possible).  At the same time, I was fortunate to be invited back to a handful of great courses, affording me the opportunity to play 5, 10, even 20 rounds, and gradually realized that a few of the US courses that I hold in the highest regard are those I have played the most, which obviously isn't coincidence. Spending the last 8 years as a member at a very good home course also added significantly to my shift along this spectrum.  More and more, I love seeing the same course many times.

My current plans still include seeing plenty of new courses, but I sincerely hope to join a great course in the US that is close enough that I can play it pretty regularly.  I also intend to begin re-visiting certain favorite links for several days each, eventually choosing one where I will spend a couple of months per year, only occasionally venturing out to see something new. 

[Carl Johnson]

As Brian has just pointed out, isn't proximity to one's home something one would look for in a home course?  A good course near your home for a reasonable (for you) price?  I'd say a 30 minute drive is the maximum I'd stand for.

[Matt Schoolfield]

isn't proximity to one's home something one would look for in a home course?

I mean architectural features and themes. Do people here think different architectural features and themes suit courses differently for: home member course, distant member course, course to visit, resort to visit.

[John Handley]

Interesting question but I often mind some of these conversations miss the point.  You don't join a golf course, you join a club. It is important that you enjoy the golf course, it may be convenient to your home or office, or provides access for your family to things you want, ie. golf/tennis/social/pool, etc.  But the reality in my opinion, what is often missed by people who have not been a member of a club, is the friendships you make.  I am a member of two great golf clubs and consider myself very fortunate. I absolutely love both golf courses.  But the guys that I have at both and the friendships I have, are worth every penny that I spend.  We have text groups where we get games going.  There are truly 50+ guys I am thrilled to play with at any given time, not just a group of 3 that you might have if you are going to a muni or a resort.


Everyone has their own needs or wants with golf.  Joining a club, especially with a top tier golf course, is not easy.  The days are gone where you can roll up and write a check that is reasonable.  There are big waiting lists and the costs have skyrocketed because of demand. Just because you identify that you are a Tillinghast fan, you're not getting into San Francisco Golf Club.


I love going around and playing some of the top courses in the world.  But what makes it even more special, I am doing it with my friends.  Many of whom, I met through my golf clubs.

[Ira Fishman]

isn't proximity to one's home something one would look for in a home course?

I mean architectural features and themes. Do people here think different architectural features and themes suit courses differently for: home member course, distant member course, course to visit, resort to visit.

Matt,


I am more inclined to play a course on a trip that is probably going to beat me up than I would join one where I would get beaten up probably every day. I am thinking particularly of courses that have punishing rough or bunkers—Ballybuninon, Nairn, and The Island Club to mind—extremely glad that I played them but doubt I would want to so on a daily basis.

[Carl Johnson]

isn't proximity to one's home something one would look for in a home course?

I mean architectural features and themes. Do people here think different architectural features and themes suit courses differently for: home member course, distant member course, course to visit, resort to visit.

Home course/features: again, I'd have limited choices given the proximity issue.  However, I'd want the course to be playable, by me, and fun for games.  No unreasonable forced carries.  Good ground game options.  Firm and fast conditions.  Contours that make you think. A good variety of holes.  A compact, walkable course.  I am not into medal play scores, but rather the competition of match play.  Two-ball, three ball or four-ball.  I cannot play "by myself" -- it's pointless (for me) without a game.  Of course, a problem that is not unique to me, I am sure, is that you can choose a suitable home course and then the Green Committee gets different ideas about how it should play, and you may be stuck where you are.  Features are not forever.


Away course/features: Something different, yes, from the home course.  My home course in the USA would likely be called "parkland" in GB&I.  Given the access to top courses available to visitors in GB&I, that's where my golf vacations have been.  All the links golf features suit me best, anyway, and I can't get that at home.  I know there are some links-like resort courses in the USA, but I am not into the resort experience.  (Some friends have asked me to travel with them to Bandon and Whistling Straits, but I have always passed.)  With maybe one exception, all the "name" GB&I links courses I've visited have been playable (by me).  The randomness and naturalness of the older courses are attractive features. 

[Joe_Tucholski]

I mean architectural features and themes. Do people here think different architectural features and themes suit courses differently for: home member course, distant member course, course to visit, resort to visit.

Yeah, as others have said I wanted something bold, dramatic and unique in a course I'm only visiting once every year or so.  I went with Carne and think it's perfect, but doubt I'll be playing 36 holes a day there in my 70's.


My number should come up for a links ticket just after I retire and the current plan is to split time there and Pinehurst.  I figure the gentle walk and more strategic golf is going to be what I'll want as I age.  Are there more opposite links than Carne and the Old course?

[Wayne_Kozun]

When thing that I don't mind on a course I visit is for it to be very difficult, and to have some holes that are spectacular, but kind of gimmicky.


The National Golf Club of Canada is one example. I have played it about ten times or so but one reason that I would never want to be a member of the club is that it is just too hard to play on a regular basis.


Another example is the 16 & 17 holes at Cabot Cliffs.  I go to Cabot a couple of times per year and I have played the courses many times.  These two holes are spectacular, but I would say that they are gimmicky and are not great holes from an architectural perspective, especially since there are significant issues with the right side of the 16th green.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I have been a member of an away club for 30 years. I love the course and the membership. I was just there for a week. I parked my car for five days and never left the grounds. On the way down and the way back, I played five courses. It is possible to have it all.

[archie_struthers]

 


Absolutely !   There are some courses you love to visit and play for one or even two days. They might be very difficult or just different and present some interesting challenges . Your home course is one you like to play all the time , should be an easier walk for sure and shouldn't be too tough on a daily basis. Plus you want some decent players that like to play in an organized game every week at least a couple times.


that's what I like

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()