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.


Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #50 on: October 10, 2024, 11:39:08 AM »
Chris,


I started this thread because Elie did something somewhat unexpected; they said no to revenue during high season. It will be interesting to me if this becomes a trend and the North Berwicks and Dornochs of the world see a need to do similarly. And then perhaps smaller clubs follow suit. That it morphed into this current conversation isn’t a negative though. It’s a terrific feature of this website.


Something in the back of my memory has Elie as different to those clubs. It has always had a huge summer holiday influx and I’m recalling that “casual member” may indeed be a summer member.


I could be wrong however. We have one or two members on here who might correct me.
I think the difference between levels of member play during the Scottish school holidays and other times of year is likely to be more striking at Elie than at almost all other Scottish clubs.  However, there is only one category of adult member.  You're either a member, or you're not.  We don't have country memberships, or anything else.  It used to be possible to but a weekly (or fortnightly) pass to play the course (which I did before becoming a member) but I'm not sure if that is still offered.


Casual member play refers to casual (i.e. not in club competition) play by members.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #51 on: October 10, 2024, 11:44:25 AM »
Matt,


I’m glad you mentioned the university system, an institution that is far more important than the golf industry and yet, despite a far more leftist orientation, is arguably far more exclusionary,

The Pine Valleys of the university world, e.g., Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Stanford, exclude about 95% of the applicants every year.

Even Cal Berkeley, a pretty far left leaning institution, excludes about 90% of applicants.

So, higher education is a bit like the golf world. Not everyone can attend or play the finest schools/courses, but pretty much everyone can attend some school and/or play some golf course.

Beyond that, let me respond to your comment about legacy admissions. Princeton recently did a study of its admissions and reported back to alumni that it will continue to favor legacy preference. But, some perspective is needed. First, the Board approved a target of 70% of the undergraduate student body would be eligible for financial aid in the form of grants, not loans (the current figure is 67%).

Then, too, Princeton reported that about 24 students each year benefit from legacy preference out of a class size of about 1,100. The school defines legacy preferences as “if all else is equal, we will admit the legacy).

Part of the legacy preference is financial: legacies are more likely to pay full tuition and contribute to alumni giving, not an insignificant consideration for a school providing grants to 70% of the undergraduate student body.

We are getting far from golf architecture, so I will leave it there.

Tim

Tim Weiman

Matt Schoolfield

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #52 on: October 10, 2024, 02:14:50 PM »
Tim, again, I'm not saying we should eliminate the club system. Quite the opposite. When I say I prefer golf in Scotland, it is exactly because I prefer the club system to the pay-per-round system, because a club has -- well, should have -- more of an interest in good golf than on profit (obviously this is complicated, but I'd hope my point is generally accepted).

Within that system, like the university system, I don't think everyone can be a member of every club. However, as someone who spent a lot of time in academia, the universities host many, many, many events open to the public. During my time at Boston University, I went to many lectures and colloquia at Harvard and MIT, because the universities all tried to be as open to the public as was practicable.

I'm simply arguing that if private clubs opened themselves up to let people play occationally it would be good for golf culture. Beyond the reasons discussed before, I'll add another:

I'd hope many in these forums would agree that America suffers from card-and-pencil play. This obsession with stroke-play affects everything from significantly higher maintenance costs, to just the psychological effect that a surprising amount of people are disappointed that they won't beat their handicap the vast majority of the time.

The club system comes with clubs' preferred games. Some play match play, foursomes, fourball, stableford etc., but only at a club can one be expected to participate in such non-standard games. Just the framing of the relationship reflects this. A pay-per-round course is transactional, a business that asks you to not play your preferred game is a bad business. A visit to a club is almost like visiting someone else's home, they don't actually need your business at all, you're a guest. You're not going to have dinner at someone's house and complain about the choice of cuisine (except maybe someone like Jay Rayner). If people play at a match play club, I suspect a majority of those visitors will decide to play match play, even without prompting.

If visiting clubs were even an occasional occurrence for most active players, I suspect that the obsession with stroke play would wane significantly, and align closer to the more diverse style of play in Scotland. I suspect this because it primes people with culturally heterogeneous experiences, which forces them to consider golf as something more than the score at the bottom of their card. Instead of "this is what the pros play, so this is what we play," people might decide they prefer to play like they do at a club they really enjoy or think highly of. 
« Last Edit: October 10, 2024, 03:12:21 PM by Matt Schoolfield »

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #53 on: October 10, 2024, 05:07:27 PM »
Matt,


I agree that the preference for match play is a nice feature of clubs across the pond. Some of my fondest memories of Ballybunion are because of it.


Tim
Tim Weiman

Chris Hughes

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #54 on: October 11, 2024, 08:29:09 PM »
Chris,

...I think Matt makes a provocative point.


I don’t see a need to browbeat him for bringing up a set of ideas that many American private club members might find odd.


"browbeat"...?


Are you kidding?!?







« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 08:38:15 PM by Chris Hughes »
Who is it CRAIG SWEET wants to "LOCK UP"...??

Chris Hughes

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors
« Reply #55 on: October 11, 2024, 09:01:25 PM »
Tim...


...I prefer the club system to the pay-per-round system, because a club has -- well, should have -- more of an interest in good golf than on profit (obviously this is complicated, but I'd hope my point is generally accepted).






If you believe truly private (golf/country) clubs in the formerly great United States of America operate "on profit", you are delusional on a level hitherto unknown to the people of this area but destined to take the place of the mudshark in your mythology...


...and no, your "point" is not "generally accepted".
Who is it CRAIG SWEET wants to "LOCK UP"...??

Matt Schoolfield

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elie to restrict visitors New
« Reply #56 on: October 11, 2024, 09:10:12 PM »
Chris, you seem to have taken my point entirely backwards.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 09:29:59 PM by Matt Schoolfield »