Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Andrew Buck on September 24, 2013, 03:29:53 PM
-
I'm currently reading "The Greatest Game Ever Played" and while I'm not sure if all the history is true, it offered that Harry Vardon enjoyed his trips to North America so much because there was less of a "class system" and he was treated much more as an equal being allowed to eat in clubhouses, etc.
This struck me in context to recent conversations here that have pointed out the much greater latitude exclusive clubs in the UK offer to outside play at certain times to the virtually non-existent accessibility at many of the top clubs in the US. Essentially, did both systems evolve, or did they just start differently?
Also, I know Pasatiempo is a "semi-private" club that offers outside play closer to the GB&I model. While I'm sure the outside play lowers annual cost, with members owning the course and "initiation" at approximately $100k, I'm sure they could convert if they desired. Has this always been the case, and are there any other US examples of High End member owned courses that open to the public?
-
Andrew,
Pasatiempo survived bankruptcy in the depression through the deep pockets of a member. When they came out of bankruptcy they incorporated, so they are not a member owned club. As such they do not have tax exempt status and need the cash flow that visitor play provides to help pay Uncle Sam's bill.
-
Andrew,
Pasatiempo survived bankruptcy in the depression through the deep pockets of a member. When they came out of bankruptcy they incorporated, so they are not a member owned club. As such they do not have tax exempt status and need the cash flow that visitor play provides to help pay Uncle Sam's bill.
Thanks for the background, that is very interesting. It looks like you have to own stock in the corporation, which is about $100k, to be a member. Now, if the members are essentially the stock holders, what taxes would they have to pay if they ran at a break-even and essentially generated no taxable income?
A quick search shows around 300 members pay $5,000 - $7,500 a year and they allow 4,500 rounds at $200 to the public. That would generate about $900k. If the members each decided they were willing to spend $3,000 more a year to bring it to $10k, you would seemingly get back to the same profit (and tax burden). It just seems to me, if people are willing to spend close to 6 figures to by stock, the additional $3,000 certainly wouldn't put them out of line with other clubs, if that was their desire?
-
I'm trying to think off the top of my head of courses in the UK that arn't accessable, ie you don't have to be a members guest to gain access and/or they don't openly publish a green fee or 'how to play here' details on their websites?
The clubs/courses that come to mind are Swinley Forest - do they even have a website? - and the newby Queenwood seems rather discouraging. Is that their aim? Some, like say Rye for example, are apparently by application but still possible. Loch Lomond used to be guests only but even though there's nothing specific on their website I've heard that playing as a visitor is possible there these days although I'm not sure of the detail. Even Carnigie/Skibo is now allowing visitors, if your prepared to folk out the £$£$.
I could be incorrect about some of the above. If so I'm sure someone will put me right!
Anyone think of any other clubs/courses in the UK that are restrictive to members or members guests only?
All the best.
-
I'm trying to think off the top of my head of courses in the UK that arn't accessable, ie you don't have to be a members guest to gain access and/or they don't openly publish a green fee or 'how to play here' details on their websites?
The clubs/courses that come to mind are Swinley Forest - do they even have a website? - and the newby Queenwood seems rather discouraging. Is that their aim? Some, like say Rye for example, are apparently by application but still possible. Loch Lomond used to be guests only but even though there's nothing specific on their website I've heard that playing as a visitor is possible there these days although I'm not sure of the detail. Even Carnigie/Skibo is now allowing visitors, if your prepared to folk out the £$£$.
I could be incorrect about some of the above. If so I'm sure someone will put me right!
Anyone think of any other clubs/courses in the UK that are restrictive to members or members guests only?
All the best.
Swinley and Rye are not the tough tickets they used to be. In fact, I don't think there is an old money club in the UK that is really hard to get on as a visitor now. The only ones that are genuinely difficult are the new money clubs - Queenwood, Wisley etc. The new St Andrews International on the hill above the town says it will be truly private, so does Centurion in St Albans.
-
Thanks for the clarification Adam,
All the best.
-
I think Vardon was speaking more of the golf professional's relationship to clubs and their standing those days. They were second-class citizens in the eyes of members this side of the pond.
M.
-
Groucho Marx’s letter of resignation to the Friars’ Club: “I don’t want to belong to any club that would accept me as one of its members."
-
I think Vardon was speaking more of the golf professional's relationship to clubs and their standing those days. They were second-class citizens in the eyes of members this side of the pond.
M.
Agreed--the movie makes a good point of showing Vardon's second-class standing.
But I really only responded to give myself the opportunity to quote someone with such great taste in music.Anyone citing 2 of my favorite Steely Dan tunes is a truly knowledgeable music fan.
-
I think Vardon was speaking more of the golf professional's relationship to clubs and their standing those days. They were second-class citizens in the eyes of members this side of the pond.
M.
I think that is precisely the case, but creates an odd dichotomy, in my eyes. It seems odd that the English would seemingly hold a greater sense of exclusivity in the member/worker relationship, to the point of not allowing the most famous golfer in the world to eat in a clubhouse, yet at the same time open up their courses to non-members at times. On the flip side, American's showed much greater acceptance to Vardon and drew much less distinction in class, yet are much less likely to share their course with non-members.
It may be as simple as in GB&I, clubs always opened there doors to members of other clubs, as they were all in the same class (to be members) and overtime more took up the game to meet the criteria to access on "Open" days.
-
Andrew,
Although all private Clubs in the UK will let you play their golf course no one said you would be allowed to eat there! Many Clubs do not allow guests to dine in the Members Dining Room and some ban women from entering completely. There is always an alternative for guests however, be it dining on the patio or at the bar.
-
Andrew,
Although all private Clubs in the UK will let you play their golf course no one said you would be allowed to eat there! Many Clubs do not allow guests to dine in the Members Dining Room and some ban women from entering completely. There is always an alternative for guests however, be it dining on the patio or at the bar.
Pete,
I understand that to be the case. That only establishes that the English Clubs still desire some level of exclusivity and privacy, so there has to be a reason they allow outsiders to play their courses without knowing members at select times?
I know Patrick Mucci opined it's about laws, and maybe that plays a role today, but I think these relative policies became established long before legalities had strong influences.
-
Andrew B. -
I agree with Martin Bonnar and JEvensky on this. Vardon's comments were directed to how professional golfers were treated in his times by private clubs in the UK (excluded) vs. how they were treated by private clubs in the U.S. (welcomed). His comments have nothing to do with "access" issues for visiting golfers.
I believe there is a famous clock at Inverness GC (near Cleveland OH) that was donated by a group of British professional golfers as a token of appreciation for how they were treated and welcomed into the clubhouse by that golf club when the US Open was held there.
In contrast, there is a famous story about how Walter Hagen was barred from having lunch at a British golf club when he was there to play in the Open. To deal with the situation, he decided to have a picnic lunch with champagne while sitting in his hired Rolls Royce in the club's parking lot.
In terms of social standing, professional golfers in Britain were considered to be "tradesmen" & 2nd class citizens well into the 1920's.
With regards to access issues, it would be intersting to know when the Britsh clubs began to welcome non-members on a daily fee basis.
DT
-
Andrew,
the reason why Vardon was not allowed into the clubhouse was to do with him being a professional sportsman. Here in the UK as late as the 1960's many sports felt that the amateur game was of a purer and therefore higher form of the sport. Vardon played for money and was therefore of a lower standing. The US not only accepted professional sports players but actually held them in esteem in Harry's day so he was accepted and even treated better as a result.
DT,
most but not all UK clubs have always accepted outside play.
Jon
-
Here is the full story on the clock at Inverness:
God measures men by what they are Not by what they in wealth possess This vibrant message chimes afar The voice of Inverness The above inscription resides on a grandfather clock presented by a group of golf professionals to Inverness Club at the 1931 U.S. Open. The incredible show of generosity resulted from something that happened at Inverness eleven years prior during the 1920 U.S. Open and forever changed the game of golf. From the time golf began in the U.S. through 1920 professional golfers had been looked upon unfavorably . . . to be frank, they were not considered gentlemen. Because of this second class social status golf professionals had not been allowed inside the clubhouses at the golf clubs where they worked, visited or played in tournaments. In this day and age of superstar golfers like Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson and Rory McIlroy its pretty hard to fathom that anyone would look down their noses at them, but things were clearly different at the turn of the 20th century. So, at the 1920 U.S. Open Inverness Club decided to open its clubhouse to both the amateurs AND professionals that were competing in the championship. This was a groundbreaking act by Inverness and other clubs followed in suit which began the process of golf professionals receiving the same amount of respect as their amateur counterparts. The grandfather clock was a thank you gift to the club for breaking down that barrier from Walter Hagen and the other top professionals… More >
http://www.golftripper.com/course-profiles/inverness-club/
-
The story on Hagen's picnic lunch:
After a down period for World War I, The Haig came back to win his second U.S. Open in a playoff with Mike Brady at Brae Burn in Newton, Mass. Then it was on to bigger things at the British Open and winning over a whole new legion of fans. The Brits quickly took him to their hearts, thanks to his courtly manner and his heroic play out of the gorse and knee-high rough on the British courses. But getting into the clubhouse and using the facilities was something else.
To circumvent the exclusion problem, Hagen rented a Rolls Royce with chauffeur and parked it alongside the clubhouse. He used this as a combination dressing and eating room. When he broke for lunch, the chauffeur, appropriately dressed, would serve The Haig, complete with champagne. Of course, the Brits were overwhelmed by this gaudy behavior, and even more impressed when, at the presentation of prizes, he turned over the first prize check, which amounted to about $50 in American dollars, to his caddie as a tip.
http://www.worldgolf.com/wglibrary/ross/ross2.html
-
David - all very cute from world golf.com; this actually happened at Deal in 1920 according to Hagen's (auto)biography, it was his first Open and he came last, so there wouldn't have been a winners fee.
What makes the Inverness clock so interesting is it was given the very same year that the incident happened at Cinque Ports when Hagen went into the clubhouse and was politely ejected and sent to the caddy room to get changed.
-
Golf clubs in Argentina follow the same pattern of clubs in the UK, although a bit less formal (no ties and jackets required in the dining room) and taking into account that the game is not that popular around here. Clubs face similar challenges. I believe that many very closed clubs are required to relax their accesibility requirements due to the need to generate income. There is a say in Spanish that states that necessity has the face of an heretic, which means that when you are in need, you tend to be less dogmatic or strict.
This is the challenge that golf clubs in Argentina face everyday and, due to the crisis, it may well be the same challenge faced by clubs in the UK. You are forced to open your gates, but at the same time, don't open them too much so that you start losing members, because they think that it's the same being or not being a member. As a club, you are required to keep a sense of belonging in your members. They have to feel that it really makes a difference being a member. To achieve that, you have to retain certain "areas" reserved for members, wether by limiting access only to members on certain days (weekends) or to certain areas of the club like the dining room, the main locker room or others. Otherwise, you run the risk of becoming a municipal golf course. This may be the reason for which UK golf clubs have relaxed their requirements to allow access, but at the same time still restrict certain days or areas.
Regards,
-
It seems the right thread to post this thought.
Another difference is the traditional clubs in GB&I favouring 2 ball Matchplay and the USA clubs favouring ‘Medal’ play.
What is so curious is that Medal play came from the working man’s game in the UK. In the 19thC workers did get access to the course, but much less frequently than Gentlemen could. Typically they got to play Saturday afternoons and in Scotland, New Year’s Day. To maximise their golfing time and to allow for larger completion days, Medal play was the preferred method.
At first Professionals played matches, often with a rich sponsors making and betting on the match. Later Park in particular put his own money on the line, but these died out circa 1890. The Amateur Championship is still matchplay, The Open has always been Medal play and professionals dominated form the start.
So the game that came to be favoured in the USA was based on the working man’s and professional’s play. This method was then re exported and became the preferred standard all over the world, including the vast majority of UK clubs today.
How much true 2 ball culture is there in the USA today? I suspect CB MacDonald would be sadly disappointed.
-
Americans predominately play match play. Be it low ball/low total or any other of many team games we play from hole to hole with a bet on each. We simply do not have the patience to wait until the end of a round to find out who wins.
As far as accessibility goes I seriously doubt that there is a poster on this site that can name 10 courses in the United States that they want to play and can not. As a matter of fact most private clubs "advertise" on their web sites that they want you to come and play. My God, the foundation of this web site is based on this very access.
-
It seems the right thread to post this thought.
Another difference is the traditional clubs in GB&I favouring 2 ball Matchplay and the USA clubs favouring ‘Medal’ play.
. . . .
How much true 2 ball culture is there in the USA today? I suspect CB MacDonald would be sadly disappointed.
Tony, in my USA private golf club experience there is virtually no 2-ball play, with the exception of several match play club tournaments. The play that predominates is 4-ball match play (best ball of two players versus best ball of their two opponents). There are variations involving more players and more balls, but it's going to be X best balls out of Y, team vs. team. Day in and day out I see no medal play. There are some guys who just tour the course together and keep their own stroke play scores, but they really aren't playing against each other. Again, this is just my experience at my club.
I also see access to USA private clubs becoming a little more open at the levels below the really expensive, really socially private clubs. It's the economy . . . .
-
Tony,
Be honest. Name 10 UK clubs that have strong 2 ball cultures, to the point of requiring 2 ball play by visitors?
I'll give you RCP and Prestwick as a starter.
-
It seems the right thread to post this thought.
Another difference is the traditional clubs in GB&I favouring 2 ball Matchplay and the USA clubs favouring ‘Medal’ play.
So the game that came to be favoured in the USA was based on the working man’s and professional’s play. This method was then re exported and became the preferred standard all over the world, including the vast majority of UK clubs today.
How much true 2 ball culture is there in the USA today? I suspect CB MacDonald would be sadly disappointed.
Tony,
My experiences is while most (not all) tournament golf is medal play in the US, almost all casual golf is some variation of Matchplay. I've probably played a thousand non tournament competitive rounds and nearly all have been some variation of matchplay. Now, it's rarely pure matchplay, but always based on a hole-by-hole match. Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
-
Tony,
Be honest. Name 10 UK clubs that have strong 2 ball cultures, to the point of requiring 2 ball play by visitors?
I'll give you RCP and Prestwick as a starter.
Add Royal St. George's and Rye.
-
Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
Apologies for the sidetrack,but could you explain what a proxy is?
-
Tony,
Be honest. Name 10 UK clubs that have strong 2 ball cultures, to the point of requiring 2 ball play by visitors?
I'll give you RCP and Prestwick as a starter.
Add Royal St. George's and Rye.
Visitor play at RSG, as at Muirfield, can be in 4-balls. Indeed, when BUDA was at RSG we played in 4-balls.
-
Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
Apologies for the sidetrack,but could you explain what a proxy is?
Closest to the pin in regulation. There are also variations with points for up and down.
I grew up on the first version, and it's probably not a coincident I'm a reasonably decent ball striker with a relatively poor short game. I'd also guess where you grow up has dramatic impact on the type of game in favor.
-
Tony,
Be honest. Name 10 UK clubs that have strong 2 ball cultures, to the point of requiring 2 ball play by visitors?
I'll give you RCP and Prestwick as a starter.
Add Royal St. George's and Rye.
Visitor play at RSG, as at Muirfield, can be in 4-balls. Indeed, when BUDA was at RSG we played in 4-balls.
As far as I know, those are exceptions and you cannot play 4 balls any day. They still favor 2 balls. We play every year on a Monday afternoon with a society and we are required to play foursomes.
-
Do folks think there is a big difference between US public and private play formats? In my experience, when playing public courses I see a lot more people with cards in their hands compared to private clubs.
I don't think there is a strong 2ball ethic in the UK. Most would consider it old fashioned and it is. In my experience, the clubs that definitely preferred 2ball
Prestwick
Worly
Deal
Brancaster
Sandwich
Huntercombe
Rye
Littlestone
Hunstanton
Muirfield
There are a few more, but one gets the idea, very few 2ballers out there! That said, looking at the list above, one could do a lot worse for a golf holiday.
Ciao
-
As I always mention on these threads, in USA whether at private or public courses everyone is ALWAYS keeping a stroke play score. Even if they are playing by themselves. Even if they are playing a two-ball match. Virtually every USA golfer is going to walk off the course after every round prepared to answer the question "What did you shoot". The number they have in mind may be arrant bullshit with all sort of mulligans, rolling the ball, picked up putts and so forth. But real or fake they are thinking a medal-play number when they walk off 18, every time.
-
Sean,
That's my point. Tony's suggestion that there is a real 2 ball culture in the UK is, I think, a fallacy. Made in a thread about access, it's even more so since the vast majority of those 2 ball clubs you named allow 4 ball play by visitors, perhaps at specified times. At Muirfield, for instance, there's no 4 ball play at all except on the only two days of the week when visitor play is allowed, when just about everybody plays in 4 balls.
-
Do folks think there is a big difference between US public and private play formats? In my experience, when playing public courses I see a lot more people with cards in their hands compared to private clubs.
I don't think there is a strong 2ball ethic in the UK. Most would consider it old fashioned and it is. In my experience, the clubs that definitely preferred 2ball
Prestwick
Worly
Deal
Brancaster
Sandwich
Huntercombe
Rye
Littlestone
Hunstanton
Muirfield
There are a few more, but one gets the idea, very few 2ballers out there! That said, looking at the list above, one could do a lot worse for a golf holiday.
Ciao
Pulborough, Royal Ashdown Forest to name two more from this year... There are quite a few really... and most traditional clubs have two-ball only time slots... I know we do, Royal Dornoch do...
Incidentally - I'm not a fan of 4-ball at all.... Gets awful tedious waiting for shots to be played and looking for other people's balls....
-
Sean,
That's my point. Tony's suggestion that there is a real 2 ball culture in the UK is, I think, a fallacy. Made in a thread about access, it's even more so since the vast majority of those 2 ball clubs you named allow 4 ball play by visitors, perhaps at specified times. At Muirfield, for instance, there's no 4 ball play at all except on the only two days of the week when visitor play is allowed, when just about everybody plays in 4 balls.
Mark I think you've been reading to many Mucci's posts. The point I was making was that there was a history of 2 ball matches at British clubs that was never replicated in the states. I added it survives in traditional clubs but not in the vast majority. Others are happily backing this up and for you not to be able to name 10 clubs in GB&I where it is ‘favoured’ even today, defies belief. Yes you can play 4 ball at some clubs but not at the weekend and usually only a couple of days a week when visitors are ‘welcomed’. But then you knew that didn’t you? Why aren’t those ‘traditional’ clubs in your eyes?
As I always mention on these threads, in USA whether at private or public courses everyone is ALWAYS keeping a stroke play score. Even if they are playing by themselves. Even if they are playing a two-ball match. Virtually every USA golfer is going to walk off the course after every round prepared to answer the question "What did you shoot". The number they have in mind may be arrant bullshit with all sort of mulligans, rolling the ball, picked up putts and so forth. But real or fake they are thinking a medal-play number when they walk off 18, every time.
Thank you Brent. That's the Medal play mentality and you're stuck with it as long as you have to make every round count for your handicap.
In the traditional 2 ball clubs over here a "significant" no of your games will be foursomes. I've even played foursomes stableford - can't enter the card on that basis.
I just think it odd that golf in the US, where Golf was undoubtedly for a long time seen as more toney than in the UK, they adopted a model played here by the working men and not the nobs and then we copied it in the vast majority of clubs. Perhaps this isn't the tread for this point but I did start by saying "Another difference..."
I’d wager it also thrives at, Westward Ho, Hoylake, Troon, Swinley, Woking(?), Felixstow Ferry .
How about Elie?
-
There are a few 2 ball courses, but mostly it is a 3 or 4 ball culture in the UK and Ireland. No 5 balls, thankfully.
In almost 30 years of playing golf in the UK and I, I have never ever played foursomes or greensomes.
The more helpful part of the culture is that it is almost all walking, sometimes with push or electric trolleys but rarely ride on buggies.
-
Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
Apologies for the sidetrack,but could you explain what a proxy is?
Closest to the hole in regulation. I assume "proxy" is short for proximity. Oh, and getting all four is usually called the umbrella.
-
Tony,
I clearly haven't learned from Pat Mucci nearly as well as you have!
You guys at RCP are very proud of being a 2 ball club, aren't you? I could, I think, easily name 10 clubs, and could maybe even think of 15 if I really tried that "favour" 2 ball play. How many golf courses are there in the UK? In the context of this thread, however, your post was misleading. 2 ball play really is not significant enough in the UK to be a major ditinguishing feature when comparing UK and US cultures. In particular this thread was about access and, as I think even you are admitting, most 2 ball clubs relax that rules for visitors.
There's plenty of foursomes at Elie, by the way, but medals are played in 3 balls and nearly all casual play is in 4 balls.
-
Since this tread is evolving.
How are handicaps determined in GB&I? I personally do think most US golfers are too beholding to the GHIN, however it isn't very hard to pick up and take your most likely score when out of a hole, as prescribed by the US system.
We definitely have more fascination in the number, especially if the number is good for us. I'm not sure where it comes from, but I wouldn't dream of picking up a putt a *meaningless* 5 foot putt for 67 on the final hole, but would sweep the same putt for 75 if it was meaningless. I've noticed this same dynamic with players of all calibers, and a part of it has to come from having to answer "what did you shoot" in the clubhouse after most rounds.
-
Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
Apologies for the sidetrack,but could you explain what a proxy is?
Closest to the hole in regulation. I assume "proxy" is short for proximity. Oh, and getting all four is usually called the umbrella.
Yep. It's often just referred to as an umbrella game.
-
Most commonly for me has been a 4 point scotch game that consists of two man teams with points for low ball, low total, birdie and proxy, with points doubling if you get all 4.
Apologies for the sidetrack,but could you explain what a proxy is?
Closest to the hole in regulation. I assume "proxy" is short for proximity. Oh, and getting all four is usually called the umbrella.
Yep. It's often just referred to as an umbrella game.
At my club it's called Peppers. I have no clue why.
-
Andrew,
The biggest difference is that, with CONGU, once a player has a handicap only competition rounds are reported. No-one will even think about entering a casual round, there is no requirement to do so and, indeed, it can be a bit of a pain if you do want to. Accordingly there's no need to keep a score at all in match play and most players will only have a vague idea of their score at the end of the round.
-
Andrew,
The biggest difference is that, with CONGU, once a player has a handicap only competition rounds are reported. No-one will even think about entering a casual round, there is no requirement to do so and, indeed, it can be a bit of a pain if you do want to. Accordingly there's no need to keep a score at all in match play and most players will only have a vague idea of their score at the end of the round.
So if people almost never play competitive rounds, but play weekly matches, they may take years to move their handicap?
Also, what type of competitive rounds do most players play? I would guess 60% of our membership doesn't play a competitive medal round most years, and another 30% would only have competitive medal round in the club championship.
-
Most half serious players in the UK and I are conditioned to consider a handicap important and play at least enough rounds in competition to maintain it. I don't think we have the same volume of regular players who don't have a membership or handicap as in the US.
Most clubs have a weekend medal or tournament at least once a month, along with a weekday one monthly, plus extra events for Captain's Day, Club Champs and various club special events, and the seniors usually have their own events on top. Also, many have 'roll ups' which are semi-causal comps where you just turn up and get paired with whoever is available. Some clubs have tournaments every weekend, sometimes both days, so there is pretty good opportunity to play tournament rounds. Away events at other clubs can also be eligible. I know players who have played 30 or 40 competition rounds this summer. I managed 8.
You can't enter a casual round after the fact, although you can post scores for handicap under a system known as supplementary scores, but these must be recorded in advance at the pro shop, to avoid people cherrypicking based on the score.
-
Most half serious players in the UK and I are conditioned to consider a handicap important and play at least enough rounds in competition to maintain it. I don't think we have the same volume of regular players who don't have a membership or handicap as in the US.
Most clubs have a weekend medal or tournament at least once a month, along with a weekday one monthly, plus extra events for Captain's Day, Club Champs and various club special events, and the seniors usually have their own events on top. Also, many have 'roll ups' which are semi-causal comps where you just turn up and get paired with whoever is available. Some clubs have tournaments every weekend, sometimes both days, so there is pretty good opportunity to play tournament rounds. Away events at other clubs can also be eligible. I know players who have played 30 or 40 competition rounds this summer. I managed 8.
You can't enter a casual round after the fact, although you can post scores for handicap under a system known as supplementary scores, but these must be recorded in advance at the pro shop, to avoid people cherrypicking based on the score.
Plus every stroke is counted and every putt is holed and the card has to be signed by a fellow club member.
I struggle to play more than 5 or 6 events each year, about 10% of my total rounds.
-
Most half serious players in the UK and I are conditioned to consider a handicap important and play at least enough rounds in competition to maintain it. I don't think we have the same volume of regular players who don't have a membership or handicap as in the US.
Most clubs have a weekend medal or tournament at least once a month, along with a weekday one monthly, plus extra events for Captain's Day, Club Champs and various club special events, and the seniors usually have their own events on top. Also, many have 'roll ups' which are semi-causal comps where you just turn up and get paired with whoever is available. Some clubs have tournaments every weekend, sometimes both days, so there is pretty good opportunity to play tournament rounds. Away events at other clubs can also be eligible. I know players who have played 30 or 40 competition rounds this summer. I managed 8.
You can't enter a casual round after the fact, although you can post scores for handicap under a system known as supplementary scores, but these must be recorded in advance at the pro shop, to avoid people cherrypicking based on the score.
Plus every stroke is counted and every putt is holed and the card has to be signed by a fellow club member.
I struggle to play more than 5 or 6 events each year, about 10% of my total rounds.
Tony,
It sounds like you guys play more medal play on that side of the pond. ;)
In reality, you probably just have a much higher percentage of serious golfers, which enables this system to work. There are certainly guys at our club that play twice a week for 6 months of the year, so they log 50 rounds but don't play a single medal round. There are club events on a similar regular basis, but other than the club championship, none are medal.
I would think your system does a far better job promoting honesty, and doing away with both vanity and sandbagging handicaps. Our system, if you remove the dishonesty, probably does a better job in assigning strokes for matches.
-
I would think your system does a far better job promoting honesty, and doing away with both vanity and sandbagging handicaps. Our system, if you remove the dishonesty, probably does a better job in assigning strokes for matches.
That's a bit like saying "If you remove everyone breaking the speed limit, our Interstates have fairly slow traffic". The whole USGA handicapping approach is to start with a patently bogus basis of "Every Stroke In Every Round Counts Toward Every Handicap" and then try to obfuscate the results by subjecting the scores to a ridiculously complex set of adjustments, exceptions, workarounds and fudge factors.
As a working statistician I'll tell you that a naïve, simple formula applied to valid data gets better results than a four-page algorithm applies to garbage data. And the data entered this coming Saturday in the GHIN computers all over the country will be mostly garbage.
-
I would think your system does a far better job promoting honesty, and doing away with both vanity and sandbagging handicaps. Our system, if you remove the dishonesty, probably does a better job in assigning strokes for matches.
That's a bit like saying "If you remove everyone breaking the speed limit, our Interstates have fairly slow traffic". The whole USGA handicapping approach is to start with a patently bogus basis of "Every Stroke In Every Round Counts Toward Every Handicap" and then try to obfuscate the results by subjecting the scores to a ridiculously complex set of adjustments, exceptions, workarounds and fudge factors.
As a working statistician I'll tell you that a naïve, simple formula applied to valid data gets better results than a four-page algorithm applies to garbage data. And the data entered this coming Saturday in the GHIN computers all over the country will be mostly garbage.
It would certainly get better results on how many shots someone should give to someone playing a medal round in competition (assuming we could get golfers to admit themselves into at least 5 - 6 a year).
I think the number of people who cheat the system (or grossly misuse it as a result of ignorance) is pretty low, and as a result if you regularly play matches within a group the team or player that plays the best wins nearly every time. Unfortunately, the number of players that cheat the system is large handicapped competition will almost always yield a couple players that skew the competitive balance.
-
Remember the scene at the beginning of The Blues Brothers where Elwood says "I didn't LIE to you. It was just...you know...BULLSHIT". That's what I'm talking about with the USGA handicap system. Some proportion of cheaters will flat-out LIE to any system you make. But the system we're stuck with ensures that the vast majority of rounds have BULLSHIT involved in the scores.
Whether it's 5-foot gimme putts between friends or mulligans or rolling the ball in the fairway or all that other stuff that golfers can't live without there is some amount of fantasy involved in most score-keeping. And it's a varying amount of fantasy, that's the problem. So yeah, if the only time you use your handicap is for assigning strokes in your same fourball game with the same guys and the same "Two off the first tee, roll them in your own fairway, root rule, leaf rule and pick up if you don't make bogey" set of b.s. "rules" then typing all that into the computer will let your foursome have a fairly matched game. But a handicap from one of those four guys is no way, no how, not remotely comparable to a handicap from some guy that plays every round like it's the US Open.
The system in the UK means all rounds for everyone are akin to the "every round like it's the US Open" guy.
-
Brent,I'm guessing the USGA has never asked you to go on tour explaining the GHIN system ;D.
-
On the contentious subject of US vs UK handicaps, I have always thought that the USD handicaps were a point or two lower than the equivalent UK one. That is based on playing with a variety of players in the US some of whom may have had vanity handicaps, as well as chatting to a few UK guys I know who played college golf in the US.
I think a lot of it is to do with the course ratings which seem to be higher than I would expect for an equivalent course over here.
I have also seen players in the US take mulligans, improve their lies and all that stuff, then at the end of the round say the card will help their handicap.
-
On the contentious subject of US vs UK handicaps, I have always thought that the USD handicaps were a point or two lower than the equivalent UK one. That is based on playing with a variety of players in the US some of whom may have had vanity handicaps, as well as chatting to a few UK guys I know who played college golf in the US.
I think a lot of it is to do with the course ratings which seem to be higher than I would expect for an equivalent course over here.
I have also seen players in the US take mulligans, improve their lies and all that stuff, then at the end of the round say the card will help their handicap.
Is the UK system designed to measure potential, or absolute? Between adjustments, and only using 10 out of 20 scores the US system is designed to be lower than "average". I truly think this makes sense for assigning strokes in matchplay, but I understand Brent's objection to the "garbage in".
-
Mid to high handicappers in the UK shouldn't play to handicap very often. I'm always suspicious of those that do.
-
Places like Sunningdale, Walton Heath and The Berkshire have a two ball and four ball course and they flip at lunch.
I believe Muirfield started the four ball days for visitors. Sandwich is Tuesday and Deal Monday and Thursday.
I've mentioned before Deal has a fourball member competition, it's played in February to ensure everyone freezes for four hours and forgets the idea until the following February!!
-
Those clubs lucky enough to have 36 holes, can of course set one aside for visitors and 4 ball play.
I dont know why the accessibility is different - I suspect because there is an expectation that if you want your members to be made welcome elsewhere then you had better make your own course available to outsiders. It just seems good manners and that ethos carries out to countries that hold to the UK model such as Australia. If someone showed up at our place from Royal Melbourne or Muirfield they would be welcome, if they were from Cypress Point or Augusta we would be justified in refusing them access on the basis the courtesy would not be returned - we wouldnt, but we would be justified in doing so.
Why is it that top level US clubs are so rude - perhaps it is the silly cost? If you are paying $250k in nomination fees, then yes, I suppose you would feel agreived at letting average Joe on for free. Why anyone would pay that is beyond me, but I can see how that would create a barrier.
-
A key driver of the difference in accessibility is US tax, discrimination and liquor laws. Private clubs need to be "strictly private" to maintain their ability to operate under various exemptions they find advantageous. Allowing people with no relation to the club to call up and play for a fee undercuts their ability to defend themselves as "strictly private". The higher profile the club, the more outside entities (specially political/taxing bodies)are looking to get them considered public. I'm sure if most high profile US clubs could safely have a couple visitors days during the week like the UK clubs, you wouldn't see any difference in accessibility
-
Josh,
Why is it that top level US clubs are so rude
Which clubs have treated you rudely?
I've encountered far more rudeness in the UK & Aus than at any top US club I have visited.
-
A key driver of the difference in accessibility is US tax, discrimination and liquor laws. Private clubs need to be "strictly private" to maintain their ability to operate under various exemptions they find advantageous. Allowing people with no relation to the club to call up and play for a fee undercuts their ability to defend themselves as "strictly private". The higher profile the club, the more outside entities (specially political/taxing bodies)are looking to get them considered public. I'm sure if most high profile US clubs could safely have a couple visitors days during the week like the UK clubs, you wouldn't see any difference in accessibility
Isn't that tax threshold actually quite high in relative terms? I think we have discussed this a few times. Most clubs choose to eat up that outside income with big charity events etc rather than piecemeal it through visitor days. I bet there are some private US clubs that actually take in more outside money than a lot of UK clubs, just a different way of going about it. The US has a much stronger culture of charity than the UK does.
Ciao
-
On the contentious subject of US vs UK handicaps, I have always thought that the USD handicaps were a point or two lower than the equivalent UK one. That is based on playing with a variety of players in the US some of whom may have had vanity handicaps, as well as chatting to a few UK guys I know who played college golf in the US.
I think a lot of it is to do with the course ratings which seem to be higher than I would expect for an equivalent course over here.
I have also seen players in the US take mulligans, improve their lies and all that stuff, then at the end of the round say the card will help their handicap.
Is the UK system designed to measure potential, or absolute? Between adjustments, and only using 10 out of 20 scores the US system is designed to be lower than "average". I truly think this makes sense for assigning strokes in matchplay, but I understand Brent's objection to the "garbage in".
In terms of the calculation method, I think they turn out similar. The US moving average system using the mean(ish) of the best 10 of 20 is the same as using the 75th percentile (from best to worst). In the UK system, an adjustment is applied after every tournament round, but the adjustment upwards for a bad round is fixed and small and the reduction for a good round is open ended, so the system is also asymmetrical in favour of a balance point well towards the better end of your likely scoring spectrum. A typical player with a stable handicap would probably expect to better or equal their handicap 1 in 3 or 4 rounds. In both systems, the effect on handicap of a player who averages a certain score with very inconsistent golf is different from another with the same average from pretty consistent golf.
So I still think it is the underlying course rating which is the biggest variable of difference.
-
I don't know of any clubs in Ireland that don't accept green fees. I believe they were planning one those private, members-only clubs in Kerry, but couldn't get permission to develop the dunesland.
I don't know if it's different all over the world, but in Ireland there's the idea that the farmers are keeping the land in trust for the people... and we have, maybe, more a connection with the land than a lot of other countries, in terms of ownership. We were trying to hold on to it for long enough.
So excluding people, maybe, is not as acceptable.
-
A key driver of the difference in accessibility is US tax, discrimination and liquor laws. Private clubs need to be "strictly private" to maintain their ability to operate under various exemptions they find advantageous. Allowing people with no relation to the club to call up and play for a fee undercuts their ability to defend themselves as "strictly private". The higher profile the club, the more outside entities (specially political/taxing bodies)are looking to get them considered public. I'm sure if most high profile US clubs could safely have a couple visitors days during the week like the UK clubs, you wouldn't see any difference in accessibility
Isn't that tax threshold actually quite high in relative terms? I think we have discussed this a few times. Most clubs choose to eat up that outside income with big charity events etc rather than piecemeal it through visitor days. I bet there are some private US clubs that actually take in more outside money than a lot of UK clubs, just a different way of going about it. The US has a much stronger culture of charity than the UK does.
Ciao
I'm not familiar with the rules in detail, but I do know the small town member owned semi-private club I grew up on is still a non-profit, and they have very little restrictions on outside play. Of course, since most member owned clubs really don't turn a profit, I feel like that aspect may be overblown. Now, a larger issue could be an institution deemed public may lose it's right to have "exclusionary" rules (such as a men's only day).
That said, I tend to agree with JakaB, that access isn't a huge issue for those who both want it and can afford it, except at a very small group of clubs. I also understand that the commentary on Vardon's acceptance wasn't about accessibility. The reason I started the thread and my interest is I feel like these different systems developed early on, and weren't forced by laws. I am interested in the history of it, and I see a dichotomy between the English system of treating professionals as laborers in the early days, yet still granting access, as compared to the US system that I grew up with.
-
I haven't come close to properly testing JakaB's theory because I find it a bit distasteful to go in search of invites without properly being invited - if you know what I mean. I have written a few letters with some success and leaned on guys I know that said they could help. Generally speaking though, I am not on a mission to play the "big tickets". I must admit it is easy for me to have that attitude because I can access loads of fine golf not terribly far from home without any hassle :).
I too would like to know how the systems started. I get the impression that in Scotland golf was fairly affordable back in the day and that later on that attitude wasn't carried over to England. Sure, there was probably a sense of noblesse oblige, but I think there was a fairly strict line between middle class and working class and golf was a middle class game, just as was cricket and rugby. Football was working class stuff. Somewhere along the line the English clubs opened up, probably the following the 2nd WW when clubs were desperate for members and the middle class was just starting to meld into a more inclusive group of people. I don't see how working class folks could afford green fees and the time off work even if they had access. Thus, in England there is a tradition of artisan clubs populated by working class folks. Not many remain relative to 75 years ago. There was also a bit of a movement by JH Taylor and Hawtree to build public courses. Anyway, for the most part, these two alternatives for lower middle class folks didn't pan out very well, but what did happen was a ton more clubs opened up which catered to these folks. That system is still in place today where there are loads of modest clubs which have dues under £1000 a year. I don't think there are many US clubs which are that cheap and accessible. Instead, in the US, public and muni courses took off. I bet there are about the same percent of private to public in GB&I as public to private in the US. Theoretically, there is little need for US players to gain membership of private courses and vice versa in GB&I.
Ciao
-
I haven't come close to properly testing JakaB's theory because I find it a bit distasteful to go in search of invites without properly being invited - if you know what I mean. I have written a few letters with some success and leaned on guys I know that said they could help. Generally speaking though, I am not on a mission to play the "big tickets". I must admit it is easy for me to have that attitude because I can access loads of fine golf not terribly far from home without any hassle :).
Sean,
I agree with you on all accounts. I do think *many* clubs are much more open to a simple call from a club professional or a letter than the general golfing public realizes, however that is still a far cry from setting aside tee times. As it is, I wouldn't likely have the time to take advantage of that much anyway, but I enjoy learning about the differences.
-
Jaka B's "theory" is utter nonsense. To compare access to private golf clubs for the traveling/visiting golfer in GB&I vs. the US is close to a waste of time, as there is virtually no comparison.
A traveling/visiting golfer to GB&I can secure a teetime at 95% or more of the golf clubs there by a simple phone call or e-mail. In many cases you can now book a teetime online. You can even drive into the parking lot, walk into the pro shop and ask if there is a time you can play that day or the next. Other than showing a minimum of decorum, nothing else is required other than occasionally being asked to produce a handicap certificate demonstrating some level of golfing competence.
Could a traveling/visiting golfer in the US do the same at even 5% of the private golf clubs in the US? The answer is no and even JakaB knows that.
Yes, there are many GCA-ers who are connected and have friends who have friends who can help them play/access many of the private clubs in the US. But what about golfers who play at munis, where they don't have a club pro to make a helpful phone call for them or who don't have buddies at the tony private club in town? What about golfers who would rather not impose on and ask favors of their friends?
In no way can one claim that accees to private club in the US is even remotely simlar to access to the private clubs in GB&I.
-
Do private clubs in the US hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?
Most clubs, although not all, in the UK hold these kind of events and they're very popular. Not only do they provide additional accessability, but the entry fees are normally cheaper than standard greenfees, the courses tend to be preped-up a bit and you might even win a prize. Some clubs even have Golf Weeks with different types of open comp held on each day.
All the best
-
Do private clubs in the US hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?
Most clubs, although not all, in the UK hold these kind of events and they're very popular. Not only do they provide additional accessability, but the entry fees are normally cheaper than standard greenfees, the courses tend to be preped-up a bit and you might even win a prize. Some clubs even have Golf Weeks with different types of open comp held on each day.
All the best
-
Jaka B's "theory" is utter nonsense. To compare access to private golf clubs for the traveling/visiting golfer in GB&I vs. the US is close to a waste of time, as there is virtually no comparison.
A traveling/visiting golfer to GB&I can secure a teetime at 95% or more of the golf clubs there by a simple phone call or e-mail. In many cases you can now book a teetime online. You can even drive into the parking lot, walk into the pro shop and ask if there is a time you can play that day or the next. Other than showing a minimum of decorum, nothing else is required other than occasionally being asked to produce a handicap certificate demonstarting some level of golfing competence.
Could a traveling/visiting golfer in the US do the same at even 5% of the private golf clubs in the US? The answer is no and even JakaB knows that.
Yes, there are many GCA-ers who are connected and have friends who have friends who can help them play/access many of the private clubs in the US. But what about golfers who play at munis, where they don't have a club pro to make a helpful phone call for them or who don't have buddies at the tony private club in town? What about golfers who would rather not impose on and ask favors of their friends?
In no way can one claim that accees to private club in the US is even remotely simlar to access to the private clubs in GB&I.
DT is right.Absent some kind of introduction from a member,the private clubs everyone wants to access are just about inaccessible.
-
Do private clubs in the US hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?
Most clubs, although not all, in the UK hold these kind of events and they're very popular. Not only do they provide additional accessability, but the entry fees are normally cheaper than standard greenfees, the courses tend to be preped-up a bit and you might even win a prize. Some clubs even have Golf Weeks with different types of open comp held on each day.
All the best
I can only speak for my little corner of the world,but yes,all the privates host competitions open to other private clubs' members--amateur,mid-amateur,senior,junior,and ladies.
-
Like everything in this apples versus artichokes comparsion, no there is no USA private club equivalent to Open Week or Walk-Up Open events at UK clubs. Not talking about inter-club matches but just plain old "Anybody in the world can walk up next Thursday and play in a one-day Open Stableford for 15 quid". Of course at a USA club if such an event existed it would be 15 quid plus 25 more for the required golf cart. ::)
-
"Do private clubs in the US hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?"
Thomas D. -
The simple answer to your question is "no." I have never heard of a private club hosting the kind of "Open Week" that Brent Hutto refers to and I have never heard of a private club hosting any open competitions (for other than scratch golfers) similar to the ones I get to play in Scotland on a regular basis. Even those clubs that do host competitions for scratch golfers do so on a very limited basis, mostly making their courses available for local/sectional qualifying of USGA or state championships.
DT
-
I can only speak for my little corner of the world,but yes,all the privates host competitions open to other private clubs' members--amateur,mid-amateur,senior,junior,and ladies.
[/quote]
JME,
That's great news. Out of interest which little corner of the world is your 'corner'?
What about the European nations, Aussie, NZ, SA, Canada, Argentina, Dubai, Russia, Chile and all the various other parts of the globe that folks post in from?
Do private clubs your countries hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?
Oh, just for clarification, most UK club opens are not walk-up's, some are, but most are not......you mostly have to submit an entry form with payment in advance or book online. The website http://www.golfempire.co.uk/ - is a very good source of tracking down UK open comps although visiting an individual clubs website will also enable you to establish details. Some open comps fill up very quickly, like months ahead, so you have to be prepared to plan in advance.
All the best
-
JME,
That's great news. Out of interest which little corner of the world is your 'corner'?
Memphis. The Memphis GA is made up of all the private clubs in town.They run 6 tournaments each year--5 of which are only open to members of MGA clubs.Each club generally hosts at least one day of one tournament every couple of years.
Isn't this the same situation as Philadelphia,Met NY,etc.?
-
JME -
Are these MGA tournaments for scratch golfers only or are there flights for handicap golfers in these events?
DT
-
JME -
Are these MGA tournaments for scratch golfers only or are there flights for handicap golfers in these events?
DT
They're flighted (usually after the first round),but not net.
The schedule has almost become a 50/50 mix of guys who are in it for the competition and guys in it for the opportunity to play at a club they might not often get to.
I'm betting Memphis is not so unusual in this regard.Fewer competitive players,more social.
-
In the Chicago District, the CDGA runs over 50 competitions (counting qualifiers) for all levels of competition. About 2/3 are held at private clubs and we try to get every club to host at least once every 4 years. Of course there are exceptions. Tourney's are open to all CDGA members whether they are members at private or public facilities. Competition for spots can be fierce and are available first come/first served except for those where there are playing requirements e.g. CDGA amateur. Otherwise, privates are only open to non-members, as a rule, to guests of members or if they are hosting a charity outing.
-
I certainly dont know of a club in Aus that doesnt hold some sort of open tournament - the caveat being that these are often limited to single figure golfers.
But with these events, corporate days, interstate visits and other little events etc, a half decent and dedicated member of the public could probably manage to tee it up half a dozen times a year at Royal Melbourne if they tried. I wonder how many times I could tee it up at Shinnecock?
Not complaining, a private club has perfect right to do as it pleases, but it does help break down that elitism. BUt then perhaps they dont want to break it down
-
What about the European nations, Aussie, NZ, SA, Canada, Argentina, Dubai, Russia, Chile and all the various other parts of the globe that folks post in from?
Do private clubs your countries hold amateur club 'open' competitions which members of other clubs, or those with proper handicaps can play in? Singles opens, same sex pairs opens, mixed pairs opens, team alliances, junior opens etc?
Here in Canada we are very similar to the US in terms of access at private clubs, especially in Toronto and Montreal. The one difference woud be that with about 99% of the clubs you would be able to get on with a phone call from your pro, but that requires being a member at a club somewhere.
In terms of Open competitions these are very rare and are generally top-flight amateur competitions. There are inter club matches, especially for juniors, and club memberships for juniors are relatively inexpensive and are usually available to any junior interested and don't require a relative who is a member of the club. But tee times for juniors are rather restricted unless the tee is empty.
-
Here in the UK as late as the 1960's many sports felt that the amateur game was of a purer and therefore higher form of the sport.
Didn't it go on much longer than that? Rugby Union was an amateur only game until 1995 - the professionals were relegated to a different code called Rugby League which was more popular in working class Northern England.
-
I haven't come close to properly testing JakaB's theory because I find it a bit distasteful to go in search of invites without properly being invited - if you know what I mean. I have written a few letters with some success and leaned on guys I know that said they could help. Generally speaking though, I am not on a mission to play the "big tickets". I must admit it is easy for me to have that attitude because I can access loads of fine golf not terribly far from home without any hassle :).
I too would like to know how the systems started. I get the impression that in Scotland golf was fairly affordable back in the day and that later on that attitude wasn't carried over to England. Sure, there was probably a sense of noblesse oblige, but I think there was a fairly strict line between middle class and working class and golf was a middle class game, just as was cricket and rugby. Football was working class stuff. Somewhere along the line the English clubs opened up, probably the following the 2nd WW when clubs were desperate for members and the middle class was just starting to meld into a more inclusive group of people. I don't see how working class folks could afford green fees and the time off work even if they had access. Thus, in England there is a tradition of artisan clubs populated by working class folks. Not many remain relative to 75 years ago. There was also a bit of a movement by JH Taylor and Hawtree to build public courses. Anyway, for the most part, these two alternatives for lower middle class folks didn't pan out very well, but what did happen was a ton more clubs opened up which catered to these folks. That system is still in place today where there are loads of modest clubs which have dues under £1000 a year. I don't think there are many US clubs which are that cheap and accessible. Instead, in the US, public and muni courses took off. I bet there are about the same percent of private to public in GB&I as public to private in the US. Theoretically, there is little need for US players to gain membership of private courses and vice versa in GB&I.
Ciao
Sean I think you are mostly on the money with this, but would add.
Access in Scotland was open to all because many courses gave access to more than one club. Between these Clubs there was social stratification.
In England I don't think Golf really changed for the majority of Clubs until the 80's when a vast no of new alternatives started to appear. Only when clubs realised that the names they had on their waiting lists had all found other places to play did they start to welcome a wider cross section of members. It would be interesting to see the decline in no's of Artisan Clubs over time, my belief is they were still going strong in the 70's. I recently played with a retired guy who was a tremendous partner in every way. He lived next to Tandridge but had never joined, as in the 70's they let him know that they were not interested in businessmen only Professionals.
-
Spangles
For sure, once the post war generation came into fruition things went into a higher gear, but many clubs were taking non-professional members from well before that. I belonged to one which prided itself on being an artisan club and it is over 100 years old. The thing I find very curious is the lack of will in the development of public courses. I can only surmise there wasn't much call for public courses; the folks who could afford to play and were keen, could join clubs.
Ciao
-
Spangles
For sure, once the post war generation came into fruition things went into a higher gear, but many clubs were taking non-professional members from well before that. I belonged to one which prided itself on being an artisan club and it is over 100 years old. The thing I find very curious is the lack of will in the development of public courses. I can only surmise there wasn't much call for public courses; the folks who could afford to play and were keen, could join clubs.
Ciao
The London County Council had an early start with this and in the 1930's had Hawtree and Taylor design two excellent courses at Hainault Forrest. For year these were known as the busiest golf courses in Europe. Moreton has written on municipal Golf in the West Midlands and it did seem to take off their. I've only played the one in the south bit of Sutton Coldfield park and half of it is really thrilling, I suspect it was once 9 fine holes.
Pure speculation on my part but.... most urban areas in the UK have tended to return majority Labour councils. To them golf was beyond the pale even if in the examples above a) the projects showed a fine return on investment and b) the fun went to people who could not afford or get access to private clubs. I do think it's that simple.
In the 1930's there was a movement to encourage health and fitness for the working population. Golf missed out on this but one of the results was the building of hundreds of beautiful Lido's up and down the country. Over time the economics of running these has seen them fall into disrepair, very few survive today. Once people had swum in indoor heated pools the bracing outdoor one lost it's appeal. I live in a traditional 'red' inner London area and have been involved in discussion with the council to get further investment for our fine Lido. The council have indicated it's low on their priority as they 've identified the users are incoming middle classes and don't match the profile of the borough as a whole. In other words there's no votes in it.
-
As I always mention on these threads, in USA whether at private or public courses everyone is ALWAYS keeping a stroke play score. Even if they are playing by themselves. Even if they are playing a two-ball match. Virtually every USA golfer is going to walk off the course after every round prepared to answer the question "What did you shoot". The number they have in mind may be arrant bullshit with all sort of mulligans, rolling the ball, picked up putts and so forth. But real or fake they are thinking a medal-play number when they walk off 18, every time.
Brent, that may be the case with the casual player, but for the frequent serious club player, we are "keeping a score" but it is not a stroke play (medal play) score. It is the score we are going to post for HC purposes. So, we do not "shoot a score," but we "post a score." We have no choice if we want to play in the USGA HC system fairly. "But real or fake they are thinking a medal-play number when they walk off 18, every time." Certainly many are, but also many aren't - it's just (1) who won and (2) what do I post, which in my experience is in most cases a private matter.
-
Martin Toal never played foursomes or greensomes in 30 years. I prefer foursomes to singles and probably play 75% of my golf in the alternate shot format.
Members only bars and restaurants? I can only think of the members bar at Sunningdale, anyone got any other examples?
-
Members only bars and restaurants? I can only think of the members bar at Sunningdale, anyone got any other examples?
Dining rooms at Prestwick and Troon are members only.
-
Martin Toal never played foursomes or greensomes in 30 years. I prefer foursomes to singles and probably play 75% of my golf in the alternate shot format.
Members only bars and restaurants? I can only think of the members bar at Sunningdale, anyone got any other examples?
AT RCD there's a large section of the Clubhouse reserved for visitors. It was clear that all the life in the club was through a different entrance where all the members were. Portstewart reserves it's best views of the course for a members bar.
Not what Golf is about IMO.
-
Josh,
Which clubs have treated you rudely?
I've encountered far more rudeness in the UK & Aus than at any top US club I have visited.
Makes you proud to be British
-
Chappers,
Of all places - Maldon GC out past Wimbledon wouldn't let me have a beer post-round with the members I'd joined up with mid-round without them having to sit with me in a different bar to the rest of their mates. In December. Lunacy.
-
Martin Toal never played foursomes or greensomes in 30 years. I prefer foursomes to singles and probably play 75% of my golf in the alternate shot format.
Members only bars and restaurants? I can only think of the members bar at Sunningdale, anyone got any other examples?
AT RCD there's a large section of the Clubhouse reserved for visitors. It was clear that all the life in the club was through a different entrance where all the members were. Portstewart reserves it's best views of the course for a members bar.
Not what Golf is about IMO.
In the days when I played RCD visitors weren't allowed in at all. I used either the boot of my car or the town course, Mourne.
-
Chappers,
Of all places - Maldon GC out past Wimbledon wouldn't let me have a beer post-round with the members I'd joined up with mid-round without them having to sit with me in a different bar to the rest of their mates. In December. Lunacy.
Scott
I don't think you can class that as rudeness, more like following the rules. You may think justifiably that the rules suck, however you can't berate anyone for rudeness for following the rules. That of course assumes I'm reading the situation right.
Niall
-
Of all places - Maldon GC out past Wimbledon wouldn't let me have a beer post-round with the members I'd joined up with mid-round without them having to sit with me in a different bar to the rest of their mates. In December. Lunacy.
This example does seem high on the lunacy side. One point to remember about member-only clubhouse areas though is that when a large group of visitors or a society is in the clubhouse things can become a little, well shall we say, noisy, and if you're a member it's nice to have an area where you can relax in relative peace and quiet. However, if you're with a member, as in Scotts example, it seems pretty bad form to not allow you complete access.
All the best
-
In the days when I played RCD visitors weren't allowed in at all.
I played RCD and Portmarnock in 1999. I have told people for 14 years that I may have been treated better at those clubs than my own.All I did was write letters a couple of months prior.
Maybe they treat Americans differently.
-
Spangles
For sure, once the post war generation came into fruition things went into a higher gear, but many clubs were taking non-professional members from well before that. I belonged to one which prided itself on being an artisan club and it is over 100 years old. The thing I find very curious is the lack of will in the development of public courses. I can only surmise there wasn't much call for public courses; the folks who could afford to play and were keen, could join clubs.
Ciao
The London County Council had an early start with this and in the 1930's had Hawtree and Taylor design two excellent courses at Hainault Forrest. For year these were known as the busiest golf courses in Europe. Moreton has written on municipal Golf in the West Midlands and it did seem to take off their. I've only played the one in the south bit of Sutton Coldfield park and half of it is really thrilling, I suspect it was once 9 fine holes.
Pure speculation on my part but.... most urban areas in the UK have tended to return majority Labour councils. To them golf was beyond the pale even if in the examples above a) the projects showed a fine return on investment and b) the fun went to people who could not afford or get access to private clubs. I do think it's that simple.
In the 1930's there was a movement to encourage health and fitness for the working population. Golf missed out on this but one of the results was the building of hundreds of beautiful Lido's up and down the country. Over time the economics of running these has seen them fall into disrepair, very few survive today. Once people had swum in indoor heated pools the bracing outdoor one lost it's appeal. I live in a traditional 'red' inner London area and have been involved in discussion with the council to get further investment for our fine Lido. The council have indicated it's low on their priority as they 've identified the users are incoming middle classes and don't match the profile of the borough as a whole. In other words there's no votes in it.
I'll continue this line, if only to agree with the essence of it......
Certainly class was a massive factor in limiting the growth of public courses in Britain. It was not until the 1980's, the arrival of Thatcher's Britain and the birth of the 'we're all middle class now' phenomenon that demand really took off amongst traditionally working class but newly aspirational men. Add to that an economic boom, only the second ever mass migration away from farming, an architectural trend which valued style (or lack of) over substance and you begin to understand why Britain is now littered with boggy farm tracks which struggle to take enough in fees to keep the fountains flowing.
And the situation in America was never that different except that, driven by a sense of socioeconomic betterment as opposed to 'class jumping,' conditions were already right for the American developments of the 1950's. Forward to the 1980's again and golf in America didn't need Reagan to sell a new capitalist model in the way golf in Britain needed Thatcher because state side the model was already there.
-
All the differences discussed in this thread about handicap systems in the US, the UK or elsewhere may dissapear if the project of a world handicap system currently being discussed is finally approved. People involved in this negotiations tell me that the main difficulty in reaching an agreement is the large number of golfers in the US who don't have a handicap or don't care about it. I don't know if that is true, but it is what they tell me.
-
All the differences discussed in this thread about handicap systems in the US, the UK or elsewhere may dissapear if the project of a world handicap system currently being discussed is finally approved. People involved in this negotiations tell me that the main difficulty in reaching an agreement is the large number of golfers in the US who don't have a handicap or don't care about it. I don't know if that is true, but it is what they tell me.
I'd guess any attempt at a universal handicap system would be a hard sell in the US.The revenue under the current system is the life blood for a lot of state/regional associations.Any discussion about change makes a lot of US organizations nervous.
-
Mark your experience of Prestwick is different to mine and bourne out by their website; There are two dining rooms and two bars. The Smoke Room (Members Bar) and Dining Room maintain a formal dress code of jacket, collar and tie for gentlemen and a change from golfing attire for ladies. As temporary members for the day visiting golfers are welcomed into these rooms.
-
I'd guess any attempt at a universal handicap system would be a hard sell in the US.The revenue under the current system is the life blood for a lot of state/regional associations.Any discussion about change makes a lot of US organizations nervous.
[/quote]
Jeff,
I don't know if they should worry. What's being discussed is the method to calculate the handicaps, so that it is the same all over the world, but the handicap will be given by the same entities as today. It shouldn't affect the revenues of the golf unions. The purpose of a world handicap is to have comparable handicaps in all jurisdictions.
-
Mark,
I played at Prestwick in March (it was cold (2 C), it was snowing (just up the road there were drifts) and windy but magnificent) and we were not able to eat in the members Dining Room, despite being in jacket and tie. We did drink in the members bar afterwards. This isn't a complaint of any sort, by the way, we were treated extremely well by all, in particular by the lady behind the bar who served us plentiful Kummel and then brought out some cake she had baked. We were last to leave the bar, long after the last member but at no time did we feel anything but extremely welcome. Prestwick is one of my favourite golf clubs.
-
I'd guess any attempt at a universal handicap system would be a hard sell in the US.The revenue under the current system is the life blood for a lot of state/regional associations.Any discussion about change makes a lot of US organizations nervous.
Jeff,
I don't know if they should worry. What's being discussed is the method to calculate the handicaps, so that it is the same all over the world, but the handicap will be given by the same entities as today. It shouldn't affect the revenues of the golf unions. The purpose of a world handicap is to have comparable handicaps in all jurisdictions.
[/quote]
I would say that probably depends. If the entire world goes to the "UK" method where it needs to be calculated based only off of medal tournament rounds, I could see many individual clubs keeping a separate local handicap for the 50% of the membership that wants to play in club events that aren't medal, but will never play in enough medal tournaments to have a legitimate handicap. In this case, I could see a small portion of the membership having a valid USGA handicap as administered through the CDGA or local Association, and many members simply having a simple club handicap.
-
Andrew,
That's a valid point and it is precisely the problem being faced in the negotiations. The UK system of medal competitions only for handicap is the one followed in many countries (Argentina, for example and most countries in South America). It is not in the mind of the average American golfer. For example, in Argentina if you don't have a national handicap, you are not considered a golfer. In fact, no club would allow you to play golf if you don't have a national handicap, except if you are in the process of applying for a handicap (for which 5 medal rounds are required). It's a huge gap in the "culture" of the sport and something that is not easy to overcome.
-
The UK handicapping system is not terribly onerous; 3-4 qualifying comps a year. If a guy can't play in that few per year is his handicap really meaningful? I hope to hell the world doesn't go for casual rounds for handicapping. Having spent much time using both systems I think the UK system is far better. Not only can one ignore score (not have to make up a score), but I think the UK handicaps are more accurate. Neither system is perfect, but anytime a player is effectively encouraged to leave the card in the proshop it can't be bad. The goal is for players to have handicaps and I am not sure the US system has done a good job of making this the case; a huge percentage of golfers don't have a cap and could care less about it. So why not change the definition of what a golfer is and use a better system?
Ciao
-
Mark - was the dining room open? It wasn't on my first visit, as not enough golfers to make it pay!
-
Americans predominately play match play. Be it low ball/low total or any other of many team games we play from hole to hole with a bet on each. We simply do not have the patience to wait until the end of a round to find out who wins.
As far as accessibility goes I seriously doubt that there is a poster on this site that can name 10 courses in the United States that they want to play and can not. As a matter of fact most private clubs "advertise" on their web sites that they want you to come and play. My God, the foundation of this web site is based on this very access.
August National
The Country Club
Chicago Golf Club
Cypress Point
San Francisco
Maidstone
Fisher's Island
National Golf Links of America
Shinnecock
Old Sandwich
My Scottish bucket list is:
St. Andrews, The Old Course
Royal Dornoch
Prestwick
North Berwick
I sure like my chances of obtaining access to those Scottish clubs A WHOLE LOT MORE over my chances to even four of my US list above.
-
As far as accessibility goes I seriously doubt that there is a poster on this site that can name 10 courses in the United States that they want to play and can not. As a matter of fact most private clubs "advertise" on their web sites that they want you to come and play. My God, the foundation of this web site is based on this very access.
I have next to no connections even though I belong to a small club just outside Philadelphia, but I could probably come up with 20 courses I want to play and cannot:
Augusta National
Cypress Point
Sand Hills
Merion East
Pine Valley
National
Camargo
Seminole
Applebrook
Gulph Mills
Shinnecock
Sebonack
Chicago Golf Club
Brookline
Riviera
Valley Club at Montecito
Oakmont
Winged Foot
Scioto
Butler National
Mind you, I've never contacted any of these courses and asked if I could play a round, but I'd say accessibility in the UK is definitely more open than here.