[Tom_Ross]

After watching Pat Mucci's thread the other day, I got to thinking about whether rankings should ever come into the psyche of a club.  <Gracely name-calling comments removed>

The USGA only hosts 13 events a year, and most of them go unnoticed by the general public.  The churn of courses on the PGA Tour is minimal.  

So other than extreme ego, why would a club care about it's ranking especially if it's a private club, and the ranking doesn't effect income?  How good is good enough, especially if you don't host major tournaments (USGA, PGA, etc.)?  Top 50, Top 100, Top 150?

Are the clubs that slip in the rankings losing members?

Are the drop in the rankings directly effecting budgets because they are frequently feeling like they need to make changes to their course?  

[THuckaby2]

Tom:

Easy on the name-calling.  Brian Gracely is a friend of mine and a great guy, fun as hell to play golf with.  I found it kind of refreshing that someone finally stood up to Mucci, and I think deep in his heart Patrick liked it also.  

But that matters not, it's just a friendly request.  

As to the substance of your topic here - that is a damn good question, one I also wondered last week when in a post about the very cool work going on at Olympic Club, one of the reasons cited for a change on one hole was that it would help to bring it back up in the ratings... Which got me to thinking, and asking here, why the hell would a great club like that give a rat's ass what their rating is?

The answer was that members, and more importantly club leadership, do for whatever reasons take this rankings quite seriously, and thus selling a change in that context made the sell quite easier.  I can dig that, makes sense to me.

So that's why in matters in the context of proposed changes... but why does it matter in the ways you ask?  I have no idea and wonder the same things.

TH

[Tom_Ross]

ok, removed the name-calling.

[TEPaul]

"....., why would a club care about it's ranking especially if it's a private club, and the ranking doesn't effect income?  

Tom:

Are you serious? If a golf club is looking for members a huge amount of those clubs figure getting a better or more noticeable ranking will attract members and new members sure do effect income! Personally, I've seen this mentality all over the place. Ego always has something to do with it, I'm sure, but so does the bottom line! There're even lots of clubs out there who don't just want waiting lists--they want longer waiting lists with more of what they think are the right kind of people on those waiting lists! Have you ever heard of clubs having people sitting on their waiting list for five years and along comes somebody and gets in within a month? Well, I sure have--it happens all the time. The only trick for the club is to create a membership policy where nobody knows how long anybody else has been on the waiting list!

[Tom_Ross]

TEPaul,

I completely understand the argument about clubs looking for new members.  It becomes a basic sales tool.  

But what about those clubs that have an existing membership roster that's full, and a long waiting-list?  Are you saying that you think there is another class of potential members, namely the person that will pay considerably more than the expected initiation, and that this is driving the concern over rankings at established clubs?  If so, should this concern be calculated to coincide with the increasing age of existing members and their chance of not making it off the 18th green under their own power?  

[A_Clay_Man]

I wonder if there isn't a corrolation between the quality of the course and the mind-set, Tom Ross speaks of?

I figure a great course would care very little. Having the satisfaction that comes from knowing. While courses less confident, would need the added crutch of popularity?

[TEPaul]

I know what I'm talking about here, Tom. I got on the waiting list at ANGC back in '67 and I waited to hear from them until 2003 when I sort of quietly asked--"back channel-wise", of course, if they could tell me where I stood.

They just said that Oh, they had extremely light turn-over or they've been working down through their secret legacy list for the last 36 years! I asked them if I should drop out and ask for my deposit back and they just told me that was up to me but that I might expect to wait for some more years as they might have to hold my spot open for some women in case they happened to lose some case in the US Supreme Court!

I guess I'll just hang in there until they let me in or I die because, you know, it's ANGC and it's way high up in the magazine rankings!

But if that course starts to drop in the rankings, for any reason at all, I'm gonna drop those schmoos and that piece of shit golf course like a hot potatt!

[Tom_Ross]

TEPaul,

I hate to tell you this, but with the decline in advertising dollars that Hootie and the Gang now collect, you're deposit was used to fund telecasts for the foreseeable future.  

The good news is that I hear they will be opening up a new class of membership that is allowed on the grounds from June to September.  You have to bring your own mower, but you're welcome to play as many holes a day as you want.  The dues are lower because the seasonal-ranking is not as high.

[TEPaul]

Tom:

Of course a club isn't going to work their waiting list so somebody will pay more than somebody else sitting on the waiting list who was put on there under the understanding the club charged X for initiaton. I did hear that happened one time, though, at a well known newish club in the New England area but it's probably apocryphal. The story involved a particular applicant who basically said I don't care what you charge or how much more than that I need to pay--just tell me what it'll take for me and I'll pay it. Apparently they charged him about three times more than anyone else, he got in but never really used the place!

[TEPaul]

"You have to bring your own mower,..."

HAH! Well, then I'll fix their little red wagons! I'll take the numb-nuts up on that and I'll mow that place back into total fairway from which the new rough will never recover. I wonder if they know my lawn mower takes out trees too?

[gookin]

The incentive to make your course the best it can be comes from the pleasure you get each time you tee off #1. However, if some portion of your membership will care about ratings.  If you need the ratings to drive membership support for a constructive improvement in the course, I say use it to your advantage.  That said if it is just keeping up with the Jones, it is a dangerous approach.

[Rob_Waldron]

Do ratingds mean anything? Ask yourself this. When traveling to a new city to play golf do you ever look at "The Ratings" as a means of identifying the courses you would like to play???

If you have the option of playing a course that has received recognition from a national publication would you generally select that course over one that has not received the recognition?

I found through experience that clubs considered in the "Top 100" are more receptive to reciprical play from members of other clubs in the "Top 100". Sort of a little "Inner circle".

Yes ratings do matter!

[Jeff Fortson]

I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but I think an even better question is "DO ratings effect the mindset of a club?"

Jeff F.

[SPDB]

A common trait among humans, who make up most of the memberships of golf clubs is to seek out approval and recognition. It lurks subconsciously in most people's minds, and consumes others (see, Donald Trump). However, it is always there and the examples of it in the golf and non-golf world are ubiquitous, they even litter this site.

While people may not seek approval/recognition out, they are, nevertheless, satisfied when it materializes and secretly (perhaps, unknowingly?) despondent when it doesn't. Its a status thing that most people are powerless to ignore, except, of course, if you belong to a course in Baiting Hollow, NY.  

[Doug Siebert]

Tom:

Of course a club isn't going to work their waiting list so somebody will pay more than somebody else sitting on the waiting list who was put on there under the understanding the club charged X for initiaton. I did hear that happened one time, though, at a well known newish club in the New England area but it's probably apocryphal. The story involved a particular applicant who basically said I don't care what you charge or how much more than that I need to pay--just tell me what it'll take for me and I'll pay it. Apparently they charged him about three times more than anyone else, he got in but never really used the place!

So how much did Donald Trump have to pay again?

[Tom_Doak]

Should they?  Absolutely not.  If you've got one of the 100 best courses in America, you're in the top 0.5 percent of courses, and the odds of improving upon that are low.

Do they?  Unfortunately, yes.  It doesn't have squat to do with financial health of the club, because pretty much none of those clubs are in any sort of trouble.  It's just about bruised egos.  Members want their course to be rated so all their friends will envy their membership.

When a course falls ten places in the rankings it seldom signifies anything.  The numbers are so close between #75 and #100 that all it takes is adding a couple of new panelists who aren't quite so enamored with the course, and the course will drop ten spots.  Is that a reason to propose substantial changes in the design?  Absolutely not, but it's enough to send the members into a panic, and there are some architects all too willing to oblige them and associate their name with a great course.

Sadly, one of the reasons some clubs have talked to me about consulting work is that they think I understand the process and can help them move up, or at least stop the slide.  Some have been pretty shocked when I tell them what I just said above.  But under-reacting to the rankings has proved more successful than over-reacting.

This is also why I'm not a big fan of all the talk on this board about "restoration."  What's sold as restoration is still often really "change," and I don't think great golf courses need to be changed.

[Lou_Duran]

Mr. Doak,

There you go again, going humble on us.  Do you not think that you could make a half-dozen "improvements" to Firestone-South and help it move up?

BTW, how much value do you put on the ratings yourself?  When you are designing a course, do they creep into your mind?

If you were to redo the "Confidential Guide" today, how would you characterize your Pacific Dunes and Rawls Course?

[THuckaby2]

shivas:

You just made me ill.
For a life-time charter no-dues-paying membership at one of the great courses on the planet, Jordan paid about the same as a full-dues-paying membership at any of several very pedestrian clubs out here.

This is golf hell.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()