Jason
I do not believe that any course should charge £150 and no new course has in my opinion has deserved the right to charge golfers that sort of price.
If the course were in high demand then I would agree that high Green Fees should be the order of the day, but that should only come from demand to play the course. TOC is classic in many ways, it is living history, it is also unique in that it is the original 18 hole, it is also a Championship Course and has been for well over a Century. Many others may come up with more reasons but those are mine. Is it worth the Fee, well really only each and every golfer must decide that for himself or herself. However, if the course was not well used then that too would be reason enough to reduce the fee to encourage its use.
As for new courses, I am not over keen on many, plus I have concerns as to construction costs and perhaps the necessity to deform the land to create a course, but that’s me. I, like my father and his before him going way back believe that golf should be open and ready available to the majority of people.
Private clubs are acceptable with vast majority of clubs here in GB&I open to all comers allowing all to experience their courses. As for Kingsbarn, its doing well but I have reservations as to the construction methods. The Castle Course, well my opinion is just too much money was spent in creating that course which may have to be modified soon to resolve some of the problems. Speaks volumes for the quality of modern design.
I list a few Green Fees from Brora, down and along to Cruden Bay to give you an idea of general fees with one of two Membership costs (to gauge value for money) – based upon summer weekdays.
Brora £ 39.00 Membership £220-290
Golspie £ 35.00
R. Dornoch £ 82.00
Tain £ 40.00 Membership £240-365
Nairn £ 75.00
Moray (Old) £ 45.50
Strathlene
Buckie £ 22.00
Cullen £ 22.00
Fraserburgh £ 37.00 Overseas Membership £ 115.00
Peterhead £ 35.00
Cruden Bay £ 85.00 Membership £ 335-510
David
I fear that you are just looking through rose-tinted spectacles, I am looking at what I see. Clearly if that is the correct word, we do not see eye to eye and our approach may indeed be down to binocular vision by both or just one of us. However, I base my opinion on what I like, what I enjoy and what allows me to relax. Regrettably the two Castle courses have certainly failed to win me over. As for a win, win, I hope you are right but it still does not change the current thinking, not even with the pressure of the present financial climate.
I take no pleasure in moaning on about these new courses in Scotland. I want to see new courses adding to the charm and quality of the game in the Home of Golf with the ability for all to play. Nevertheless, there does not seem to be any consideration for the average golfer be they home grown or overseas. A fair price for a round allows all the opportunity to experience the new golf courses. Scottish golf broke the mould and opened the doors for golf to be played by the ordinary man & woman. That was one reason Old Tom kept his £1 per day fee for most of his life, unlike other designers who charged considerable more.
What I see with the new courses is the need or is it panic or just plain greed to try to start filling the coffers as soon as possible after laying out unbelievable amounts of money in the first place. Why can’t they prove the quality of the course first then introduce a sliding scale from the start, rather than say we are as good as other courses and start charging comparable fees from the off. As I have said, time will prove someone right or wrong in the end and that will be by the (hopefully) average golfer.
Bryan
Perhaps you have hit the nail on the head I am not here to make money out of golf but these guys certainly are. The modern curse of the game today is money and the need to acquire more, no matter what is done to the land in the process. I care for golf, its past and future is important to me, it’s just the way I am.
I do not have problems with sleepers, but the finish leaves much to be desired. Look at all the old usage of sleepers and timber fences– they are left level (horizontal) and follow the slope contours without the random stepped method used at CS. I said in my post that it just applies to the odd one or two bunkers plus the drive/car part area, oh yes, and around the clubhouse.
I also feel that these new courses are starting to change the face of our golf, or what we perceive as our golf. This idea of building anywhere if you have enough money, of ripping the natural out of the land to reinstate an alien landscape. The need to mature a course faster than the golfers can play or become accustom to it.
What has happened to design, to creativity, to utilising the natural face (contours) of the land? To draw inspiration and utilise that which attracted the use of the land in the first place as a golf course. It seems that the very form that attracted one are destroyed in the design and construction process, leaving the need to dress the course and recoup the original investment as quickly as possible.
Yes, I far enjoy the older courses, the less congested, enjoyable and fun courses at sensible prices. However, then that is me and I am in part the sum of my heritage. Like wine, I know what I like and am guided by my own preferences. If I enjoy an expensive bottle, two, or three, I will happily pay the price, but I expect value for money. I do not like to pay a high price for something I am not certain is to my taste. Golf Courses are I suppose like wine, we don’t mind returning for more of the same, but sometimes a younger wine is made to pretend it can match the quality of an older vintage, but in real terms, it may have been mixed with anti-freeze to help mature it. The problem is what it is and no dressing can actually improve it – as always it all down to the taste of the golfer.
Melvyn