Is the future of golf in alternative facilities?

[Mark_Fine]

There is more and more talk these days about golf being too slow, too expensive, taking up too much land, …  Is the future of golf in alternative facilites?  

We designed and built a First Tee facility that opened last summer (here is a photo from earlier this March as the facility came out of the winter)




It includes a flexible Birdieball course which can be played as 18 different holes (only three greens).  It sits on about one acre and you can hit every club in the bag including driver.  We are getting more and more interest in this concept of late.  I’m also starting to see more articles and write-ups about alternative golf and alternative limited flight balls.  The AllmostGolf ball is being actively promoted, etc.  Will this kind of thing be where the demand is for design in the future?

[Steve Lang]

 

How many years has golf survived without such?

Who's talking?  Americans? ADD folks? Space limited folks?

How ya gonna keep em down on the farm once they've seen the big city?  

[Mark_Fine]

Steve,
Golf as we know it is not going away, but you can't deny that the numbers are flat if not dropping.  More courses closed in the last year than opened.  

I am a strong advocate of alternative forms of golf such as Birdieball courses so maybe I'm a bit biased.  But our facility in the Lehigh Valley is very popular (even with adults) and it could catch on.  Even the USGA is behind it.  Here is a link to an article by the USGA on our facility  http://www.juniorlinks.com/facility/  

We have several requests for plans on the books.  All these things take time and money, etc. (more than most realize) but the interest level seems to be expanding.  I'm just curious what this group of mostly "purists" thinks about such an idea.
Mark

[Mark_Fine]

Sean,
Good points and well stated.  A lot does depend on your prospective.  If you are member of a struggling private club you might look at things differently as your dues keep going up to offset the lack of members vs. someone who belongs to one that has a five year waiting list to get it.  The same goes if you are a public course player and you are seeing courses that you play closed because real estate is a better financial option.  It is all a matter of perspective.  

One of the ideas behind alternative golf is not too become "competition" to golf, but to introduce more people to the game we all love.  

[Brent Hutto]

I can't agree with the proposal as stated, "the future of golf". In some areas there could very well be a future for the sorts of facilities Mark describes but in my opinion that sort of thing is more of a golf-related recreation than golf per se.

I have a hard time imagining that the future viability of real golf courses could be affected one way or another by the existence or absence of fun little facilities like the one shown in the Mark's photo. That's akin to saying that more people would play golf if there were more Putt-Putt (tm) courses out there. Not every activity that involves hitting a ball with a crooked stick toward a hole is golf (once again, just IMHO).

I have a degree of sympathy for Sean's point, as well. I don't think having more people playing the game or more rounds played is necessarily good or bad. I'd no doubt want to see more golfers and more rounds played if I were a golf pro or a course architect or a seller of greens mowers but as a golfer it's a pretty neutral matter to me if 2008 finds 10% fewer rounds played than 2007 or 10% more. It's obvious to me that there's a difference between golfers like myself who spend inordinate amounts of time and money on the game and other people who play a social round a dozen Saturdays a year with their in-laws. I'd love to see more hard-core golfers playing regularly and making the game part of their life but I couldn't care less how many random occasional rounds are played this coming Sunday afternoon by people who won't touch a club again for three months.

If there's an "alternative facility" that is crucial to the future of golf I suspect it is a regular course that can be built and maintained in a manner that supports reasonable greens fees and that is fun and playable by golfers of a wide range of abilities. Not necessarily the most beautiful piece of landscaping in the county and without water hazards in play on a dozen holes and not built around a multi-million dollar clubhouse or staffed by dozens of uniformed nose-wipers and greeters. I think the most dangerous tendency in the industry is for the game to gradually be defined as more and more of a high-end experience for people who can blow thousands of dollars a year on golf and who have expectations to match.

[Peter Pallotta]

Mark
yet another perspective, a 'natural' one: it seems to me that those who've gotten pleasure and peace and enjoyment out of golf might naturally want to see others share that pleasure, a son or daughter or friend for example. And it seems natural that those newcomers to the game would like to learn to play it in as congenial and affordable a setting as possible. With small and/or public courses under more financial pressure than ever before and sometimes closing down, it seems natural to suggest that there may be fewer and fewer such settings where newcomers can learn (and learn to love) the game. Naturally, if there are no new players coming into the game, eventually there'll be no golfers left at all; how many courses would soon be left in the world then?

So, "is the future in alternative facilities?" That's not exactly the way I'd  put it. I'd say instead that "we can do much to help ensure golf's healthy future by encouraging the development of alternate facilities like the ones you mention, or like the 6-hole courses that Paul Cowley has been involved in."  

In short, I can't see any down-side whatsoever in encouraging alternate facilities, and only potential upsides.
I'm glad you're working on some of those.      

Peter

[Kirk Gill]

Having the opportunity to play golf on an actual course and not on the driving range is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive in urban areas. As Peter mentions, affordable public facilities are becoming increasingly rare, as the "economic model" is not that lucrative.

Steve Lang - my kids don't have ADD but it sure would be nice to be able to introduce them to the game at less than $50/round. I wouldn't figure that they'd stay "down on the farm" for long, but if there was a facility like the one pictured near me, they'd have a chance to actually play something like a game of golf more easily and more cheaply then they can now.

Sean, you say "I am much more interested in the type of people entering the game, not the numbers." I'm hoping that you mean that you are interested in classy, wonderful, passionate golfers entering the game. I'm hoping that you DON'T mean that you want to keep out the riff-raff who can't afford it, the lower classes, minorities, etc. (the very people who might actually benefit most by the kind of facility pictured in Mark's original post).

Brent says "I couldn't care less how many random occasional rounds are played this coming Sunday afternoon by people who won't touch a club again for three months." Well congratulations to you, Brent, you hardcore golfer you, who has the opportunity and wherewithal to play as much as you wish, unfettered by petty considerations like cost or time. Things change, my friend. I used to be a lot more hardcore than I am now, but having four young children tends to broaden one's perspective. Like I said, times change, and as the kids get older I'm having more opportunities to play now than I did a couple years ago, and as time goes by I hope to play more. I totally understand, though, that you couldn't care less about that.

I totally agree with your last point, Brett, that a regular ol' golf course, nothing special, not much in the way of amenities or maintenance, is what I wish there was more of in my area, so my kids would have a great place to learn, and hopefully decide that they want golf to be a part of their life. But as has been said on this group many times, that model is disappearing. I get that there's not much money in it. It's just too bad is all. A question is, would a municipality be more likely to put some money into a project like the one Mark outlined above than into purchasing/creating a full-fledged course? Or are cities less and less likely to get involved in the game of golf?

[Mike Hendren]

I had the good fortune of playing Love Design's Origins Course at Watersound during spring break and will start a thread with photographs when time permits.  

Plenty of good architecture in the nine holes there - a bargain at $25 with a $15 replay rate when everything else in the area is north of $100 in prime time.  

The course is a great amenity for the community and those on vacation, but its economic viability as a stand-alone facility would be a challenge, I'm guessing.  

Until a dozen years ago there was a pitch and putt on the periphery of Nashville's tony Belle Meade neighborhood.  I lived "across the tracks" about a mile from it for 8 years and never played there.  I never recall seeing anyone play there come to think of it.

Mike

[Wayne_Kozun]

NO

[Mark_Fine]

The beauty of some of these alternative "golf balls" such as the Birdieball is that you can take a pitch and putt course and turn it into a championship venue.  Using the Birdieball, you can use all your clubs to play holes that with a real golf ball were merely a half a sand wedge.  The standard Birdieball only goes about 40 yards.  A 70 yard hole might be a driver/4I.  When you get on the green, you take out a real ball and putt.

Mike,
I suggest you get a few Birdieballs and go play that pitch and putt course and let us know what you think.  You might be amazed.  If you want me to send you a few, IM me.  

Kirk,
IM me if you want some Birdieballs to try out.  I think your kids (and even you) would love them.  Part of our vision for the future is that instead of taking the kids out to play miniture golf or go bowling, you will go to a near-by Birdieball course, pay your $6.50 or whatever, and play Birdieball.  And even if you are a scratch golfer, you can still work on your game because the ball fades, draws and feels like a real one.  It's fun!

[Mike Nuzzo]

A 70 yard hole might be a driver/4I.

Why wouldn't you hit wedge/wedge?
When do you putt?

Who would play birdie ball with more than one club?

[Ken Moum]

If there's an "alternative facility" that is crucial to the future of golf I suspect it is a regular course that can be built and maintained in a manner that supports reasonable greens fees and that is fun and playable by golfers of a wide range of abilities.

Bingo!

And we need these courses to find a way to produce rounds that only take 3 1/2 hours.

Too many of us in the business seem to have given up on the hope that golf can be affordable, fun and fast.

I learned to play on a simple, nine-hole course that you could easily play in 90 minutes, even when it was busy.

We need more of them.

[Mark_Fine]

Mike,
Good questions.  Wedge/wedge might get you there or it might not (typically a wedge goes about 25-30 yards).  Just like regular golf, it depends on the conditions.  If you are into a good breeze, you might need driver/driver.  The different clubs hit the ball slightly different distances but also at different trajectories which can make a big difference.  

As to who would play Birdieball with more than one club; the answer could be anyone.  If you are a good short iron player, you might want to work on hitting your longer irons or hybrids.  The beauty of the Birdieball is that you CAN if you want, use/practice with all your clubs.  I'm sure as the game progresses, golfers will become very proficient with different clubs in different conditions, just like in real golf.  

You putt when the Birdieball gets on the green.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Thanks Mark,
I like the birdie ball, it is fun in the back yard or at a park.
I had intened to order a bunch with my logo - but forgot.
But I'd most likely not take my daughter to a birdie ball course.

I think any way to introduce someone to the game is great as is what you are doing, and I don't see Birdie ball as replicating the qualities of golf.

Cheers

[Brent Hutto]

Brent says "I couldn't care less how many random occasional rounds are played this coming Sunday afternoon by people who won't touch a club again for three months." Well congratulations to you, Brent, you hardcore golfer you, who has the opportunity and wherewithal to play as much as you wish, unfettered by petty considerations like cost or time. Things change, my friend. I used to be a lot more hardcore than I am now, but having four young children tends to broaden one's perspective. Like I said, times change, and as the kids get older I'm having more opportunities to play now than I did a couple years ago, and as time goes by I hope to play more. I totally understand, though, that you couldn't care less about that.

Kirk,

I'm sorry you found my attitude objectionable. My comments were in the context of "the future of golf". I remain entirely convinced that the number of people playing less than a handful of times per year is totally meaningless as an influence on the game's future outlook.

In no way should that be construed as belittling or dismissing the pleasure those players take from their occasional rounds. I have a few friends and coworkers in that category and I play golf with them whenever they have a free afternoon and are inclined to join me.

But if we could suddenly convince a hundred thousand new people to each play three rounds of golf next year it would only be a tiny blip in the economics of game and wouldn't cause a single new course to be built or a single existing course to remain instead of being plowed under for a housing development. I would say the same about facilities like the one mentioned at the beginning of this thread. A thousand such places being built and attracting users would be unlikely to cause a meaningful growth in the game in my estimation.

It's easy to imagine the scenario of someone taking their ten-year-old child to play at a Birdieball course a few times, discovering the child loves the game and eventually the parent and child start playing golf regularly together. But the question we have to ask is whether that same child would eventually discover the game if the Birdieball course weren't available. There are several possibilities. There are those families who would have come to the game in some other way if Birdieball didn't exist. There are others who try and enjoy Birdieball but can't or don't ever become regular golfers for all the reasons that keep people away from the game. And then of course there are the ones who end up playing golf regularly only through their exposure to Birdieball. I just don't think there are a significant number of people in that latter category (with "significant" being the many thousands needed to have any meaningful effect on the future of the game).

The situation I'm more familiar with is trying to get people to change their health behavior. All kinds of barriers to healthy behavior can be posited and programs funded to get people starting healthier behavior by overcoming one or more of those barriers to initiation. Yet in the end, on a population basis, it tends not make much difference in long-term behavior. To me this sort of thing falls into that category.

There just aren't enough people in the USA to grow the game beyond its current scale by adding a few rounds per year per golfer. There are lots of former or potential "hard-core" golfers who would play 50+ times a year if they could but they just aren't able to because of time, money or other constraints. My argument is that finding ways to allows those folks to play more is a more productive path than finding new ways to coax people into golf-like activities when the real game is going to be beyond their reach anyway due to all the commonly-mentioned factors.

[Mark_Fine]

Mike,
You said you like the Birdieball - that's great.  But you also said, "But I'd most likely not take my daughter to a birdie ball course."

We wondered the same thing - would people come to play?  We figured we could speculate all we wanted but the only way to find out is to build one, which we did.  They are coming and the USGA and others think they will come because they put their money behind it.

I believe people went through a similar thought process when they introduced mini golf.  Who would want to putt their golf ball through a clown's mouth, that is not golf    

I think Birdieball courses represent a new paradigm and an out of the box version of the way we think about golf.  It will surely not be for everybody and most hard core golfers will probably shy away.  But grandma might take her grand kids to play (she can do it too), and Jimmy might take his high school date (because the courses are small enough to light up at night and its a fun cheap date to walk around in a park setting with your girl friend),... and what a nice alternative when you are on vacation and looking for something different to do for an hour or so.  Time will tell!

One last thing, most golfers (kids included) like to rip it.  You can't do that playing pitch and putt or mini-golf but can with a Birdieball.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I love pitch n putt and would take my daughter every day.
My grandma could play for a long time too.

There is a big difference between birdie ball and pitch n putt.

Doesn't the birdie ball require more full swings than pitch n putt?

[Mark_Fine]

Mike,
I love pitch and putt as well.  It is great for the short game (unless they make you hit off the mats).  Yes Birdieball would be more full swings but it is easy to learn and the ball doesn't go too far and there are (should be) alternative teeing positions.  We have all ages playing at our course in Bethlehem.  The longest hole there is only about 70 yards but that is three good shots for many of the younger kids.  

[Kirk Gill]

Sorry Sean and Brent - I'm obviously feeling my oats this morning.

Sean, I don't know you, and wouldn't put words in your mouth. I read the phrase "The type of people entering the game" and just wasn't sure where you were going with that. I WAS attempting some humor, but not well.

Brent, in re-reading my response to you, it reads a lot nastier than I intended. As I mentioned, I agreed with your post regarding what kinds of facilities are needed, and perhaps a little of my own frustration at being unable to play as much as I used to (and as much as I want) crept out in my reply to your earlier comments. I'm sure that the occasional player is in no way the backbone of the golfing industry, but if there was any point in my reply it was that the occasional player might not always be so, and that there may be some value in bringing that golfer back.

What gets my dander up in this whole discussion is the fact that I have fewer affordable options in connecting my children to golf then I had when I was a kid. Golf may not have ever been exactly "cheap," but I was able to take advantage of the opportunity to play the local par-three and some undistinguished local munis growing up that made it pretty easy for me to play. I probably live in a better neighborhood now than the one I grew up in, and find fewer places nearby for the kids to play. Bring on Birdieball !

[Brent Hutto]

I'm sure that the occasional player is in no way the backbone of the golfing industry, but if there was any point in my reply it was that the occasional player might not always be so, and that there may be some value in bringing that golfer back.

Agree totally. I think if anything could be changed, changes that enable a wants-to-be-regular player to play forty rounds a year instead of four would be most helpful.

...I have fewer affordable options in connecting my children to golf then I had when I was a kid. Golf may not have ever been exactly "cheap," but I was able to take advantage of the opportunity to play the local par-three and some undistinguished local munis growing up that made it pretty easy for me to play.

I didn't even know golf existed when I was a kid but I suspect in the area I live there may be almost as many opportunities as there were 30 years ago (I'm mid-40's and still live in the town where I grew up). But we're somewhat unusual in that there are some legitimate entry points into the game around here, of the type Sean would term "cheap and cheerful". However, some of those places are going away and others are moving relentlessly upmarket so we're probably slower than average but headed the same direction as everyone else.

[Greg Murphy]

Mark,

I believe creating alternatives to lengthy eighteen hole golf courses has the potential to be a significant development within golf course architecture. But the thinking so far seems to be in its infancy and the attempts to date less than desirable.

Why is anyone attracted to golf? Bob Cullen has written an entire book on the subject. The two most fundamental elements seem to be:

- To connect with nature
- To exercise control over our environment

In the case of golf, control over our environment is exercised by hitting a ball with a stick to a target, either along the ground or through the air. We especially get a kick out of making the ball fly. Rolling or bouncing the ball along the ground is essential but ancillary to the allure of making the ball fly through the air with various trajectories, curvatures and distances over and around hazards.

The birdieball approach is along the right track as it satisfies the primary urge of making something fly by hitting it with a stick and presumably offers the ability to create various shapes and distances and trajectories, but the playing ground as photographed does not satisfy the other fundamental element of golf, i.e., the urge to connect with nature, so I don’t ever see that type of facility being a tremendous success.

I know some people believe that the beauty of the grounds over which we play golf is irrelevant. They were probably drawn to the game by the beauty and variety of its playing surfaces, but have since graduated to some higher level of appreciation for the game that the rest of us may never attain and I persoanlly have no interest in attaining.

For the vast majority of existing players as well as those who may take up the game, there must be some sort of connection with the beauty of nature. And the trick for designers of alternative facilities will be to figure out how to make alternatives or substitute "grounds for golf" more natural and more beautiful. This will be difficult at first since the alternatives are designed to be low cost and spending money on aesthetics will be deemed unnecessary, until someone does something really beautiful and others can see the value in doing so.

Greg

[Doug Siebert]

Sorry, I really can't see this as a viable solution, it looks like a cheap gimmick to me.

I think the future for golf not played on full sized golf courses lies in computer simulations.  I can elaborate more on the mechanics of it if anyone is interested, but its possible to do WAY better than the simulators you see today at a pretty reasonable price, its just a question of the demand being there for the design and integration outlay to be justified.  Of course the main limitation for home customers even if it were offered for free would be space since you'd need to dedicated a good sized bedroom to this (and for those who live in some older or cheaper homes, ceiling height would also be an issue )

Yes, its not outdoors, but if you are going to be playing off mats in a little tiny fenced in area like Birdieball, whatever connection to nature golf had is lost anyway.  Given what computers do for physics calculations these days, I'd rather have a stereo display and a computer calculating the effect of terrain, wind, etc. than whacking a whiffle ball around a glorified putt putt golf course!

It'd probably be easier to get kids into it since computers are second nature to them, and its a lot cheaper to dedicated a couple hundred square feet in a community center or pizza place for this than an acre of parkland, especially in areas with high land costs where access to real golf courses for kids is the biggest problem.  Whether they could be transitioned to real golf is something I don't know, but the way the game was played would be closer to real golf than Birdieball.

[Mark_Fine]

Doug,
We've done focus groups on this and your comments are not far off from others we have heard.  It is a different concept and is not "real" golf.  But if you've hit one of them (as Mike Nuzzo has) they are fun.  You make a real golf swing and if you are a slicer it will slice and if you draw it, it will draw, etc.  

Believe me, I have my reservations as well but sometimes you have to go for it even if it is not obvious that it will be successful.  That is what we did with our Lehigh Valley facility.  The USGA and The First Tee bought in to the combined tune of six figures in financial support.  The Bethlehem Housing Authority ponied up much much more to build that elaborate clubhouse/indoor teaching center that you see pictured.  It was a huge commitment (and risk) all around.  Most impressively, it was built right in the middle of a public housing development.  But that is the beauty of it.  Hundreds of the kids we are targeting to help, can walk with the bag of clubs we give them over their shoulder, to their own golf club/course.  They love it and we think other kids and adults will as well.  

Forrest and I just got a request this week about a property out West.  The owner has a little over a 100 acres and is planning a housing development but also would like to have a golf amenity.  We have not yet seen the property or even a topo survey but we likely could design and build an 18 hole Birdieball course and only use 10 acres or so to do it.   With Birdieballs, you don't need to worry about setbacks and the land demand is minimal.  There are other alternative options we'll consider as well but this one is definitely in the mix.  

Who knows for sure where this will go but I do believe some form of alternative golf is going to happen.  It can only be good for the game.  

[wsmorrison]

What was Flynn thinking when he designed this miniature golf course for JF Manne to be built in Ocean City, NJ?  

Note:  The scale is in units of 10 feet.

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
That is pretty cool!  Judging by a few of the holes, it looks like it required chipping and putting to play it.  Do you know if is was ever constructed?