Is benign neglect responsible for

[Patrick_Mucci]

more changes than conscious efforts ?

Probably

Is the lack of money often the foundation for ongoing changes to a golf course ?

Small changes, yes. Covering/grassing over bunkers, less bunker maintenance in general, etc.

Are we about to go through a period of substantive changes due to the crisis at local clubs ?

Possibly, but not extensive changes

What will be the more prominent changes brought on by benign neglect or lack of funds ?

Wouldn't the benign neglect come from the lack of funds??

Not necessarily.
Often benign neglect comes from a lack of understanding as to what's affecting the golf course or play on the golf course.
A good example is trees that were planted that over time altered the corridors of play.
The changes happened so gradually that most weren't aware of them

I've noticed that mowing patterns and frequencies have been changed at some clubs.
I've seen higher rough and narrower fairways (less area to maintain)
I've noticed that areas outside the playing corridors have been abandoned when it comes to maintaining them.

I've seen bunker maintainance diminish.

What other areas will be affected from a maintainance perspective ?

How will GCA be affected by the lack of funds ?

Fundamental GCA will probably not be affected too much. A bunker can be grassed in, but if maintained with higher than standard rough length grass it can still pose a hazard. The routing is pretty fixed without a huge expenditure. Fairway and green contours are pretty well fixed. So, the things that are really in jeopardy of being lost, IMO, are some far back tees, bunkers and perhaps in the rare cases where they exist, second greens on holes (holes that have two separate green sites). But the 'big' things can't really change, things like the routing, like contours, or even something like grass type.

And lastly, will clubs, in an effort to retain existing members and attract new members, go through a modernization/renovation/restoration process ?

The mid level clubs may do this a little bit, but it is not likely.

Why not ?

The high end clubs will do whatever they feel like because money is of little concern to them.

I don't know of one club, high end or otherwise, that's not concerned about money at the present time.

[John Moore II]

more changes than conscious efforts ?

Probably

Is the lack of money often the foundation for ongoing changes to a golf course ?

Small changes, yes. Covering/grassing over bunkers, less bunker maintenance in general, etc.

Are we about to go through a period of substantive changes due to the crisis at local clubs ?

Possibly, but not extensive changes

What will be the more prominent changes brought on by benign neglect or lack of funds ?

Wouldn't the benign neglect come from the lack of funds??

Not necessarily.
Often benign neglect comes from a lack of understanding as to what's affecting the golf course or play on the golf course.
A good example is trees that were planted that over time altered the corridors of play.
The changes happened so gradually that most weren't aware of them

I've noticed that mowing patterns and frequencies have been changed at some clubs.
I've seen higher rough and narrower fairways (less area to maintain)
I've noticed that areas outside the playing corridors have been abandoned when it comes to maintaining them.

I've seen bunker maintainance diminish.

What other areas will be affected from a maintainance perspective ?

How will GCA be affected by the lack of funds ?

Fundamental GCA will probably not be affected too much. A bunker can be grassed in, but if maintained with higher than standard rough length grass it can still pose a hazard. The routing is pretty fixed without a huge expenditure. Fairway and green contours are pretty well fixed. So, the things that are really in jeopardy of being lost, IMO, are some far back tees, bunkers and perhaps in the rare cases where they exist, second greens on holes (holes that have two separate green sites). But the 'big' things can't really change, things like the routing, like contours, or even something like grass type.

And lastly, will clubs, in an effort to retain existing members and attract new members, go through a modernization/renovation/restoration process ?

The mid level clubs may do this a little bit, but it is not likely.

Why not ?

Well, how extensive a modernization, etc., are we talking about? Small scale bunker renovations, new sand, perhaps even reconstruction of a few lost bunkers or lost tees don't count. But how many mid-level courses have major renovations planned (major renovations being complete irrigation systems, new greens, complete bunker renovations coupled with these, new tee construction, etc.)?

 The high end clubs will do whatever they feel like because money is of little concern to them.

I don't know of one club, high end or otherwise, that's not concerned about money at the present time.

Well, while I don't have access to their P&L's, I figure courses such as Augusta National, Cypress Point, Pine Valley and the top end courses on Long Island (NGLA, Friar's Head, Shinnecock Hills, et al.) aren't too concerned about cash flow.

[Sean_A]

Golf Club Altas is not helping that profile either. Most of us (myself included) "hit and run" a course one or two times and expect it to be perfect. When it is not, the course quickly gets dismissed here.

Mike

How do you explain so many Americans playing in GB&I and not complaining (much) about conditions?  For some reason most accept how conditions are and some even applaud, but why then isn't this approach taken home?

Ciao 

[Mike Sweeney]

Sean

John Updike made a well known speech at the USGA's Centennial celebration in 1994 that probably answered your question:

But in the New World, the ideal of human perfectibility favored medal play over match play, and precise and faithful scorekeeping encouraged ever more perfect golf course conditions.

I wonder, one hundred years after Charlie Macdonald cried out for some rules and course standards, whether we Americans aren't in danger of taking golf too seriously - too mechanistically.

Full reprint is at: http://www.usga.org/news/2009/january/John-Updike-s-Speech-At-USGA-Centennial-Banquet/

[Sean_A]

Sean

John Updike made a well known speech at the USGA's Centennial celebration in 1994 that probably answered your question:

But in the New World, the ideal of human perfectibility favored medal play over match play, and precise and faithful scorekeeping encouraged ever more perfect golf course conditions.

I wonder, one hundred years after Charlie Macdonald cried out for some rules and course standards, whether we Americans aren't in danger of taking golf too seriously - too mechanistically.

Full reprint is at: http://www.usga.org/news/2009/january/John-Updike-s-Speech-At-USGA-Centennial-Banquet/

Mike

Hmmm, yes, I can see that argument for a few gig events each year, but do ya really think the average country club guy has a different ideal of acceptable maintenance depending on if he has a card in hand (which is always no?) compared to playing a friendly game for a few a bob?

Ciao

[Mike Sweeney]

I don't think Updike is saying that is THE reason. I think he sees it as a one point in time that leads to a thousand things that lead to the current pop culture version of American Golf - Augusta in April on TV.

But we all get a little too crazy and we think that the 500-1000 courses that we talk about around here is somehow representative of golf. In America, there are so many levels of conditions, architecture and price points that it is hard to classify them. Reality is we just don't talk about the 90% that are similar in style to the UK because the better courses are typically private and in better condition.

[Sean_A]

I don't think Updike is saying that is THE reason. I think he sees it as a one point in time that leads to a thousand things that lead to the current pop culture version of American Golf - Augusta in April on TV.

But we all get a little too crazy and we think that the 500-1000 courses that we talk about around here is somehow representative of golf. In America, there are so many levels of conditions, architecture and price points that it is hard to classify them. Reality is we just don't talk about the 90% that are similar in style to the UK because the better courses are typically private and in better condition.

Mike

There is no question few here are much bothered about the hundreds of good courses with sketchy (which is often irrelevant) conditioning scattered about the US.   This is probably for good reasons such as every area has these sorts of courses and few are in anyway special for the traveling golfer - which is essentially what this site caters for.  That said, for some reason many are interested in the same sorts of courses in the UK with similar conditioning issues, alright, not all that many, but more.  Maybe I was just lucky where I grew up as I still think many of the no-name courses are good and cheap, not terribly different from many of the wee courses in GB&I people talk about. Personally, I think the issue may be like wine when traveling.  It often tastes much better in its own environment than when brought home.  Same wine, essentially same food, but very different attitude on the part of the drinker.

Ciao     

[TEPaul]

MikeS:

Thanks so much for linking that 1994 speech of John Updike’s. Leave it to Updike! His speech catches the entire evolution of golf and the evolution of golf in America so well and so accurately and in a way that is beautifully rhapsodic.

A part of his speech seems to explain the thing I call “The Big World Theory” that golf in its different forms and differing conditions can appeal so well to the entire spectrum of tastes and desires of all golfers-----all the way from the ideal of the immaculate condition of an ANGC and the Masters in the spring to what Updike ends his speech with;  “All it takes for a golfer to attain his happiness is a fence rail to throw his coat on, and a target somewhere over the rise.”

This, this speech, makes an incident with Updike even more poignant to me than it already was.

I read some of Updike years ago but I wasn’t all that knowledgeable on his Pulitzer Prize winning novels. To me, the thing that stood at most about him was his unusual look; his unusual face and physiognomy. His countenance always seemed to me to depict some kind of bird of prey with his long aquiline nose looking to me like a big bird beak. I only saw him on the jackets of his books; I never met him, until 2008.

I think that was the second of third year I played in the Herbert C. Leeds tournament at Myopia, a senior member/guest. I was aware that was Updike’s club and my partner told me he may be there in it but he wasn’t and I found out why a few years later.

After the tournament was over in 2008 I went to the parking lot to get my car as my partner waited at the clubhouse. When I pulled it up he was sitting on the steps with Updike. He was sitting on the steps bent over looking at his feet. He seemed so old to me because I suppose I had only seen him in that photograph on his book jackets. But that face of his was unmistakably recognizable. My partner introduced us and mentioned to him that I was the USGA Architecture Archive contact for Myopia and that we were looking for content on the club and particularly the course.

Updike looked up sort of sideways and mentioned that he had once given a speech for the USGA (the one you just linked). I asked him if he would consider writing his impressions about the golf course for us and he looked back down at his feet and said of course he would.

We said goodbye and I dropped off my partner and drove back to Philadelphia. I had every intention of calling on Updike and taking him up on his offer to write something on Myopia for the USGA Architecture Archive but the next thing I knew he was gone.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Golf Club Altas is not helping that profile either. Most of us (myself included) "hit and run" a course one or two times and expect it to be perfect. When it is not, the course quickly gets dismissed here.

Mike

How do you explain so many Americans playing in GB&I and not complaining (much) about conditions?  For some reason most accept how conditions are and some even applaud, but why then isn't this approach taken home?  

Sean,

My guess is for two reasons.

1.  That's what they're expecting.
2   The ball tends to run irrespective of how things look

[Sean_A]

Golf Club Altas is not helping that profile either. Most of us (myself included) "hit and run" a course one or two times and expect it to be perfect. When it is not, the course quickly gets dismissed here.

Mike

How do you explain so many Americans playing in GB&I and not complaining (much) about conditions?  For some reason most accept how conditions are and some even applaud, but why then isn't this approach taken home?  

Sean,

My guess is for two reasons.

1.  That's what they're expecting.
2   The ball tends to run irrespective of how things look

Pat

I expect you are right - expectations can be the great equalizer. 

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

more changes than conscious efforts ?

Probably

Is the lack of money often the foundation for ongoing changes to a golf course ?

Small changes, yes. Covering/grassing over bunkers, less bunker maintenance in general, etc.

Are we about to go through a period of substantive changes due to the crisis at local clubs ?

Possibly, but not extensive changes

What will be the more prominent changes brought on by benign neglect or lack of funds ?

Wouldn't the benign neglect come from the lack of funds??

Not necessarily.
Often benign neglect comes from a lack of understanding as to what's affecting the golf course or play on the golf course.
A good example is trees that were planted that over time altered the corridors of play.
The changes happened so gradually that most weren't aware of them

I've noticed that mowing patterns and frequencies have been changed at some clubs.
I've seen higher rough and narrower fairways (less area to maintain)
I've noticed that areas outside the playing corridors have been abandoned when it comes to maintaining them.

I've seen bunker maintainance diminish.

What other areas will be affected from a maintainance perspective ?

How will GCA be affected by the lack of funds ?

Fundamental GCA will probably not be affected too much. A bunker can be grassed in, but if maintained with higher than standard rough length grass it can still pose a hazard. The routing is pretty fixed without a huge expenditure. Fairway and green contours are pretty well fixed. So, the things that are really in jeopardy of being lost, IMO, are some far back tees, bunkers and perhaps in the rare cases where they exist, second greens on holes (holes that have two separate green sites). But the 'big' things can't really change, things like the routing, like contours, or even something like grass type.

And lastly, will clubs, in an effort to retain existing members and attract new members, go through a modernization/renovation/restoration process ?

The mid level clubs may do this a little bit, but it is not likely.

Why not ?

Well, how extensive a modernization, etc., are we talking about? Small scale bunker renovations, new sand, perhaps even reconstruction of a few lost bunkers or lost tees don't count.

 But how many mid-level courses have major renovations planned (major renovations being complete irrigation systems, new greens, complete bunker renovations coupled with these, new tee construction, etc.)?

Why not throw in demolition of the clubhouse and rebuilding a neweclub house.
Your list is absurd.
How many clubs attempt all of those projects when times are good ?

 The high end clubs will do whatever they feel like because money is of little concern to them.

I don't know of one club, high end or otherwise, that's not concerned about money at the present time.

Well, while I don't have access to their P&L's, I figure courses such as Augusta National, Cypress Point, Pine Valley and the top end courses on Long Island (NGLA, Friar's Head, Shinnecock Hills, et al.) aren't too concerned about cash flow.

Listing Augusta is absurd they're in a seperate league with ample reserves due to their TV contract.
As for the others, they're all concerned about cash flow/money, today and into the future.
These are difficult times with no relief in sight.
Many of those clubs are second, third or fourth clubs for their members, who may think twice about paying all of those dues to so many clubs
Attrition is a concern for every club..

[John Moore II]

Pat-How many mid-level clubs are considering any of what I said at this time? Say only a irrigation reworking, or a greens rebuild?

I think right now very few clubs are doing major projects. Langley where I play is putting new sand into the bunkers, but given that sand costs between $10 and $20 a ton, that is maybe a $10,000 project. Small scale. How many clubs, especially mid-level clubs, are undertaking projects with, say, $250,000 price tags or more?

As far as listing the other clubs being absurd, I had a friend who worked on the professional staff at Liberty National, given the people that he said were members there, I don't think any of them are worried about this present downturn. They are all still making in the 7 figures.

[Mike Sweeney]

As far as listing the other clubs being absurd, I had a friend who worked on the professional staff at Liberty National, given the people that he said were members there, I don't think any of them are worried about this present downturn. They are all still making in the 7 figures.

John,

Not sure what a couple (couple dozen) of rich members at a club have to do with the club itself. Liberty National cost $120+ million to build so they need 240 members @ $500,000 to hit that number. As the very expensive condos are separate but tied to the project and they came to the market at the very top of the market, I would be surprised if Liberty National is in a comfortable position.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat-How many mid-level clubs are considering any of what I said at this time? Say only a irrigation reworking, or a greens rebuild?


JKM,

Irrigation systems cost about $ 1,000,000 to $ 1,500,000, not an inconsequential number, especially in these times.

While I can't speak for the universe of local clubs, I"m aware of a few in my area that are undergoing or thinking of undergoing projects for the purpose of improving their golf course.

I was asked recently to provide the cost to regrass 19 greens at two local clubs and to estimate the down time and alternate methods for completing the projects.

When you have a number of courses in the same area, competing for the same members, product and price are critical.
If you don't have a good product, it's hard to price it to make it attractive.

I think right now very few clubs are doing major projects. Langley where I play is putting new sand into the bunkers, but given that sand costs between $10 and $20 a ton, that is maybe a $10,000 project. Small scale. How many clubs, especially mid-level clubs, are undertaking projects with, say, $250,000 price tags or more?

I can't speak to the golfing universe, but in the Met area, I'd say that more than a few are undertaiking or considering undertaking those porjects.  The only major difference I see is that instead of doing it in one fell swoop, they're planning them over 5 years.

As far as listing the other clubs being absurd, I had a friend who worked on the professional staff at Liberty National, given the people that he said were members there, I don't think any of them are worried about this present downturn. They are all still making in the 7 figures.

You're wrong about that.
Liberty National isn't a golf project, it's a development project with housing, hotels, etc., etc.
Liberty National isn't member owned.
And, Liberty National is undersubscribed, so they are worried, you just don't know it.