News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


BCowan

Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #75 on: June 02, 2014, 08:50:02 PM »

The reason why this is important Brian, is to determine how many carts (what kind) dormant Bermuda or a fescue grass could take.  

I thought this thread was about natural-looking cartpaths? And does your home course have either dormant Bermuda or fescue? Mine does not, nor does our superintendent object to cart usage. So I repeat my question about why we continue this debate?

But those single carts would require more carts, which means additional upkeep costs and more wear and tear on the course.

Sometimes threads go in other directions and it does relate to whether or not cart paths can me natural or not.  No, my home course is not, but this matter has been discussed with Streamsong.  I may have a home course someday that doesn't over seed with rye.  Why do you comment on something you don't care about?  This is something that interests me and I am trying to learn from Sean and Paul's perspective across the pond!  There is no debate other than with Mucci.   The additional carts could possibly require less maint.  There would be less wear and tear because they weigh significantly less, plus they solve the 3 some or 3 people using a cart problem.    
« Last Edit: June 02, 2014, 09:00:51 PM by BCowan »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #76 on: June 02, 2014, 09:02:40 PM »
Pat,

Brilliant. I mention walking and your first thought is to hire a caddy. And apparently I don't live in the real world! You, dear boy, are fast becoming an antique.  ;D

Paul,

I won't hold your ignorance against you, but, at the great majority of clubs in the NY area, members aren't allowed to carry their bags.
Junior members, yes, but, not regular members.

 Many clubs in the midwest have the same moronic policies. 
 Unless they are in a booming area or are near full in the membership department, they ought to rethink their position.


I think they establish policies that suit their member's needs and desires as opposed to your advice


You have so much to learn about golf in the U.S. and I can only devote so much time to your education. ;D


Paul isn't missing anything but idiotic policies, and that is coming from a former caddie. 

I used to caddy as well.

Those policies are what the members want, not what you think they should have.

 

BHoover

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #77 on: June 02, 2014, 09:09:27 PM »

The reason why this is important Brian, is to determine how many carts (what kind) dormant Bermuda or a fescue grass could take.  

I thought this thread was about natural-looking cartpaths? And does your home course have either dormant Bermuda or fescue? Mine does not, nor does our superintendent object to cart usage. So I repeat my question about why we continue this debate?

But those single carts would require more carts, which means additional upkeep costs and more wear and tear on the course.

Sometimes threads go in other directions and it does relate to whether or not cart paths can me natural or not.  No, my home course is not, but this matter has been discussed with Streamsong.  I may have a home course someday that doesn't over seed with rye.  Why do you comment on something you don't care about?  This is something that interests me and I am trying to learn from Sean and Paul's perspective across the pond!  There is no debate other than with Mucci.   The additional carts could possibly require less maint.  There would be less wear and tear because they weigh significantly less, plus they solve the 3 some or 3 people using a cart problem.    

If I didn't care, I wouldn't be posting.  More carts on the course would obviously result in more cart traffic, which would mean increased wear and tear.  Simple as that.  Face it, we aren't getting rid of carts anytime soon, so why use something that would cause more damage?

BCowan

Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #78 on: June 02, 2014, 09:09:58 PM »
Pat,

Brilliant. I mention walking and your first thought is to hire a caddy. And apparently I don't live in the real world! You, dear boy, are fast becoming an antique.  ;D

Paul,

I won't hold your ignorance against you, but, at the great majority of clubs in the NY area, members aren't allowed to carry their bags.
Junior members, yes, but, not regular members.

 Many clubs in the midwest have the same moronic policies. 
 Unless they are in a booming area or are near full in the membership department, they ought to rethink their position.


I think they establish policies that suit their member's needs and desires as opposed to your advice

When you see courses closing left and right maybe you can determine that not everyone can afford a caddie  ;), but I know you subscribe to golf being a luxury.  Which is sad.  
You have so much to learn about golf in the U.S. and I can only devote so much time to your education. ;D


Paul isn't missing anything but idiotic policies, and that is coming from a former caddie. 

I used to caddy as well.

Those policies are what the members want, not what you think they should have.

 I suppose you would rather they go out of business then change.  As stubborn as you are, I'm not surprised.  Remember the Prairie Dunes thread, doesn't remove them from criticism..... All someone can say is ain't it a shame.  

BCowan

Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #79 on: June 02, 2014, 09:12:58 PM »

The reason why this is important Brian, is to determine how many carts (what kind) dormant Bermuda or a fescue grass could take.  

I thought this thread was about natural-looking cartpaths? And does your home course have either dormant Bermuda or fescue? Mine does not, nor does our superintendent object to cart usage. So I repeat my question about why we continue this debate?

But those single carts would require more carts, which means additional upkeep costs and more wear and tear on the course.

Sometimes threads go in other directions and it does relate to whether or not cart paths can me natural or not.  No, my home course is not, but this matter has been discussed with Streamsong.  I may have a home course someday that doesn't over seed with rye.  Why do you comment on something you don't care about?  This is something that interests me and I am trying to learn from Sean and Paul's perspective across the pond!  There is no debate other than with Mucci.   The additional carts could possibly require less maint.  There would be less wear and tear because they weigh significantly less, plus they solve the 3 some or 3 people using a cart problem.    

More carts on the course would obviously result in more cart traffic, which would mean increased wear and tear.  Simple as that.  Face it, we aren't getting rid of carts anytime soon, so why use something that would cause more damage?

The tires are smaller and the cart weighs significantly less, which means less wear and tear.  It is simple as that.  I am not trying to get rid of carts, I'm trying to enable people to ride and not have to over seed in the winter!!!  Where is your proof that it causes more damage???  Don't say common sense, because 2, 200lb people plus a cart that weigh at least double is more compaction and wear/tear! 

BHoover

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #80 on: June 02, 2014, 09:14:54 PM »
The tires are smaller and the cart weighs significantly less, which means less wear and tear.  It is simple as that.  I am not trying to get rid of carts, I'm trying to enable people to ride and not have to over seed in the winter!!!  Where is your proof that it causes more damage???  Don't say common sense, because 2, 200lb people plus a cart that weigh at least double is more compaction and wear/tear! 

My proof is that single carts hold one person, rather than two.  So a foursome would use four carts, as opposed to two.  That's 16 tires as opposed to 8 rolling around the course.  You don't think that would cause more damage?

BCowan

Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #81 on: June 02, 2014, 09:20:00 PM »
No, I don't.  More vehicles that are half the weight= less wear/tear.  Do 4 walkers do less damage then two regular carts?  Do roads that allow trucks to carry the most weight, crumble quicker?  (see Michigan as example).  I would like to see which one would do the best.  So a case study is in order IMHO.  

   Plus pace of play should improve drastically too.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2014, 09:23:40 PM by BCowan »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Natural looking cart paths New
« Reply #82 on: June 02, 2014, 09:23:52 PM »


Paul,

You and Ben aren't living in the real world.
Yes, we'd all prefer cart use at a minimum, but it ain't going to happen.

I live in the real world, NYC isn't the real world.

Who mentioned New York City ?
I don't recall many, if any private clubs in New York City.

But, the greater New York City area does represent a large portion of the real world, not some isolated little town in the midwest.
For confirmation, just look at the populations
 

It isn't a representation of the USA as a whole.


The greater New York City area is representative of the USA as a whole.
In case you hadn't noticed, you'll see that golf courses followed population centers


One of the determining factors is cost.

Yup it costs money to maint carts and to drop $17-25 every round for them.

Every club I've been at made a profit on their carts, hence, it doesn't cost money, net, to maintain carts.


If it costs $ 40 to take a cart and $ 60 to take a caddy, which choice is the low cost financial choice the golfer will make ?
The real world answer is the cart.

Again, you aren't in the real world.

I've been in the real world two to three times as long as you and have exponentially more experience in the administration of club policies and their finances than you.
 


Your viewpoint is of top 50 courses in the US.


My view point is from local clubs, clubs you have never heard of, not the top 50 courses in the U.S.
Get your facts right before you make any definitive statements.
Quite simply, you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to local clubs in the greater New York City area.
 

Flyover, ever hear of it?  Or the fact my club 60% walk and the 40+ year olds use trolley's.  What a concept.

Your club is an isolated club far removed from the cities and towns in the U.S. where the vast majority of clubs are located


Clubs have to develop a prudent cart/caddy platform and pricing mechanism that encourage caddy use versus cart use.

Clubs that aren't anywhere close to full, need to allow trolleys and introduce others into their club or go extinct


So your solution to membership issues are to allow trolleys and that will solve the problem.
What a joke.
You don't have a clue as to what you're talking about.
The core financial woes relating to clubs have nothing to do with carts vs trolleys.
That's beyond moronic


I thought that you and Ben would have been able to figure that out without my help. ;D

If there is anyone that needs help, it is you  ;)

Yes, I do need help with my irons as I'm hitting them rather poorly.
But, when it comes to the finances and administration of clubs in the U.S., you and Paul are in the dark.
At least Paul recognizes that, you on the other hand remain delusional.

Trolleys will solve the financial woes of clubs with membership issues, that's a classic.
Have you written to these clubs and told them how you can solve their financial problems ?



« Last Edit: June 03, 2014, 01:07:34 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

BHoover

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #83 on: June 02, 2014, 09:26:06 PM »
No, I don't.  More vehicles that are half the weight= less wear/tear.  Do 4 walkers do less damage then two regular carts?  Do roads that allow trucks to carry the most weight, crumble quicker?  (see Michigan as example).  I would like to see which one would do the best.  So a case study is in order IMHO.  

   Plus pace of play should improve drastically too.

I do agree about improving pace of play, but so would proper cart etiquette.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #84 on: June 03, 2014, 01:49:06 AM »
Sean,

I fully appreciate what you're saying. That's very much my point. I'm not suggesting Americans are suddenly going to start walking but I struggle to comprehend a policy which flatly prohibits it. Every round walked is one less buggy used. And on a positive note, I've been getting the impression that the trolley is at least beginning to make an appearance over there.

And you really don't need to speak ill of your fellow Americans. I think you've long been accepted as an honorary Brit!  


Paul

In truth, the number of courses which don't allow walking (without a caddie) is quite small compared to the number of courses in the country.  We often get hung up on this site about private US clubs because that is where the cream of architecture lies, but that isn't the game the vast majority of Americans play. In other words, whatever Mucci says is pretty much the opposite of what the comfortable majority of American "golfers" experience  ;D 

I am not speaking ill of Americans, its just that they are a generation or tow ahead of the curve with convenience culture. Most societies are heading the same way - including Britain.     
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Phil Lipper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Natural looking cart paths
« Reply #85 on: June 03, 2014, 11:39:02 AM »
Stanwich in CT has green carts paths that make you feel like your driving on tennis court. Although I'm not a fan of carts paths I liked theirs.