[Michael George]

I was looking at cities (regions) that have the biggest disparity between the private and public options available for the golfer.

I quickly identified New York City/Long Island and Boston/Cape Cod as 2 winners.  Both cities are amazing at the number of amazing private courses and the lack of great public courses.

NYC/Long Island - Private - Shinny, NGLA, Maidstone, Sebonack, Friars Head, Fishers Island, GCGC, Sleepy Hollow, Piping Rock, Winged Foot, Quaker Ridge, Bayonne, Baltusrol, Ridge at BB, Plainfield, Somerset Hills - etc.  Public - Bethpage Black.

Boston/Cape Cod - Private - Old Sandwich, Brookline, Boston GC, Kittanset, Eastward Ho, Myopia Hunt, Salem, Essex. Public -

Are there any other markets that can be considered even close to these 2 lopsided markets? Chicago certainly comes to mind, but not many others.

Maybe the economic problems today will create a situation that corrects this disparity in these and other markets.  It may just be one positive result of this economy if the US becomes more like the rest of the world re: public access to great golf.

[Sean Leary]

Philly is up there with NY and Boston.

[Matthew Sander]

Michael,

I'm not sure how high Chicago would rank on that list. Chicago actually has a fairly deep roster of public options. They don't match the quality of the world class private clubs in the area (Chicago Golf, Beverly, Shoreacres, Medinah, on and on...), but I would wager a guess that public golfers here have many more options than those from Boston, NYC, or Philly to name a few. Many may be overpriced, but there are pretty nice values such as Highlands of Elgin and Shepherd's Crook (another plug for this week's GCA outing up there). Consider the Cog Hill facility along with Cantigny, Prairie Landing, etc... and you have plenty of very good (not necessarily excellent) accessible golf.

Make no mistake, there is certainly a disparity between the two categories, but it is mostly attributed to the quality of private clubs (many of which are classic ODG clubs), as opposed to a paucity of golf for the masses.

[Howard Riefs]

Michael -

Your selections of NY/NJ and Boston/Cape Cod are tracking with this discussion from 2004. Per Sean's suggestion, it includes Philly/Delaware, too:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7824.0.htmll

And here's the corollary ("the narrowest gap"), which spotlights Chicago:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,7825.0.html

[Chris_Hufnagel]

I lived in Columbus, Ohio for four years and always pretty disappointed by the public options as compared to the variety and quality of private options.  

Great/very good privates included The Golf Club, Scioto, Muirfield Village, and Double Eagle.

Good/OK publics included Cooks Creek, Grandville, and The Players Club at Foxfire.

While I lived there Longaberger opened to great fanfare and we made the trip out to play while the clubhouse was still a doublewide trailer (without the charm of the Kingsley Club).  As we were unloading our bags from the trunk we asked a ranger if we could walk and he just laughed...it was pretty much downhill from there...

[Pete Lavallee]

Michael,

I'd be hard pressed to name any major city that has compareable private/public golf. Bandon, Oregon is the only one that comes to mind.

[David_Elvins]

Bandon, Oregon would be top of the list in my mind.  4 great public courses but nothing close to comparable for the golfer who wants to be a member of a club. 

[Tim Martin]

Michael,

I'd be hard pressed to name any major city that has compareable private/public golf. Bandon, Oregon is the only one that comes to mind.

Pete-I agree with your first sentence but can`t imagine that a place like Bandon in such a remote area would qualify as a major city/region.

[Joel_Stewart]

As for Boston, you have to place George Wright on the list as being the most popular public course.  I'm told it could be one of the great restorations in America if someone could come up with the money and a good architect.

This thread goes against the common belief that 80% of all golf is played at public golf courses.

[jeffwarne]

I was looking at cities (regions) that have the biggest disparity between the private and public options available for the golfer.

I quickly identified New York City/Long Island and Boston/Cape Cod as 2 winners.  Both cities are amazing at the number of amazing private courses and the lack of great public courses.

NYC/Long Island - Private - Shinny, NGLA, Maidstone, Sebonack, Friars Head, Fishers Island, GCGC, Sleepy Hollow, Piping Rock, Winged Foot, Quaker Ridge, Bayonne, Baltusrol, Ridge at BB, Plainfield, Somerset Hills - etc.  Public - Bethpage Black.

Boston/Cape Cod - Private - Old Sandwich, Brookline, Boston GC, Kittanset, Eastward Ho, Myopia Hunt, Salem, Essex. Public -

Are there any other markets that can be considered even close to these 2 lopsided markets? Chicago certainly comes to mind, but not many others.

Maybe the economic problems today will create a situation that corrects this disparity in these and other markets.  It may just be one positive result of this economy if the US becomes more like the rest of the world re: public access to great golf.

Just takes a little research
Long Island  Bethapage (has 5 courses not just one) LI national, Eisenhower park, Tallgrass, Goat Hill, Montauk, Indian Island, Lido,Timber Point,Island's End

Cape Cod
Highland Links. Dennis Pines, Dennis Highlands,Cranberry Valley, +multiple others

I'd say we;ll all be better off when we are content to play and enjoy good golf, and not spend hours opining about the conditions, "experience" and belt notching of the course we just played.(and perhaps even use that time to jump in a cart and play 9 more)

[David_Tepper]

In terms of quality, I think the public golf options in the San Francisco area are way below the private clubs. There is next to nothing that compares to SFGC, the Olympic Club, the Cal Club, the Meadow Club, Claremont, Lake Merced, Peninsula, etc.

Harding is probably the best public/muni golf option. The 2 courses at Half Moon Bay are probably the best CCFAD options. All 3 are well below the courses listed above. Pasatiempo is the only public course that could compete with the private clubs, but it is a little outside the SF area.        

[Cliff Hamm]

Rhode Island

Private - Newport, Wanamoisett, Rhode Island CC, Sakonett, Metacomet, etc.

Public - Newport National, Triggs

[Andy Troeger]

Bandon isn't a city--any remote resort probably could make the same claim.

Albuquerque as a city has better public golf than private golf and assuming the metro area counts its not close. Paa-Ko Ridge, UNM Championship, Twin Warriors, Santa Ana, and Sandia are probably all better than ANY of the private clubs. Four Hills is the only private club that gives any of those a run for its money.

New Mexico as a state also qualifies.

[Matthew Sander]

Pete,

I've mentioned it before, but Indianapolis is darn close when comparing privates to publics. Granted, Crooked Stick and Wolf Run are probably (haven't played them) separated from the field, but the third ranked private course near Indy (at least by GD), Sagamore, in my opinion is no better than the city's best publics; The Trophy Club, The Fort, Brickyard, Bear Slide, etc...

That said, Indy has far fewer ODG classics than many cities, with Broadmoor (Ross) being the most notable exception...

[Mike Benham]

Biggest Category:  Mullen, NE


Smallest Category:  Pebble Beach, CA

[Chris Hans]

Red Tail in Devens just northwest of Boston and TALLGRASS Golf Club on LI.

[Michael George]

I realize that the majority of privates will surpass the majority of publics in any city.  I was talking where that disparity seems too large and extremely non-beneficial to the game.

I got to thinking of this topic as I watched several clubs closing for financial reasons.  When they are bought out of foreclosure, I could see a renaissance of quality public golf in the US (eg. Spanish Peaks).  The membership groups that re-purchase the clubs from foreclosure will be looking for revenues and will likely become "semi-private" allowing for limited public play.  I have always believed that the "semi-private" model is much better for golf.  I am astounded when private clubs boast about only have 20 rounds a day.  It is an absolute waste of what God created.  While I certainly appreciate his contributions to golf in the US, I think CB MacDonald's early desire for pivate clubs has substantially hurt the game in this country.  Maybe this economic downturn will change that.

I did not include Chicago because of the quality of public golf in that city.  I think there is a disparity, but the public options are pretty good.  I  did not include Columbus solely because I enjoy Granville, Cooks Creek and Scarlett (which is semi-private) and don't mind taking a cart and playing Longaberger, which I also enjoy.  However, I fully understand that opinion because Golf Club and Muirfield Village far exceed anything else in the area. 

An underrated city with a large disparity is Pittsburgh.  Oakmont, Fox Chapel, Pitt Field Club, Laurel Valley.  You have to travel pretty far to get to Mystic Rock and Bedford Springs.

[Sven Nilsen]

I realize that the majority of privates will surpass the majority of publics in any city.  I was talking where that disparity seems too large and extremely non-beneficial to the game.

I got to thinking of this topic as I watched several clubs closing for financial reasons.  When they are bought out of foreclosure, I could see a renaissance of quality public golf in the US (eg. Spanish Peaks).  The membership groups that re-purchase the clubs from foreclosure will be looking for revenues and will likely become "semi-private" allowing for limited public play.  I have always believed that the "semi-private" model is much better for golf.  I am astounded when private clubs boast about only have 20 rounds a day.  It is an absolute waste of what God created.  While I certainly appreciate his contributions to golf in the US, I think CB MacDonald's early desire for pivate clubs has substantially hurt the game in this country.  Maybe this economic downturn will change that.

I did not include Chicago because of the quality of public golf in that city.  I think there is a disparity, but the public options are pretty good.  I  did not include Columbus solely because I enjoy Granville, Cooks Creek and Scarlett (which is semi-private) and don't mind taking a cart and playing Longaberger, which I also enjoy.  However, I fully understand that opinion because Golf Club and Muirfield Village far exceed anything else in the area. 

An underrated city with a large disparity is Pittsburgh.  Oakmont, Fox Chapel, Pitt Field Club, Laurel Valley.  You have to travel pretty far to get to Mystic Rock and Bedford Springs.

Michael:

Using Spanish Peaks as an example of a formerly private course that might help the public golf scene is a bit of a joke.  First, its location is about an hour outside of its nearest "city," which is Bozeman.  The population of Bozeman dwindles in the summer when MSU is out of session, and regardless the local populus is much more interested in fishing the Madison, Jefferson and Gallatin then they are in swinging the golf club.  As for tourist play, I can't imagine anyone is ever going to consider making the Big Sky area the focus of a golf getaway.

With regards to the topic at hand, the Providence area seems to win hands down.  NYC has a least a few decent public options, as do Philly, Boston, Detroit, etc.

I've always heard people complain about the public options in LA, but don't know enough about the area to comment.  Same goes for San Francisco and San Diego.

I'm not sure what the value is in just pointing out the disparity.  To me the question should really be if you don't belong to a private club, what city is it the most difficult to get out and play a decent course in.  Factors in determining most difficult have to include population (an available tee times per person calculation), travel (including if its a city in which you might not own a car) and to a certain extent weather.  I think it would be hard to say NYC doesn't "win" this debate.

[Michael George]

Sven:

Spanish Peaks was just referenced as a course that recently closed, not as one that will bridge the disparity.  Unfortunately, I think the golf community is in for some more bad news.  Some of the courses that I have heard from members are in financial difficulty are amazing to me.  

I will use my personal experience as to why the disparity matters.  I grew up playing what I thought were really good golf courses, many of which were private.  However, I did not develop an interest in golf course design and architecture and really develop a love for the game until I was able to experience great private designs like Oakmont, Kirtland and Brookside.    I am fortunate in life and have the ability to play many of these private courses.  Unfortunately, there are the majority of people that cannot play private courses and don't have public options that will create this level of interest.  Want to know why golf is down, because many of our largest metropolitan areas are not providing the best that this sport has to offer to new golfers.

Plus, I just enjoy looking at golf destinations and analyzing how golf is treated in different communities.  Certain cities have a Scottish attitude toward golf while others have a much more elitest attitude toward the game.

[jeffwarne]

Want to know why golf is down, because many of our largest metropolitan areas are not providing the best that this sport has to offer to new golfers.

Golf is "down" because too many courses were built for too many boobs who jumped into the game because it was the cool thing to do.
When the realities of time,money, and difficulty kicked in, coupled with a recession, something had to give.

The game is fine-courses in overbuilt areas will sufer

[Howard Riefs]

Using Spanish Peaks as an example of a formerly private course that might help the public golf scene is a bit of a joke.  First, its location is about an hour outside of its nearest "city," which is Bozeman.  The population of Bozeman dwindles in the summer when MSU is out of session, and regardless the local populus is much more interested in fishing the Madison, Jefferson and Gallatin then they are in swinging the golf club.  As for tourist play, I can't imagine anyone is ever going to consider making the Big Sky area the focus of a golf getaway.

For a more apt example, I'll offer Ravisloe, a respected club in Chicago's south suburbs that recently transitioned from private to public. It's now arguably one of the top 5 public courses in the Chicago area.

http://www.ravisloecountryclub.com/

[Alex Miller]

San Diego doesn't have great private options, so I'd nominate L.A.

Private: LACC, Riviera, Bel Air, Wilshire, Sherwood, Palos Verdes, Virginia, Annandale, Hacienda, Oakmont, Lakeside (with the first 2 in a group of their own)

Public: Rustic, Rancho, Oak Quarry, Brookside 1 (maybe)

A list with the quality of Michael's original post would only have LACC, Riv, and Rustic. So a 2:1 ratio.

[Jon Wiggett]

The problem is you are not comparing similar products. For me a public course (here in Britain often called a Municipal) is for the masses. They want to be able to get out and play a round for a breath of fresh that is cheap and cheerful. They are not so interested in quality of the playing surfaces and probably not aware of GCA quality. Places such as Bandon are resort courses and not public courses as they are expensive (compared to British Muni GF prices) and would probably not allow your 200 strokes for 18 holes in jeans and pit boots on the course (though I could be wrong). This also rules out St.Andrews (well atleast the main courses).

Here in the Britain Leeds is a good example of a happy mix with Alwoodley, Moortown, Sandmoor, Scarcroft plus several others offering good to great golf on private courses with Temple Newsam (spelling?), Roundhay (original 9), Gotts Park, Middleton, plus quite a few pay & play offering some good quality public golf

Jon

[Sean_A]

Jon

I don't see any value in distinguishing between munis and other types of publics. 

The UK is a totally different ball game to the States.  For as much as people rave about the privates in the US, the public options are of incredibly high quality and very competitively priced at all levels.   I know a lot Brits who are impressed by the no-name publics in the US and how cheap they are to play and in fact they blow away what is on offer in the UK which makes it easy to see why accessing the privates is so popular.  I was a public vagabond in Michigan and was more than happy with what I played compared to what I got.  The thing which became hard in the go-go 90s was required cart use on weekends, not the quality and value of golf on offer.  This effectively killed off a huge percentage of courses we played.  Before I moved to England I think we were down to rota of about 6 courses we would hit.  Sure, in general the publics aren't up to the standard of the privates, but as someone mentioned, most folks are looking for cheap and cheerful golf, not a private club which often breaks down to more than $100 per round for its members - even for moderately priced privates.  In the UK the advent of societies and private clubs allowing for public play doomed the idea of public courses ever being something other than of minor importance on the UK golf scene.  That doesn't mean the publics don't matter, because they do, but in my experience most golfers who are somewhat serious seek out privates at least as much as publics.  It remains to be seen if the public courses can take advantage of this economic downturn in "encouraging" folks to either move over to publics with memberships (which is just about all publics) or just encourage folks to become vagabond golfers hitting the best deals on offer.   

Ciao   

[C. Squier]

Maybe the economic problems today will create a situation that corrects this disparity in these and other markets.  It may just be one positive result of this economy if the US becomes more like the rest of the world re: public access to great golf.

Can you take this quote a little further down the road?  Are you hoping that private courses fail so that they become public?  Do you walk into retail shops and tell the owner you hope he goes bankrupt so you can take advantage of the clearance sale?

Private courses failing is not a positive result of the economy in any way, shape or form. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()