[Kalen Braley]

Not surprised to see another thread go the way of the dodo.  The reality is golf is a many different thing to each subset of our culture..


The munies are the weekend escape for the masses...which actually represents golf for most.
The higher daily fees are for the tweeners, extra cash in their pocket, not enough to join a club.
The plethora of Doak 2 privates for the older peeps with old money who are fully bought in and golf out of habit and for social purposes.
Then the small group who play high end publics like Bandon, etc.
And of course the top tier privates for the "elites" where everything can be had regardless of price.
Then of course the golf geeks who will play any and all of the above......


So you see golf is something different to nearly everyone...

[John Kavanaugh]

Ordering from Amazon is elitist. My wife has been begging me for days to take her to WalMart. I just don't have the strength.

[BCowan]

I used to work at a top 100 course, actually a few of them.  One of them let bag boys play everyday after 3pm and hit balls whenever you weren't working.  Golf is the least elitist it's ever been.  Hockey is expensive as hell to play, but nobody raises the elitist card on that sport.  My parents said I could play hockey or golf, even though they could afford to pay for both, they made me make choices at a young age.  Now kids are worshiped and parents throw their life savings at every whim for their kids.  Stop using the 1%er clubs as the main focus.

[Peter Pallotta]

My own golfing life and experience tells me that the perception of the game's elitism is in large part just that, a *perception*, and one held mostly by folks with little good-will in the matter. And yet: maybe when skiers start building slopes and manufacturing snow in southern Texas, and soccer players start buying 400 acres of land just to plop a single 100 yard long field in the middle of it, outside folks will better understand the golf industry's tendency to put golf courses in places and spaces that seem so contrary to the nature and spirit of the game, and so unnecessary in terms of its basic/essential requirements. Until then, the hubris of doing something just because you *can*, without regard to whether or not you *should*, will indeed seem elitist to many. It does to me. The humble (and practical, and financially prudent) approach would never even conceive of such follies.   
Peter

[Steve Lapper]

 its perhaps just a tad hypocritical to "worry about such an images' perpetuation." There are certainly a myriad of other ways to counteract that kind of trend.
 

Steve:


I've built a lot of golf courses for fairly modest budgets, and I'm not the one who sets the prices for them.  It does bother me that when the Revolution comes, most of our clients will be targets for the guys with the pitchforks, and I'll probably be targeted because of "guilt by association".


I lived a year in the UK and Ireland where there was zero perception of golf as elitist, in a country where they are keenly aware of elitism.  It's Americans that turned it into a negative -- by the very "market forces" that we are so keen to embrace.  If you've got other ways to counteract that trend, speak up ... we need them!

   Tom,


    I rather doubt they'll be burning copies of the Confidential Guide when the Revolution comes. Instead, I suspect they'll more likely be tipping over and setting fire to your co-author's G550 MB Gelandewagen   , or barging the gates of your other co-author's uber-elite Japanese clubs he did such a good job of representing. I believe you'll be safe from any "guilt by association" up in Traverse City.


  We both know of plenty of UK and Irish clubs that remain with an inclination toward's elitism, however I agree far more exist over here. I don't believe it is at all a function of "market forces" as you suggest, but instead a function of century-old prejudice and social-stratification.


  The Brits and the Irish treat golf as one of their national pastimes, much like we do for baseball or football. They developed their early golf with healthy doses of elitism, but smartly and contemporarily switched the business modes to opening up in order to allow golf tourist revenue to subsidize their local memberships. Lets not forget their native populations are but mere fractions of our's over here.


  Elitism on this side of the pond, either by perception or reality, doesn't align itself purely with money. Our capitalistic "market forces" have produced dozens of big-ticket private clubs whose membership is only restricted by checkbook size. Most, if not all, don't give a rats-ass about where you went to school, how you made your $$,or what the name of the ship you just stepped off of. If you aren't a criminal, have a buddy or two to vouch for you, and your check clears..... voila...let me show you the way to the first tee!


  Real elitism resonates from the old school clubs that still practice distinctly selective discrimination, often based on religion, race or genetic affiliation. There's practically one in every major US MSA. We both know who they are and they are the most egregious promoters of the perception of golf's elitism. It's their right and as in the UK and Ireland, it's protected by the laws of the land, but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach.


  Your reasoning that you've "built a lot of golf course for a fairly modest budget..and you aren't (sic) the one who sets the prices" is borderline irrelevant. If you truly wanted to counteract the trend of golf's perception as elitist, there are plenty of other ways you could have a tremendous impact.


   For starters, you could easily identify several unique projects that you could then go back to your client base and advocate for financial support that would produce attractive "open to the general public, et.al." venues. You could even create a Tom Doak foundation where you could request/require clients to help fund for such a purpose. Heck, I bet you could even trade off some part of your service engagement for a guaranteed "open access slot." Artists have long had a history of including that into their contracts with various institutions. My bet is that plenty of existing and upcoming GCA talent would be thrilled to join in such an undertaking.


   In today's social media world, you could handily use it's different platforms to carry various messages to the golfing community promoting the values you believe to be promoting open access and anti-elitism.


   As one of the games most erudite spokesmen, you have plenty of media "throw weight" to use. You could even pick up where David Fay left off and use your reputation to help push the blue bloods over at the USGA out of their insular comfort zone, and into the right direction. Sure, Mike Davis might well be sympathetic to similar principles, but he's conflicted out.....you aren't!


  Ron Whitten might not extend himself to help you (and you'd be not missing anything there), but many other golf architects and true golf journalists would likely be more than happy to help you spread the right message.


  Just saying......
 
 

[Sean_A]

The blanket of golf is without question elitist because the face of golf is elitist. Golfers push for as good as they can afford and that push often comes in the form of better clubs (more exclusive really and better facilities and better maintenance).  In the big picture, it is even very easy to attack the concept of all but a very few courses simply because of conditioning demands.  Extend that concept futher to climates and areas which cannot support golf even at a most basic level without massive natural resources being poured into the projects.  To be honest, I am quite surprised golf doesn't have a worse reputation among the general public. Nevermind about the elitist face of the game...that is changing and will continue to doso.  If we focused more the amount of wasted resources for golf we would be far better off...because this isn't about perception...its reality.  And yes, as an avid golfer I am guilty of perpetuating the waste. However, the first step in acknowledging that golf isn't doing anything close to what it could or should to raise its reputation is to accept that golf is miles off the mark.

My guess is that this site does as well as anywhere to raise the issues of waste in golf maintenace, but I think most here would acknowledge that we don't really give that much time to the question of raising the rep of golf by being far more responsible in how resources are used.

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

There has never been a golf course built as environmentally disruptive as the finest TopGolf facility.  So much for the masses.

[Kalen Braley]

john,


Surely you jest.  TopGolf's footprint on a bit of land is a mere fraction compared to the hundreds of acres just one single course often takes up.  And you can fit a lot more people in on that limited bit of space on person per acre basis.


Stuff like TopGolf is the future, regardless of whether the current cronies realize it...

[John Kavanaugh]

Kalen,


My test is what do you want to live next to. Power plant, battery factory, waste dump, TopGolf or a golf course. Even in Vegas TopGolf is the ugliest structure in the neighborhood.

[Ian Mackenzie]

What is this thread anyway?


Had it been started by anyone else, it would have died.....;-)


The pitchforks will arrive; of that I am rather certain.


Yesterday's political Kabuki theater (celebrating "legislation" before it is even ratified by the senate) was another step towards the inevitable.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,


My test is what do you want to live next to. Power plant, battery factory, waste dump, TopGolf or a golf course. Even in Vegas TopGolf is the ugliest structure in the neighborhood.

None of the above John,


I pick a suburban spot not near any of those.  Or a nice hilltop perch to peruse over the minions...

[BCowan]

Kalen,


My test is what do you want to live next to. Power plant, battery factory, waste dump, TopGolf or a golf course. Even in Vegas TopGolf is the ugliest structure in the neighborhood.

  ,   Jkava how many years before the novelty ends or the credit cards get denied w TopGolf?

[Mike_Young]

If I was not a nice person I could make a very accurate list of the elitist on this site. 

They are what make the site fun.  However golf is like most other things in life where the elitist are rarely the one behind the curtain and yet they think they are.  And the one behind the curtain knows how to manipulate the strings of the elitist without being one.   

[Ira Fishman]

What is this thread anyway?


Had it been started by anyone else, it would have died.....;-)


The pitchforks will arrive; of that I am rather certain.


Yesterday's political Kabuki theater (celebrating "legislation" before it is even ratified by the senate) was another step towards the inevitable.

Ian,


I take and accept your point about the person who started this thread. However, I have never met Mr. Doak, played any of his courses (although will do so this fall), nor purchased the Confidential Guide, but he raises an important question for the people on this site who love and care about the game of golf.


Golf as a game is not elitist inherently.  The posts about the UK and Ireland evidence that fact, and none of those mentioned golf courses being public parks.


Unfortunately, golf in the US always has been perceived, and properly so, as a game for the elites.  The first generation of courses were formed by the wealthy and powerful. Often, such courses made it a point of honor that if you were not of "the right kind", you were not welcome whether by social status, wealth, religion, race, or gender.  How many times do we talk about courses where playing, let alone joining, requires knowledge of a secret code?  Dr. MacKenzie has precisely one course in the US that the public can play.  Not sure that Mr. Tillinghast has many more.  Mr. MacDonald?--I can think of only Old White off the top of my head. Mr. Ross is an exception. And the public ones require green fees that could pay for a month's rent.


My point: the tone for golf was set in this country over a hundred years ago.  And the leadership of golf has embraced and reinforced that tone. 


That tone permeates the sport all the way through to the more affordable courses.  Think about the fact that virtually every course has a dress code.  Why does it matter if one plays in a T-Shirt and sneakers?


The originating tone is made clear by the counter examples that we celebrate: Francis Ouimet winning our Open, and Walter Hagen breaking down the door to clubhouses to let professionals enter.  And I cannot prove it, but I am confident that much of the popularity of Hogan, Snead, Palmer, and Woods has to do with the fact that their life stories run counter to the elite narrative. 


I have loved the game of golf since I first played it 47 years ago.  I have been fortunate enough to be (mostly) part of the elite. But as the base of golfers continues to shrink, it is an important topic to decide whether the sport returns to the very narrow base from which it came in the US or whether the leadership of the game wants to take meaningful steps to reverse the slide. 


Ira

[BCowan]

What is this thread anyway?


Had it been started by anyone else, it would have died.....;-)


The pitchforks will arrive; of that I am rather certain.


Yesterday's political Kabuki theater (celebrating "legislation" before it is even ratified by the senate) was another step towards the inevitable.

Ian,


I take and accept your point about the person who started this thread. However, I have never met Mr. Doak, played any of his courses (although will do so this fall), nor purchased the Confidential Guide, but he raises an important question for the people on this site who love and care about the game of golf.


Golf as a game is not elitist inherently.  The posts about the UK and Ireland evidence that fact, and none of those mentioned golf courses being public parks.


Unfortunately, golf in the US always has been perceived, and properly so, as a game for the elites.  The first generation of courses were formed by the wealthy and powerful. Often, such courses made it a point of honor that if you were not of "the right kind", you were not welcome whether by social status, wealth, religion, race, or gender.  How many times do we talk about courses where playing, let alone joining, requires knowledge of a secret code?  Dr. MacKenzie has precisely one course in the US that the public can play.  Not sure that Mr. Tillinghast has many more.  Mr. MacDonald?--I can think of only Old White off the top of my head. Mr. Ross is an exception. And the public ones require green fees that could pay for a month's rent.


My point: the tone for golf was set in this country over a hundred years ago.  And the leadership of golf has embraced and reinforced that tone. 


That tone permeates the sport all the way through to the more affordable courses.  Think about the fact that virtually every course has a dress code.  Why does it matter if one plays in a T-Shirt and sneakers?


The originating tone is made clear by the counter examples that we celebrate: Francis Ouimet winning our Open, and Walter Hagen breaking down the door to clubhouses to let professionals enter.  And I cannot prove it, but I am confident that much of the popularity of Hogan, Snead, Palmer, and Woods has to do with the fact that their life stories run counter to the elite narrative. 


I have loved the game of golf since I first played it 47 years ago.  I have been fortunate enough to be (mostly) part of the elite. But as the base of golfers continues to shrink, it is an important topic to decide whether the sport returns to the very narrow base from which it came in the US or whether the leadership of the game wants to take meaningful steps to reverse the slide. 


Ira

There is so many inaccuracies. There is more then one public Mackenzie. There are tons on below $40 Ross tracks. Majors are played on public courses more then ever. T shirts are allowed at many ma and pa courses, which is sad that asking a collard shirt is too much. Poor people used to wear suits to baseball games.  It doesn't cost anymore to wear a collard shirt.


Golf is NOT shrinking. Rounds are up in a lot of areas across the country. Played in Jan and Feb up north with 100 folks out chasing a ball around.  I asked a few of these folks how they played the game, not one said well I read a USGA Pamphlet.


One can join about 99% of private clubs in the US. PEOPLE want the best of the best on their terms.  Leaders are people who develop golf courses, not governing bodies.  No one starts playing golf due to central planning. 


One can play Stoatin brae for $60 or less, but hey that's not on an ocean or the best of the best. That's why it isn't talked about on here.  Almost every course built today is public, still not good enough for some.  They think they should set the green fees price. 


Super bowl and Stanley Cup tickets are through the roof, but hey the same cost to play Pebble or Bandon is elitist.  I should have a right to play CB McDonald. 

[MClutterbuck]

 Just as Porsche used the Cheyenne to generate capital to invest into their rarer cars. 

The main market for the Porsche Cayenne, from what I saw, was developers.  Every developer we were working for in 2007 had one or two, to show prospective members / buyers around their sites ... all on a business / development loan from the bank, of course.  There were a lot of used ones for sale after the housing crash stopped all those projects in mid-stream!

Tom, a collegue of yours told me he was picked up by 3 Cayenne´s for a first visit to a site. By the end of the day all 3 were stuck and abandoned and the site visit was saved by an old Defender.

[Mike Sweeney]

Then of course the golf geeks who will play any and all of the above......

with anyone who loves the game.


Most memorable partners over the years:

• One of the guys who literally cleans the mice cages in one of the research labs at Yale;
• Sam Snead - actually was a caddie in his group. I thought I knew the "F-bomb" from a famous basketball coach, and then I met Sam Snead;
• A French lesbian couple in Ireland! One was smoking hot and the other was...

Golf is great. Just have fun, ignore the politics and take a trip to Maine....

[John Kirk]

"elitist" can be used to describe a person who thinks they are somehow better or smarter than others.

Here's the Wikipedia explanation for "Elitism":

Attributes that identify an elite vary; personal achievement may not be essential. Elitist status can be based on personal achievement, such as degrees from top-rate universities or impressive internships and job offers, it can (in archaic societies) be based on lineage or passed-on fame from parents or grandparents. As a term "Elite" usually describes a person or group of people who are members of the uppermost class of society, and wealth can contribute to that class determination. Personal attributes commonly purported by elitist theorists to be characteristic of the elite include: rigorous study of, or great accomplishment within, a particular field; a long track record of competence in a demanding field; an extensive history of dedication and effort in service to a specific discipline (e.g., medicine or law) or a high degree of accomplishment, training or wisdom within a given field. Elitists tend to favor social systems such as meritocracy, technocracy and plutocracy as opposed to radical democracy, political egalitarianism and populism. Elitists also believe only a few "shakers and movers" truly change society rather than society being changed by the majority of people who only vote and elect the elites into power. To elitists, the public is abjectly powerless and can be manipulated only by the top group of elites.^[2]
Some synonyms for "elite" might be "upper-class" or "aristocratic", indicating that the individual in question has a relatively large degree of control over a society's means of production. This includes those who gain this position due to socioeconomic means and not personal achievement. However, these terms are misleading when discussing elitism as a political theory, because they are often associated with negative "class" connotations and fail to appreciate a more unbiased exploration of the philosophy.

[Mike Wagner]

What is this thread anyway?

Haha - outstanding.  I'm just waiting for the definition of elitist.

[Niall C]

  The Brits and the Irish treat golf as one of their national pastimes, much like we do for baseball or football. They developed their early golf with healthy doses of elitism, but smartly and contemporarily switched the business modes to opening up in order to allow golf tourist revenue to subsidize their local memberships. Lets not forget their native populations are but mere fractions of our's over here.
 

"O wad some Power the giftie gies us
To see oursels as ithers see us" - Robert Burns

Thankfully that power is golfclubatlas and I always enjoy reading what overseas visitors make of us. Not sure I agree with Steve's historical perspective however, in fact I'm sure I don't, and I'm utterly baffled by what he's trying to say in the last line.

Niall

[Ian Mackenzie]

@ Ben Cowan-


I think you make an excellent point about other sports and how their ticket prices have skyrocketed over the past 10 or so years. I live in Chicago. I am a huge hockey fan. I also live in the city somewhat close to Wrigley Field - (home of the Chicago Cubs.)


Four tickets to any one of their home games in moderate seats will costs the same as a foursome at Brandon.


The point: it's not just golf that now has elitist overtones. Go to a home game of the Blackhawks, Cubs, Bears or Bulls....social diversity you will not find.

[Steve Lapper]

  The Brits and the Irish treat golf as one of their national pastimes, much like we do for baseball or football. They developed their early golf with healthy doses of elitism, but smartly and contemporarily switched the business modes to opening up in order to allow golf tourist revenue to subsidize their local memberships. Lets not forget their native populations are but mere fractions of our's over here.
 

"O wad some Power the giftie gies us
To see oursels as ithers see us" - Robert Burns

Thankfully that power is golfclubatlas and I always enjoy reading what overseas visitors make of us. Not sure I agree with Steve's historical perspective however, in fact I'm sure I don't, and I'm utterly baffled by what he's trying to say in the last line.

Niall

Niall,


  My albeit brief history synoposis was in response to Tom's assumption that their was "zero perception of golf as elitist" in the UK and Ireland (when in fact there has always been no less than some...i.e. admission to the "Royal" clubs. Also, if you think about his quote about "market forces," any analysis worth its salt would have to note the vast differential in the numbers of participants(golfing population) between the country'...unquestionably an impactful demographic (mathematical) force on the very definition of relationship of elitism to golf.

[Sean_A]

Niall

For sure there is elitism in the UK.  Just look at the small corner of nKent with Princes, Deal and Sandwich.  The pecking order is clear well beyond course quality.  The history and membership of each club are an integral aspect of the pecking order.

I gotta say, it strikes me that elitism is assumed to be negative.  I don't think is automatically the case.

Ciao

[John Kirk]

What is this thread anyway?

Haha - outstanding.  I'm just waiting for the definition of elitist.

Beat you by 19 minutes.

Ask and you shall receive.

[Tim Martin]

What is this thread anyway?

Haha - outstanding.  I'm just waiting for the definition of elitist.

Beat you by 19 minutes.

Ask and you shall receive.

It's good that you used the Wikipedia definition because everybody knows that is the gold standard.😉

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()