GCA's Next 50 section has been replaced by 147 Custodians of the Game

[John Mayhugh]

'Below is a list of 147 courses where the game, as I enjoy it, is celebrated.'

That’s the first line, so it’s my list and the attitude of “Your list should reflect my personal preferences” is not a convincing path for meaningful discussion. There are 30,000 courses in the world and I have drawn attention to 147. Favorites of mine didn’t make the list and I am still grumpy that I ‘published’ without finding room f

Ran,
You could have easily fit in Holston Hills on the list. It's quite a bit better than the Ross at French Lick. But, be warned, that bag drop usage is encouraged at both. For that reason, I think Lookout Mountain would be a worthy substitute. Far from the best Raynor in its present state, it's delightfully unfussy and an absolute blast to play. Best of all, unlike the two Rosses mentioned, dogs are welcome to tag along. As Lorne Smith notes on his FineGolf site, dogs "add much to the 'joy to be alive' feeling by adding to the relaxation and sociability of the recreational game." And who better to nudge you back to the first tee after a round?!

I've really enjoyed reading through your post over the past few days, and the short reviews are simply outstanding - especially the one of Brora! Each time I go through the courses or read the text that leads in, I find something new that makes me think. Many thanks for the concept itself and the huge amount of time you must have spent to compile everything.

I have often wished you would post more in the discussion group, but every time I see a course profile or something like 147, I'm reminded that you are using your time far better than most of us.

[Mike Sweeney]

I have often wished you would post more in the discussion group, but every time I see a course profile or something like 147, I'm reminded that you are using your time far better than most of us.

We are all still waiting for the Mayhugh 147 Course Accoutrement list!!


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45997.msg1013104.html#msg1013104

[JReese]

Here is Ran discussing the 147 Custodians list on the most recent State of the Game podcast.
https://stateofthegame.libsyn.com/

[Jim Hoak]

I've kept my mouth shut, but I'm having trouble with this whole "Custodians of the Game" concept.  I admire Ran and all he has done with this website and the game of golf in general.  But I think that to label golf courses as "Custodians, " when he's really talking about golf clubs, not courses, confuses things.
And, more importantly, I have trouble with the criteria selected in selecting these "Custodians."  It's unsaid, but maybe implied, that these are based purely on Ran's personal choices of what defines a "Custodian."  I would have a very different list of criteria by which I'd pick these "protectors of the game," and my list would not closely resemble his. 
By this statement, I don't mean to take away from Ran, nor his list,  nor his right to define "Custodians" in any way he wants.   Nor do I presume that I have the same reputation nor experience in golf as he.  I just didn't want to leave it unsaid that at least one person would differ with him in his criteria and his results.  But as the US founding fathers said, I'd defend to the death his right to say whatever he wants.

[Jim Franklin]

Loved seeing Rock Creek near the top of the list as it should be. Good work Ran.

[John Mayhugh]

Mike,
Trying to narrow down to 147...


Jim Hoak,
Ran made clear in his first statement that "Below is a list of 147 courses where the game, as I enjoy it, is celebrated."  (Emphasis added is mine)  You seem to have overlooked that part. If you don't like the criteria he used, how about sharing your own? Based on your criteria, how about some examples of courses you would add and delete?

I think you have every right to disagree, but if you're going to disagree, how about putting yourself and your views out there with some tangible examples? The discussion group benefits from having things to discuss.

[Jim Hoak]

John, thanks.  I did not overlook the statement you emphasize.  And I did say that it was implied that the criteria were personal to Ran, which is fine.  I just said that my criteria would be different.
First of all, and not to quibble, but it is the club,  not the course, that celebrates the game of golf.  I see the point of this website to focus on the architecture of courses.  Some of these criteria have nothing to do with the course, only how the club conducts itself.
But, more specifically. i would argue that many of the leading clubs in the US do a lot more to protect and guard the game of golf than many of the smaller clubs mentioned in Ran's list.  I'm not going to name specific clubs, but you will note that most of the "big-name" clubs are excluded from his list.  I don't agree.

[Thomas Dai]

I suggest folks read or re-read Rans preamble - http://golfclubatlas.com/147-custodians-of-the-game-year1/
Atb

[Jim Hoak]

Bill, I don't have 3 names that I would argue should be included on Ran's list.  It's not the names on the list that I don't agree with, it's the criteria for inclusion as "Custodians" or "Guardians" of the Game that I have trouble with.  It's Ran's list and he has the full right to set any criteria he wants.  It's just that I don't agree that those criteria are the ones I'd choose if I were defining who are the true "Custodians of the Game."  Is my definition any better than his?  I don't know.  But I do know that his list is his personal definition of the matter.
I'm going to leave it at that, before I set myself up as appearing to be confrontational to someone I very much admire and respect.

[Mike Sweeney]

jim, could you share the names of 3 "big name" clubs (not already among the current 147) that you feel would be worthy candidates for ran's list?

Three[size=78%] that come to mind are for different reasons. [/size]


Pine Valley - I have stayed in the cabins on one trip and did a day trip too. They are the #1 club most years in America and they sit within 3 hours of probably 25 million people. I found the Members that I met to be "Custodians" of the game and they were very generous with me. Obviously everyone want to play there, and I think that many members try to accommodate "golfers". Once you get through the gates, I found that everyone is treated in a fantastic "on a voyage" way - the caddies, the players, and the staff.


Winged Foot - It is easy to take cheap shots at WF as they continue down the USGA path of more US Opens, but this summer I was hosted with my son during "Fleet Week" in NYC. We were guest of a friend, but "The Club" was hosting 30 members of the Military that day from Fleet Week. They had both Officers and Enlisted golfers as they just wanted to share their special place. On a regular day, it is pretty hard to not run into a Clergy Member at WF.


Cypress Point - A large number of GCAers have played it during the Uncle Bob era. I did not even understand what an "unescorted foursome" was until I played Cypress Point.

[corey miller]

Good point on Winged Foot and it’s generosity toward clergy.


Unescorted happens at more than a few places.


As for Pine Valley.... imo loses many points in this exercise because most members bring their own game. Nice to show up unannounced and play with other members.

[Ted Sturges]

I shared the list and the preamble with several friends at my home club, Crooked Stick.  I received emails back from several expressing surprise that CS didn't make the list.  A very healthy exchange of dialogue has followed which I believe has the potential to open minds to the principles behind Ran's list and exercise.  This has the potential to raise our collective golf IQ, and subsequently, it has the potential to achieve a refocus on that which is most important.  In my eyes, the ultimate end result could be a reduction in the cost of golf.  As the game struggles to find its next generation, raising the price of entry into golf is clearly counter to any goal in that regard.  Randolph, I am proud of you for using your GCA pulpit to try to effect change that has the potential to improve the game we all love.  I do believe this website has changed golf in some ways over the years, and this has been a good thing.  Your Custodians of the Game concept has the potential to do the greatest good GCA has yet accomplished.  Bravo.


TS

[Colin Sheehan]

In my mind, the real custodians of the game are the clubs/courses that answer yes to most of the following:


Does that course make itself available to junior and amateur tournaments, both male and female?

Does it let high school teams, both male and female, practice and have matches? And doing so while waving the fees?

Does it host local, section and state events?


Does it host First Tee or outreach clinics? 


Are the male and female juniors in the club/course treated equally?


Does the club/course treat male and female members/golfers equally? 


Does it make itself available to college teams, both male and female, to practice and play? 


Does it wave the fees for those visits, or reduce the costs? Does it let them carry their bags?


How often do the caddies get to play? Is it more than just once a year? More than Mondays? 


Is there a caddie and/or employee scholarship?

[Jeff Schley]

Colin, I can't read all the small font, but I do also feel courses (particularly private courses) have an obligation to make their course accessible for youth/hs/college play as well as local qualifying to earn our respect as a golfing community.  Specifically an accolade such as Ran's 147 Custodians list.  It shouldn't be easy to make this list and the criteria is pretty stringent and with suggestions such as these will only continue to pinpoint the truly deserving.

[Ira Fishman]

In my mind, the real custodians of the game are the clubs/courses that answer yes to most of the following:


Does that course make itself available to junior and amateur tournaments, both male and female?

Does it let high school teams, both male and female, practice and have matches? And doing so while waving the fees?

Does it host local, section and state events?


Does it host First Tee or outreach clinics? 


Are the male and female juniors in the club/course treated equally?


Does the club/course treat male and female members/golfers equally? 


Does it make itself available to college teams, both male and female, to practice and play? 


Does it wave the fees for those visits, or reduce the costs? Does it let them carry their bags?


How often do the caddies get to play? Is it more than just once a year? More than Mondays? 


Is there a caddie and/or employee scholarship?

Colin,


I think Ran's criteria largely are spot on when we are talking about how the player interacts with the course (playing the game). I think that yours are truly excellent when we are talking about the sport and culture of golf writ large.


Ira

[Ted Sturges]

In my mind, the real custodians of the game are the clubs/courses that answer yes to most of the following:


Does that course make itself available to junior and amateur tournaments, both male and female?

Does it let high school teams, both male and female, practice and have matches? And doing so while waving the fees?

Does it host local, section and state events?


Does it host First Tee or outreach clinics? 


Are the male and female juniors in the club/course treated equally?


Does the club/course treat male and female members/golfers equally? 


Does it make itself available to college teams, both male and female, to practice and play? 


Does it wave the fees for those visits, or reduce the costs? Does it let them carry their bags?


How often do the caddies get to play? Is it more than just once a year? More than Mondays? 


Is there a caddie and/or employee scholarship?

Colin,   Your list is terrific and are things that all clubs should consider doing for the purpose of promoting the game of golf and its future.  But, you may be missing the larger point Ran is making.  If we do all the things on your list in the spirit of bringing new people to the game, but at the same time we are adding expense to what it costs to play this game (higher maintenance costs, forcing people to take carts or caddies at certain times), how many of those new golfers will be willing to stay in the game if it costs too damn much?


TS

[Peter Pallotta]

Good and insightful posts by both Ira and Colin.
And the different 'facets' of a golf course's role/function that Ira notes brought much to my mind.
But I shouldn't and won't put the resulting 'list' on here, because as Ran pointed out, this is *his* list.
I really liked and appreciated Ran's list -- but just to say: these two posts above seem to open a window in my thinking re: my own/additional lenses and value systems.
P 

[Thomas Dai]

In my mind, the real custodians of the game are the clubs/courses that answer yes to most of the following:


Does that course make itself available to junior and amateur tournaments, both male and female?

Does it let high school teams, both male and female, practice and have matches? And doing so while waving the fees?

Does it host local, section and state events?


Does it host First Tee or outreach clinics? 


Are the male and female juniors in the club/course treated equally?


Does the club/course treat male and female members/golfers equally? 


Does it make itself available to college teams, both male and female, to practice and play? 


Does it wave the fees for those visits, or reduce the costs? Does it let them carry their bags?


How often do the caddies get to play? Is it more than just once a year? More than Mondays? 


Is there a caddie and/or employee scholarship?

An interesting list and seemingly certain country centred. It does though seem to encompass quite a number of what I will call ‘give aways’ on which there could be different perspectives.
Some folks see ‘their’ club as ‘their’ property. See their club, ‘their’ ‘private members club’, as just that, ‘private’. A place of peace and tranquility where they can get away from the hurly-burly and distractions of the outside world. Indeed at clubs were the members are shareholders it is ‘their’ club.
Playing devils advocate for a moment, why should they at ‘their’ club, be asked/required to give away for free anything? Indeed it’s not even free, someone else, the members/shareholder are paying for it. And it’s ‘their’ club. Would they be expected to give up ‘their’ house, garden, car, effectively paying out of their own pocket for such to be used by others, irrespective of who they might be? Some may see this as giving sponsorship or as being charitable or as ‘doing something for the game’. Others might not like it at all.
Now I’m not suggesting that items on this list are wrong or inappropriate or begrudging some clubs who operate in such a way or who some wish would operate in such a way, as I said I’m playing devils advocate here, but there are different perspectives which ought to be at least acknowledged.
Atb

[Eric LeFante]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

[Mark_Fine]

Haven’t played all of them to comment from first hand experience but hard to argue with any of the 147 courses on the list.  What is most amazing to me is that I could easily add 147 more that probably wouldn’t get to much debate!  What a fantastic game we play to have so many wonderful and varied venues 😊

[Tim Martin]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

+1 on NJ


Knickerbocker, Montclair Golf Club, Arcola, Morris County, Hackensack, Atlantic City CC, Seaview, Alpine, Knoll West, Canoe Brook......

[Jeff Schley]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

+1 on NJ


Knickerbocker, Montclair Golf Club, Arcola, Morris County, Hackensack, Atlantic City CC, Seaview, Alpine, Knoll West, Canoe Brook......

Although not fitting with Ran’s criteria, also add Galloway national and Hamilton farm.

[Kalen Braley]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

I think Bandon could make a case for beating that on its own, much less some of the other top notch courses in Oregon be included...

[Eric LeFante]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

I think Bandon could make a case for beating that on its own, much less some of the other top notch courses in Oregon be included...

NJ gets no respect!


I admit Bandon is remarkable, with all four of its courses ranked by Golf Magazine US Top 100 between 17-57. No other courses from Oregon made that list.


NJ has 6 courses in the top 100, including #1.




NY - 15
CA - 14
MA - 7
NJ - 6
OH - 6
FL - 6
PA - 5


https://www.golf.com/courses-and-travel/photo/2017/08/16/top-100-golf-courses-united-states-2017

[Jeff Schley]

Ran states next to Eastward Ho! that New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Ohio are the top 5 golf states in the US.


I would like to stick up for my home state of NJ as I think it should be in the top 5:


Pine Valley, Somerset Hills, Plainfield, Ridgewood, Baltusrol, Hollywood, Mountain Ridge, Essex County CC, Forsgate, Hidden Creek.......

I think Bandon could make a case for beating that on its own, much less some of the other top notch courses in Oregon be included...

NJ gets no respect!


I admit Bandon is remarkable, with all four of its courses ranked by Golf Magazine US Top 100 between 17-57. No other courses from Oregon made that list.


NJ has 6 courses in the top 100, including #1.




NY - 15
CA - 14
MA - 7
NJ - 6
OH - 6
FL - 6
PA - 5


https://www.golf.com/courses-and-travel/photo/2017/08/16/top-100-golf-courses-united-states-2017

Well even some who work in NYC respond to the question of where they live, "Just West of Manhattan."