A Club is more than just a course.

[Michael Morandi]

A lot of effort is made in ranking the best courses in the country and the world but little seems to be given to ranking  the best clubs, which  includes a combination of the course, the membership comraderie , the atmosphere and the friendly attitude toward guests. I’ve played “great” courses that left me cold before and after the round. They were either self important or had no vibe at all. Which “clubs” would you rank highly based on these holistic criteria?  And I should add that great clubs are not as vulnerable to cost per round calculations to justify when to leave or stay a member.

[Chris Hughes]

Garden City

--------

Camden
Mimosa Hills
Palmetto
Roaring Gap
Westhampton

NOTE:  Garden City rates at the top, the balance listed in alphabetical order -- all are fantastic!

[Kyle Harris]

I disagree with the premise laid out in this post.


Almost every ranking has some element of “club” to it. And the weight of “club” is too influential.

[Thomas Dai]

Members vrs consumers. Golf in the current era.
Atb

[Kyle Harris]

I disagree with the premise laid out in this post.


Almost every ranking has some element of “club” to it. And the weight of “club” is too influential.

Even the first post here is just flipping the script by using architecture to uplift a club ranking.

A men's club in the year of our lord 2024 is top of such a ranking?

Which thus begs the question what kind of club? There are already so many different "architecture" influenced lists that have several qualifiers to skew the results.

"Top 47 Golf Clubs with less than three tennis courts and a 2:1 pinochle to poker deck grille room card ratio"

Clubs, any group really, are by nature exclusionary to those that aren't seeking the thing put forth by the club. How much of that is emotionally based? You're only going to feel as welcome as you are.

[Jim_Coleman]

    This thread is a tribute to pomposity. Our people are better than your people is a far cry from our course and facilities are better than yours. But, I suppose, golf has long been criticized for it’s pomposity.

[Steven Wade]

The club aspect is so variable. The member you are with, the caddies you have that day, whether or not the guy in the proshop hit his parlay the night before; These all will impact your view of the club.


I was lucky to play a top 10 on the latest Golf list 3 times this season and each was with a different host and each was such a different experience. Had I just experienced one of those rounds my view of the “club” aspect of the club might be very different.


I will say that in my experience the clubs that the overwhelming majority of foursomes that go out as one member, three guests seem to feel less like a club to me. In my experience these are the very top of the rankings type places and there just isn’t much member/member play. I think that’s a big reason why many members of those clubs also have a second club locally.

[Dan Boerger]

Think about the time and money most spend at a private golf club. It's significant. Enjoying time at the club beyond just playing the game itself is also significant for me (and many other here I'm sure). And just because I may really like my club and my club experience certainly does not mean I harbor any feeling that "it's better than yours."

[Bernie Bell]

    This thread is a tribute to pomposity. Our people are better than your people is a far cry from our course and facilities are better than yours. But, I suppose, golf has long been criticized for it’s pomposity.

Respectfully disagree.  "Membership camaraderie" and "friendly attitude toward guests" are the opposite of that to me, especially the latter. 
As a guest, not a member, I nominate Old Town and second Westhampton.

[Brian Finn]

"A club is more than just a course." Undeniable fact.  I can't imagine (m)any would disagree.  However, this site is meant for the discussion of courses.  Even course discussions often end up in the realm of pomposity, so I don't think it is crazy to suggest this thread will have a heavy dose.  There is much to love about the many great golf clubs around the world, but will this thread end up any more than another brag sheet?  Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Jeff Schley]

"Top 47 Golf Clubs with less than three tennis courts and a 2:1 pinochle to poker deck grille room card ratio"

Top clubs with the most Cantankerous superintendent?

[BHoover]

If a club does not feature orange remoulade on the fish tacos, then no matter how good the course is, it just cannot make up that deficiency. Sorry, those are the rules.

[Michael Morandi]

    This thread is a tribute to pomposity. Our people are better than your people is a far cry from our course and facilities are better than yours. But, I suppose, golf has long been criticized for it’s pomposity.

Not so. One of the best “clubs” that I was ever a member was inexpensive, diverse, with a cast of characters and a William Flynn course. The antithesis of pomposity

[Mike Wagner]

A lot of effort is made in ranking the best courses in the country and the world but little seems to be given to ranking  the best clubs, which  includes a combination of the course, the membership comraderie , the atmosphere and the friendly attitude toward guests. I’ve played “great” courses that left me cold before and after the round. They were either self important or had no vibe at all. Which “clubs” would you rank highly based on these holistic criteria?  And I should add that great clubs are not as vulnerable to cost per round calculations to justify when to leave or stay a member.

Shouldn't you start with your own list?

[Tim_Weiman]

    This thread is a tribute to pomposity. Our people are better than your people is a far cry from our course and facilities are better than yours. But, I suppose, golf has long been criticized for it’s pomposity.

Jim,


I understand and respect your post, but for a different perspective I was thinking about Ballybunion during the era of Sean Walsh as Secretary. Sean was not only welcoming to visitors but handled the locals with grace and sensitivity. Remember, this was before the “Celtic Tiger” and unemployment in County Kerry was running about 45%. Quite a few members simply couldn’t afford the annual dues which were all of 200 Irish, but Walsh made it work.


It was just a very special club environment that sadly doesn’t exist today…..as best as I can tell.


Tim

[Chris Hughes]

I disagree with the premise laid out in this post.


Almost every ranking has some element of “club” to it. And the weight of “club” is too influential.

A men's club in the year of our lord 2024 is top of such a ranking?

Squarely at the top of my list, not even close.

[mike_malone]

Can a course affect the club’s culture, membership, and treatment of guests?

[Bruce Katona]

Well, back in the day, we used to send out unaccompanied foursomes quite regularly, as it was business entertainment and folks liked playing the assets my previous employer &  Eric Bergstol own(s)(ed).


The assets were/are all solid places to play, with as much course and difficulty as you wanted depending on the tee selected. What told us how we were doing on the hospitality side of the ledger was the calls received after the unaccompanied guests went out, finished play and had their post round libation. 


When the "thank you call" began " Bruce - the staff at _________, treated us like members, as guests we couldn't have asked for more", we knew all was well.


There was only one occasion in 15 years the staff rang me the next dat to say " Bruce - the guests you sent out - I don't know how to say this - but they were an issue with our members." Obviously that group never was invited back, nor did we do much business with them.

[Matt Schoolfield]

I mean, ironically, I'm in full agreement with the proposition, and it very much conforms to my preference for a personalized value-systems as the basis for rating golf experiences.

I think there is an uncomfortable elephant in the room though. If we started rating clubs, we'd probably have to come to terms with a lot of the less sympathetic parts of our culture that we ignore or even pretend don't exist: the decadence, the discrimination and exclusion... all that becomes relevant.

Imagine if suddenly the "very strong concerns" that the articles (that never seem to name names) in magazines started influencing the very real status the clubs receive from their ranking lists. I for one would welcome such a change, but I don't think it would be very popular.

[MKrohn]

If a club does not feature orange remoulade on the fish tacos, then no matter how good the course is, it just cannot make up that deficiency. Sorry, those are the rules.

Has this replaced shower water pressure in the rules?

[David Kelly]

If a club does not feature orange remoulade on the fish tacos, then no matter how good the course is, it just cannot make up that deficiency. Sorry, those are the rules.

I guess if you don't like Mexican food that would be something you'd put on a fish taco.  I happen to love Mexican food so I'd skip the remoulade. 

[David Kelly]

Raters have enough on their plate just rating the courses, let alone pronouncing judgment on the clubs themselves, which they are not members of and whose atmosphere and traditions they experience very little if anything at all.

[Matt Schoolfield]

Raters have enough on their plate just rating the courses

Do they though? I'm happy to claim ignorance here if I'm wrong about that, but it seems like nice work if you can get it.

[Chris Hughes]

I think there is an uncomfortable elephant in the room though. If we started rating clubs, we'd probably have to come to terms with a lot of the less sympathetic parts of our culture that we ignore or even pretend don't exist: the decadence, the discrimination and exclusion... all that becomes relevant.

How so?

[Matt Schoolfield]

I think there is an uncomfortable elephant in the room though. If we started rating clubs, we'd probably have to come to terms with a lot of the less sympathetic parts of our culture that we ignore or even pretend don't exist: the decadence, the discrimination and exclusion... all that becomes relevant.

How so?

I mean, Chris, please. You have brazenly suggested Garden City Golf Club. We both know exactly what your doing. Your top club has wildly discriminatory policies as to who they allow membership and play. Some might even call it open sexism, but what do I know, I can't say I've been there.

Perhaps, say, Kristel Mourge d’Algue-Lawton, a rater for Golf Magazine decided to rate their club? How might she rate the hospitality given that she likely wouldn't even be allowed in because of a missing chromosome? How would she rate the "strong traditions"? The plausible deniability of rating courses only politely leaves all of these thorny issues aside. However, once you start rating the clubs, all of the open discrimination is entirely relevant to the raters who may not be welcome, and it is likely not irrelevant to the raters who are invited.

I know it's not just me. There are a lot of folks exhausted with the fact that many bad actors get a pass because nobody is willing to say anything, and there is nothing really to do. If, however, people were suddenly tasked with rating these clubs instead of just their courses, I suspect we would find some noticeable exclusions.