[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

I believe you have come closest to describing Mr ‘UK’ Average although I cannot comment on Mr ‘USA’ Average.

Adrian’s comment about Island Greens is surprising as my feedback from the UK side is that the Average golfer does not like Island greens. It seems that the more competent golfers enjoys testing his skills knowing that he is fairly accurate and will reach the Green. AS I said the info from the average golfer is the concern that it may kill his round, his day trip to that course and his mood for the week-end. That I believe is not the point or intention the designer or the club wants to project.
I can sympathise although I am not anti-water features, just island Greens as they can be frustratingly more terminal and yet not really penal in the golfing sense.

Also why would MR Average put himself to that expense, first the Green Fees for a round that he might not be able to complete and the cost of lost balls in the water surrounding the Green – could be an expensive as well as a frustrating day as not all clubs promote the Island green.

Melvyn

PS  Adrian, statically speaking may well be correct but stats are stats and can convey many things depending upon their presentation, perhaps we should start off with defining MR Average – my point of view is that he is not highly skilled or competent, and struggles to hold down his high handicap

[Adrian_Stiff]

Melvyn - I think what has changed also is that golfers dont play so much medal these days and to some extent even the handicapping system in relation to medal play has changed. We play a lot of stableford points now, its popular with Mr Average where he is a golf member, society player. The Island green and the ruination of his/her round is therefore somewhat abolished, it is after all a BLOB, another modern golf word. These things are just the evolution of the game, rightly or wrongly.

That aside Mr average from my experience likes lots that purists don't and you might not believe it but I am basically purist and mad keen traditionalist, but I also run a golf course and some of my (and your likes) are not popular with the till.

One of the hates of the average golfer I think is three putting, as many have alluded to the key is to make it fun, fun can come in an 18 hole score or Mr Average just making a birdie or a few pars, there was a survey run many years ago that said something like a golfer does not mind losing a ball in water but he hates losing a ball in rough/ after searching for it. I can see the sense in that.

[Tom Yost]

My take, based on conversations with random playing partners and reading posts on other general golf forums, is that the average golfer favors conditioning above all else.  Green grass and soft receptive greens being most desired.  I also think that the average golfer actually enjoys difficulty or at least holds a more difficult course in higher esteem.

[Philippe Binette]

The average golfer wants to step on the tee and see nobody in front of him...

Seriously, I'd say he wants 4 things

1) a course where he can hit the ball, find it and hit it again
2) a course with 4 or 5 challenging shots a round set by the architecture, he's going to figure out a way to create more challenging shots by his poor driving
3) greens in good shape (never seen anybody like a course with spotty greens)
4) a cold beer at the end of the round

[Carl Rogers]

I am around a lot of people that play casually in scrambles .... captain's choices, etc.  If they wanted to apply themselves, they could be an easy 11 to 14.  They do not want to play in a format in which every shot they hit must count.

I have no idea how the golf industry could get these folks out on the course more to "grow" the game. Money is not the issue.  Time is kind of the issue.

[Tom_Doak]

With so many large organizations spewing off about what they think golfers want, there MUST have been multiple studies done on this very subject, but I do not recall ever seeing the results of one ... instead, the discussion is all about what different factions THINK the average golfer wants. 

Has anyone ever done a really good survey?  I don't know who would have the guts.  The ASGCA is unlikely to do one, if the results say that golfers don't care about design and only care about good conditioning.  The GCSAA would be sticking its neck out to try and confirm their own importance, when most people in golf already accept it as a given.  The CMAA thinks it's all about the clubhouse, and the NGF is too busy looking for phantom golfers to bother interviewing real ones.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom Doak,

NGF did surveys every other year for a while at least.  Here is the only one I can quickly find on my hard drive and its from 2008:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary:

Think about the last time you played golf. What made it enjoyable? We asked 850 Core golfers to divvy up their enjoyment of playing golf across 10 factors, and here is what we learned. The people and the golf course account for over half of golfers' enjoyment.

Ball striking is important - all golfers need some positive reinforcement. That feeling of "shot euphoria" adds to everyone's enjoyment and keeps golfers coming back.

The last six factors: scoring, weather, amenities, course aesthetics, exercise and competition add to, but certainly don't significantly drive the enjoyment of golf for most golfers (of course there are always exceptions). Scoring itself accounts for less than 10% of total enjoyment. And competition isn't for everyone. It accounted for only 3% of all Core golfer enjoyment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stats from survey:

People: the people you play with   19%
Course conditioning: greens are most important 19%
Course design: challenging, memorable design   17%
Ball striking: hitting some good shots   12%
Score: how well you score   8%
Weather: come rain or shine   7%
Amenities: the clubhouse, range, 19th hole, etc.   6%
Course aesthetics: the flora, fauna and feeling   6%
Exercise: the good walk spoiled   4%
Competition: vying to win a match   3%

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, we can debate if the 850 core golfers were really average golfers or not.

I also recall an earlier survey that put course design about the same but the name of the gca down at about 3%, right along with competition.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Oops, found my earlier one, which I copied from their website in Oct. 2007.  I didn't copy the summary or methodology on this one, if it was available.  Obviously, whoever they surveyed were allowed to pick more than one factor, and I believe the % numbers are the number of golfers who listed it as "important" in some way or to some degree.


Scenery and Aesthetics – 85%
Service – 79%
Golf Cart Quality/Cleanliness – 78%
Clubhouse and Locker room – 77%
Golf Maintenance – 77%
Greens Conditions – 73%
Food and Beverage – 71%
On Course Restrooms and Drinking Water – 66%
Tee Time Availability – 61%
Pace of Play – 57%
Convenience of Course Location – 45%
Name of Golf Course Architect – 3%

[Adam Clayman]

This might sound stupid...but they want "ball marks"...I had forgotten how thrilled I was at a kid when I first could hit a green from far enough away to make a ball mark....   We often forget that so many rarely have the thrill of hitting a green in regulation on many of our newer courses....we need 325 yd - 350 yard holes for so many guys....SO..that's one thing

I think that's only kids.  When I play with adults who are fairly new to the game they don't care about ball marks.  They do care about getting birdie putts, but don't care if its because they stuck the ball close to where it landed or bounced it on.  They'll take a ricochet off a tree!

But I agree about the shortish holes, that lets them still have a shot at getting it on/near the green if they screw up their drive, and if they peg their drive, gives them a nice short approach that either gives them a great chance of putting it on the green, or teaches them why people keep telling them to practice their wedges more and their drivers less.

Newer golfers (Or fairly new) are not average golfers. Admittedly, the term average golfer has a wide definition, or at least, regionally, culturally, and, sophisticatedly diverse.
 
 I know senior citizens that just love a 2" deep ball mark.

In the last few days as this subject has come up on other threads, I recall Don Mahaffey's line when George Pazin and I went to visit him in Amarillo. His course at that time had an $18 green (if I recall correctly) and the line was

"All my customers care about is that the weeds are green"

[Jeff_Brauer]

I know that I am not a representative sample, but I recall loving playing Glencoe GC after work, because at its 6300 yard length I was hitting the same mid irons to greens that I saw pros hit on TV.  I have recently started moving back to the 6300 yard tees to get the same feeling.  Sadly, it gets harder to replicate the tour pro feeling (or maybe just the golf feeling of a nice drive followed by a usually comfortable approach shot)

Perhaps one of the disconnects of wanting to emulate the pros, but also feeling somehow like we need to play longer courses to satisfy our ego?  I have noticed more and more guys my age (55) starting to move forward, and more guys in their 60's who won't even play a course where there is NOT a sub 6000 yard option for them, whereas my father wouldn't touch a tee set at under 6000 yards.

I also recall Jim Colberts Father wanted to keep playing, and wanted a sub 5000 yard set when he was in his 80's, but refurse to play on the furthest forward tees to do it.

[Garland Bayley]

I think golfers say the conditioning is important to them, because it is the safe thing to say. They tune into golf broadcasts where you invariably hear the broadcasters go on and on about the conditioning (perhaps because it is the safe thing to say) so golfers who have done no other evaluation of a course say conditioning is important to them.

I would bet that if you gave them specific examples they may come up with another story. For example, course A is standard golf, Doak 2 or 3, and the conditioning is immaculate, and course B is perhaps a Doak 4 or 5 with highly acceptable conditioning, but there can be some rough spots in high traffic areas perhaps. I think intuitively the golfers will say they prefer B, because they will perceive the interest although they may not be able to put their finger on exactly why they liked the course more.

[Sean_A]

To me an average golfer has to play at least 10-15 times a year before he is called a golfer.  Playing five times a year doesn't cut it.  Given this, average in the UK compared to the US is a totally different animal.  I think the average UK golfer has some sort of affiliation with a club or society.  In the US this is far from the case.  So the two groups are starting from completely different possitions.  One of the big differences between the two is competitions.  The average UK golfer plays in far more comps sticking to some form of the proper rules.  This is far from the case in the US.  No booze in the UK during golf; it could be flowing freely in the US.  The average UK golfer will come across some excellent world famous courses in his  time; rarely the case for the US golfer.  The average UK golfer plays in all sorts of weather and thus conditions are less important than in the US except in summer time.  Why else would UK golfers go out on nearly all parkland courses during the winter?  Its a waste of time for me, but not so for the average golfer.  One area both groups share is a desire to play affordable golf and to get good value.  Both groups want to have fun, but they go about it in different ways.  

Ciao  

Sean - Your case for the average UK golfer is wrong though you might be nearer the mark if you were to say average UK golf member. Statiscally only about 30% of golfers play in the UK winter time, golf is very sun controlled. The biggest group of UK golfers are not members of clubs and most do just play 5-15 times but they are golfers none the less. We have over 1000 members, you would be amazed how many people have played 100 times and you would be amazed how many have played less than 15 times... those figures are 9 and 671. An average club member throughout the UK plays 40 times (though not all at his club) the statistics of patterns of play can get distorted, seniors play the most, juniors can tally crazy summer runs. A lot of people dont even care about competitions or keeping their handicap these days and do not want to pay the EGU levy (about £13 per year). Booze is becoming part of a round too, many courses have added half way houses and the tempt of not selling a bottle of beer at £3 well, its what the customer wants.
Golf is changing and the bastion of what once was will go, the new golfer wants so much different, I think pockets of 'old school golf clubs' will still be there but not so many, there will be change and the change starts as soon you see the signs of clubs taking 2-4-1 vouchers, dropping the joining fee etc in order to compete....it drops its guard, its drop its standard, for many ofcourse it is survival. There wont be enough room for every golf course to maintain its standards of course conditioning, staff will have to go, greens cut every other day, fairways weekly (even sheep)... the simple reason is cost of course and when you look at patterns of play you see many members that are low users jacking their membership in favour of casual play when its sunny.

Adrian

The reason your average golfer doesn't play in the winter is because he isn't an average golfer.  Using your logic, a golfer could be a guy who plays once a year - thats nonsense.  There has to be some sort of reasonable minimum number of games played to say a guy is a golfer - I would personally go with at the very least 12 (once a month).  Would you call a guy a bowler because he bowls five times a year?  I know I wouldn't.  Perhaps this wierd ideas of what a golfer is is part of the reason for the industry getting it so wrong in terms of how many courses were needed.  I would also note that I in no way stated that the average UK golfer is a member of a club.  I said a society or club and club may include competition sections at muni courses.  The point is, the average UK golfer is part of some form of organized comps.  Its amazing how many societies are out there and how many of them run comps.

Ciao

[Richard Choi]

Frankly, I don't think surveys are all that helpful (especially ones asking for their opinions). People usually answer what they think the people who are taking the survey want to hear (a conditioned response from years of test taking in schools).

If you want to find out what an "average golfer" want, just look at where these "average golfers" are spending their money.

I have not done any analysis, but I am guessing the majority of money is spent at the range and next at a "muny type" of a golf course located nearby where conditioning is just fair (not great), and packed with people, but is less than $50 to play.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sean you make all the criteria you want to exclude or include golfers but I think your stats will go wacky.

Firstly the Summer - Winter relationships of golf in the UK. THERE IS 3 TIMES MORE PLAY IN A SUMMER MONTH THAN A WINTER MONTH..... the natural of that statement is that golfers play less frequently.

Taking a golfer as "one with a set of clubs" could be a criteria. If you read how many people play the game its a vast figure, as members of clubs its not so many. You will probably get a better idea of the things we need to do to get more playing by looking at the 0-12 round per year group and trying to make it popular for them then quote from your 12-100 rounds who by definition are satisfied.

That aside its been said what the average golfer wants... the keyword is value because cost and quality are just the parts, good greens course nicely mown bit of water...what they donot care about is if Harry Colt designed it or Harry Karri, where as if Jack Nicklaus has designed it then it must be special!

On another issue about UK playing more competitions, a lot do not. Last year the EGU brought in compliant handicapping, you get your handicap but you have to retain it, if you do not put it three cards during the year your handicap becomes inactive.... you won't believe the amount of golfers who go inactive and the type of golfers that go inactive, but until the pro-ams and trophy hunting compeitions ask for active, its going to continue. The downside is that many see a reason for being a member is to retain a handicap and to these people its pure purgatory to put three cards in, so it could drive further members back to casual play.

Could there possibly be a GCAerr on here from the UK with an inactive handicap?

[Adam Clayman]

You want to see average golfers? Turn on HDNetwork right now and watch my friend Emily Jillette play in The World High Stakes Golf Championship. It's Am golfers playing a unique format against Pro Poker players

[Jason Walker]

Adam-
Same Emily who is married to a certain performer and also sister to my friend Amanda in NYC?

[Sean_A]

Adrian

The bottom line is do you want to be drawing conclusions about golfers based on guys who play at least 12-15 games a year or 5?  IMO, talking about a guy as representative of the average who only plays five games a year is meaningless.  

Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian

The bottom line is do you want to be drawing conclusions about golfers based on guys who play at least 12-15 games a year or 5?  IMO, talking about a guy as representative of the average who only plays five games a year is meaningless.  

Ciao

Sean I think there is sense in trying to make the guy that plays 5 times play 25 times. It seems to me there are a lot of these sub 12 guys. I think we need to analyse why they are infrequent golfers and try and make things better for them to up their frequency. It might not be possible but the reasons may be that price, time and the fact that they are crap (which are the three reasons I suspect) are the inhibtors.

One thing thats not been discussed (I dont think it has) on this post is 9 holes. I feel many 18 hole courses dont make a 9 hole rate freely available, certainly few websites champion it... 9 holes is cheaper and less time, if we get our 5 time guy playing 25 times his crapness might turn him to dare I saw Average!

[Duncan Cheslett]

One thing thats not been discussed (I dont think it has) on this post is 9 holes. I feel many 18 hole courses dont make a 9 hole rate freely available, certainly few websites champion it... 9 holes is cheaper and less time, if we get our 5 time guy playing 25 times his crapness might turn him to dare I saw Average!

A good point, Adrian.

Until recently I was one of your 3 rounds a year guys - if that. Since I took the plunge and joined a club 3 months ago I've played 2 or 3 times a week - but rarely a full round.

A full 18 holes of golf with travelling and a drink or a meal afterwards is basically a day written off, particularly for infrequent players who find it knackering. Most peoples' working lives don't suit that level of commitment, and at weekends neither do their family lives!

Being able to pop in for a quick 5 or 9 holes before or after work is one of the things I am enjoying most about being a member of a club. If this opportunity was available to visitors by way of a reduced green fee I am sure it could stimulate business among the occasional golfer and get him out more.

I'd be interested to see if it worked...

[Doug Siebert]

Sean - Your case for the average UK golfer is wrong though you might be nearer the mark if you were to say average UK golf member. Statiscally only about 30% of golfers play in the UK winter time, golf is very sun controlled. The biggest group of UK golfers are not members of clubs and most do just play 5-15 times but they are golfers none the less. We have over 1000 members, you would be amazed how many people have played 100 times and you would be amazed how many have played less than 15 times... those figures are 9 and 671. An average club member throughout the UK plays 40 times (though not all at his club) the statistics of patterns of play can get distorted, seniors play the most, juniors can tally crazy summer runs. A lot of people dont even care about competitions or keeping their handicap these days and do not want to pay the EGU levy (about £13 per year). Booze is becoming part of a round too, many courses have added half way houses and the tempt of not selling a bottle of beer at £3 well, its what the customer wants.
Golf is changing and the bastion of what once was will go, the new golfer wants so much different, I think pockets of 'old school golf clubs' will still be there but not so many, there will be change and the change starts as soon you see the signs of clubs taking 2-4-1 vouchers, dropping the joining fee etc in order to compete....it drops its guard, its drop its standard, for many ofcourse it is survival. There wont be enough room for every golf course to maintain its standards of course conditioning, staff will have to go, greens cut every other day, fairways weekly (even sheep)... the simple reason is cost of course and when you look at patterns of play you see many members that are low users jacking their membership in favour of casual play when its sunny.

Adrian,

These stats are very interesting, and I suspect you'd get different results if compared against the US clubs that members of this board are members in, or at least those who think you can't have more than 300 members for per 18 hole course seem to believe so.  The UK folks are always shocked how much clubs in the US cost, the US guys are always shocked at how little the UK clubs cost.  Further, the UK folks never seem to realize what a very small percentage of all the golfers in the US belong to a club, whereas those of us in the US don't often quite grasp the comparatively large percentage of all the golfers in the UK who do belong to a club.

So I see a sort of a chicken and an egg dilemma.  If clubs here cost more like what the UK clubs cost, a lot more people would be interesting in joining a club.  Guys like me, who play my nominal "home" course perhaps 20 times in a banner year.  If clubs in the UK cost more like what the ones in the US did, there would be far fewer in the UK who belonged to a club.

Is it the relatively higher cost that has fewer in the US joining a club, or is it because so few in the US want to join a club, that the cost must be higher to support it?

When I see a thread like this saying that a club needs to charge $500/month to be viable with the size of membership it must be limit itself to, I see guys like me totally ignored.  Sure, I can afford it, but why pay $6000/yr for a club when I could pay the greens fees on public courses I play now, and have enough leftover for a week in Scotland?  It only becomes reasonable if I move into an area where greens fees on decent courses average $100, and I play 2-3x as much as I do now!

Maybe struggling clubs need to rethink what kind of golfers they are trying to attract.  Having some sort of weekday 9a-3p only membership, or some sort of lower tier membership that limits you to playing a certain number of rounds per year and perhaps restricts other amenities available to full members (total number of guests per year, pay if you want a locker, pay a surcharge to play on weekends, whatever) Get creative!  Just don't go overboard and make it as confusing as buying an airline ticket

[Matt Day]

the Australian average golfer generally wants a course within 20 minutes of home, good course conditions, value for money in the green fee, the ability to play with friends and a cold beer after.

[Jeff_Brauer]

In the spirit of information sharing, I just got this email from the NGF.  This survey was about the use of third party booking systems but the data pertains to what the average core golfer wants, based on an NGF survey of 510 Core golfers in December 2010...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.....Moreover, when looking at how golfers decide where to play, price is not at the top of the list. These reasons come before price: course conditions, where friends play, proximity to home, course layout and golf experience. Since we’re Core golfers too, this did not surprise us.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bruce Katona]

What our customer would look for is:

1. Good green conditions
2. Good tee ground conditions - in between made very little difference.
3. Hitting 3 good shots per round - that will bring the custoimer back quickly and make them a repeat customer.
4. A course that looks difficult but they can achieve a respectable score on (to brag at around the water cooler).
5. A cute cart girl who had cold beer.
6. the ability to get out and play about what time thet'd prefer.
7. Ability to get something to eat between 9's.
8. The ability to have a few cold one after the round.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bruce,

Most of my designs focus on how to get the golfer more of No. 3 and 4.

I find myself returning to some of the 1970 modes, like making sure any bunker on the right of a green doesn't extend much in front of the green because just so many shots land there and start golfers piling up the score.  I am not surprised when golfers just like gently rolling greens, without tiers, big breaks, etc.  Just getting a 20 foot putt anywhere near the hole distance wise without big directional or vertical changes has always proven tough enough for the average golfer.

You might be interested to know that one of my local courses here in DFW has three cart girls who make over $55K in tips, and its not Cowboys!

[Kyle Harris]

There are no average golfers, and this should be made a corollary to the Tom Paul Big World Theory of Golf Architecture.

However, it may be useful to measure a few averages about the people who play golf.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()