TravelGolf.com
- Updated Daily |
Golf Search
-
Course ReviewsCourse GuideResort FeaturesTravel FeaturesGolf InstructionGolf PackagersReader Forums
WIN Free golf lessons with Butch Harmon!
Win a free golf book!
 

menuNext Day Teetimes

US Course Guide
World Course Guide
Course Reviews
Travel Features
Resort Features
Reader Forums
Free Golf Guides

 

Home
Advertise Here
Business of Golf
Author Archives
Course Guide
Golf Blog
Golf Instruction
Golf Packagers
Rave of The Week
The Club House
This Week's Buzz


WorldGolfWire.com
-

Open venues July 18, 2007, 6:55 pm

by Hal Watson
I know someone is going to bust me on this, so I will correct myself--I obviously meant Valhalla as a PGA venue, not Valderama.

Open venues July 18, 2007, 6:52 pm

by Hal Watson
Like most generalizations, the statement that Open venues are accessible to the public is pretty easy to attack, in that only three of the courses on the Open rota are completely open to the public (the Old Course and Carnoustie are public courses and Turnberry is a resort course), and Muirfield is notoriously difficult to get on. On the other hand, British private courses are generally very receptive to visitors, and generally a letter to the club secretary accompanied with a handicap certificate will get you a tee time. This is impossible at most private clubs in the U.S., where you at the very least need an introduction from a member or from your pro, and often need to play with a member. Whether this is a good thing or not depends on perspective; while I am glad to be able to play most British courses, I certainly wouldn't want my club to be as open as most British clubs are.
While I thus generally agree with TravelGolf on the question of accessibility of Open Championship venues, I do take issue with the statement that the trend of playing the US Open at more public/resort courses is a good development. So much of what makes for a memorable major championship is tradition, and the ability to compare the great champions that have won at a particular venue. This is of course much of what sets the PGA Championship apart, since the PGA has so often been staged at venues that are completely devoid of any history (think Valderama). This criterion does not necessarily turn on whether the course is open to the public; no one would argue that Pebble Beach and Pinehurst No. 2 are anything but iconic in golf lore. But Bethpage Black and Torrey Pines? I think that Merion, the Olympic Club and their ilk are far more appropriate sites for our national championship.

Re: July 18, 2007, 1:22 pm

The Open July 18, 2007, 1:22 pm

by David Smith
You are totally wrong on several counts about the ability to play the Open courses. Muirfield is VERY private and Hoylake and Royal Troon are almost as difficult to get on, as a non member. Several of the courses (Turnberry & Birkdale) are now so ridiculously expensive (as is Pebble Beach) that many golfers are essentially priced out too. This article is very poor.

RE: The Open July 18, 2007, 1:33 pm

by Brandon Tucker
David, you couldn't be more wrong. Do about two minutes of research then you'll realize how libelous you're being.

RE: RE: The Open July 19, 2007, 6:02 am

by HurricaneCanada
Brandon, you are the one who is totally wrong. A "public" course to MOST golfers is not one that requires a bank loan to be able to play one round on and a one-year tee time reservation (totally paid in advance). Pebble Beach, St. Andrews, and these other so-called "public" courses are simply elitist and charge many times a "public" green fee rate simply "because they can". Let's call a spade a spade here and label these courses "accessible if you are in the top 10% of disposable income in the country" rather than true "public" courses where ANYBODY can afford to play. There is not one golf course that I have seen on the TravelGolf web pages that could truly qualify as a "public" course.

RE: RE: RE: The Open July 19, 2007, 3:23 pm

by Brandon Tucker
Hurricane Canada,
God bless the internet and the ability to write mean-spirited, factually inaccurate attacks without backing it up with a real name.
Anyways, I just wrote a blog comparing prices and accessibility of the major American venues versus the British Open venues:
http://www.worldgolf.com/blogs/brandon.tucker/2007/07/17/british_open_courses_like_carnoustie_ar_
I'll agree with you not EVERYONE has $250 for a round of golf. But legions of lifetime golfers agree that no matter what their income is, making it across the pond once to play these courses is a kind of "rite of passage".
Your definition of "public" seems to be closer to "municipal" or "socialist". I define a public course as somewhere you don't have to be a member to play.

RE: RE: RE: The Open July 19, 2007, 6:21 am

by Lester Hinson
>>>"There is not one golf course that I have seen on the TravelGolf web pages that could truly qualify as a 'public' course."
HurricaneCanada: Step. Away. From. The. Crackpipe.

British open golf July 18, 2007, 1:00 pm

by Golf Goddess
For a monarchy, Britain sure has a democratic view of golf.
I wonder why here in the U.S., we prefer golf be for the privileged?

 



- -
FREE Vacation
Package Quote

We can help you
find the best deals!
-
Free Masters Package Quote
-
Free Ryder Cup
Package Quote

This Week's Buzz
GolfPublisher.com Add GolfPublisher.com articles/headlines to your web site
Course Reviews | US Golf Guide | Resort Features | Travel Features | Golf Instruction | Golf Schools | Golf Packages | Free Vacation Quote

© Copyright 1997-2008, WorldGolf.com, LLC. For questions, comments or suggestions on any of our network publications, Contact Us!
Privacy Policy