We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Augusta and Growing the Game

jt2929

jt2929

Equipment Junkie
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
2,556
Reaction score
166
Location
Southern Tier, NY
Handicap
golf
Last week I heard a lot about Augusta's efforts to grow the game and started wondering if it was really working. Are kids or potentially new players listening to stuffy old rich guys? Is it a bit backwards that they want more people to play golf, just not at their course? It's like they are saying "golf is a wonderful game and you should try it, but you can't play here, you're not good enough or rich enough."

Or am I just overthinking this as a jealous hacker who will probalby never see the beautiful grounds of Augusta National?
 
I think you are overthinking it personally.
The PGA Tour wants to grow the game, and most will never get to play on it.
There are thousands of courses that are amazing venues that most will never get to experience, yet its still in their best interest (and the game's best interest) to grow the sport.
 
My dad, who only plays maybe two times a year, called me after The Masters and said that it gave him the bug and he wants to play soon. I'm sure I wasn't the only person that got a call like that. I believe Augusta and the Tour are both making the effort to grow the game.
 
I agree that there is a level of irony here and many would say that Augusta portrays a certain image that stifles the game or limits its growth, but I think you are overthinking it.
In every city/country the nicest courses and most prestigious clubs are private, it's just the way it is.
 
The Drive Chip and Putt competition was awesome. I loved it. If I were a kid, I would be all over it. The Masters has also started admitting competitors from the Asia-Pacific Amateur and will soon start giving a slot to the South American Amateur Champion as well. These are solid efforts to grow the game, and have nothing to do with whether or not Augusta is stuffy and rich.
 
I dont care what augusta does and they have every right imo to do what they want and how they wish to do it but i do understand the meaning of the OP. How can one advocate for sometthing for the masses when they themselves limit it to a select few. I guess that can be viewed as kind of hypocritical in a way. As said in the OP "everyone should play, but just not here".

But things can always be viewed two ways and then also the right way. There will always be the haves and the have nots in just about every thing and any thing we do. There will always be a damned if you do and damned if you dont scenario. They are damned if they make any efforts and do any advocating to grow the game just as we are seeing happen here and they are also damned if they do nothing just as badly.

But when it comes to growing the game I dont know just how great that would be anyway. I mean in one sense I want always to be able to play golf and play it cheaply as posible. I dont want to see courses closing. I dont want to see course conditions deteriorate due to financial difficulty. But on the other hand in many ways who wants more people and more problems. More pace problems that we so constantly discuss, more ediquette issues that we so constantly discuss, more idiots disrespecting and ruining courses, more cahnces of some one else ruining your good time. Inability to get a favorable tee time, etc, etc. The more people involved in anything, the much higher the potential for all the bad things too.

Also higher demands for equipment will drive the prices up on that. More demand for tee times will drive those prices up too. Bottom line is that over population in the sport will cause just as many problems for us as under population can. There need to be a happy medium between the two to keep things in check both ways. Need to be enough to stop it from hurting yet not too much to hurt it.
 
They will have a much larger impact on the game of golf focusing on what they are focusing on than they would turning Augusta National into a municipal course.
 
I'm reminded that many country clubs are social (or society) clubs with a golf course attached. Like many such establishments, philanthropy and social contributions abound, but that doesn't mean a purely egalitarian mindset.

To that end, a club like Augusta can be deeply interested in growing the game and encouraging people to play and enjoy the benefits of the game, and still not necessarily imply or state that that means they should become members of their social club.
 
I think the best way Augusta grows the game is by by people seeing the Tournament and getting the bug to go back out and play
 
I think that new Drive, Chip and Putt competition could really help, I thought it was awesome.....can you imagine getting to hit a putt on the 18th green at Augusta as a 8 year old kid!
 
Miller Time said:
My dad, who only plays maybe two times a year, called me after The Masters and said that it gave him the bug and he wants to play soon. I'm sure I wasn't the only person that got a call like that. I believe Augusta and the Tour are both making the effort to grow the game.
Click to expand...
I usually try to avoid playing on the Monday after the Masters, lots of folks out there that are playing their once or twice per year round. I am glad they are there as maybe one year the bug will bite harder and they will become regulars. A course full of non golfers or yearly golfers makes for a slow round but we were all there at one time. I guess what I am saying is that yes, the Masters does pike the interest of casual and non golfers each year.
 
In my opinion, the greatest obstacles to growing the game of golf are the equipment and space required to play. We all know that you don't have to have the latest and greatest to play the game. However for many, even cheap equipment is too cost prohibitive. Also, you have to have room, which is why you will rarely, if ever, hear about an inner city kid making it big on the tour. The cost of equipment or to play already cut out a large portion of the population from ever trying golf. I don't know that there is a solution, but I think it is just a reality of economics.

As I sit and type this, I only have a 2 1/2 year old and a 3 month old. However, I am thinking as they get older that I will try to help a friend or friends of theirs who may not be able to afford to play. Maybe if those of us who do play grab your kid and a friend of theirs (if they are interested) and take them to the range. You never know which kid will catch the "bug" that many of us have. Just a thought as I have started typing this.
 
evand23mc said:
In my opinion, the greatest obstacles to growing the game of golf are the equipment and space required to play. We all know that you don't have to have the latest and greatest to play the game. However for many, even cheap equipment is too cost prohibitive. Also, you have to have room, which is why you will rarely, if ever, hear about an inner city kid making it big on the tour. The cost of equipment or to play already cut out a large portion of the population from ever trying golf. I don't know that there is a solution, but I think it is just a reality of economics.
.
Click to expand...

Certainly economics is a big factor and I agree with all you said here but there is more too it than just that. It also has a lot to do with where one is from. Lets take the equivalent of that inner city child and place him with his same financial scenario but instead of in the city we put him in a the suburbs or a small rural area too. There are very many less financialy stable people in such places too. But if the place he lives is one that has a lot of golf or is near to a lot of golf then it changes a lot of things regardless of his financial status.

Golf simply by default becomes better known by him. Perhaps when the boy is old enough to work he ends up working at a golf course or driving range instead of a department store simply by default because that's where the job is. Just not finding that job in the middle of Manhattan. I believe Lee Trevino got his first job as a youngster at a golf course. If his family and he lived in the middle of Manhattan he may never have played the game or barely heard of it or cared about it.

Kids grow up in and around big cities in many areas of the U.S. know, watch, and play basketball in school yards and parks. Kids grow up around big cities in Canada they, watch, know, and play Hockey on frozen ponds and lakes or even on foot or roller skates. Kids grow up in and around Innsbruck Austria they watch, know, and partake in skiing. Demographics and geography has a lot to do with it besides the cost factors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top