Could Not Believe It!

I played the Abbotts course at Stapleford Abbotts GC on Friday afternoon.

There was a three ball, then a single player then me.  I'd been allowed to go in front of a two ball as his mate was still in the pro shop when I got to the tee.

We played the first three holes slowly.

<<EDITED BY MODERATOR >>  he was actually struggling to keep up with the three ball in front of him.

When I got to the fourth tee he had driven but not as far as I drive my ball, so I waited for him to get out of reach before I hit my three wood.

I walked up to my ball and my gps said I was 147 yards from the green.

The bloke in front of my was on the green putting.

He got his ball into the hole and then walked back to his bag which was on the front edge of the green.  He put his putter back into his bag, got out his scorecard and wrote his score down.  Then he picked his bag up and slowly walked off to the next tee.

All the time he was doing this he could see me waiting to play my shot!

When I got to the fifth tee he was looking for his ball, again not far enough down the hole for me to play my tee shot.  No wave through, nothing.

Then the same thing on the green, marked his scorecard stood by his bag, even though the tee was empty.

I had a two ball behind me and because this guy was so slow they were catching me up regularly.

On the tenth hole I had taken my time so left a little gap between us, without holding up the two ball behind me.

I arrived at my ball and I was 120 yards from the green.  Whilst waiting to play my shot I realised that this guy was putting with two balls!

Now I know that golf clubs are always looking for new members but it appears that they will now let anybody in as long as they have the money.

I think all new members should have to play a round or two with a committee member before being allowed out onto the golf course alone.

Has anybody else come across something like this?

Russ

Played my local course last week and had a similar experience with people not letting you through.  There were 2 4 balls in front of me and the rest of the course is completly empty!  They would not let me through even when I was stood waiting on the tee with them.

The round took me about 4 hours on my own!!  Normally just under 3 on my own.

People should be made to read the etiquette section of the rules.  Its not rocket science!!

It does appear that we need a new ruling on playing through!

You should not have to call the pro shop to complain about people not letting you through, but sometimes it's the only thing to do.

This is where a course marshall is needed.

If you are stood on the tee with the group in front of you then they should let you play through, there should be no discussion about it.  The only exception would be if they had a group in front of them.

What do other people think about this?

Russ

<>

What happened here?

I am old school and honestly believe that a single player should have no standing on the course (As it used to be), that does not mean that they cannot play, just that they have to realise that by attempting to charge through the field they are in effect upsetting the game of those he wishes to plough through.

A puiblic course I used to play in London (Richmond Park) all tee times, when busy, were made up into fourballs. I could just turn up, put my name down and I would be fixed up very quickly with a group.

Thats how it should be John.

I always used to enjoy joining up with other golfers, met some pretty varied characters.

Russ, do you often play on a Friday afternoon? Would mind joining up with you one day.

I can believe it Russ. Last year I played in a club competition as part of a 4 ball. On looking at the order of play on the notice board I saw that the group in front of us was a 4 ball of notoriously slow players so I was already expecting the worst. It took us half an hour to play the first hole as we hung around watching the group place their bags at the opposite end of the green to where they should be in relation to the 2nd tee. Nobody was ready to take their putt, nobody was lining up their putt, they were all stood together watching each other putt. Scorecards were marked on the green, then followed the amble to the bags and trollies and the dawdle across the green to the 2nd tee followed by a lot of farting about and nobody ready to take their tee shot. The second hole was quite unbelievable. We waited 20 minutes on the fairway to take our approach shots into the green whilst the snails in front stood admiring each others' putting prowess ( I witnessed missed putts left less than a foot from the hole being marked instead of being finished off ) 3 of the group exited the green leaving one member to go to his bag, take 3 balls out, drop them onto the green and he then started practising his putting!!! To say I was seething was a gross understatement! I'm even angry typing this up!

The problem we all face in situations of this kind is the fact that they are totally oblivious to anything going on around them and are cocooned in their own little world.

They will say to you that golf is a social event and should not be rushed and this is why it is impossible to play 36 competitiive holes in one day anymore, like we used to do.

A fourball should take no longer than three hours, we could do that many years ago so why can it not be done in todays modern age?

Paul, I lived in the Bristol area for sixteen years and was a member at Clevedon Golf Club for the entire time.

It was the only way to play golf in those days, as there was not a single public course in the area at all.

It was very difficult for newcomers to take up the game as all the clubs insisted on at least a 24 handicap, a standard a letter of introdcution from a previous club if one knew no one at the new club to propose and second them for membership. This was all followed by the deadly appearance before the committee to see if one was a suitable candidate to become a member.

Private members clubs still operate this way, even in these trying times when they are appealing for members, they will still have a criteria that they will stick to.

The new pay and play courses that have sprung up in the past twenty years or so have completely split the game into two completely different ways of playing the game, in my opinilon to its detriment.

Some would call it progress myself I feel it is a backward step and because of this we are not producing the amount of good players that we used to under he old system. Club professionals, in the main, are there because they just were not good enough to earn a living at the game. They teach, and yes, some are really good but bottom line is it is just the way they earn their income and quite honestly the majority could not care two hoots whether you improve or not.

These are the requirements to join Huntercombe Golf Club, just up theroad from where I live:

Joining Huntercombe

There is a Waiting List to join Huntercombe although we would expect most successful candidates will be invited to join within about 18 months to 2 years. The Club has a Membership Committee whose sole task is to ensure that all new Members are fully compatible with the nature and ethos of the Club and so fit in easily with the Membership as a whole. Joining fees also apply.

Entry into Huntercombe Golf Club requires a Proposer and a Seconder who are both current full playing Members of the Club. The Proposer and Seconder both need to know their candidate well and have played golf with him/her and able to properly support the application. Additionally each candidate must obtain 6 letters of support from other Members.

All those who would like to be considered for Membership should, in the first instance, write to the Secretary to indicate their interest in joining. This letter should give a brief resumé of the candidate covering all the relevant information - education, career, golfing history, personal interests and achievements, etc as well as giving reasons for wishing to join Huntercombe.

Once the letter is received, it will be carefully reviewed by the Membership Committee and if the candidate is thought to be suitable, he/she will be invited to meet the Membership Committee and they will arrange for the candidate to play golf with a number of other Members to generate the required letters of support.

Huntercombe would be delighted to hear from suitably qualified golfers who would like to be considered for Membership. Preference will be given to younger applicants (under 40 years old) as well as those who are better players.

Visitors are normally required to start at the 1st tee only. We only allow two ball games at Huntercombe although three ball games may be possible depending on the time and only with the express permission of the Secretary. Fourballs are not allowed at any time on the Course.

It appears here that a 'Certificate of golfing competence' is needed!

Maybe the golf authorities could sort out the requirements and each person who plays golf should take the test.

This could be similar to a handicap certificate and could even be incorporated into the handicap certificate.

When you have passed the test you could turn up at any golf club to play, show them the certificate and they would know that you can at least make your way around the course without holding other people up!

Russ

Danny, I can play most Friday afternoons, even when I was working.

We'll sort something out soon.

Russ

I disagree, Pat, as you knew I would.

The game is not cluttered with rules and snobbery it is cluttered with players who have no regard for the rules yet blame snobbery for their own deficiencies

I got to say John, joining the Huntercombe would not be for me. There's enough red tape and bureaucracy in every day life without the need for that palaver.

Danny, what you have not taken into account is that were you a member of Huntercombe, or Royal Norfolk for example you would quickly appreciate how nice it is to play golf in nice surroundings with likeminded people at a speed that the modern player just would not understand.

Pat, I doubt you come across any of the snobbery that you are quoting. An example may make me change my mind.

Well,Pat, we are on a completely different wavelength if you think that sort of dress code is snobbery.

If that is the way you dress over there in Northern Ireland then I am glad that I don't play there. Dressing like someone on Blackpool pier is not what I wish to see at my club.

I don't mind a bit of snobbery. If a club wants me to wear a jacket after 6pm, then so be it.

John I see your point, but if I wanted to join Huntercombe, how could I? I've never been a member of another club, and I know nobody who is a member. I consider myself a decent kind of person, with a good grasp of the ethos of the game, but I'd never be able to join a club like Huntercombe, where it seems it's not what you know, but who. That is a bit elitist, which is something I've never really liked.

Talent does not mean one has to disrespect the rules of the golf club and I doubt for one moment that Rory would ,as he will have brought up in better quality surroundings than either of us.

You are forgetting that he was a very accomplished amateur, I believe +4 which will only have been attained by playing in all the top amateur tournaments, where, surprise, surprise they have very strict rules as to what competitiors can and cannot do. I know this because I was a part of that circuit when I was younger.

If Rory had turned up on the first tee in the Brabazon for example wearing ankle socks with shorts he would have been politely asked to leave the course.

Danny, if you read the requirements again you will see that the secretary is willing to have you play with members to get the necessary letters you need to support your application.

You have to remember that I was a lowly truck driver yet had no trouble in joining good golf clubs.

A little but true story, just for you Danny.

When I returned from Spain I bought a house in Clacton-on-Sea and had a few games on the course there. A nice course and I thought about joining. I came up against a barrier which is easy to develop when two people just are not on the same wavelength and I thought the secretary was a bumptious idiot.

I started playing then at Frinton-on-Sea Golf club which everyone would assume to be so stuffy because of its reputation of wealthy members who were stuck up. In actual fact I used to knock round with the pro and his assistant and the odd member and in the end it was the members who asked if I would care to join as I woul dbe an asset to their team. It does not take long to build up friendships with members at clubs, just takes a little time and patience.

Dress code is not snobbery it is setting and maintaining of standards.

Golf clubs have a right to have what they want in the way of rules and dress codes.

A line has to be drawn somewhere or we will next be seeing golfers in swimming trunks because it is warm in the summer.

I suggest you buy your own course and then you can have all the slovenly dressers to play there.

I couldn't find that bit John.

John would have been welcome if you were a lowly truck driver with a 26 handicap?

No one of 26 handicap would have got in a golf club in my days, because that kind of handicap never existed then. It has only been introduced to cater for the many players who have taken up the game in the last twenty years or so and have not been able to reach a reasonable standard.

Here is the bit that is relevant, Danny.

All those who would like to be considered for Membership should, in the first instance, write to the Secretary to indicate their interest in joining. This letter should give a brief resumé of the candidate covering all the relevant information - education, career, golfing history, personal interests and achievements, etc as well as giving reasons for wishing to join Huntercombe.

Once the letter is received, it will be carefully reviewed by the Membership Committee and if the candidate is thought to be suitable, he/she will be invited to meet the Membership Committee and they will arrange for the candidate to play golf with a number of other Members to generate the required letters of support.

As you can see once you have writqen to the secretary and the initially approve then they make every effort after that to get the necessary letters for the committee.

You must remember this is a private members club and they have rules which they like to maintain. If they are not for you then you don't apply.

I feel that many golfers are missing out on the cameraderie and good golfing that comes with joining a good club.

"If Rory had turned up on the first tee in the Brabazon for example wearing ankle socks with shorts he would have been politely asked to leave the course"

Not true I'm afraid John.  Dress code at the Belfry states "Whilst wearing shorts, socks must be worn (ankle socks are permitted)". 

I do agree with having a standard of dress - collar, tailored trousers/shorts, no jeans, no tracksuits, no sleeveless shirts, etc - but the wearing of knee length socks isn't necessary.  The way people dress has changed and we need reflect that whilst still maintaining a standard of dress code.  It's an evolutionary process - we wouldn't expect plus-fours to be worn anymore but 75 years ago if a pro turned out onto the course as they do now there would be uproar. 

"If Rory had turned up on the first tee in the Brabazon for example wearing ankle socks with shorts he would have been politely asked to leave the course"

Not true I'm afraid John.  Dress code at the Belfry states "Whilst wearing shorts, socks must be worn (ankle socks are permitted)". 

I do agree with having a standard of dress - collar, tailored trousers/shorts, no jeans, no tracksuits, no sleeveless shirts, etc - but the wearing of knee length socks isn't necessary.  The way people dress has changed and we need reflect that whilst still maintaining a standard of dress code.  It's an evolutionary process - we wouldn't expect plus-fours to be worn anymore but 75 years ago if a pro turned out onto the course as they do now there would be uproar. 

I'm not for the snobbery of golf.

But if I was required to attend a meeting with the membership committee then I would.

As for clothing, I cannot play golf in jeans so I wear trousers.  Jobbing bottoms won't work so trousers it is!

The rule about wearing socks that come upto the knee when wearing shorts was sheer stupidity!  The reason you are wearing shorts is because the weather is hot, so normal socks should be good enough.

Russ

Showing your inexperience there Chris, The Brabazon is the English Open Amateur Strokeplay Championship, not that mickey mouse course at Sutton Coldfield, which it must be if they have such low standards.

Didn't know there were two John, so I'll accept the education.  I stand by the other comments though.  Even you must admit that whilst there is nothing wrong with your current dress standard on the course (I would argue it's often better than most), 75 years ago it would've been unacceptable.  Progress is necessary to advance and improve and I would suggest that there would be many very good golfers who would not have entertained taking up the game had they been forced to wear plus-fours before even stepping out on the course. 

The Brabazon, Chris is a major amateur competition held at different course evry year. When I played it in 1970 it was held at Copt Heath..

If I had been playing 75 years ago then I would naturally have dressed like anyone else at the time. In fact when I first started playing I used to wear plus2's and did for many years.

Progress, what a funny word that is. It would be nice if things did progress, but IMO they seem to either stagnate ot go backwards. Think of how this country has declined in the past fifty years.

As I do not watch professional golf on the TV perhaps you could enlighten me as to which players are playing in shorts during the summer season when the tournaments are played in very warm weather. I am quite sure you will find that it is not permitted for players on tour to wear shorts. Caddies maybe, but not the players.

I watch very little golf on TV John (the missus won't let me!) but I haven't seen players in shorts during a comp.  I was merely indicating the overall dress code has changed to reflect more modern attire.  A pro golfer wearing slacks and a polo shirt on the course would not have been acceptable 75 years ago but is considered appropriate and the norm now. 

I think Tiger pushed the boundries (and his luck) when he wore a mock collar for the first time, and this has seen a relaxation to allow this style because Tiger wears it.  I think that this is a step too far and he should've been told to change as a mock collar is only fractionaly removed from a crew neck, which is unacceptable. 

You are forgetting that 75 years ago the game was played by gentlemen, who, as we all know dressed with jacket and tie at all times. If the fashion had been slacks and polo shirt then  I am sure they would have worn them.

Golfers have worn some pretty ridiculous outfits over the years but if a club decides that they wish to have a pretty strict dress code, then they are pefectly at liberty to impose it.

The public course at Sutton Coldfield is only attempting to make as much money as it can and has no scruples whatsoever in how it does so.

Tiger did indeed push the boundary but I think he has learnt his lesson.

Let us all hope for your sake, David that the current snowy weather does not persist or all the flights from this country will be grounded.

"Golfers have worn some pretty ridiculous outfits over the years"

Santo still does!

I would suggest that every course is trying to make as much money as possible, but the reasons behind it may vary.  Some are purely profit driven whilst others use the money to improve the course and facilities.  As regards scruples, I don't think they can be questioned too heavily just because you think allowing the wearing of ankle socks is too relaxed a dress code - there's nothing to stop those who wish to wearing knee socks if the feel they are more appropriate.  I know that when playing munis where jeans are allowed, I still wear slacks and a polo shirt because I feel it is the right thing to do. 

One thing I will say about "the public course at Sutton Coldfield" is that the course comes first.  On Friday there was a trolley ban on the PGA and two players had tried to sneak theirs out and were walking down the first as I arrived.  A few minutes later, one of the Belfry's staff walked in carrying two trolleys - they hadn't even made the first green.  Reserve your judgement until after you have played in March, John.  You may find that just because they allow ankle socks it doesn't mean they have low standards. 

JonnyP, if those rules are too much for you then you don't apply, do you. No one is making you.

You are quite willing to answer all those questions when applying for a job, so what is the difference. None at all.

The club is just trying to assess whether or not they think you will  be a suitable member for their club just the same way an employer does. No difference.

Chris, I am quite sure that the overall condition of the public course at Sutton Coldfield has improved since I last played there and I certainly am looking forward to playing with all you guys and that is the attraction, not the course.

I still believe that many on this forum just do not understand the difference between a private members club and these new monstrocities that have sprung up all over the country demanding exhorbitant green fees.

A private iclub is not run as a profit making organisation, its costs are reflected in the members fees and if costs rise then so do the fees. These other courses are not clubs in the true sense of the word, I know because I now belong to one and even though I am a meber I am given no preference whatsoever in front of anyone wishing to come and play and pay a green fee. I know this and I accept it.

Any club has the right to select who they would like as members. The criteria they lay down is theirs and theirs alone and I'm sorry, if you do not agree with it then you will never be a member there. Why should they allow every Ttom, Dick or Harry, who thinks he can play golf, entrance to a club knowing that they will, in all probability ,not fit in with the current membership.

I was an artisan member at St.Georges Hill Golf Club because I was, just that, an ordinary working man. The club decided that they would have only those members they considered suitable. For instance they never allowed showbusiness people to be a member. I know because I used to play with Spike Milligan who actually lived on the estate and he could not get membership.

I am quite sure that if you owned a private club then you would be very discriminating in who you allowed to join.

So an employer should not be allowed to ask the same questions, that is what you are saying.

I'm with John P on this one.

If a club has certain rules for joining, playing or dress code then you have 2 choices. You either abide by them or you find somewhere that has rules / standards that meet your requirements.

If you want to wear jeans to play or have a drink in then there are plenty of courses that allow that & plenty of pubs that will not turn you away.

I think it is a bit 'snobbery' for someone to expect clubs that have been operating for years to change their rules to accomdate non-members.

John.

I agree with both sides (nothing like sitting on the fence eh!).  A club has a right to expect a certain level of etiquette, manners, dress code, etc and interviewing people to find out if they will not upset other members, damage the good name of the club or do harm to the course is perfectly acceptable. If the prospective member is willing to abide by reasonable rules, there should not be a problem. 

HOWEVER

Making judgements on applicant's suitability based on their upbringing, education, creed, colour, sex or religion is out of order.  I've met single mother black women brought up on council estates who left school with no education and rely on social handouts to get by who are the nicest friendliest people you could ever hope to meet, but based on their background and without meeting them you would not ever expect them to be allowed to join a club like Huntercombe.  I've also met people who meet their ideal demographic - public school, old money, went to Oxbridge, high powered job in the city, played golf since 12, professionally coached, drive a Jag, etc.  9 out of 10 of these people that I have met are insufferble fools who are so far up their own ar5e I wouldn't give them the time of day. 

Point is, it doesn't matter where you are from or the route that you took to where you are, judge the person not the perception. 

You have quoted excellent examples of both sides of the coin, Chris, but you will have to accept that in both cases they would be classed as the minority in their respective behaviour.

A private golf club, is just that, a private club and has every right to decide how it selects its membership. Whether you or I feel that it is wrong is irrelevant.

I used to drive my artic into West Hill Golf Club, Woking regularly for a game of golf. I would not be able to do that today. Probably more snobbery now with all this new money, than there ever was when the clubs members were all wealthy in their own right.  So in many respects things have changed. Some for the better and some for the worse.

Come on John, now you are getting bolshoi, I have not even mentioned players of a different colour or nationality.

The club has the right to make the decision as to who they let join and who they refuse membership to. I am surprised at you for that unwarranted attack.

Jonny,

You assume wrong & you should never assume because ASSUME makes an ASS out of U & ME.

I never said anything about a persons skin colour or ethnic beliefs. But the truth is there is a small amount of discrimination in all walks of life. For example a person of a certain height is not allowed to be a poilce person, an air steward, fireman etc.

Would I as a white person be allowed to walk into a Mosque with my shoes on & could I harp on saying they are being snobs because they expect me to take my shoes off to enter the temple of prayer???

Would an ethnic minority be allowed to join the National Front??

Should all school uniforms be abolished because it is a part of snobbery??

I think you should be careful of what you accuse / interpret what people say as calling someone a racist is treading on very thin ice.

John.

Paul,

That is the attitude that I applaud. 

John.

I doubt there is anyone more tolerant than me to anyone else on a golf course. Even when I was a good player I would play with anyone, irrespective of their ability. Being an International truck driver I have come across more different nationalities than most on here and regularly play with an Indian member and two South Africans at my home club.

Thank you Santo, my eyesight is not so good at the moment. I hope you don't mind me mentioning the incorrect use of 'your' in your post to me.

Jonny,

I think it is you who have been reading between the lines

How can you write a statement like

..by your rationale, some would say it's fine and dandy to ban black people from joining a club becasue they have the wrong coloured skin.

from my statement

If a club has certain rules for joining, playing or dress code then you have 2 choices. You either abide by them or you find somewhere that has rules / standards that meet your requirements.

Where in that did you elude me being a racist & saying it was OK to ban people for their skin colour????

John.

"both cases they would be classed as the minority in their respective behaviour"

Sorry John, but no.  in my experience (and I recognise this is just my experience and opinion) most of the old money Oxbridge types are self-important asses who think they are better than the average working man.  I have encountered this many times and in one case had to leave a company I enjoyed working for because the manager was blocking my attempts to better myself because I was a blue collar worker. 

As regards the other social demographic, I AM that social demographic (well, apart from being a black woman!).  I was brought up on a council estate by my mother while my father was a deep sea merchantman and away for 10 months of the year until I was 13.  I went to the local comp, had to go uni in my own time at night while working and have had to work my way up to where I am now, facing bigotry and assumption every step of the way (see comment above about leaving a job).  I feel I am a well-rounded, honest working man and whilst I am not everyone's cup of tea, I don't think I would have a problem being accepted into most golf clubs. 

Judge the person, judge the personality, judge it blind.

I have found the opposite, all the old school types at clubs I have met have been charming people, the only problem I have ever had is from tnose who having suddenly acquired some money think that everyone else is inferior.

Like you I do not feel inferior to anyone, after all we all know different things, so no one person is better than the next.

I did not go to university, you did.

The debate is now getting out of hand as my argument is that a private organisation like a private members golf club should be permitted to have a say in who they wish to have as members.

Try and get a game at Swinley Forest. No green fees allowed, only play as a guest of a member.

All the class courses keep the riff raff away by charging high green fees, or so they think.

Jonny,

I still don't see how you can associate rasicm to my remarks. You completely went off topic & I was justifed in defending my comments. Obviousley as you have experienced racism in the past you feel that any rule/guidelines that are used to allow members etc are for the sole purpose of this & as you said it is 'in your mind' an excuse to ban certain people.

I do not know where you are going with the 'victim' remark so I will ignore it.

If you want a serious discussion about racsim & it's history in golf I would be more than happy to add my comments if you create a new forum post on this.

John.

I agree with John that if a club is owned and run by a group of members then they do have the right to choose who new members are although presumably the criteria they use would have to abide by the laws of the land.

As far as dress codes are concerned then I think every club has the right to impose one and then players can choose whether they want to play there.

Going back to ettiquette which was the original point of the thread I think that should be the same on every course.  However as with good manners actions can be perceived differently by different people.  Russel mentioned that there was three ball in front of the guy that was annoying him.  Maybe he was hanging back and occupying himself because he was worried being inconsiderate to the group in front by standing on the fairway waiting for them to putt out.  I don't think that excuses his behaviour but might put it in a slightly different light.

Jon, the problems of singles and two balls amongst three and fourballs is a phenomena that has only arisen since the introduction of all these new pay and play clubs.

All private clubs operate different tee times for 2 balls and 3/4 balls at certain times of the day and usually utilising the 10th tee as well.

This means that 2 balls are not tangled up with 4 balls etc. So no problem. All private clubs also have the rule of a single player having no standing whatsoever. Quite rightly so.

Not exclusive to private members clubs John. One of our local pay and play does take the trouble of making up fourballs from one, two and threes in the mornings when they are busy.  They are probably motivated more by financial concerns than the comfort of customers but it is an enjoyable experience to be able to go and play with new faces and it only takes a little effort from the staff.

Thanks for the PM Jonny.

John P.

I think private member clubs can choose who they want to be members. I was just debating the fairness of their selection. We've played golf together, and I consider myself a decent kind of guy, but would I get into the Huntercombe, probably not.

Now as I live in London, thats no skin off my nose, as there's plenty of others to choose from. What if that was my only local course? Its just not fair.

You're right though, they can choose who they like. They could have a club of members with the name Colin only if they wanted.

I wonder how they will fair in the credit crunch? I know of a local course quite like Huntercombe in it's membership requirements. Recently a friend, a plumber, has just become a member, with no contacts at the club, and not a great CV. But he is a fairly competent golfer (10HC), and he can pay the greens fees, and signing fee.

Danny, I am quite sure that I would not be able to get membership at Huntercombe at my time of life. It is young blood they are looking for.

Also it would not interest me now although it would have done when I could play the game as it is an excellent course with all year round play.

But would you have got a membership in your younger days?

Yes, I would, without a doubt, being a scratch/low single figure golfer is what gets one into golf clubs.

I doubt they would miss you, Pat.

How do you know John. What if they wanted the right person, and you didn't fit their idea of what the right person would be.

You said you'd love to have played their when you were a better player. But say you went their and they just didn't want you playing because you're not the right sort of person.

They would have used the process they're entitled to to select members, and because you were a truck driver for instance, they've choose not to have you at their private members club. How would you feel. It would make me feel pretty lousy about myself. Then I'm just a big softy.

I don't think John is Pat.

They wouldn't miss me, you, John P or most of the members on this site.

How do I know, Danny, I don't, but I have never been blackballed by any club that I have made an application to.

Yes I was a truck driver, but also managing director of my own international haulage business, so maybe that issue would not have come up, as I would have applied being an MD and not a truck driver, although I am very proud of my driving exploits.

I still feel that being a good player opens doors that might not otherwise do so.

So here's a question.  What would you rather have at your club: -

I know what my choice would be......

I think the point is Chris. That huntercombe can afford to choose number 3.

3. Good players (5 and under h/c) but thoroughly decent people whose company you enjoy.

I'm begining to see John's point.

If you have a standard of person/golfer you want, how do you determin it?

If you went to this course to join, it's easy for them to determin if your golf is up to scratch, not so easy to judge what kind of person you are.

So here's a question.  What would you rather have at your club: -

1. Average players (14-20 h/c)but they are complete asses who you would avoid socialising withI know what my choice would be......

2. Good players (5 and under h/c) but thoroughly decent people whose company you enjoy'

I know what my choice would be........

But its the 3rd group John. Which is 90% of this site.

3. Average players (14-20 h/c)but thoroughly decent people whose company you enjoy.

You cant deny their existence as you've played with many of them. In your own words, you're now one yourself.

As I said though, if clubs like huntercombe feel the need to omit this group, that is their choice.

I'm forever the optimist though, and I'd like to think they would have me as a member.

I don't feel that they are asking questions that are invasive, after all we face the same kind of questions if applyuing for a job and if you did not achieve the right academic results then certain employment opportunities are not open to you.

Everywhere there are standards being applied, so why on earth are we all getting our knickers in a knot because a golf club does the same.

I had to pass an 11+ to get to grammar school, another form of selection. When National Service came up I was drafted into the Army, why not the RAF or Navy, who knows what their criteria was.

Huntercombe are not omitting any particular group, I am quite sure that Chris, who is obviously very intelligent having been to university and holding the kind of job that he does, would have no trouble sataisfying the committee at Huntercombe.

My background may satisfy the committee John, but that doesn't mean I am the right sort of person for the club or have a suitable golf game.  Conversely, someone without the background may be just the sort of person they are looking for and be a decent golfer with the ability to become a very good golfer.

I don't disagree with interviewing applicants, and I actually think that clubs should interview as it ensures that they are getting members in keeping with the club, its beliefs and its history (as long as those do not exclude based on sex, race, religion, etc).  I don't see how whether someone attended uni or not (for example) can have an effect on their suitability.  It's who that person is now, not how they got to be that person that matters in my opinion.

I agree John. As in my previous posts there is criteria for everything.

You can't blame the police force or a school for not employing someone with a criminal record.

If you go to certain clubs / pubs / restaurants you have to adhere to their dress code.

I've never been to Huntercombe but if I applied & got refused I think I would be in my rights to ask why I was refused.

When I joined my club I had to have a proposer & seconder, I then had to have my application form displayed in the clubhouse for a month for any existing members to lodge any comments. After this I attended an interview which was very warm, open & not intrusive at all.

I was not treated any differently to any other member that had applied.

Sometimes the fear of the unknown is often the barrier.

John.

Good post John F.

Your last post, Chris, says that you agree with any prospective member being interviewed. That is all Huntercombe are doing.

It is also quite likely that on occasion they get it wrong and make an asshole a member. All clubs usually have a few.

JohnF, I feel quite sure that you would have no difficulty in gaining membership anywhere, yes, even Huntercombe and the same applies everyone on this forum. It is how you approach the application that is important.

Myself, if I had wished to join I would first of all start playing there regularly paying green fees, it is surprising how quickly ones face becomes recognised.

Steven, if you are going to comment on something I say, then it would be nice if you get your facts right. Please point me to where I said that I was a member of a club that only allowed 2balls.

These clubs are few and far between and the reason it is usually adopted is so that all the members have a chance to play golf on a Sunday morning and all be home for lunch.

There is no way that you can justify a single player having any standing whatsoever. You are contradicting yourself in the next sentence when you admit that golf is a social sport. Which side of the fence are you going to sit on. The R & A have now included this in the etiquette section of the rules, not the rules of golf, I might add which  gives the option for all clubs to decide whether or not to permit this. I would be very surprised if any private clubs have altered their previous thinking on this.

As a 2 ball, myself and my golf buddy in Somerset needed only 2 hours and 10 minutes to play a round of 18 holes. I was 60 when I played and carried for three rounds at Camberley Heath with my Son and Friend, even having lunch and tea in between each round.

My tortoise can move faster than some of the players I see these days.

I cannot believe the way this game has disintegrated in so many ways.

Well, Santo, that is stooping very low attempting to correct obvious typos, I never do that. I much prefer myself to me also.

There is also no valid reason why a singleton, now he has the power of standing, to insist on blasting his way through everyone on the golf course. Which is what you're saying he can now do, and agree with. Well, I don't agree, and any decent club still does not allow this.

Personally I have never even attempted to have a round of golf on my own. A singleton is only playing to practice as the round can count for nothing, so is it important that he plays the full 18 holes for instance. He is quite at liberty to move about the course to other holes if he feels it is too slow.

Under your intepretation of this new rule, the single player with standing has every right to quote the rule and demand that he be let through, as the group in front is holding him up.

If you agree with this then how would you feel when all the club members are playing in a medal in 3/4 balls and one selfish single player decides that he does not wish to play in the medal but now that he has the standing he will now charge through the field and there is nothing you can do about it. Spoils everyone elses game.

If this is what you think should happen then fine, but I can assure you this rule will not be implemented at any self respecting club.

No-one, no matter how many in the group has the RIGHT to play through.  If a group, be it a single or four-ball, is being held up and the group holding them up is not keeping up with the pace of play etiquette requires they are offered the option of playing through.  The rule is to keep up with the group in front, not ahead of the group behind. 

Your comment about singles demanding they to be let through is quite correct John; no-one has that right and if I were in a four-ball who were keeping up with play and a single player demanded to be let through, I would not-so-politely refuse.  If we weren't keeping up with play and they demanded to be let through, I'd advise them to wait until the next hole and ask politely and I would consider it. 

Unless otherwise determined by the Committee. This is the get out clause that allows all private member clubs to have the No Standing for single players rule, which I wholeheartedly agree with.

You are agreeing to the rule, yet are looking for dispensation when you are playing in a competition. That is not what the R & A have said. Seems as though you want your cake, and eat it too.

There has always been the rule that if a group loses a clear in hole in front of them, that they should invite the group behind to go through.

I would let him through, of course I would. That is not my argument though.

Once power to have standing is given to the single player he then has the right to demand to come through, as he is being held up. That is what I disagree with.

Think it's a terminology thing John.  No-one has the right to demand they are allowed through, but everyone who is being held up AND THE GROUP IN FRONT IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH PLAY should be allowed to play through.  The 'standing' term merely means that a singleton has the same rights as a two, three or four ball in that respect. 

Etiquette has to work both ways or it does not work at all.

We all know that a single player will be faster than a 2ball, even so once he steps on the first tee he is going to be putting every group on the course under pressure.

Without standing then he has to take his chances with the generosity of those who he comes up behind.

With standing then he can demand to be let through, as he is the faster group and if the group in front refuses then they are the ones who are not playing to the rules.

No standing has worked for well over 100 years now and I see no reason to change it. In fact Committees all over the country are ignoring it, for the same reasons I have pointed out.

If guidlines are expected to be implemented then they are as good as a rule,

However, I have decided to surrender on this point as it is obvious I am way out of touch with the modern game being an old dinosaur.

I will just have to learn to live with this free for all that is now the modern version of a game that used to be the most enjoyable experience one could ever have. Sometimes, these days it is really painfull to be out on the course.

You are so right, of course, Jonny. Hoping for a game soon with you at Chipping.

The brain has been ready for sometime, the knee is dodgy for a walk round, no problem with a buggy, but the weather is preventing the use of those and the eyesight is not improving as yet. As soon as I feel it is OK I will contact you.

 This is one of the longest threads I have read and reminds me of two situations. Me and two partners went to the East coast last Sept. We played Flamborough on Fri afternoon, not busy however the pro came over to us on the third fairway and asked me if we would let through the captain, who was at that time two holes behind us, in a fourball but with buggies and I thought it was a bit off but seeing as I was a visitor I felt obliged to do so. It seems to me that some people take the word course into another context and want to finish the round asap.

 On an etiquette issue: I was playing at Bingley St Ives last year and I tucked my trousers into my socks as was v muddy and one of the members asked me to take them out. I also did that.

 Reflecting on all the comments made I reckon I should have told both of those blokes to sod off, first one being a selfish and the other one wishing we still had the empire.

As a person who goes out onto the golf course as a single player I feel that seeing as I'm paying the same as everyone else then I have the right to play.

When I was working (nights) I often used to get up at dinner time and get 18 holes in before I went to work.

Here are my thoughts on being a single player.

If I tee off and the course is busy, I'll try and join up with somebody else, but this seems to be getting harder and harder to do!

So I tee off as a single player and it's busy in front of me.  What I do here is adjust my speed of play so that I stay near enough to the group in front of me, but not near enough to put pressure on them.  If a group in front of them is holding them up then I have no right to play through.  I understand this and accept it.  Sometimes when it's slow a group may invite me to play through them, which I do and I thank them for it.

I try to adjust my speed of play so that I'm never right up behind the group in front or holding up the group behind.  If I'm starting to hold up the group behind then I have to speed up which might mean me catching upto the group in front.

Now if the group in front of me have a clear gap between them and the group in front, then I would expect them to let me play through if I was catching them up all the time. 

I have played a few times where there has been nobody behind me and the group in front are slow.  So I'm in no rush.  I either play two balls off the tee (par 3 holes) or I take my drive and play three balls in from the 100 yard mark.

Golf is all about manners on the course, if you are holding somebody/group up and you are a full hole behind the group in front of you then you MUST let them play through, it's that simple.

Our club has a fourball who are notorious for being slow, I've heard they have been told about it but that's as far as it went, they are still slow.

Now I would split this group up, during busy periods I would not let them play as a fourball!  No you might say that golf is social and if they enjoy playing together then they should be allowed too!  The problem is that while they are enjoying playing together everybody else behind them isn't enjoying their golf!  So in this case I'd say 'Majority Rules'.

Russ