“All the boomers are doing is masking what’s really leaking in golf."
I missed Gene Yasuda's alarming Oct. 4 piece on just how far down the drain golf is headed, but it's loaded with some great stuff and one huge stink-bomb of blame directed at the wrong source of the game's troubles. First, he explains how retiring boomers are masking huge declines in play among 25-44-year-olds.
In 1990, there were approximately 12.4 million golfers in that age group; by 2005, their ranks had fallen to 9.2 million – an alarming 26 percent drop. According to industry consultant Stuart Lindsay, who attributed the data to the National Sporting Goods Association, the fall-off bluntly underscores that golf isn’t appealing enough to the sweet spot of the U.S. population. He says the participation rate for that age group is about 20 percent lower today.
“All the boomers are doing is masking what’s really leaking in golf,” he says.
And the problem? Slow play and the overall emphasis on an 18-hole saga, of course.
Golf finds itself in this predicament for one main reason: In a day and age when free moments – let alone hours – are scarcer than ever, the game has become a time-sucking affair. Simply put, golf hasn’t adapted to sweeping societal changes, including the predominance of dual-income households. The increase in the number of married women in the workplace has redefined child-rearing and the division of household labor.
“Helicopter parenting” – hopping from one child’s activity to another – saps potential time on the links. And when these harried folks finally do get a chance to play, they’re quickly discouraged from going out again, thanks to five-hour-plus rounds.
Indeed, slow play is an epidemic.
And you know who gets the blame for that don't you? Yes, those pesky developers who just woke up one day and said, I want to build longer, tougher courses for no apparent reason!
Blame it, in part, on developers’ desire to build tougher tracks: 70 percent of courses built in the U.S. between 1990 and 2006 had a slope rating of 125 or more. By comparison, the average U.S. slope rating has been hovering around 119.
It still amazes me (I'm not sure why) that at this point, where the bottom is nowhere in sight, that everyone dances around addressing the distance chase for fear of upsetting manufacturers. They're in this mess too, and should be just as open to anything that sparks interest in the game.
Oh that's right, they don't look beyond the next quarter and no one wants to give up twenty yards or the joys of buying the same stuff the pros play.
There I go again.
Geoff
**On this topic of the golf experience, check out architect Edwin Roald's articles and website devoted to the concept of why 18 holes...
Reader Comments (35)
Who were the 25-to-44 year-olds in 1990? They were the great many souls born between 1946 and 1965, also known as the Baby Boom. In 2010, 25-to-44 year-olds are basically Baby Busters. The former were the bulge in the python, and if it's not inevitable that participation has declined among this important age group (indeed it isn't, insofar as the overall U.S. population has increased in the last 20 years, but then again, a healthy chunk of that increase has been relatively poor immigrants and their offspring), it's certainly not inexplicable.
And I have to say...I don't like slow play at all, but I doubt much of the life-is-too-frenetic-to-play-18 effect can be attributed to a marginal 20 or 30 minutes in the average length of a round. For the 25-to-44 dads I know, the question is *can they get out AT ALL,* even for a speedy 3+ hour round. Too often the answer is no. Which makes me wonder if I really want kids after all...
In other words, golf (like classical music) has always been largely consumed by retirees or near retirees: folks who can afford the time and cost of the equipment, dues, lessons, etc. As long as there are retired people with time and 401k's on their hands, there'll be golf and Cialis commercials during golf tournaments on TV.
And, as pointed out above, no one should be surprised by bubbles moving through the age groups by the baby boomers.
What's most frustrating, however, is that my kids now want to go play, and we are basically relegated to the driving range. When I was learning to play in So. Cal, there were Par 3 courses. Not many. But some. And that is where my Dad took me and my brother. They weren't exactly kid-friendly places (except for Sinaloa), but at least we could play. I live near Detroit now. And short courses are basically non-existent.
True story: I played Cog Hill No. 4 (slope of 150 or so) with a friend on a Sunday - we were paired with a couple. I fully support casual golfers taking the time to get out and play, but the poor lady's tee shots topped out at a 100 yards, seldomly made it onto a green in less than 8 shots, and had feel for any type of short game. In other words - she shouldn't have been there. There is simply no way that she was enjoying herself - and the pace of play overall suffered greatly.
If I play with friends in a 3-some, walking, without people in front of us, we'd play in less than 4 hours every time. We need to create enough facilities to allow players of differing ability, time commitments, etc. to play on the appropriate track.
To the primary point, if boomers (or 50+) weren't getting a break in greens fees at many places, golf would be even further up s___ creek.
Your story about Cog Hill is quite normal. (And I bet the lady in question took a practice swing before many of those eight shots.) Where is the ranger in that situation? Answer: off doing something else. I've never played a course that actually enforced pace-of-play. It's deplorable.
Slow play sucks, yes -- but it's not an issue if people aren't playing. How far behind did your group fall, Alex H? Even if she's taking all those shots and swings, you would still keep moving unless you had to wait for the group in front of you.
Why would things be tough for the golf industry right now? Gee, I dunno -- how about IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID! Focusing on other issues is like reading the green without taking the mountains into account.
To play golf in a reasonable amount of time, we are going to start playing at public course that allows people to go out at 6:30am. Thankfully, people who get up that early to play are quick golfers. Once our girls are old enough to have morning soccer games, I expect we will both have to quit playing regularly.
I know this will get me banned from Geoff's site (which is regrettable), but why don't a few of the marginal courses -- you know, executive layouts or barely making it public courses -- experiment (I said "experiment") with a six-inch or eight-inch cup? (Yeah, yeah, i know, it's Charlie Rymer's suggestion and many others before him.)
What would be the harm to do it one day a week, or one afternoon a week? You wouldn't play competitive rounds this way, but when beginners and high handicappers and my wife are 20 feet from the hole, they have no realistic chance of making it. With an eight-inch cup, you might cut your chipping and putting in half and speed play.
Again, this is NOT for Congressional, Bethpage or any place you've ever read about. It's for the owner who's thinking about paying off his city council so he can get the zoning changed to residential.
Also, I guess the mere suggestion of this means i have to surrender commenting privileges. *sigh*
Build more 9 hole courses
Why is the game not popular with the 25-44 demographic?
Golf is a tough sport...too tough for a demographic that has had everything easy for their short lives.
Golf is a sport of success/failure. And dealing with it.
Too much to ask for today's generation.
You can't play golf with 2 thumbs.
Most young people today don't want to spend time learning a difficult game. They're used to video games, where your handicap gets to single digits in a couple of days.
Add to that the rising cost of golf - 3 digit green fees for a good course in many metro areas, and it's not surprising that golf is in decline.
Golf will stabilize with far fewer courses, both public and private, and a much smaller base of hard-core players. Back similar to what it was before the golf boom of the last half of the 20th century. Right there with bowling.
But I'm afraid also that the game has been hugely coarsened. I decided to walk the first 6 holes of my home course on Wednesday (PRGC in Bermuda); that's the flat bit. I teed off on an empty course. I'd walked down the first 150 yards after my ball. I heard a shout, turned round, couldn't hear the guy, walked all the way back to his cart by the white tees. He says "we're playing in a tournament, we'd like to play through as this is our last hole". I was flabbergasted, but I said OK as I was in no hurry. I walked back towards my ball. They played, and as they passed me one of them said "you shouldn't play this course if you can't afford a cart". These were all sixty-somethings like myself. It took them 22 minutes to vacate the 390 yard hole and none of them was in any trouble looking for a ball, as far as I could see. The last 5 minutes were spent at the green side doing their scorecard accounting and settling their bets.
Walking, I usually play the hole in about 7 minutes.
Now, I realise these people are crass idiots who demean golf by their very being on a golf course, and I didn't really care as it was the most glorious day imaginable, but you could see how someone not used to this kind of behaviour could be most seriously offended, and shocked at and put off by the presence of such arrogant loutishness on a golf course.
By the way I checked with the pro's office and there was no tournament played that day.
The only answer to the slow play is marshals empowered to throw groups who do not allow faster players through off the course, without refund. The "keep up with the group ahead" tactic does not work because you can only play as quickly as they do.
In Scotland and Ireland you are excoriated if you don't let faster players play through, whereas in the Western Hemisphere it seems to be an insult to manhood to offer this most common of courtesies.
The game is too hard for today's generation.
No instant gratification.
You can't buy a new app to make you seem better, quicker, smarter for eventually you have to take the clubhead back. If you haven't played baseball or hockey or stick/ball games, It can take years to break 100 if you wait until 25.
We've seen a lot of clubs slash or completely eliminate the intitiation fee, I expect to see a LOT more of this. Pity clubs that are loaded up with debt -- many bankruptcies to come. This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Bif, there's only one Bethpage Black and it's walking only -- no carts allowed. More Bethpage like complexes is EXACTLY what golf needs. There's a course for all levels/abilities at Bethpage. And my experience there has been that well in excess of 50% of all play is walking, at least before 12noon. The afternoon sloths mostly ride!
No side pockets on shorts, even if they are smooth, adults who still think kids are in the way, and a lack of ability for many to focus on any task for more than half hour are all PART of the many more reasons golf is struggling.
Biggest issue in southern cal that I have seen. It's too damn expensive! I take students to golf courses in the area for practice rounds, rarely (if I am friendly with the guys, or they have come to our place) ask for comps, and it is staggering how much a day of golf for 2 costs. PLUS, 60-70% of the courses are staffed by people that act at times like thy are doing you a favor for letting you play their course. It's pretty eye opening to be an anonymous customer, who knows a little about operations
It now has 500 members and a course rating so players can get a handicap. It's great for beginners, Dads and Mums with kids, the very elderly and people who don't want to play more than an hour or so.
Many NZ clubs have 9 hole members (half annual fee), usually women with competitions and tee times.
There are few carts at most New Zealand courses- golfers carry or pull trolleys.
The driving range was needed and is a plus -- no debate there.
However, I lobbied for changing the 36 holes to something more creative -- one 18, a more modest driving range and a "12 holer" instead -- the idea of a 12 hole course was sitting there for the taking. It would have been a perfect place for older and younger golfers to play. We'd create a 3-hour round possibility for those on the go -- etc. etc. --
The reaction to a 12-holer was basically, "you can't do 12 holes -- no one will "get it" and no one will understand the scoring, handicapping, etc." The idea was basically treated as a joke.
Too bad - the opportunity for this sort of innovation really only comes across once --
The diversity of youth is as varied as it has ever been.
Now go run those kids off your lawn.
And play well, and have a good weekend. ;)
Stabilize the game!
There's your new affordable golf slogan. "A Buck a Hole". Make it happen people.
My home track has 2 18 holers, and a 4 hole par 3 loop. Play all you want all day on the 4 holer for $5.... holes are 100-200 yds long.
City also has a 9 hole track that the beginners flock to, but we need more, more logisticly placed.
If golf is a priority, something you enjoy, you'll find a way to play and you'll even put up with some hardship--whether it is the expense or a ridiculously severe Nicklaus course or long rounds or a long trip there and back, or making it work with kids.
At one time or another I've experienced all that, often simultaneously.
Today, between myself and my golf addicted son--who is 15 and aspires to play collegiately and spends every hour of every day of his summers at the course when not elsewhere playing tournaments, we play 10 rounds a week or more at the peak of the season.
We're doing are part.
And I've created a monster of a son who, worse case scenario, will be a life-long scratch golfer.
All those people who aren't out playing, especially those dads who only find excuses not to bring their sons and daughters out to the course with them, don't know what they are missing.
I've had the time of my life the last few years playing golf more regularly AND with my kids.