Adapting courses to suit particular golf markets
Perhaps one of the key reasons that it has proved difficult for golf to establish itself in many new markets has been the kind of courses that have been built. It’s understandable that both developers and architects would seek to create ‘marquee’ courses – there are sound business reasons why that kind of course might be a good investment, and golf architects know that it is building spectacular courses that gets them noticed – but 7,500 yard championship courses that are extremely expensive to build, maintain and play are never going to be the ideal venue for beginners to learn the game.
Beginner golfers need simple, affordable golf courses. Though they have not got that in a number of high profile new markets – like China, for example – there are plenty of other countries that have approached golf development in this sustainable, bottom-up fashion. Finland, Sweden and the Czech Republic are three countries that, over the years, have built a reasonable number of fairly straightforward, even basic golf facilities, and have, over time, reaped the rewards by developing a substantial cadre of new golfers.
Golfers, like every other species on earth, evolve over time. In the beginning, new golfers have very little ability to differentiate between a good golf course and a bad one. So long as a course is not so difficult that they cannot play it without losing lots of balls, they are generally just happy being on the course. But, as they acquire skills and experience – and in particular, when they start to travel to play golf, and see courses, usually fairly high profile ones, in other countries – they become better judges of what is good and what is not. As they have children, or even grandchildren, who they introduce to the game from a young age, their country becomes a real golfing one, with second or third generation golfers, with a more instinctive feel for the game.
Historically, I feel it is proven that is the case when you look at more established markets. Take Sweden, which is at least a generation ahead of many other European markets. The Swedes are no longer first generation golfers – and as a result, they are demanding better designed courses. My partner Michiel VanderVaart and I work with County Louth, one of the most famous and best links in Ireland and a must play if you appreciate links golf. That club has a lot of Swedish golfers coming to play. And links golf is an acquired taste: for a lot of people it isn’t enjoyable to begin with, if you are used to trees and parkland style golf. Those who appreciate that kind of golf are more educated, if you like. This, I think proves the point.
When the game becomes a larger part of their lives, golfers begin to appreciate the diversity that exists in golf courses. Travel opens their horizons to the many things that golf can be. And then you go home to your home club, and you start to appreciate what it could be, which in turn sees clubs trying to become better and live up to what their members want.
Denmark is getting there. The Netherlands as well. Most other European countries are getting there as well. I look at the percentage of people playing golf. There is a glass ceiling – you are not going to get 100 per cent of people playing golf! In countries like Sweden and Ireland, nearly five per cent of the population are registered golfers, in Denmark it’s just under three per cent, but in most European countries it is less than one per cent. So there is potential demand for new courses as the proportion of golfers increases.
But mostly, at the moment, the issue is not new courses, it is existing ones trying to improve their facilities to match up to what more savvy golfers want. I see it all around Europe – the larger scale renovation market is starting to exist, because clubs have realised they need to upgrade what they offer, or they will lose members and visitor income. When does a project become a big project? For me, that would be one with a construction cost of say, €800,000. For that, you can really change a course – you can redo all the bunkers, most of the tees and perhaps six or seven greens – and you can make a big upgrade in the golfing experience.
What I am seeing is that clubs are trying to focus on producing a unique product, rather than just competing on price. If you can buy two things that are the same, most people will go for the cheaper option!
There are three things that are crucial for a development plan to be a success. From a design point of view, it must be clear that the finished product will be significantly better than what they have. Then there is finance; how is it going to be funded? And the last thing, is how it is going to affect the daily play of the members? If they are going to have excavators there all the time for five years, you will get pushback.
You get so much out of undertaking a development plan. I tell them about who I am and what I have experienced as a golf architect, which is that clubs have been mostly focused on finding short term, ad hoc solutions to their problems. But this is not the best way forward!
Most courses are not particularly architecturally significant and could be significantly improved. By undertaking a long term development plan you ensure that everything you spend on the course is going to give the right result – not just now but ten years from now.
Philip Christian Spogárd is a partner in the international golf design firm of Spogárd & VanderVaart
This article first appeared in issue 45 of Golf Course Architecture.