New Rule for eligibility to Away Opens

cairny

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

Before people get thoroughly exercised over this, can anyone say how many distance memberships there are?

Dunno but there's 7,000 in one club alone!

GreeBo

blue note wrote: »

I'd argue it is helping the situation. They're putting money into clubs by paying distance membership, paying open fees, buying food and drink after, and whatever else they spend and whoever else they bring.

If you take away their handicap, which is essentially what they are doing, the vast majority of these people won't pay full membership somewhere and will reduce their spend on golf. And the remaining club golfers will be the ones who will ultimately have to make up that lost revenue.

We know there are too many clubs and not enough golfers, spreading all the cash around them all isnt going to do anything other than prolong the slow starvation. Its great for NAMA clubs who attract lots of greenfees/opens but whats that doing the struggling clubs?

How many of these "distance" clubs would be afloat today without their distance members?
That money, imo, should be going to clubs that have playing members.

cairny

pete4pool wrote: »

I was a full member of a local club a few years ago and joined this distance club, due to an injury that I knew would limit my play the following year, so did not want to lose my handicap, since my time has been taken up with other things so have continued the member ship.

It is actually alot cheaper to play opens on a weekday then to play green fees at the weekend, slightly cheaper than playing green fee during the week. But it would also be cheaper for me to pay green fees at my nearest club and play every second week (which would be a very good year for me) then pay the sub for the year. but I am not going to do that either.

But the main reasons I do it is, I find it hard to concentrate when the round is not important/competitive (sorry its my nature), most of my buddies are members of the local clubs and only play in competitions, so to get out with them its best/easier to do in the opens.

I am not a bandit, played 10 opens in the last year and a half, broke 36 once.

I agree that this will result in less GUI members, less people playing golf, less money going to clubs. And the only way they will get this back is to increase the subs.

If I could play every second week, I would find the money, because I know I'd get value out of it. Then I could play during the weekend which makes it easier and I could join club teams, etc.
Being a member of a local club is way better than what I am doing. But for many it is not an option. And with rules like this will make many give up the game.

There might be a few people, join local clubs because of this rule, agreed. But then in 2016 they will realize that it was not worth it and then give up.

I'm don't in any way mean to be critical of you, you're using the system that's there. The distance specialist clubs are abusing the system and this needs to be stopped, it's unsustainable and damaging the game.

Of course the opens are cheaper than green fees but you're getting a discount that you shouldn't really be getting in equity.

I disagree that this will lead to less money for clubs, it may well lead to an increase in the number of members of local clubs allowing them to reduce the sub but this remains to be seen.

blue note

GreeBo wrote: »

We know there are too many clubs and not enough golfers, spreading all the cash around them all isnt going to do anything other than prolong the slow starvation. Its great for NAMA clubs who attract lots of greenfees/opens but whats that doing the struggling clubs?

How many of these "distance" clubs would be afloat today without their distance members?
That money, imo, should be going to clubs that have playing members.

Irrespective of the fact that there are too many clubs, this will reduce the number of golfers and take money out of the game. My club, a members club, run a successful weekly Friday open. If we get a fourball each week of these distance members playing, that's a hundred euro a week, five grand a year. We'll lose a lot of this money if people can't buy handicaps anymore.

fordy1208

It sounds to me as if the GUI are trying to make golf an elitist hobby again. Its a shame because the majority of golfers I know (including me) are OP.

superhooper

In relation to the banditry issue are these distance clubs not updating handicaps correctly for their members who play in various opens? If they are updating them where is the issue?

alxmorgan

superhooper wrote: »

In relation to the banditry issue are these distance clubs not updating handicaps correctly for their members who play in various opens? If the are updating them where is the issue?

Can't see this as a banditry issue fixer in any way shape or form. Truth be told there is no real way to stop bandits. You can't force somebody to try their best so what can be done ?

A uniform cut for team comp performances seems like a good one to me. Harsh on some team members perhaps but for the greater good.

GreeBo

blue note wrote: »

Irrespective of the fact that there are too many clubs, this will reduce the number of golfers and take money out of the game. My club, a members club, run a successful weekly Friday open. If we get a fourball each week of these distance members playing, that's a hundred euro a week, five grand a year. We'll lose a lot of this money if people can't buy handicaps anymore.

Maybe some of them will join, how many would you need to cover the loss of *some* of the open players?

GreeBo

fordy1208 wrote: »

It sounds to me as if the GUI are trying to make golf an elitist hobby again. Its a shame because the majority of golfers I know (including me) are OP.

How is it elitist in the slightest?

SnowDrifts

PARlance wrote: »

-On team events, I'd certainly accept a blanket 0.5 (or whatever) cut if I was part of a winning team despite how I played. This IMO is the best and easiest way to address an area that is wide open to abuse.

alxmorgan wrote: »

A uniform cut for team comp performances seems like a good one to me. Harsh on some team members perhaps but for the greater good.

Agreed, this would be a very good idea.

fordy1208

@Greebo by encouraging golfers to join clubs that may not suit their availability to play, this in turn would give an incentive to clubs to up their membership price thus making it more unaffordable.

redzerdrog

No hcap or discount is worth having to play 3 rounds in Scarke, what a horrible place that is!!

I did think this was a good idea until I realised it is going to effect me next year as I am newly joining a club in January, there should be something in place like suggested already 3 rounds in previous year or 5 rounds in current year in your home club. As is, i will be forking out a significant amount of money to join a club in Jan yet wont be able to play in an open in an away club which is 5 minutes from work.

GreeBo

fordy1208 wrote: »

@Greebo by encouraging golfers to join clubs that may not suit their availability to play, this in turn would give an incentive to clubs to up their membership price thus making it more unaffordable.

These people are already paying to pay in opens (if they aren't then by definition they dont form part of our conversation)
Clearly they can afford to play, where exactly are they living that they cant afford anywhere nearby but can afford to play nearby opens?

mike12

blue note wrote: »

Irrespective of the fact that there are too many clubs, this will reduce the number of golfers and take money out of the game. My club, a members club, run a successful weekly Friday open. If we get a fourball each week of these distance members playing, that's a hundred euro a week, five grand a year. We'll lose a lot of this money if people can't buy handicaps anymore.

If they can't play in the open they they will pay green fees and have that extra €120 a year to spend on more green fees.
If you want regular comps and you wouldn't see yourself as a bandit then join a club. If not can't you just pay green fees and play with your mates for a €5.
There are places like Bellewstown that are cheap €220 a year for a handicap and are pay and play after that that are within easy travel distance of Dublin. The €100 you would spend on petrol on the 3 hour trip would make up the difference.

superhooper

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Agreed, this would be a very good idea.

Are these open team comps then the biggest issue in relation to bandits??

mike12

superhooper wrote: »

Are these open team comps then the biggest issue in relation to bandits??

You play in your average 4 person team comp in your club 90 points is a good score and 94/5 will always get a prize.
You play in a open one where there are big prizes on offer you seem to get a lot of 100 point type scores. Even the Atlantic coast this year 3 man team scores were way over 90 points. That's a average of 5 points a hole which for me is mad for 3 players over 3 days.

blue note

mike12 wrote: »

If they can't play in the open they they will pay green fees and have that extra €120 a year to spend on more green fees.
If you want regular comps and you wouldn't see yourself as a bandit then join a club. If not can't you just pay green fees and play with your mates for a €5.
There are places like Bellewstown that are cheap €220 a year for a handicap and are pay and play after that that are within easy travel distance of Dublin. The €100 you would spend on petrol on the 3 hour trip would make up the difference.

Some will and some won't. Some people like that you can put your name down for an open and have people to play with, or they just like competitions or for whatever reason might not continue to play as much if they aren't able to keep their handicap.

At the end of the day, I just don't think that they are causing a problem. We have too many clubs or too few golfers. I think there's a practically untapped market of golfers who are not serious enough to pay full membership, but would still like to play a bit. The recent reduced green fees and distance membership options were starting to bring a few of these people out, but we seem to be closing the door on them and I think we'll all miss out as a result.

GreeBo

blue note wrote: »

Some will and some won't. Some people like that you can put your name down for an open and have people to play with, or they just like competitions or for whatever reason might not continue to play as much if they aren't able to keep their handicap.

At the end of the day, I just don't think that they are causing a problem. We have too many clubs or too few golfers. I think there's a practically untapped market of golfers who are not serious enough to pay full membership, but would still like to play a bit. The recent reduced green fees and distance membership options were starting to bring a few of these people out, but we seem to be closing the door on them and I think we'll all miss out as a result.

Those options have been around for years now and there was no magic influx of people. In any case, you are never going to fill all the golf courses with greenfees you need a base of membership for the vat majority of courses.

How do you propose tapping this market? How do you think clubs can survive by spreading all these "play when I feel like it" golfers around?

"Your" model will result in no feeder/beginner courses as people can play a top quality course for €30 in an open instead.
How does that help build golf numbers in Ireland?

FixdePitchmark

cairny wrote: »

Dunno but there's 7,000 in one club alone!

Seriously ?:eek:

blackwhite

alxmorgan wrote: »

Whatever about any other arguments I think the fact that a new member cannot play opens until the following year is madness. Cannot see any reasoning behind that one.

I can't understand why they didn't just make it a rule that you need to have 3 qualifying competitions at your home club in the last 12/24 months.

It's a crazy situation that someone could join a club on 1 January 2015, and play 30 qualifying competitions on that course between then and June (it'd need to be a links!), but still cannot enter an open competition for another 6 months after that.

GreeBo

blackwhite wrote: »

I can't understand why they didn't just make it a rule that you need to have 3 qualifying competitions at your home club in the last 12/24 months.

It's a crazy situation that someone could join a club on 1 January 2015, and play 30 qualifying competitions on that course between then and June (it'd need to be a links!), but still cannot enter an open competition for another 6 months after that.

3 in current calendar year or 5 in previous would be better, otherwise you would have people doing a weekend and then not seen again for 2 years.

Or even 3 in the last 12 months (rolling) but would be more difficult to track probably.

blackwhite

GreeBo wrote: »

3 in current calendar year or 5 in previous would be better, otherwise you would have people doing a weekend and then not seen again for 2 years.

Or even 3 in the last 12 months (rolling) but would be more difficult to track probably.

TBH, anything that factors in the current calendar year at all would be an improvement.

It's a very poor reflection on the people who drafted this rule (and on those who voted to approve it) that not one person thought of a tiny change that would bring current year scores into it as well.

SaveOurLyric

pete4pool wrote: »

My only problems with the rule are.
1. They should call it what it is, to stop distance members (not to stop handicap abuse)
2. Should be made more public, only by chance I heard of this and only 2 good golfing months left in the year.
3. More detail on how it will be enforced.

1) Why do you care what they call it? If its a good thing, its a good thing. So no problem.
2) The move is against people who are already considered to be offside (either due to being loophole members of the handicapped golfing world, or by getting access to competitive golf on the cheap that was never intended). So no great effort to inform the 'outlaws' their wings are being clipped is hardly surprising.
3) Again, except for those who must operate it, as a simple player, why do you care ?

SaveOurLyric

Russman wrote: »

Exactly, its got little to do with banditry other than paying lip service to it. I mean if that's the best they can come up with to combat bandits, then golf really is f--ked. I really do believe its mostly to stop the exodus of members from so called proper clubs to the "get a handicap and play opens" option that's becoming more and more common. There's probably a million and one arguments and factors in that debate though.

It is to do with both banditry, and, people accessing cut price competitive golf through a back door at others expense.

And its a good step in the right direction. However, having the courage of their conviction on the handicap front, they would have followed through fully and forbidden entry to home competitions as well unless a player has the 3 cards in in the previous year.

SaveOurLyric

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Interclub comps will have to be looked at - seriously looked at.

No motivation in the GUI for this one I would guess! They like the hoopla, the days out, the blazers, the photos, the free lunches, etc. Its part of the raison d'etre. The whole handicapped interclub scene has been crooked since the off and its a lie that has gone on too long and just become too big to admit to at this stage. Even though the 'praise' (pause for laughter) heaped on the 'winners' should really be a handicap card tearing ceremony where they are relieved of their GUI membership for unsportsmanlike conduct and given life bans.

SaveOurLyric

cairny wrote: »

The OP's situation is a very common one. My take on it is of you only get to play 7 times a year then why do you need a handicap at all? It won't be a reflection of your true ability and you can't expect to be competitive in the opens with that level of practice.

Why not put the €120 towards green fees? Probably work out cheaper in long run what with golfnow type green fee discounts available and you won't be pouring money into the distance clubs that are just taking advantage of a loophole to line their own pockets.

Two good points. The point of GUI handicaps is that it is for committed golfers who have a home club and play there regularly enough for their handicap to be a reasonably true reflection of their playing ability. It was not intended for the occasional golfer - i.e. not really a member of Club GUI.

Greenfees are for the occasional casual golfer. Distance/Open is a loophole, and any action, even imperfect if fine if it tightens the noose.

SaveOurLyric

alxmorgan wrote: »

Whatever about any other arguments I think the fact that a new member cannot play opens until the following year is madness. Cannot see any reasoning behind that one.

It makes sense though from the perspective of a regular club member with a handicap history. So wait a year. Play your golf in the club you just joined - you cant be bored of it yet. And it discourages the flybynight merchants - the rule ensures that you must be a member of a club for two consecutive years to play opens.

golfwallah

blackwhite wrote: »

TBH, anything that factors in the current calendar year at all would be an improvement.

It's a very poor reflection on the people who drafted this rule (and on those who voted to approve it) that not one person thought of a tiny change that would bring current year scores into it as well.

In all fairness, the people who proposed this motion, the Leinster Provincial Council, are not stupid and, in my experience, not prone to making proposals that are impracticable to implement.

Any changes like this would have been properly researched, thought through by knowledgeable people at Council level as regards how to implement and explained to those voting on it, before being put to a vote.

So it's fair to assume that issues like those you are expressing, desirable and all as they are, would have come up in debating the motion.

I was not present at this particular meeting but have represented my club at Leinster Branch GUI AGMs, where similar issues and proposals were debated. Generally, I found that if motions made sense to the clubs and were implementable, they were passed. Motions not satisfying these criteria failed.

I expect all this will become clearer when the GUI provide guidance to Clubs on how this motion is to be implemented.

SaveOurLyric

blue note wrote: »

Irrespective of the fact that there are too many clubs, this will reduce the number of golfers and take money out of the game. My club, a members club, run a successful weekly Friday open. If we get a fourball each week of these distance members playing, that's a hundred euro a week, five grand a year. We'll lose a lot of this money if people can't buy handicaps anymore.

All clubs have been using opens as a means of kidding themselves that they have not lowered greenfees as much as they think they have. The proliferation of opens is just a lowering of greenfees by another name while limiting those who can access them. And its fair game. It maximises the income by segmenting the market, attracting the member golfer who has already paid a sub somewhere else, and squeezing more from the non member.

So I dont thing it will take money out of the game in total. Just force those who arent members anywhere (and we count the Scark, Slievnamon folk as not really members of a golf club) to pay a more realistic green fee. So their spend on golf is shared out among the courses they actually play on, rather than syphoned off to clubs that they dont.

SaveOurLyric

fordy1208 wrote: »

It sounds to me as if the GUI are trying to make golf an elitist hobby again. Its a shame because the majority of golfers I know (including me) are OP.

Nonesense. They have no interest in making it elitist. Sounds like you have a chip. GUI and ILGU are desperate to include as many people as possible in the game. But it must be one equitably. They cannot stand idly by while some pay the true cost, while other get by on the cheap at their expense.