Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Sean C,
Is rugby ever played on artificial turf? Soccer and hockey, yes, but is any rugby played there, other than touch? (I don't know the answer).
Getting the usage figures out of Chamberlain sounds like investigative journalist work :-) I'm damned sure it's not always operating at capacity - most times I ride past it doesn't look full.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Russell Brown,
It is interesting. Note that Chamberlain Park was not included in the survey, though, and from my experience it's quite an unusual and exceptional place. I'm not sure which club they were referring to as Albert-Eden, presumably it's Akarana, which is the only other club I see in the Albert-Eden area.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Sean C,
Yes, it would be interesting. It’s the busiest golf course I’ve ever been on, by far, so I’d make the assumption that it’s nearly at capacity. Hence my calculation of what that capacity roughly is. But I can’t really be sure of the flow speed. My memory was that when it was busy, a round could take 4-5 hours. Which boils down to about one group every 8-10 minutes entering the course (and about the same exiting), based on the groups being about 200m apart (which roughly tallies with my memory of how long each group takes to tee off and walk to a safe distance ahead). It’s open from dawn until dusk, so about 12 hours on average. So that’s about 84 groups through the place in a day. Groups are typically not more than 4 people. So the peak usage would be around 84 x 4 = 336 people per day. That if it’s absolutely chockers all day long.*
By contrast a game of rugby has 31 people on the field at a bare minimum and the game is about 90 mins long (I don’t know if this is how long it’s usually played for by kids though). 31 people playing on 6 fields for 90 mins at a time means that it would take about 3 hours for as many people to have enjoyed the fields taking less than half the space of the 18 hole course, as could possibly have even used the golf course in the entire day. That’s using maximum figures for the golf and minimum figures for the rugby. Of course the rugby will have a lot of spectators too, who could be said to be using the facility.
So I don’t think it’s very likely that the total number of users will come down in favour of the golfers.
It’s also important to note that playing fields are not a dedicated use thing, so there is potential for events that are not just sports games to take place on these fields. It seems highly likely, in fact, that this would occur, given the location. Festivals, concerts, etc, can and do get held on public sporting fields. Sometimes they're just used for parking, something that would be of great service when major events are on at Western Springs.
Calculating the number of people getting public utility in that way is quite difficult. An event like Pacifica, or the Big Day Out, can attract thousands of people.
*Note that I’m grossly overestimating a number of things here. The course is open until dusk, but I don’t think so many people are entering it for a number of hours before dusk, because they can’t hope to complete a round. This is a mental exercise just to put upper limits on things. Real stats would have to be acquired from the course itself.
-
The dead at Gallipoli were mostly brave but the campaign itself is not something to proudly remember at all. Is Key actually telling us he's planning a disaster?
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Sacha,
Do people have to bring their own clubs?
No, you can hire them. But a set of new clubs is only around $300 and a full second hand set maybe $150 (depends on condition and luck). So if you play more than about 4 games you might as well buy a set, since they're hardly going to lose much value anyway, and there are advantages to owning the set (hiring them takes extra time, and you can never get used to them). If you stop playing after a short while you'd probably be able to sell them without very much loss. Naturally you can spend a hell of a lot more than that on clubs too, but unless you've got money to burn, it's probably wise to play for a while to see if you actually do want to continue.
Since it's a game usually played with at least one partner, it's not at all uncommon for people just getting into the sport to share clubs. They won't let you onto the course without a set of clubs (because people sharing clubs play much slower when the balls are separated), but it doesn't have to be a full set. And a full set can be broken into two half sets, using the odd and even numbers.
The main expense isn't the clubs for regular players. It's the green fees. 18 holes is between $25 and $32 per person at Chamberlain, for casual play. Concessions apply the more you play. But for anyone thinking of having a bit of a go first time, then yes, the clubs double the cost. A round could set each person back $69.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
I think it's most golfers. Even if they are a pleb, sometimes it's nice to rub shoulders with the gentry, or at least to play their game for a little while, completely segregated from the world, wife and children by a high fence.
-
At the very least it would be nice to have a golf course where golfers are not completely segregated from the plebs.
Well, Chamberlain has always been a course where the golfers ARE the plebs.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Bart Janssen,
I’m sure you can come up with a couple of hundred reasons to disagree with me but I still think the idea would be cool.
Yes, I shouldn't dismiss it out of hand. The idea of tree lined pathways (which they already have anyway) through the course, where passers by can walk, cycle, or just sit and watch or even have a picnic, sounds nice. But it does have the issue that anyone can sneak onto the course to play at any time, without paying. I can see many conflicts arising.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to stever@cs.waikato.ac.nz,
It's probably something that would only cause a serious injury very rarely. But it's injuring someone else. I don't have much of a problem with dangerous sports where the people the participants are endangering are themselves. When it's endangering passers by in a really busy area, though...fences seem like a good idea. But yeah, I guess the utility of people being able to pass through is pretty big. Pathways through the course could be done, so long as it's really clear that you can't cross fairways.
-
Hard News: Park Life, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Personally I think it would be kind of cool to have the golfers weave in and out of the areas that are used for other activities.
Until someone loses an eye. Unfenced golf courses are for areas where there's not much foot traffic. Putting one in the middle of popular facilities for children? I'm astonished that Hagley Park had one, can only put that down to it being flat as a pancake so one could see the golfers and they could see people that they might hit. Chamberlain Park is nothing like that.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 193 194 195 196 197 … 1066 Older→ First