Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Benjamin Litman on January 05, 2016, 12:39:59 PM
-
I'm not one for rankings (especially the contrived best/favorite divide), but I know many on here are. So as a public service, here are the latest Golf Digest rankings of the top 100 golf courses in the world (the rankings are biennial, with the previous ones released in 2014): http://www.golfdigest.com/story/worlds-100-greatest-golf-courses-2016-ranking
And here is Ron Whitten's accompanying article: http://www.golfdigest.com/story/royal-county-down-tops-our-world-100
A few observations: The new No. 1 course, Royal County Down, hosted a high-profile professional event, the Irish Open, last year. Is the correlation between exposure and ranking as direct as that example would seem to suggest? Other evidence that it is comes in the sky-high debuts for mega-hyped seaside darlings Cabot Cliffs (No. 19) and Cape Wickham (No. 24). Further evidence that it is comes in the falls of yesteryear's darlings Barnbougle Dunes (No. 33, down from No. 11) and Lost Farm (No. 40, down from No. 23), Pacific Dunes (No. 39, down from No. 21) and Bandon Dunes (No. 90, down from No. 62), and even Friar's Head (No. 53, down from No. 37). Cabot Links bears the brunt of its baby sister’s rise, falling from No. 42 all the way to No. 93. And a similar story plays out in Scotland, where both Kingsbarns (No. 69, down from No. 50) and Castle Stuart (unranked, down from No. 87)--both no longer all the rage--lose ample ground to the courses that are. In general, the jumps up and dives down for previously ranked courses are substantial (Portmarnock made the biggest jump, up from No. 83 to No. 25, while San Francisco Golf Club fell the furthest, down from No. 29 to No. 81), and many courses make the list for the first time.
Much more to observe, but that's what the Discussion Group is for. Have at it.
-
SFGC falling that much is crazy. I do know a GD guy that said he did not care for it because there were some rough patches on the fairways. He also commented at how much better Kinloch was than SFGC.
-
An amazing amount of new courses on the list and some amazing rises and falls.
Different panelists?
Did somebody get out more?
Looks like a High School Homecoming queen contest ;) ;) :o ::)
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
On one level, it may be at least explained.
BD and LF - Very remote,
Cabot Links - Pretty remote
Bandon Dunes - Remote
SFGC - very exclusive.
Perhaps they just didn't get the data points and others blew by them.
-
The list that broke the Internet.
Rioting in the streets.
Alotians permanently assume their spot among the world's elite.
-
An amazing amount of new courses on the list and some amazing rises and falls.
Different panelists?
Did somebody get out more?
Looks like a High School Homecoming queen contest ;) ;) :o ::)
I quickly browsed this list and that was the first thing that stood out for me. Dramatic drops in rankings for quite a few courses.
-
Played the new number one course a couple of times this year and played pretty well too. Also played the clubs other course. The other course might be more fun......light blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance! :)
Atb
-
Does churning the list provide the impetus for more ad dollars?
-
The only way you get changes that big in the rankings is if you change the methodology somehow.
It's hard to tell if that's the case because I am not sure that GOLF DIGEST even publishes an explanation of how they arrive at their rankings.
In the past, it has seemed that the international courses were ranked consistently with their sister publications' rankings in other parts of the world, and then somehow mixed in with DIGEST's own U.S. top 100. But they've also made some noise about having their U.S. panelists rate other courses they've seen around the world, and the more weight they give to those votes, the more things will change. [However, that shouldn't have any effect on how the American courses in the list rank, compared with one another.]
In the end, any list of the top 100 courses in the world is a hair-splitting exercise ... any position on the list is terrific. If they've managed to produce such a list without any courses that look like they've bought their way on, so much the better. Are there any Trump courses in there?
P.S. I was at S.F.G.C. a month ago. It sure didn't look like it had fallen far. They did have a rough year for fairway turf, but it's hard to believe the rankings are tied to that in any significant way.
-
A new day for me. For the first time ever, the gca.com thread ABOUT the Top 100 List is not only of MORE interest to me than the list itself, but is in fact the ONLY source of interest. In other words, I haven't yet -- and have no desire to ever -- click on the link and look at the actual list; this thread is enough, starting with Benjamin's excellent OP.
Peter
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
Conversely... lots of movers in the opposite direction as well (beyond the new entries):
25. Portmarnock G.C. +58
38. Oakland Hills C.C. (South) + 29
42. The Country Club (Clyde/Squirrel) +29
56. Casa de Campo (Teeth of the Dog) +29
72. The Honors Course +23
36. Oak Hill C.C. (East) +22
45. Royal St. George's G.C. +21
48. Wade Hampton G.C. +21
-
Peter:
Your comment actually caused me to look at the list. And holy crap, there are some ridiculous courses down near the bottom of the so-called top 100, that wouldn't have made the top 250 on most other lists. Now I would REALLY like to know what their methodology is.
P.S. And this is coming from the guy who built their highest-ranked modern course: they somehow put Cape Kidnappers one spot ahead of Sand Hills.
-
Just a guess but looking at the significant movements in ordinal rankings of a fair number of courses makes me suspect the scoring is very tight and that small changes in score can produce big movements in ranking. For example, Portmarnock jumped 58 spots but might have picked up, say, just a couple-tenths of a point.
Buttressing this argument: the rankings don't disclose scores, suggesting the editors don't want you to see how small the differences are (as is the case with the GD USA list).
If that's the case then these movements mean little; a meaningful proportion of a course's change in score may be down to random variance. Maybe more / fewer rankers saw it, maybe the course hosted a special event, etc etc. That fewer rankers see the international courses also suggests small sample size can account for the variance, depending on how the scores are calculated and weighted.
-
Ballybunion was #27 in 2013-4; not ranked in 2016. That was so surprising that I thought I'd missed it and went back over the linked list where I noticed it skips from #88 to #90....so maybe Ballybunion is hiding there. Even if it is, that's quite a plunge for a perennial top 30-level course and difficult to understand.
-
Mark and Tom hit the nail on the head. This list is:
More akin to the "64 player field World Match play" where nearly anyone can beat anyone else on a given day....
And less..."68 team NCAA BB tournament", where the vast majority of teams have no shot in hell at winning the whole enchilada.
-
Golf Digest lost their credibility years ago and I put zero value in their rankings. As someone who played golf with a few of their panelists over the years, I can assure you that there was a giant shift in the way they handle and 'weigh' their panelists evaluations. It's all about selling rags and ad space anymore. Sad but true.
-
Gave up reading it when I saw New South Wales at 30.
-
If there are 58 courses better than Prairie Dunes, I know zero about golf.
-
If there are 58 courses better than Prairie Dunes, I know zero about golf.
I didn't need to see rankings to know that! ;D
-
A slightly odd list.
I do a 'poll of polls' of 5 lists - Golf Club Architecture (2013), Golf Digest (now 2016), Golf.com (2015), Planet Golf (2014) and Top100courses.com (2015 list). My rule is that a course has to appear at least twice to be included. I then average the ranking but if a course doesn't appear in one of the other lists it gets an arbitrary '101' for that list when averages. It is of course nonsense, but it passes the time.
Excluding Cabot Cliffs and Cape Whickham as they are 'too new to rate' for the other list the biggest outliers are as follows -
Worse rated by Golf Digest-
Ballybunion - Not Ranked by Golf Digest (14 average by others)
San Francisco - Ranked 81 by Golf Digest, (34 average by others)
Royal Aberdeen - Not ranked by Golf Digest, (average 58 by others)
Bethpage Black - Not ranked by Golf Digest, (average 61 by others)
Ballyneal - Not ranked by Golf Digest, (62 average by others)
Pinehurst 2 - Ranked 63 by Golf Digest, (24 by others)
TPC Sawgrass - Not ranked by Golf Digest, (63 by others)
Better rated by Golf Digest -
Fancourt Links - Ranked 43 by Golf Digest (not ranked in any other list)
Yas Links - Ranked 46 by Golf Digest (not ranked in any other list)
Sentosa - Ranked 58 by Golf Digest (not ranked in any other list)
Royal Melbourne (East) -Ranked 55 by Golf Digest, average 100 by others)
The Alotian Club - Ranked 62 by Golf Digest (not ranked in any other list)
Ellerston - Ranked 29 by Golf Digest (average 88 in others)
National GC of Canada - Ranked 66 by Golf Digest (not ranked in any other list)
-
If there are 58 courses better than Prairie Dunes, I know zero about golf.
I didn't need to see rankings to know that! ;D
So there are approx. 15,500 golf courses in the U.S. ...and based on some simple math, I guess having your course rated in the 99.63 percentile just isn't high enough.
The tragedy of it all! ::) ;)
Edit:
My bad, this is a entire World list. So with approx. 34,000 courses world wide, 99.83 percentile is an even bigger travesty.....
-
No one has mentioned the most bizarre inclusion.
The Old course at The National (Australia) at 87.
I had no idea it was even in contention for world top 100.
-
Ballybunion was #27 in 2013-4; not ranked in 2016. That was so surprising that I thought I'd missed it and went back over the linked list where I noticed it skips from #88 to #90....so maybe Ballybunion is hiding there. Even if it is, that's quite a plunge for a perennial top 30-level course and difficult to understand.
I noticed that as well and came on here just to see if anyone else had... Seems like an obvious oversight.
-
David,
Saw that re National Old as well. Some nice holes and views sure but it's not even the best course on the property.
Where would it be 10-20 range in Victoria?
-
I am a GD panelist and I don't understand the list either. Not sure where some of those numbers came from!! :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? Certainly not representative of my World 100!!
-
Huge jump by Oak Hill East
-
I am a GD panelist and I don't understand the list either. Not sure where some of those numbers came from!! :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? Certainly not representative of my World 100!!
Ditto. It's rather embarrassing.
I searched and found that it's some type of cumulative scoring from the 1000 panelists in the US plus the 600 or 700 international panelists. Whatever the case I don't recall voting for an international ranking?
-
Cape Wickham looks extraordinary! Some long overdue notoriety for Mike DeVries. Let's hope it leads to more great opportunities for him and his team...
-
Joke
I love RCD but in no lifetime can I put it ahead of either Pine Valley or CPC.
Pacific Dunes at 39 ? Oh dear....
-
Saw that re National Old as well. Some nice holes and views sure but it's not even the best course on the property.
Where would it be 10-20 range in Victoria?
30.
-
I can only comment on the Australian courses. RM West, Kingston Heath and the 2 Barnbougle courses are obvious and rightfully ranked highly. Even at 30 I think NSW is underrated, it is an amazing place with the 6th being as good a par 3 as there is in the worlds and the 14th a great par 4.
I haven't played Ellerston as it is one of only 2 courses in Australia that mere mortals cannot get access to, I do wonder of the exclusivity bumps it a bit higher?
I have played the National (Old) 5 or 6 times and it is a fun course to play but the Moonah course in the same complex is far superior. A better RTJ course is Joondalup in Western Australia. It might be a bit of an unpopular view but I am not that enamoured with RM East. There are some great holes but I think that Victoria Golf Club and Lake Karrinyup are better. Courses that are not in Victoria struggle to get acknowledged as much as they should.
-
I am a GD panelist and I don't understand the list either. Not sure where some of those numbers came from!! :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? Certainly not representative of my World 100!!
Ditto. It's rather embarrassing.
I searched and found that it's some type of cumulative scoring from the 1000 panelists in the US plus the 600 or 700 international panelists. Whatever the case I don't recall voting for an international ranking?
Joel -
Every panelist was sent an email asking to rate whatever international courses you had played from 1-10. It was not detailed like the regular rankings, just a number.
-
Unfortunately I can't get the link to work so can someone tell me what number Forfar is ?
Thanks
Niall
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
On one level, it may be at least explained.
BD and LF - Very remote,
Cabot Links - Pretty remote
Bandon Dunes - Remote
SFGC - very exclusive.
Perhaps they just didn't get the data points and others blew by them.
Kalen
How much more remote/expensive to get to is RCD than Bandon and Cabot ? Is it possible that once the wow factor of the new wore off that panelists made a more sober assessment ?
Niall
-
How the hell has Remedy Oak been overlooked again.......
Seriously, this is one of the worst lists I've seen in respect of the British Courses.
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
On one level, it may be at least explained.
BD and LF - Very remote,
Cabot Links - Pretty remote
Bandon Dunes - Remote
SFGC - very exclusive.
Perhaps they just didn't get the data points and others blew by them.
Kalen
How much more remote/expensive to get to is RCD than Bandon and Cabot ? Is it possible that once the wow factor of the new wore off that panelists made a more sober assessment ?
Niall
Niall,
That could of course be true.
I'm a bit biased because RCD has always been my #1, and I'd probably give even more spots to UK and Ireland courses. (even though they are well represented numberswise-just many odd/poor choices)
One thing's for sure, there were WAAAAY more modern monstrosities on this list that I have zero interest in playing than any list I've ever seen.
But I'd also say given the crazy variance from year to year that something odd is in play.
Their credibility fades away with such inconsistent variance and simply makes one wonder who will play where next, be wowed by opulence,service, 500 extra seldom used yards. and green grass, and change the list wildly again ::) ::)
The list looks like something cobbled together by Executive Golfer, not a list from once the most respected golf publication.
The only reason such lists matter to me (negatively) is that in the zero sum game of golf tourism, it sucks that so many asshole traps are perpetuated and therefore patronized while many good/great courses are ignored at a time when every incremental dollar counts.
Otherwise I really wouldn't care as it's nice to leave the great gems affordable and uncrowded, but not if their survival is threatened-and even more importantly it sucks to see the monstrosity model celebrated and therefore copied by more developers.
-
No one has mentioned the most bizarre inclusion.
The Old course at The National (Australia) at 87.
I had no idea it was even in contention for world top 100.
Wasn't there a recent GD raters trip to Australia that got some peoples' knickers in a bunch? Or was that another magazine?
-
No one has mentioned the most bizarre inclusion.
The Old course at The National (Australia) at 87.
I had no idea it was even in contention for world top 100.
Wasn't there a recent GD raters trip to Australia that got some peoples' knickers in a bunch? Or was that another magazine?
I think that was Golfweek
-
It wasn't the trip it was the use of the word "rater" 75 times in the following blog that was amusing.
http://golfweek.com/news/2015/apr/05/golf-courses-golfweek-raters-australia-jim-hansen/ (http://golfweek.com/news/2015/apr/05/golf-courses-golfweek-raters-australia-jim-hansen/)
MWP made a trip on the heels of these guys and is responsible for most of what we read today.
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
On one level, it may be at least explained.
BD and LF - Very remote,
Cabot Links - Pretty remote
Bandon Dunes - Remote
SFGC - very exclusive.
Perhaps they just didn't get the data points and others blew by them.
Kalen
How much more remote/expensive to get to is RCD than Bandon and Cabot ? Is it possible that once the wow factor of the new wore off that panelists made a more sober assessment ?
Niall
Niall,
To be honest I don't know exactly where RCD is in Ireland, so I don't have a concept of how remote it is.
But I think you certainly could be right when it comes to the wow factor of the latest and greatest thing. And who knows, perhaps even a place like Bandon would get old if you played it day in and day out...but its hard to imagine from where I sit! ;)
-
46 of these courses sit on the ocean. If we would all stop taking pics and posting on Facebook we just might return to rational evaluation.
-
Not only the amount of new courses is strange. The tumble some of the courses take seem fishy as well. Barnbougle Dunes losing 22 places, Cabot Links going down 51, Bandon Dunes down 28, San Francisco G.C. down 62(!). It feels like they wanted to shake up the rankings just to generate headlines
On one level, it may be at least explained.
BD and LF - Very remote,
Cabot Links - Pretty remote
Bandon Dunes - Remote
SFGC - very exclusive.
Perhaps they just didn't get the data points and others blew by them.
Kalen
How much more remote/expensive to get to is RCD than Bandon and Cabot ? Is it possible that once the wow factor of the new wore off that panelists made a more sober assessment ?
Niall
Niall,
To be honest I don't know exactly where RCD is in Ireland, so I don't have a concept of how remote it is.
But I think you certainly could be right when it comes to the wow factor of the latest and greatest thing. And who knows, perhaps even a place like Bandon would get old if you played it day in and day out...but its hard to imagine from where I sit! ;)
RCD is 1 hour south from irelands second largest city, and 2 hours north from its largest. I hardly consider this remote.
-
KR,
Thanks for the clarification, I too would not consider that remote..
In general terms this thread is a bit funny. All of these courses are undisputable .1%ers....a very good place to be indeed, especially in these current market conditions. And just like in real life, all the squabbling goes on about who has the nicest car or biggest vacation home in the Caribbean with all the ensuing comparisons.
Meanwhile the other 99.9% on the outside looking in can clearly see all of these courses have indeed already grasped the brass ring!!
-
46 of these courses sit on the ocean. If we would all stop taking pics and posting on Facebook we just might return to rational evaluation.
Such meta-level insights are why this thread is of more interest than the list itself. It appears 'over stated' but I don't think it is. Live by the sword, die by the sword I guess -- but sad to see the herdlike consensus/trend to downgrade the great inland courses.
-
46 of these courses sit on the ocean. If we would all stop taking pics and posting on Facebook we just might return to rational evaluation.
Such meta-level insights are why this thread is of more interest than the list itself. It appears 'over stated' but I don't think it is. Live by the sword, die by the sword I guess -- but sad to see the herdlike consensus/trend to downgrade the great inland courses.
This is one principal reason I've come to doubt the panels myself. I've benefitted from their favoritism for oceanfront golf as much as any architect, but their inability to appreciate the same sort of architecture on wonderful inland sites was baffling at first. After a few years of watching, though, I'd replace "baffling" with "telling".
Still, there is something else going on with this list. Some sampling error on the Asian courses, for starters ... a bunch of high grades from Asian panelists, and hardly any American votes on those courses to temper their enthusiasm.
The enthusiasm for Royal County Down is unsurprising, though. The first time I did the GOLF Magazine list it was #3, behind Muirfield and Pebble Beach. It was only AFTER we published a list with the courses in order, that the forces of conventional wisdom started to work their influence.
-
Is No 54 even the best course in that city?
Atb
-
Lists like this exist to foment controversy, but this is really out-of-whack. San Francisco's drop (as noted by Mr. Hurricane, above) is simply astounding. There are many other tumbles that are jarring, as well. It seems that they dropped a lot of stalwarts to include a passel of tracks in China, Japan, Vietnam and the UAE. Let me guess right now that the top 100 chasers might hit the pause button before going to some of these newbies.
-
No one has mentioned the most bizarre inclusion.
The Old course at The National (Australia) at 87.
I had no idea it was even in contention for world top 100.
It might not make my top 100. :o After my trip in 1997 it was near the bottom of my 'meets expectation' list
-
I am a GD panelist and I don't understand the list either. Not sure where some of those numbers came from!! :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? Certainly not representative of my World 100!!
Ditto. It's rather embarrassing.
I searched and found that it's some type of cumulative scoring from the 1000 panelists in the US plus the 600 or 700 international panelists. Whatever the case I don't recall voting for an international ranking?
Joel -
Every panelist was sent an email asking to rate whatever international courses you had played from 1-10. It was not detailed like the regular rankings, just a number.
Wow, this gets better and better. They made up the rankings from different sets of criterias?
-
Wow, this gets better and better. They made up the rankings from different sets of criterias?
When I saw that, I figured that tells all. That makes it easy to explain non-stellar courses making the list.
-
46 of these courses sit on the ocean. If we would all stop taking pics and posting on Facebook we just might return to rational evaluation.
Such meta-level insights are why this thread is of more interest than the list itself. It appears 'over stated' but I don't think it is. Live by the sword, die by the sword I guess -- but sad to see the herdlike consensus/trend to downgrade the great inland courses.
This is one principal reason I've come to doubt the panels myself. I've benefitted from their favoritism for oceanfront golf as much as any architect, but their inability to appreciate the same sort of architecture on wonderful inland sites was baffling at first. After a few years of watching, though, I'd replace "baffling" with "telling".
Tom,
far to many people are influenced by the setting to the point where if it is spectacular they completely overlook even glaringly obvious drawbacks with a course.
Yet another crappy, tinpot list to consign to life's dustbin.
Jon
-
Joel -
Every panelist was sent an email asking to rate whatever international courses you had played from 1-10. It was not detailed like the regular rankings, just a number.
So the American courses are rated to the ten thousandth decimal and the international courses just get a 1-10?
In an effort to make these rankings with a quantifiable formula they have clearly de-standardized the formula.
Is this list also available in sky mall next to Americans 10 best steakhouses?
-
Wow, this gets better and better. They made up the rankings from different sets of criterias?
When I saw that, I figured that tells all. That makes it easy to explain non-stellar courses making the list.
We have a for-profit enterprise publishing a bi-annual list of the worlds greatest courses generated by what appears to be a non-rigorous statistical sample.
Should generate plenty of discussion. About the methods, and the merits of some of the courses' inclusion.
Mission accomplished.
-
If I ran such a list, knowing that ranking courses with two different criteria, and with different sample sizes, would produce such year to year variances (and it did) I would simply tweak it.
Would at least salvage some credibility ;) ;D
-
"Mission accomplished".
Yes, that's it in a nutshell. And that's also why this annoys me way more than it probably should.
Not to get too judgemental or precious about this, but I really believe that:
Just because we can do something doesn't me we should do it.
Just because sloppy, cynical work does accomplish its mission doesn't mean that work was worth doing.
Just because we're sophisticated grown up men of the world who know how the game is played doesn't mean we should shrug our shoulders at work that we know to be cut-rate.
Every churned out pop song, every self indulgent jazz solo, every half-baked idea for a book or movie or golf course brought to life not because the writer or director or architect actually believes in/deeply cares about it but solely because he can get someone to finance it -- in and of themselves these may be of no importance whatsoever, but I'm convinced that cumulatively they have a negative impact on people individually and collectively:
Such poor and churned-out work sends out a very clear message, however unconsciously -- and that message is that it's all a racket, a con-game; that's there's nothing worth truly devoting one's best efforts to; that everyone is it in for themselves; that you're a fool to put the interests of others/the audience ahead of your own; that no matter what people say they're doing they're lying to you; that a deeply cynical view of your audience (i.e. of people, in other words, which of course ultimately includes yourself) is the way of the world, and the route to success; and that success is measured in one way only - "sales", i.e. money.
Yeah, I know, I know it's just Golf Digest's bi-annual list of top 100 golf course, and I'm taking this way too seriously. Yes - but I have to start somewhere...
Peter
-
Dreadful so called journalism,Inthink we have established that for certain.
However they did get Cape Wickham justifiably into the top 50 at first attempt.....even if it has only been open three months...as well as a soft opening of equal time.....Delightedfor Mike De Vries ,Darius and Duncan, the pollsters whatever that means did get this one right.
The MASSIVE drops of neighbors at Barnbougle blows my mind, as well as numerous other equally sized jumps and falls and bizarre inclusions and omissions.
What a friggin farce,between this and the mess at Golf Magazine ratings have become somewhat of a joke.
How can the people at GD on the back of the GM debacle even think about publishing this ?
.that stupidity above all blows me away.
I guess it is the stubborn arrogance at what their rankings have become over the past twenty years that has gone to their heads, and they assume everybody will just read and agree.
I couldn't resist chiming in on this comedic reading of a rating,stunned by the compilation model stunned by the whole thing.
The so called unwanted stepchild of golf course rating magazines, is now looking like the most ethical and knowledgable list available.
Mr Klein your integrity and years of sticking to your guns even under the pressure of magazine owners and executives reaps its rewards, even if that reward is at the expense of other publications transparent selling out.
-
My first reaction to the list was indeed that they simply combined the ranking of the various international GD publications and weighted them equally. I would expect this list to act as a catalyst to sell both advertising and far more issues around the world and especially in Asia.
The one break in my reaction is exactly what Tom pointed out. If indeed the above was done why would this of had such a huge impact on the rankings of the US courses in relation to one another. The only answer I can think of for that would be that their raters abroad had equal voice in this process as well and given few of them have most likely seen most of the US courses that throws things relatively way off. Especially given the variance in ranking processes.
In any case they have succeeded in making it a discussion point and perhaps one could argue that all publicity is still publicity.
-
Chip paper
-
I didn't even look at the list but just reading the dialogue here tells me that was a wise move.
Just seeing Oak Hill East at #36 in the world tells me the list wouldn't suit my tastes. I'm not even sure it would be in my top 40 courses in New York State.
-
Ballybunion was #27 in 2013-4; not ranked in 2016. That was so surprising that I thought I'd missed it and went back over the linked list where I noticed it skips from #88 to #90....so maybe Ballybunion is hiding there. Even if it is, that's quite a plunge for a perennial top 30-level course and difficult to understand.
GD amended the list to account for the missing #89. It went to Pete Dye's The Golf Club.
-
Dreadful so called journalism,Inthink we have established that for certain.
However they did get Cape Wickham justifiably into the top 50 at first attempt.....even if it has only been open three months...as well as a soft opening of equal time.....Delightedfor Mike De Vries ,Darius and Duncan, the pollsters whatever that means did get this one right.
The MASSIVE drops of neighbors at Barnbougle blows my mind, as well as numerous other equally sized jumps and falls and bizarre inclusions and omissions.
What a friggin farce,between this and the mess at Golf Magazine ratings have become somewhat of a joke.
How can the people at GD on the back of the GM debacle even think about publishing this ?
.that stupidity above all blows me away.
I guess it is the stubborn arrogance at what their rankings have become over the past twenty years that has gone to their heads, and they assume everybody will just read and agree.
I couldn't resist chiming in on this comedic reading of a rating,stunned by the compilation model stunned by the whole thing.
The so called unwanted stepchild of golf course rating magazines, is now looking like the most ethical and knowledgable list available.
Mr Klein your integrity and years of sticking to your guns even under the pressure of magazine owners and executives reaps its rewards, even if that reward is at the expense of other publications transparent selling out.
Michael, Let's not get carried away. Some pretty off base comments in your conclusion and I truly believe you know that.
-
Dreadful so called journalism,Inthink we have established that for certain.
However they did get Cape Wickham justifiably into the top 50 at first attempt.....even if it has only been open three months...as well as a soft opening of equal time.....Delightedfor Mike De Vries ,Darius and Duncan, the pollsters whatever that means did get this one right.
The MASSIVE drops of neighbors at Barnbougle blows my mind, as well as numerous other equally sized jumps and falls and bizarre inclusions and omissions.
What a friggin farce,between this and the mess at Golf Magazine ratings have become somewhat of a joke.
How can the people at GD on the back of the GM debacle even think about publishing this ?
.that stupidity above all blows me away.
I guess it is the stubborn arrogance at what their rankings have become over the past twenty years that has gone to their heads, and they assume everybody will just read and agree.
I couldn't resist chiming in on this comedic reading of a rating,stunned by the compilation model stunned by the whole thing.
The so called unwanted stepchild of golf course rating magazines, is now looking like the most ethical and knowledgable list available.
Mr Klein your integrity and years of sticking to your guns even under the pressure of magazine owners and executives reaps its rewards, even if that reward is at the expense of other publications transparent selling out.
Michael, Let's not get carried away. Some pretty off base comments in your conclusion and I truly believe you know that.
Greg, Let's not get carried away. It seems to me that Michael is safely on base, and that base is home plate.This list with it's so obviously flawed methodology is not to be taken seriously, unless of course you need subject matter for jokes.
-
Belt notchers are going to have to buy more belts. This is the most ridiculous list I've ever seen. Even worse than the perennial list they seem to bungle every year in my own state.
-
??? ???
Ranking is so subjective , most of the top 100 courses are spectacular in their own way . They are diverse and have different special qualities that set them apart.
It does appear that GD wanted to shake the tree a bit this year , it's all about selling you know .
-
Finally got around to reading the magazine article from the copy the OGA provides me at home. Couldn't help but notice that Whitten calls out Jack Nicklaus with four courses among the 100 being the person with the second most after C&C. He lists Cabo del Sol (70), Punta Espada (76), and Sebonack (94). Non ocean-side course is Muirfield Village (34).
For Tom Doak he lists Sebonack (94), Cape Kidnappers (16), Barnbougle Dunes (33), and Pacific Dunes (39). How does this not match or beat Mr. Nicklaus?
-
Finally got around to reading the magazine article from the copy the OGA provides me at home. Couldn't help but notice that Whitten calls out Jack Nicklaus with four courses among the 100 being the person with the second most after C&C. He lists Cabo del Sol (70), Punta Espada (76), and Sebonack (94). What is the other course?
For Tom Doak he lists Sebonack (94), Cape Kidnappers (16), Barnbougle Dunes (33), and Pacific Dunes (39). How does this not match or beat Mr. Nicklaus?
Muirfield Village?
-
Thanks Carl,
I'll update the previous post.
-
Every panelist has been a victim or being feed, entertainined, etc and that impacted on their rating. How else could it not be.
-
Shulzie,
While I unquestionably agree with your description of the GD list as the WORST, and love your warped analogy, I need to balance the discussion with a little "inside" information.
Ron Whitten, who I've never once defended before (and may never again), was not responsible for this list and I'm told was initially "ashamed" to have been associated with it. Although he wrote the article that serves as introduction, it was on direct orders from his editor-in-chief, Jerry Tarde. Tarde, we know, has very few compunctions about taking the magazine to new lows. I'm told his best thinking is usually done somewhere close to a medicinal urinal.
The list came from other editors and was arbitrarily and shamelessly put together using the international affiliates of GD. This is more akin to having Playboy deem any one of the dentally-challenged pin-ups from the UK's Daily Sun.... Playmate of the Year!
For the record, I get the suggestion of freeing up Geoff Shackleford from GD, but Matt Ginella needs to spend at least several months with someone who possesses genuine, highly-refined and non-conflicted, architectural skills before he's ready to be weened off the pacifier. Until then, we'll just have to make up our own minds....no?
-
I think Garland is closest to the truth, it is an attempt to grab attention it seems more than anything else.
One of my fellow top 100 "questers" Paul Rudovsky summed it up perfectly on his blog when he saw the list: "it was almost like the editors wanted to make a big splash…forgetting that in diving competitions the golf medals are usually awarded to those who make the smallest splash. Enough said!!"
Since Paul is trying to play every course ever ranked on any list, there will be at least beneficiary of the new list: the airlines where he will rack up tons of new frequent flyer points now
-
I think Garland is closest to the truth, it is an attempt to grab attention it seems more than anything else.
One of my fellow top 100 "questers" Paul Rudovsky summed it up perfectly on his blog when he saw the list: "it was almost like the editors wanted to make a big splash…forgetting that in diving competitions the golf medals are usually awarded to those who make the smallest splash. Enough said!!"
Since Paul is trying to play every course ever ranked on any list, there will be at least beneficiary of the new list: the airlines where he will rack up tons of new frequent flyer points now
John, is the book out yet?
-
Does anyone play the entire top 100 without also becoming a rater? I think I could trust that guys opinion. How would a FBI profiler characterize a guy in chase of a list when they are so adamant against any other list where they do not have a vote? I can think of no one less qualified to judge than someone who has seen it all.
-
Chip paper
TP?