[David_Tepper]

Looks like Zagats is getting into the golf course rating business. Check out
http://www.nypost.com/sports/51668.htm

[Paul Richards]

David:

I received my copy of their book the other day.  It looks pretty interesting.

[Mike_Cirba]

Yeah, I browsed it the other day, and it's a real treat.  

"Courses" are ranked by "course", "clubhouse facilities", "service", and "value".  At least 3 of the 4 would be essentially meaningless to most in here.

The comments are priceless and insightful, as well.  They range from such gems as "lush and gorgeous, each fairway is like a carpet", to "unfair because the greens don't hold", to "the ranger kept pushing us and was rude".  

If you liked Golf Digest's "Places to Play", you'll LOVE the Zagat Guide.   :-/

[Matt_Ward]

I've seen the Zagats guide and it's nothing more than the opinions of Joe Sixpack and his cousin Phil Wineglass. Mike hit the nail on the hit -- it's basically a "cut and paste" of GD's "Places to Play" which is probably the most empty and useless "information" book that exists today. The Zagats guide delves into issues real golfers could frankly care less about.

I'm sorry for being so harsh, however, opinions from the gallery are nothing more than asking the average "Joe" on the street what his opinion is on a variety of subjects.

Unfortunately, I can say this candidly, but there are courses in my "neck of the woods" that really get upset when they're not recognized by my magazine but have received "four stars" or more from GD. The reality is most people want certain aspects that are periphery aspects -- the clubhouse, the food, the range balls neatly placed in a pyramid, the size of the showerheads, the size of the beer cups, are they greeted by some hi-tech walkie-talkie teen with a smile, and on it goes.

The rush to publish "generalized" info books is really a poor substitute for the kind of due diligence lacking in most reviews. You get nothing more than surface comments and it's likely you will hardly find the kind of cross comparison analysis that's needed. When you take person "x" and he reviews "x" number of courses and then you take person "y" and he reviews completely different "y" number of courses you get this sloppy Joe product that conveys very little insight.

Many of the real "golfers" I know (as opposed to those people who play golf) skip those sources and rely upon more meaningful sources.

[THuckaby2]

And the vast majority of the real golfers/people who play golf/those who spend money on the game that I know rely heavily on sources such as GD's places to play and would love this Zagat's survey, whilst thinking we on this discussion group are a bunch of overzealous arrogant old traditionalist crackpots.  

It's a big beautiful golf world.

Don't kid yourself, Matt.  We and people who think like us are so far from the majority as to make it really silly to contemplate.

Look for this Zagat's survey to be very popular, as is GD's Places to Play.

TH

[Mike Vegis @ Kiawah]

TH--

Ya hit the nail on the head...  Denizens of this site are like wine connoisseurs in a "twist off" world.  So be it.  There's a market for Ripple.  Y'all will be heartened to know that quality can sometimes blind the average player.  The Ocean Course with it's modest little pro shop and grill rated "25" under Facilities while the multi-million clubhouses at both Osprey Point and Turtle Point only rated "24."

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

At the risk of sounding like an "overzealous arrogant old traditionalist crackpot" (I actually sort of like that description! ), my answer was tailored to THIS "bunch of overzealous arrogant old traditionalist crackpots", because I believe 90% of the people in here would peruse it for five minutes and then throw the book on the junkheap of history, as I did.

I really don't want to know that they'll shine my shoes at Bulle Rocks Glen.  I really could care less that "clubhouse renovations have made a "BIG" difference at Frosted Icing Links at the Meadows Del Poopie".  And I really could care less that I can play at "a real steal of a bargain rate of $120 (with cart) at Pompous Pretention Plantation (the "Experience" course) after 3pm.  

Perhaps Mark Fine's 99% love this stuff.  I doubt most in here would.    

[THuckaby2]

Understood perfectly, Mike - you'll notice my message wasn't directed to you.  Heck, I'm with you for the most part, although I do get impressed with a little service from now and then... you'll notice I used the FIRST person in my message also.  I include myself with the crackpots and make no judgement against us.  And hell yes this survey will be ridiculed and discarded by the vast majority of regulars here.

It's just silly to me to think that we're even close to the majority in this big beautiful golf world.  Mark Fine is right.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tom H:

Just re-read the sentence I posted:

"The rush to publish "generalized" info books is really a poor substitute for the kind of due diligence lacking in most reviews. You get nothing more than surface comments and it's likely you will hardly find the kind of cross comparison analysis that's needed. When you take person "x" and he reviews "x" number of courses and then you take person "y" and he reviews completely different "y" number of courses you get this sloppy Joe product that conveys very little insight."

Tom, you can slap together just about anything and claim it provides some sort of "definitive guide." Generalized info is not really not hard research -- it's the USA Today style of just give'm any anything on the subject and go from there. I'm not a village idiot to believe there are others who play this grand game.

Many people who pick up such a book will be wives and close friends who honestly think they are giving the golfer in their lives something of real value. I don't blame the person who buys it thinking it's likely to give them some insights, but I do blame the companies that produce them because they are putting out a product that does so little except put $$ in their publishing pockets.

There are serious golfers, beyond the people who post / lurk here on GCA, who do want something beyond the base level of info they get in these "definitive guides."

Mike V:

I don't doubt the resorts that are rated will enjoy the books because it will drive traffic. Anything that gets out the name of the facility in a positive spirit is fine and dandy in that regard. Their $$ is no less valauble than mine.

[Michael Moore]

The Zagats parodies are by now a cliche. Nevertheless, I have to add mine -

The Old Course
St. Andrews, Scotland

"Charming", "royal and ancient", "non-returning" rave the regulars, but this out-of-the-way "links" is not without controversy. Many raters mentioned the "blind" approaches and "rude" starter, as well as the "brown fairways". You'll either love or hate the "Road Hole" with its "I'd like to buy a vowel" tee shot and "unfair" hazards. Everyone does agree, however, on the "drunken" and "irascible" caddies. Make sure you bring enough club to negotiate the "double" greens!

[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward:

I'm with you and wondered myself how Zagat's could possibly come up with something meaningful for real golfers.

But, I will be honest and say that the most impressive golf experience I've had in recent years came at a local daily fee here in Cleveland.

Matt, I won't mention the name of the course, but it has virutally no redeeming architectural qualities whatsover. I really can't think of a thing.

Nonetheless, the owner sunk several million dollars into a new clubhouse.

Go out on the course and you'll wonder what the hell you are doing there. Go into the bar/dining room and you will see people having a ball.

Okay, I thought to myself, maybe I am a golf snob!

So, Zagats just may be successful, not with you and I, but with a big crowd out there whose exposure to golf architecture is not anywhere near the level we have been fortunate to experience.

[Mike_Cirba]

Michael Moore;

I don't know why there is need for even one additional comment on this thread after your post.

The Zagat review of the "The Old Course" sort of says it all...  

To quote Tommy Naccarato, I feel like sticking fiery hot needles into my eyeballs.  

[THuckaby2]

Matt:  OK.  Heck, I agree with you.

People are still gonna love this guide.  We can ridicule it, we can complain about it, we can wish it weren't so... but that's not gonna stop the popularity.  Zagat's is a respected name and the content isn't going to matter... the same goes for Golf Digest.  Given the business you're in, I can see how this bothers you and I sympathize with you.  But this truly does negatively effect a tiny very narrow section of people...

If someone gives this to me as a gift (which is likely), I'll peruse it for kicks and then toss it aside, as most of us would.  Yeah, money that might have gone to something "serious" and better done would have been spent on the wrong thing, but hell, as if that hasn't happened forever and won't continue... Gib's latest column is about the wrong type of golf gifts to give, and well... this Zagat's guide is WAY better than the horrible things he mentions, most of which we all get from time to time...

I wish the golf world was run by us traditionalist crackpots.  It never has been, never will be.

And we'll live.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tim:

I don't doubt what you've said.

Just remember this -- plenty of people went to
see "Jackass -- the Movie." Does that mean this film classic will be put in the category of worthy cinema efforts and I'm not remotely linking it to the all-time greats? Well, if you go by the measuring of how many tickets it sells then sure -- it's a classic.

The same can be said for the junk that masquerades as "fast food." Keep in mind this the reason why fast food houses have had to diversify their menus was because of exposure for nutritional needs. Otherwise -- the same sloppy greasy hamburger would still be the only item of interest. If you expose people the awareness level will increase.

The publishing houses / major media companies are very slick in knowing such "information guides" will be easy pickings for those who don't know much about golf and will buy them at their favorite bookstore for their spouse or close friends. It's nothing more than empty analysis and it rarely, if ever, goes beyond surface discussion. It reminds me of the vague praise you see above the marquee on many Brodway shows -- "Powerful", "A Must See", "Leaves you wanting more." What b*lls"it!

I have no allusions or criticisms of the masses. They are like cattle -- they go where they are pushed. I grew up on a taxpayer owned facility where grass grew by accident not by design. I just believe that if solid info sources were put together you can help elevate the minds of a number of people who really do want to know more. Asking Joe Sixpack what he enjoyed and throwing out such inane and redundant comments is more comical than informative. The only people laughing louder are the companies making a tidy buck from this drivel.

[Tim Weiman]

Matt Ward:

Just one build on the Cleveland daily fee I mentioned.

Quite near where I live are two courses I think the world of. They are 2500-2700 yard, nine hole courses perfect for people taking up the game, e.g, no forced carries, almost no bunkers and few opportunities for lost balls.

I go down there a couple times a year, usually in March (when the snow breaks) or December when $5, forty degree golf seems pretty nice.

These courses, in my judgement, actually have more to offer architecturally than the packed daily fee with the million dollar clubhouse. No, not on every hole, but 3 or 4 or maybe even 5 holes offer some interest, even if you went down there in mid season form.

But, even with green fees at 10-20% of the daily fee, these cute little munis can't compete with the big clubhouse when it comes to attracting a crowd.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Huckaby;

I find it interesting that the average increase in the # of stars given to courses year to year in the Golf Digest guide seems to be about 1/2*.  Some of the most banal and even woefully conditioned courses I've seen somehow magically seem to gather 3 or more star these days.  Earlier editions seemed to have more critical comments, overall, which I generally find more useful than the glowing ones.

I'm not sure the dynamic at GD that accounts for this trending.  Perhaps it's like a regional golf guide that I used to do some writing for.

In the earliest "startup" years, writing for it was a blast because I knew I could be totally honest, directly critical, and even humorously satirical and my words would go into the guide verbatim.  At the time, the "profit model" somewhat naively (and unprofitably) was based simply on sales to consumers.

Over time, the publisher began to fund the project by selling advertising space to golf courses, and you can guess the result.  

Some of the best stuff I ever wrote lies on their cutting room floor.  

[THuckaby2]

Wish I could see that, Mike!

And please realize that I am not defending the content of the Zagat guide nor GD's places to play.  I haven't seen the former but much of the latter is indeed painful to read.

Unfortunately though, it is READ.  Widely.  Ridiculing it or complaining about it won't change this, however fun it is!

That's all I was trying to say (and apparently failing at!).

TH

[Doug Siebert]

Mike, Golf Digest's rating inflation has probably occurred for the same reasons why strong buy = buy, buy = hold and hold = sell for stock guidance.  They don't want to alienate those they depend on for revenue with poor ratings.  A bigger problem today with declining ad revenue in general anyway.

As for Zagat's, would anyone in GCA really expect them to be rating courses on merits anything like what we do?  Do you think that true gourmets find Zagat's restaurant ratings any better?  They'd be quite happy to visit a place with a rude staff and wobbly tables if they offered some truly excellent food, just as we're happy with the "surly starter" (read "doesn't kiss the ass of snooty Zagat's reviewers") and brown fairways at TOC.  At this point, wouldn't all of us be happy to see the masses steered away from TOC and over to Soggy Acres GC instead?

[THuckaby2]

Just came back from lunch with two gentleman, both casual golfers, both somewhat in the know on most things....

With no prompting from me, they were each raving about the new Zagat's golf guide to the tune of "now we'll know where to play when we travel."

The prosecution rests.  

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Huckaby;

Nolo contendre, compadre.  

[Matt_Ward]

Tom H:

Great sample size. I don't doubt that the masses know very little. Like I said before there were tons of people who went to see "Jackass -- the Movie." Does that make them out to be film officianados? If the masses signify success then McDonald's is no doubt high quality cuisine.

My only issue is the nature of what is provided under the pretense of so-called "information." An extremely generalized listing is really nothing more than a cash cow for the people putting out such rubbish.

Clearly, the average "Joe" places some sort of value because of the branding names involved -- i.e. GD, Zagats, etc, etc. The average "Joe" just makes the erroneous assumption that these so-called sources really do know what type of golf is indeed available. Of course, these sources don't do any homework -- they simply gather input fromt he masses, tally it up and then "waaaalaaaa" -- you have some sort of "quality" listing. How conveniently easy and cost efficient!

I know years ago I used to place stock in the same sort of things from advertorial type "reviews." Mike Cirba highlighted the issue quite clearly -- there's a desire to use these information source books as a general revenue machine for the parent companies.

It's gotten to the point that the awarding of stars is simply laughable -- you hardly ever see any real critical analysis. Minus the very top courses which most agree with (i.e. Pebble Beach, Pinehurst #2, Pacific Dunes, Bethpage / Black, etc, etc.) the bulk of the rest of the reviews is quotes from people concentrating on the esoteric and bizarre. I never knew how important it was for people when playing to have a frozen Snickers bar or how the range balls are stacked on the practice tee!

In today's information age I am quite sure many people who are truly interested can get independent information, but it seems more and more difficult given the desire to do the "lite" approach in course reviews.  

[THuckaby2]

Matt:

OK, I agree with you.  I have from the start.

My point, or "case" given I've gone down this road, remains that people will take this seriously and it will be a success.

I agree with you it sucks.  I agree with you that I wish it were different.  I agree with you that Zagat's hasn't done their homework.  I agree with you especially that the name is among the big reasons why this is - ie people "trust" the Zagat's name.  I agree with you that the masses don't indicate what is "right" or what "should be" or is "correct", not do they indicate quality.  I never said they did so.  I agree my sample size is tiny, but it is indicative and the immediacy of this is telling - these are not the type of people to talk "golf" very often, but nevertheless, this was the subject.  Perhaps its because they know what a golf nut I am... but they expected me to be ecstatic about this.  They were work superiors to me, so I nodded politely and said, yeah, this is great....

My case remains, as from the start, that this survey will be taken very seriously by the vast majority of people who care about golf at all, and will likely do very well due to that.

I remain happy with my case.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tom:

We are in agreement -- no doubt. I just think you can elevate the awareness of players through better information. The homework is utterly sloppy and thrown together to collect $$ from the unsuspecting that love the game.

Not too many years ago I was the poor slob who played the munis and didn't know any better. You give exposure to people and you can bring them into a better sense of what is quality golf / design.

Nuff said.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Huckaby;

I would have given anything to see your face as you nodded along agreeably (with feigned happiness and glee! ), as your bosses expounded on their perceived GREAT value of the Zagat Guide to you.  I'm somewhat hysterical sitting here envisioning it.  

I've had similar circumstances at parties, business functions, etc.  

Once someone finds out I have an interest in golf courses, they seem only too happy to talk my ear off on all sort of subjects, usually something to the effect of "Didja ever play "Highlands Canyon"?  It's AWESOME.  How about that 10th hole (usually the one that requires a 280 yard forced carry to a 10 yard wide fairway sandwiched between homes on both sides and on which everyone loses 3 balls and writes X on the card), isnt' that cool?"

You wouldn't believe some of the things I've agreed with in polite conversation.  

[THuckaby2]

Mike, you have a VERY good sense of how this lunch conversation went.  VERY VERY VERY good.

It was a fine test of my people skills, let's say.  

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()