[Ran Morrissett]

Masa Nishijima has been kind enough to send us every world top 100 ranking since GOLF magazine started in 1983. It is now posted under In My Opinion. For all you ranking junkies, it makes for some interesting reading (and I am sorry that there isn’t a better way to format it on this web site other than how we did).

Trends are evident for those who like to analyze. Watch how an impressive engineering accomplishment like Shadow Creek starts off hot and then fades as it becomes less unique.  See St. George’s appear in 1997 when The Confidential Guide was gathering momentum – coincidence or not? Either way, it is ceratinly deserving.

What are the least deserving courses to make the list? Bali Handara? The Australian?  East Lake? Huntingdale? Haig Point? Innisbrook? Solid tests but not world top 100 caliber. Even my friends at CCNC wouldn’t argue that it deserved a spot in 1985. Nor Essex in Canada in 1989, despite being very fine flat land architecture.

Which year best reflects your tastes? To me, Swinley Forest and Rye are musts so that points to the later years. Other years show Notts and Gleneagles, which works for me too. Same for Canterbury and The Country Club of Ohio (I never realized that TCC was ever on it). Perhaps Yale can return one day?

Some courses deserve to be on there now based on the past 5-10 years of good work  (e.g. Royal Hague, Sunningdale New (which was ranked #43 in 1989), Eastward Ho!, Deal, Paraparaumu). Hopefully, they will get their due in future rankings.  Conversely, poor decision have undermined other courses (The Cascades being one) and such courses have been appropriately dropped (which is good as it shows the rankings function properly).

Have fun with this and good luck to Masa and all those in Japan as they continue to heal and rebuild.

Cheers,

[Joel_Stewart]

I still have the original issue.  Most of the greats have stood the test of time.

Wild Dunes ranked 34th in the world in 1985 might be the course that has fallen the most?

You have to laugh at some of the courses back then, Doral caught my eye.

[David Harshbarger]

For any spreadsheet nerds out there here's the data in spreadsheet form.....

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US

Dave

[Tim Martin]

For any spreadsheet nerds out there here's the data in spreadsheet form.....

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US

Dave

Dave-Nice job on the spreadsheet.

[David Harshbarger]

For any spreadsheet nerds out there here's the data in spreadsheet form.....

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US

Dave

Tim, Thanks 

[JC Urbina]

Ran,

I recently received this info and my biggest surprise was the National Golf Links not even in the top 50 in the early 80's

Prairie Dunes, one of my favorites was in the top 25 for many years.

[Tim Bert]

I can't find Crystal Downs on the list in 1985.  In 1987, it appeared as #59.  In 1989, it was #21.  In 1991, it was #16!  Then it bounced around a bit - 15,14,14,18,24,24,23,22,20,20.

Did any major changes to the course (maintenance practices or more significant work) happen between '85 and '89 or does this pole vaulting in the ratings simply coincide with Doak's "re-discovery" of the course in the national eye?

Also, for anyone familiar with the history, between 1997 and 2001, what caused it to fall from the top 20 spot that it had secured for a decade?  Just natural settling or something else?

[Tom Birkert]

Is Sunningdale New in 1989 a typo?

Sunningdale Old doesn't appear in 1989 yet has been in every other list, unless my eyes are deceiving me?

I think Sunningdale New deserves to be in there, albeit with a healthy dose of bias, but it is normally overshadowed by the Old and doesn't get full credit for being a fantastic course.

[Tom_Doak]

I can't find Crystal Downs on the list in 1985.  In 1987, it appeared as #59.  In 1989, it was #21.  In 1991, it was #16!  Then it bounced around a bit - 15,14,14,18,24,24,23,22,20,20.

Did any major changes to the course (maintenance practices or more significant work) happen between '85 and '89 or does this pole vaulting in the ratings simply coincide with Doak's "re-discovery" of the course in the national eye?

Also, for anyone familiar with the history, between 1997 and 2001, what caused it to fall from the top 20 spot that it had secured for a decade?  Just natural settling or something else?

Tim:

That one I can explain.  The first time I took the ballots, in 1985, the only person on the panel who'd played Crystal Downs besides me was Jack Nicklaus, who apparently played there as a kid on summer vacation with his parents.

By 1987, about seven or eight panelists had played the course.  Before that, we'd had a quorum of ten before a course could be ranked, and there were two or three courses with near unanimous support from the people who'd played them but not enough votes to get ranked.  So, I suggested we do what they do for batting champions in baseball who fall just shy of the minimum # of plate appearances  -- average in a couple of negative votes to get them up to ten, and if the course still qualified, rank it accordingly.

That's how Crystal Downs was #59 its first time on the list.  Two years later, it had more than ten ballots, and its real batting average put it 21st on the list.

As for the change between 1997 and 2001, I don't think it means anything at all.  There's very little difference between 15th and 20th place, and most courses with only a small # of ballots tend to fall back a bit over time, because the people who are most disposed to like them are going to be the first ones to seek them out and vote.  Plus, of course, there are a couple of new courses that have cracked the top 20 in recent years and pushed it back a bit. 

[Tim Bert]

Tom - Do you know if the big 3 ratings use the minimum plate appearance adjustment today or do they exclude them (or does each rating system handle that situation differently)

Also - did the extra attention generated in the late 80s result in any changes or improvement in upkeep or maintenance practices at Crystal Downs or were they already doing everything pretty much the same as today?

[Tom_Doak]

Tim:

Crystal Downs' maintenance budget has steadily increased over the past twenty years, partly because of the prosperous times and partly, I think, because of the increased attention to the golf course.  When I joined the club as a junior in 1988 there was still no waiting list ... now it's a pretty long wait, and those new members have contributed a fair amount of funds to the conditioning of the course.

However, some might debate whether the better conditions and faster greens really make for a better golf experience or not.

As for the "minimum plate appearance" system, I am pretty sure GOLF DIGEST doesn't use it, and I doubt GOLFWEEK does, either.  I know it was still in the GOLF Magazine system five years ago, and I think it still is, as the write-up of Lost Farm in the current issue implies that it may have qualified under the same loophole.

[David Harshbarger]

For the spreadsheet heads, I've updated this spreadsheet:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US

so that now there is a sheet (sheet2) that lists all the courses, the number of years they have been ranked, their min, max, average, and standard deviation of ranking, and then for each year, their rank.

From this you can derive some fun facts:

184 courses have been deemed Top 100 material over the 15 editions of rankings.
6 courses have never been ranked worse than top 10.
9 additional courses have never been ranked worse than top 20 (and all have been top 10 at some point.
All of the courses that have been top 20 or better have been on the list all 15 years, with the exception of Sand Hills.
Pasatiempo had the most fleeting dance with fame, breaking the top 100 once, at 100, before dropping out again.
Walton Heath Old is the "worst" every list performer, never rising above 76, but never dropping below 92.

Shoal Creek, Firestone South, El Saler, and and Colonial, to a name a few, have not been treated well by time.  Firestone, in particular, was never rated hiigher one edition to the next, before being popped off the list.

[Mark Saltzman]

Really cool, thanks David.

[Jud_T]

Interesting that Muirfield seems to have sprung a very slow leak...at this rate in the year 2192 it will no longer be top 100 material...

[David Harshbarger]

Interesting that Muirfield seems to have sprung a very slow leak...at this rate in the year 2192 it will no longer be top 100 material...

Muirfield Village will be there much sooner, by around 2050 I reckon. Tiger may win again by then.

This data set is a very interesting lens into tastes and trends.  I'd like to do some longitudinal analyses.  By adding in the architects and years I think I can get some trending on tastes for eras and archies.  I'd also like to do something along the lines of tastes by course style, but frankly don't A) know what set of styles to use and B) which styles apply to which courses.  If anyone would like to help me with that I would really appreciate it.  I can open up the spreadsheet for editing and the data could be added in there.

Dave

[David Harshbarger]

Posted are additions to the data on the Top 100 World courses, including:

Architects
Years
Trends by Decade
Trends by Architect

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US

Quick facts:

Most courses ever listed in World Top 100: Tom Fazio - 12
Decade with most listed courses in all editions: 1920's
High Points of recent decades:
1950's - 1987 (3, now 0)
1960's - 1985 (9, now 2)
1970's - 1985 (13, now 4)
1980's - 1993 (10, now 2)
1990's - 1999-2003 (9, now 7)
2000's - 2011 (12)
2010's - 2011 (3)

Architects Ascendant:

Tom Doak - 0-5
Alistair MacKenzie 5-9
Coore and Crenshaw - 0-4
A. W. Tillinghast 5-7
David McLay Kidd 0-2
Seth Raynor 2-4
Old Tom Morris - 4-6
Tom Simpson - 2-3

Architects Descendent

Robert Trent Jones 7-2
Dick Wilson 4-0
Tom Fazio 8-0
William Flynn 4-1
Donald Ross 8-5

Also, interesting to compare the trends on some contemporary architects. 

Tom Fazio has placed 12 courses in the world top 100, but none have had the staying power to be there today.
Pete Dye has placed 10 in the top 100 at some point, and 6 remain today.
Robert Trent Jones, Sr. has placed 10 in the top 100, and 2 remain today.
Jack Nicklaus has placed 7 in the top 100, and 3 remain today.
Tom Weiskopf and Jay Morrish have placed 4 in the top 100, and 1 remains today.

Finally, when anyone finds flaws in my attributions or dates, please let me know and I will attempt to fix them.

Dave

[Tom_Doak]

David H:

What eight courses did Tom Fazio have in the top 100 in the world, and how long ago was that?

I am surprised [but not shocked] that the list is so trendy.  New courses benefit from a natural self-selection:  the panelists most likely to love them are the ones who see them first, so nearly all new courses enter the list higher than they wind up.  And, of course, new courses are busily spending $$$ on promotion, and their architects are busy promoting them, only to have the promotional spending drop to zero and the architects move on to newer courses 5 years later.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,

I can answer that...the xls link is pretty handy and sorts intuitively.  Here is the list:

1   Black Diamonds   Tom Fazio   1987   1980's
2   Butler National   Tom Fazio   1974   1970's
3   Estancia   Tom Fazio   1995   1990's
4   Jupiter Hills   Tom Fazio   1970   1970's
5   Lake Nona   Tom Fazio   1987   1980's
6   National GC of Canada   Tom Fazio   1976   1970's
7   Shadow Creek   Tom Fazio   1987   1980's
8   The Vintage Club   Tom Fazio   1981   1980's
9   Trump National NJ   Tom Fazio   2004   2000's
10   Wade Hampton   Tom Fazio   1987   1980's
11   Wild Dunes (Links)   Tom Fazio   1980   1980's
12   World Woods pine barr   Tom Fazio   1993   1990's

[David Harshbarger]

Tom, re-reading my post I wasn't clear that Tom Fazio had a high of 8 in one year, but a total 12 courses in the Top 100 at one time or another.

If you follow that link and go to the sheet Course and Architects, you can filter the list to just the Fazio courses.  My iPad copy/paste doesn't deal with that well, but you can see the data easily enough.

Your point about self-selection has been internalized.  My crass reflection on that is that many of these Fazio, Nicklaus, And Jones courses appear to be super high-end real estate plays.  I would think high ratings for these business concerns would be extremely valuable to the principles.

The Vintage Club, Wade Hampton, Wild Dunes, World Woods seem to fit this bill.
For Nicklaus, Shoal Creek jumped out as a RE play.

I'd be interested to see if there are any trends re RE versus golf or resort courses as far as stayimg power of Top 100 courses.

[Kalen Braley]

Here is Tom Fazio's year by year total:

1985   4
1987     3
1989     4
1991     7
1993     8
1995   6
1997     6
1999     3
2001   4
2003   3
2005   3
2007   1
2009   0
2011   0

[Tom_Doak]

David H:

Thanks, I found that the eight at one time were:

Black Diamond, Wade Hampton, Shadow Creek, Lake Nona, Wild Dunes, National GC of Canada, Jupiter Hills, and Butler National.

That was back in 1993!  Who'd've thought Tom Fazio peaked in 1993?  Certainly not GOLF DIGEST.

[Carl Nichols]

David H:

Thanks, I found that the eight at one time were:

Black Diamond, Wade Hampton, Shadow Creek, Lake Nona, Wild Dunes, National GC of Canada, Jupiter Hills, and Butler National.

That was back in 1993!  Who'd've thought Tom Fazio peaked in 1993?  Certainly not GOLF DIGEST.

Comparing the 12 Fazio courses that have been on one of these lists with the current list of Fazio courses on the GD current top 100 is quite remarkable -- there's hardly any overlap.

[Jud_T]

Carl,

Sounds like a sell signal for the GD Faz's to me...But I'd sure like to hire his marketing guy....

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()