I started with how many courses each architect was credited with in the World Top 100 (that was to be part of my scoring system). I got the following data (this was from about a year and a half ago)... Colt (7), Mackenzie (9), Old Tom Morris (6), Coore & Crenshaw (4), C.B. MacDonald (2), Tom Doak (5), A.W. Tillinghast (7), Donald Ross (4), Seth Raynor (4), Perry Maxwell (2), Robert Trent Jones (2), George Thomas (2), Pete Dye (6), Jack Nicklaus (3), Tom Simpson (3), Herbert Fowler (2), and Stanley Thompson (2). I limited my list to architects who had at least 2 in the World Top 100 at the time I examined that list (again, over a year ago).
1. My first score was to be based on how many are among the best 100 courses in the world.
2. My second score was to be based on the highest quality of one's work. For me, I am pretty much in agreement with the Doak scale, so I would apply that scale and give a second score to architects that had courses that were 9's or above on the Doak scale.
3. My third score was to be based on how prolific the architect was, and my measure was going to be not only how many courses did they build, but how many "good" courses did they build. I settled on..."how many Doak 7's or better did they build during their careers?". That to me, is an important measuring stick. Pete Dye and Donald Ross built a lot of courses, and no doubt have a good list of Doak 7's or better. Both of them would score high in category 3. But...this is where my project lost steam...how to sort through each man's work and come up with a tally in this section of scoring, was going to be a big chore, and I was probably not going to be familiar enough will the complete body of work of each man to assess how many 7's or better they had.
But to me, those 3 categories would provide a pretty accurate and reasonably thorough measure of how one would want to rank the best architects of all-time.
Knowing what I believe to be true using these 3 criteria, my top 10 would look like this:
1. Mackenzie
2. Colt
3. Old Tom Morris
4. Tom Doak
5. Seth Raynor
6. Coore & Crenshaw
7. A.W. Tillinghast
8. Donald Ross
9. George Thomas
10. Pete Dye
TS
First of all, we rank everything. To think that we shouldn't rank golf architects is preposterous.
I'm going back to my criteria above. Seems like nobody else liked it, but I think it checks all the boxes. Start with who built the best golf courses in the world (where else would you start?). Give credit to those who built more of them than everybody else. Then give additional points for the highest quality courses in the tops in the world list, then give additional points for breadth of work. That is all.
TS
Hi Ted,
I'll give your post some attention, as it closely reflects my sentiments.
I might change criteria #1 to include the top 200-300 courses in the world.
At the heart of the argument is the value of a great course compared to an ordinary course. If there are 30,000 courses worldwide, the best 300 are the top 1%. Should they be valued 100 times better than the bottom 300 courses? I can make arguments that they are either 1,000 times or 10 times more valuable. I don't think this value assessment has been fully addressed yet.
Choosing criteria #3 to award points for Doak 7s instead of Doak 6s probably changes the list considerably. We've discussed Doak 6s before, and there's a substantial difference to character between the two levels of golf courses. I think you're making the right call here.