[Charlie Goerges]

I remember an esteemed poster once making a comment about the difficulty of comparing courses. In his example, it was something like Ballyneal and Garden City GC. I don't know whether they're ranked similarly or not, but say they are reasonably close (or substitute Winged Foot or something). How can that possibly work well at all?


It makes me wonder if there has ever been any thought given to separating the lists by purpose rather than the way they are now (generally an overall list and a places you can play)? Maybe that would result in too many categories or something, but would it be worse or less helpful than the current way it's done? What if the categories were something like Destinations, Pay to Play, and A Nice Members Club? I don't know.


It just feels weird that a bunch of munis are up against Pebble Beach or the Bandon courses. Not to mention the weirdness that is Ballyneal vs Garden City. I realize that they'll sometimes do a listicle of the best munis or whatever, but those articles carry no weight or prestige whatsoever.

[Mark_Fine]

Comparing a course like Sand Hills to the TPC at Sawgrass is like comparing a Rolls Royce to a Porsche.  It is fun to try but near impossible to accomplish anything definitive.  Yes you can dissect all the various design aspects of a golf course, give each a number or a letter or two stars or whatever, but at the end of the day it comes down to a subjective opinion. 


All these lists should be taken for what they are - a compilation/tallying of a certain group’s opinions.  Just to make a list like this is an accomplishment and should be viewed at as such.  Does it really matter if one course is #56 vs #73?  I am sure many will argue yes it does, but in some ways it is like being at a World Series game.  No one asks where you sat.  They are just impressed you were at the game


By the way, Tom can correct me if I am wrong but I am sure Tom Doak’s personal Top 100 list looks very different from GM’s Top 100 list.  Given we all respect Tom’s opinions, does that make the GM list null and void 

[Ben Sims]

There’s a reason we use aggregate acceptance (i.e., voting) to determine our most important of positions. It’s the least provocative and most objective means of doing so. If there’s one thing you don’t want in elections or other important public determinations, it’s provocative subjective opinion. This is why the magazines use rating panels with a statistically significant number of raters to make their lists. Simply, they want to be the arbiter of quality. It’s so….anodyne. 


I kid, sort of. Sean per usual nails it earlier in this thread speaking on the essence of panels being groupthink that becomes one opinion. I think it waters down the entire subject and marginalizes the work. I could probably go into more detail on why I think that, but first you’d have to accept the premise that statistical analysis isn’t the best method for judging art. Though it certainly has its place.

[Dan_Callahan]

Having never been to Pine Valley, I can't comment on the merits of the course. However, from the photos I have seen, I am surprised that raters don't hold (what appears to be) a massive encroachment of trees against it. I know some people love trees on golf courses and the feeling of isolation that can create from one hole to the next. When I think about my own list of favorite courses, it isn't until I get to Yale at #11 that I find a course with an abundance of trees. And at 11, it has moved up quite a bit from where it was prior to all the tree clearing. Newport moved up significantly for me when they knocked out a ton of trees/gorse, as did Kittansett. Same is true with the Country Club. Is Pine Valley so insanely good that even with what looks to me like claustrophobic overgrowth it's still better than every other course in the world?

[Mike Bodo]

While I think it's widely agreed by those here that course rankings are a subjective excercise at best. They matter to a greater swath of the golfing public.


They are important to destination resorts in attracting golfers to them in the form of plays and stays. They impact the fees destination resorts and public courses can charge. They affect private clubs in the amount of annual dues/fees they can charge existing members, in addition to the initiation fees required for new members. The rankings influence the courses retail golfers plan trips around to play and or private clubs they wish to join. The rankings affect states with a healthy golf tourism industries. They aid in determining where major golf championships are held and not held. The rankings affect advertising spends with the respective publications and or websites in question, in addition to social media and other digital/print/visual media outlets.


In short, if course rankings didn't matter and have the influence they do on the general golfing public, they wouldn't exist. But because we humans require having just about everything we enjoy and partake in organized in a neat orderly manner, lists exist.

[John Kavanaugh]

When the caddie culture at a club believes it's necessary to cheat so you can have a pleasant day it's just not that great of a course.


note: I would catch caddies cheating all the time at a difficult course where I used to be a member. I remember once catching a caddie moving my ball and calling a two stroke penalty on myself. He begged me not to do it saying no harm was done and he was just trying to give me a recovery option. I think he learned something that day. Don't carry for assholes.

[Charlie Goerges]

The lists are an important entry point that ordinary golfers have access to. I think losing them would be a bad thing. But improving them would be a boon.


Mark mentioned comparing cars. I feel like if we followed the car industry a little more, there might be an improvement. Because they don't compare a sports car with a luxury car (or a pickup with a subcompact).


Or maybe we should just keep it the same, but provide off-ramps for people. I was trying to learn more about architecture and started seeing different courses on the list (specifically Bandon and Pacific Dunes), then I happened to see a book at Barnes and Noble in the sports section called Dream Golf. Luckily I was at a store that turned the book so the front cover was out, rather than the spine or I probably would have walked right by. Eventually I would have found my way, but that's not really reliable.


That said, the lists weren't a huge influence to me, that's been the books and GCA-style course tours and discussion here and elsewhere. (so I agree Ben that statistical analysis isn't the best way to evaluate art!)

[MCirba]

I think Ron M. nails it as far as Pine Valley retaining it's position despite changes made in recent years to bunkering on a few holes, the negative response to those likely tempered by some improved tree management.


I've played or walked all of the US contenders and when asked I tell folks that Pine Valley is #1 because it has 17 great holes and 1 really good one, and knowledgeable folks debate which hole that is.

[Jeff Schley]

Great work again by the panel.

• I thought Blue Mound would make it's way into the rankings with this panel and "groupthink".
• Good to see Davenport, curious where Cedar Rapids was in the final rankings.
• Valley Club at Montecito is low at 49, it would be in my top 30. I prefer it to Garden City for example at 28.
• Desert golf courses just don't get much love from this panel.
• Illinois courses are at just 2 (Medinah, Olympia Fields, Butler National, Rich Harvest, Canyata) yet several have been ranked in other rankings/years.
• Is Old Elm a candidate for top 100? My dark horse in Chicago area is typically Onwentsia which I think is very good.

[Adam G]

Re: Sheep ranch. Last time they said that the gap between sheep ranch at 80 and 120 was as small as it has ever been. Ultimately if you look the ratings really separate themselves in the top 10-20, a bit 20-50, and after 50 its almost splitting hairs. For instance, for Golf Digest the gap between 1 PV at 72 points and Fishers at 9 (66.47 points) is as big as the gap between 9 and 100 (Spring hill at 61.0191 points). Thats why a few ratings can really tip things in the 40-100 range. Ultimately that's why I prefer a Doak scale type exercise to a top 100 list.

[Mike Hendren]

Just rename the list “Courses That Definitely Do Not Suck.” Same criterion I use at the polls today.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I tend to agree with you about throwing out legacy, history, reputation, championship history etc when evaluating a course. Although, I think that is harder done than said.

I agree 100% that it's difficult, if not impossible, to throw out and ignore history when evaluating and ranking golden age courses. It's an element of their charm and appeal.

I don't know how much the walk, efficiency of design, max use of a limited size property effects many raters, but for me these elements add up to a degree of charm which many modern courses lack. I think that is just the way it is with modern design..health and safety, eye candy, bigger budgets etc. So sure, all things being equal, I can easily see myself siding for some of the classic courses. However, this is where The Loop seriously shines. In my eyes it's a modern masterpiece. But it lacks the bells and whistles of what gets modern courses ranked highly. Its a shame, but that's the reality. As always, I say just go with what you like. Anybody who has been around a few decades playing golf and reasonably aware of what's going on doesn't need a top 100 to guide them.

Ciao

Totally agree with your take on The Loop for the reasons mentioned in a topic you posted on your experience playing there.


BTW, I hope you had a chance to make it to Lafayette Coney Island downtown Detroit during your travels to our state. It's an icon of the city, as is American Coney Island adjacent to it. Had I known you and Ally would be there this summer I would have invited you both to play Sylvania CC as my guests. Cheers!

I always make it to Lafeyettes when in Detroit. A few weeks later it was shut down for health reasons!

Ciao

This only confirms my suspicion that I was pretty lucky to survive some of the places you took me to.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Having just returned from Bandon, I was interested to see GOLF's ranking of the courses. It is close to mine. I would just flop Old Mac and SR. I don't think Trails gets as much respect as it should, so I was happy to see it number 2. I thought the routing was brilliant.

17. Pacific Dunes
40. Bandon Trails
46. Bandon Dunes
77. Old Macdonald
97. Sheep Ranch

[Sean_A]

I tend to agree with you about throwing out legacy, history, reputation, championship history etc when evaluating a course. Although, I think that is harder done than said.

I agree 100% that it's difficult, if not impossible, to throw out and ignore history when evaluating and ranking golden age courses. It's an element of their charm and appeal.

I don't know how much the walk, efficiency of design, max use of a limited size property effects many raters, but for me these elements add up to a degree of charm which many modern courses lack. I think that is just the way it is with modern design..health and safety, eye candy, bigger budgets etc. So sure, all things being equal, I can easily see myself siding for some of the classic courses. However, this is where The Loop seriously shines. In my eyes it's a modern masterpiece. But it lacks the bells and whistles of what gets modern courses ranked highly. Its a shame, but that's the reality. As always, I say just go with what you like. Anybody who has been around a few decades playing golf and reasonably aware of what's going on doesn't need a top 100 to guide them.

Ciao

Totally agree with your take on The Loop for the reasons mentioned in a topic you posted on your experience playing there.


BTW, I hope you had a chance to make it to Lafayette Coney Island downtown Detroit during your travels to our state. It's an icon of the city, as is American Coney Island adjacent to it. Had I known you and Ally would be there this summer I would have invited you both to play Sylvania CC as my guests. Cheers!

I always make it to Lafeyettes when in Detroit. A few weeks later it was shut down for health reasons!

Ciao

This only confirms my suspicion that I was pretty lucky to survive some of the places you took me to.

I know you didn't like the Billy Goat, but I am thankful we went there....I love the dive end of town. It had been at least 25 years since my last visit. Your face was priceless when I said neither the food or beer is good 😎.

Ciao

[Michael Chadwick]

Ultimately if you look the ratings really separate themselves in the top 10-20, a bit 20-50, and after 50 its almost splitting hairs. For instance, for Golf Digest the gap between 1 PV at 72 points and Fishers at 9 (66.47 points) is as big as the gap between 9 and 100 (Spring hill at 61.0191 points). Thats why a few ratings can really tip things in the 40-100 range. Ultimately that's why I prefer a Doak scale type exercise to a top 100 list.

Great point from our resident economist above. It affirms a few interesting points to me; that the difference between Doak Score 7 and 8 is the hardest to distinguish of the entire scale (even among the Conf Guide authors as well), because 7's are still great courses. A combination of 8-7-8-7 (Shoreacres) can result in top 25, but 8-7-7-6 (Bel Air, Lancaster) can result in 67 and unranked.


I don't think there are any DS consensus 6's on the list, nor should there be. But personally I'd enjoy an unranked and alphabetized 100-150 or 200, though I suppose the regional lists lend themselves towards providing extra courses.


Unless I'm mistaken, Ballyneal seems to be lowest ranked DS 9? With about 8-11 courses ahead of it with weaker Doak Scores.

[Ira Fishman]

First, all rankings are fun because they prompt debate, but certainly are just an aggregation of subjective opinions molded by groupthink, history, and good photography/marketing.


Second, I am sure that the irony is not lost on the modern architects that their successful restoration/renovation work causes their own designs to be ranked lower.

[Tom_Doak]

By the way, Tom can correct me if I am wrong but I am sure Tom Doak’s personal Top 100 list looks very different from GM’s Top 100 list.  Given we all respect Tom’s opinions, does that make the GM list null and void 

I don't really have a personal top 100 list.  And I kind of resent that the GOLF Magazine voting system makes me try to have one, when I am much more comfortable with giving out my 10's, 9's, 8's, and 7's.  Those are subjective, too, but they are a little less precise, and better for it.


I've thought about quitting the panel as Ian says he is going to do, but I keep getting guilted into staying on because I have seen a lot of the contenders in the places where fewer people travel, and they need every vote they can get to have a quorum.

[archie_struthers]

 


Although I've been blessed to play a lot of the courses on these lists I haven't traveled oversea's enough to be a good arbiter. I can reply to Dan Callahan as to Pine Valley and the trees.


Dan Pine Valley is so wide in general that although most holes are an island to themselves they are big , the ones that aren't super wide tend to be the shortest on the course (#2,8) so you accept as a player that you need to concentrate on accuracy on the tee shot
.  That's the simplest way to describe it. They have indeed taken out many trees in the last ten years and some of the views achieved are really good.     Number 9 behind the green fabulous, #12 not so great 


Having played the wonderfully designed and maintained Sand Hills multiple times  (54 in one day lol) ...thanks to our host members...it has great architecture,  an incredible site , great hospitality  but it, it just isn't quite Pine Valley.  Crump lived his dream like no other that has followed


 so I wouldn't be surprised if PVGC holds the top spot for a long long time

[Kalen Braley]

By the way, Tom can correct me if I am wrong but I am sure Tom Doak’s personal Top 100 list looks very different from GM’s Top 100 list.  Given we all respect Tom’s opinions, does that make the GM list null and void 

I don't really have a personal top 100 list.  And I kind of resent that the GOLF Magazine voting system makes me try to have one, when I am much more comfortable with giving out my 10's, 9's, 8's, and 7's.  Those are subjective, too, but they are a little less precise, and better for it.


I've thought about quitting the panel as Ian says he is going to do, but I keep getting guilted into staying on because I have seen a lot of the contenders in the places where fewer people travel, and they need every vote they can get to have a quorum.

Tom,

It seems like they just take it one extra step...take that list of 7 thru 10s (regardless of the criteria used for that process) and sort them in a list, more or less.

P.S.  I presume you keep your list of courses is in a xls somewhere, pretty easy to select all, and sort by DS... largest to smallest? 

[Tom_Doak]

Mr. Doak, should my opinion of say a good course in Michigan that I've play 100x be more informed than a course in Augusta that I played 2 years ago through some lucky invite? I don't agree that each opinion carries equal weight.

Years ago, when we started this process, I let panelists check whether they had played each course or only seen it, and we weighted the votes from those who’d only seen the course as half a vote.


I ran the results both ways, and found that it really didn’t make any difference to keep track of that.  In the end, counting some votes as lesser only strengthens the status quo, and as discussed here, the status quo already has an outsized influence on the results. 

[MCirba]

Having played the wonderfully designed and maintained Sand Hills multiple times  (54 in one day lol) ...thank to all you members...it has great architecture,  an incredible site , great hospitality  but it it just isn't quite Pine Valley.  Crump lived his dream like no other that has followed


 so I wouldn't be surprised if PVGC holds the top spot for a long long time

Archie,


Spot on, exactly.


Neither is anything else in the US.


And, it's truly not even close.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

It seems like they just take it one extra step...take that list of 7 thru 10s (regardless of the criteria used for that process) and sort them in a list, more or less.

P.S.  I presume you keep your list of courses is in a xls somewhere, pretty easy to select all, and sort by DS... largest to smallest? 

Sure, Kalen.  But I only have nine courses in my top ten, and about 50 courses tied for 29th, and about a hundred tied for 80th place.  I always have to go back on the golf ballot and move some courses up higher than I wanted to put them.  Maybe I’m just saving room for what the list will look like in another twenty years!

[Michael Chadwick]

Culled from the regional lists, the below constitute 100 courses missing the US Top 100 cut, though they are not reflective of a 101-200, since regions were allotted the same number of total entrants (50 each across 4 regions).


The first runner-ups from each region, ranked one below a Top 100 entrant, were:


Northeast: Fox Chapel
Southeast: McArthur
Midwest: Trinity Forest
West: Colorado GC

Alotian (Roland, Ark.)

Atlantic — Bridgehampton, N.Y.

Augusta Country Club (Augusta, Ga.)

Austin Golf Club — Austin, Texas

Baltusrol (Upper) — Springfield, N.J.

Beverly — Chicago, Ill.

Blackwolf Run – River — Kohler, Wisc.

Blind Brook Golf Club — Purchase, N.Y.

Bloomfield Hills — Bloomfield Hills, Mich.

Boston Golf Club — Hingham, Mass.

Brook Hollow — Dallas, Texas

Canterbury — Beachwood, Ohio

Cascades (Upper) (Hot Springs, Va.)

Castle Pines — Castle Rock, Colo.

CC of Fairfield — Fairfield, Conn.

Cedar Rapids — Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Challenge at Manele Bay — Lanai City, Hawaii

Chambers Bay — University Place, Wash.

Charlotte Country Club (Charlotte, N.C.)

Chechessee Creek (Okatie, S.C.)

Clear Creek — Carson City, Nev.

Colorado Golf Club — Parker, Colo.

Concession (Bradenton, Fla.)

Country Club of Charleston (Charleston, S.C.)

Desert Forest — Carefree, Ariz.

Diablo — Diablo, Calif.

Dismal River – Red — Mullen, Neb.

Dormie Club (West End, N.C.)

East Lake (Atlanta, Ga.)

Entrada — St. George, Utah

Erin Hills — Erin, Wisc.[/t][/size] Estancia — Scottsdale, Ariz. Eugene Golf Club — Eugene, Ore. Forest Dunes – The Loop — Roscommon, Mich. Forest Highlands (Canyon Course) — Flagstaff, Ariz. Fox Chapel — Pittsburgh, Pa. Franklin Hills — Farmington Hills, Mich. Harvester — Rhodes, Iowa Hokulia — Kealakekua, Hawaii Holston Hills (Knoxville, Tenn.) Idle Hour — Lexington, Ky. Indian Creek (Indian Creek, Fla.) Interlachen — Edina, Minn.[/t][/size] John’s Island (West) (Sebastian, Fla.) Jupiter Hills (Hills) (Tequesta, Fla.) Kapalua (Plantation Course) — Lahaina, Hawaii Kinloch (Manakin-Sabot, Va.) Kirtland — Willoughby, Ohio Lancaster Country Club — Lancaster, Pa. Landmand — Homer, Neb. Laurel Country Club (Laurel, Miss.) Long Cove (Hilton Head Island, S.C.) Lookout Mountain (Lookout Mountain, Ga.) Mauna Kea — Waimea, Hawaii McArthur Golf Club (Hobe Sound, Fla.) Meadow Club — Fairfax, Calif. Medalist (Hobe Sound, Fla.) Medinah #3 — Medinah, Ill. Mid Pines (Southern Pines, N.C.) Mountain Lake (Lake Wales, Fla.) Mountain Ridge — West Caldwell, N.J. Old Elm — Highland Park, Ill. Olde Farm (Bristol, Va.) Olympia Fields – North — Olympia Fields, Ill. Omaha — Omaha, Neb. Ozarks National at Big Cedar Lodge — Hollister, Mo. Philadelphia Cricket (Wissahickon) — Flourtown, Pa. Pine Hills — Sheboygan, Wisc. Pine Needles (Southern Pines, N.C.) Pine Tree (Boynton Beach, Fla.) Quail Hollow (Charlotte, N.C.) Reserve at Moonlight Basin — Cameron, Mont. Roaring Gap (Roaring Gap, N.C.) Rustic Canyon — Moorpark, Calif. Salem Golf Club — North Salem, N.Y. Sand Hollow — Hurricane, Utah Sand Valley – Mammoth Dunes — Neekoosa, Wisc.[/t][/size] Sankaty Head — Nantucket, Maine Scottsdale National (The Other Course) — Scottsdale, Ariz. Sea Island (Seaside) (Sea Island, Ga.) Sebonack — Southampton, N.Y. Secession (Beaufort, S.C.) Shoal Creek (Shoal Creek, Ala.) Silvies Valley Ranch (Craddock/Hankins Reversible) — Seneca, Ore. Southern Pines Golf Club (Southern Pines, N.C.) Spyglass Hill — Pebble Beach, Calif. St. George’s — East Setauket, N.Y. Stone Eagle — Palm Desert, Calif. Streamsong (Black) (Streamsong, Fla.) Tobacco Road (Sanford, N.C.) Trinity Forest — Dallas, Texas[/t][/size] TXO (formerly Wolf Point) — Port Lavaca, Texas Wannamoisett — Rumford, R.I. Waverley — Portland, Ore. We-Ko-Pa (Saguaro) — Fort McDowell, Ariz. Whippoorwill — Armonk, N.Y. Whispering Pines — Walkerton, Ind. Wilderness Club — Eureka, Mont. Wilshire Golf Club — Los Angeles, Calif. Wykagyl — New Rochelle, N.Y.

[Tim_Weiman]

Having never been to Pine Valley, I can't comment on the merits of the course. However, from the photos I have seen, I am surprised that raters don't hold (what appears to be) a massive encroachment of trees against it. I know some people love trees on golf courses and the feeling of isolation that can create from one hole to the next. When I think about my own list of favorite courses, it isn't until I get to Yale at #11 that I find a course with an abundance of trees. And at 11, it has moved up quite a bit from where it was prior to all the tree clearing. Newport moved up significantly for me when they knocked out a ton of trees/gorse, as did Kittansett. Same is true with the Country Club. Is Pine Valley so insanely good that even with what looks to me like claustrophobic overgrowth it's still better than every other course in the world?

Dan,


Based on my experience at Pine Valley, I would say there is not a “massive encroachment of trees”. As many people have commented over the years, the fairways are actually quite wide.

[Tom_Doak]

Well there appears to be one huge error on the regional lists:


Salem Golf Club, North Salem, NY


I don't know anything about this course.  But I suspect the Salem that people voted for was the perennial top-100 contender on the north side of Boston.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()