[Ally Mcintosh]

By Tom Doak, I meant Renaissance Golf. The guys building your courses will definitely spend a large amount of time making everything look right. It’s what makes designing detail in the field a better approach than building from detailed plans.

Yeah, that's what makes working for me a good gig, they get to contribute things to the finished product!


Likewise, many of the wild and woolly greens I've built over the years were actually the creation of one or another of my associates.  Everyone thinks it's all me, but I just did the first ones that enabled all of them to freestyle.  The cool part is that they don't have to get them past a client, usually, they just have to get them past me and I've got a lot of tolerance for cool greens.


But I do hate that people equate my designs with a certain aesthetic, when I really don't care as much about it as everyone thinks.  My focus is on the shots you'll have to play.  I guess I could fire everyone who works for me and build a much duller-looking course in order to prove this point, but you and maybe three other people in the world would be the only ones who thought that was a positive step!

I think you only have a certain aesthetic on a macro scale, driven by your design philosophies, things like width, hiding transitions, free-form shapes, a love of undulation.


On a micro-scale, I see your courses as more different aesthetically than your competitors.


But an aesthetic is important, even if it changes with every project. All I am referring to is that a lot of time is spent making shapes tie in, work to scale or just look “right”. Bunkers aren’t just cut out in any fashion, greens are shaped attractively, fairway mowing lines are arranged to work with the land. All of that is caring about aesthetics. It’s not meant as a negative. I’m just not sure some people realise how many conversations are about getting those details just right…


…although as you say, you’re probably past some of those points because of the team you have. Doesn’t stop a lot of their thoughts being about that stuff.

[Thomas Dai]

How many of the courses on this listing are in gorgeous photogenic scenic locations vrs how many are in downright ugly places say next to an oil refinery, a steel works, or a chemical plant?
Atb

[Sean_A]

How many of the courses on this listing are in gorgeous photogenic scenic locations vrs how many are in downright ugly places say next to an oil refinery, a steel works, or a chemical plant?
Atb

Deal is far from a looker. It took this long for the panel to recognise what is obvious. Some of these raters need glasses or just get binned.

Ciao

[Niall C]

How many of the courses on this listing are in gorgeous photogenic scenic locations vrs how many are in downright ugly places say next to an oil refinery, a steel works, or a chemical plant?
Atb

Deal is far from a looker. It took this long for the panel to recognise what is obvious. Some of these raters need glasses or just get binned.

Ciao

Sean


I kind of know what you mean. It doesn't have the external views that some courses have however for a keen linksman it's a lovely looking course. But is the real problem that not enough raters go to see it rather than marking it down when they have seen it ? I could be wrong about that but I get the impression that a lot of these lists tend to be self-perpetuating and that a lot of raters tend to go to see the same courses.


Niall

[Sean_A]

How many of the courses on this listing are in gorgeous photogenic scenic locations vrs how many are in downright ugly places say next to an oil refinery, a steel works, or a chemical plant?
Atb

Deal is far from a looker. It took this long for the panel to recognise what is obvious. Some of these raters need glasses or just get binned.

Ciao

Sean


I kind of know what you mean. It doesn't have the external views that some courses have however for a keen linksman it's a lovely looking course. But is the real problem that not enough raters go to see it rather than marking it down when they have seen it ? I could be wrong about that but I get the impression that a lot of these lists tend to be self-perpetuating and that a lot of raters tend to go to see the same courses.


Niall

Pretty much all the panels have a specified list of candidate courses. So, yes, raters are all seeing the same courses in a broad context.

It boggles my mind that well travelled raters can’t see Deal for what it is. If crumpled land, creative greens, a good walk and f&f conditions are valued, then what is the issue with Deal? It comes down to one thing, idiot raters.

Ciao

[Ian Andrew]

I wish I could ask every panelist, "what's your guilty pleasure?"

When our friends get together we have a guilty pleasure music night and its hilarious, but you also realize you've left some great music behind because at the time the style didn't fit your style. If I look at the list, I feel like that might be happening.
 
That's the list I would really love to see. The panelist list that one course that appears architecturally out of touch with the current beliefs. But you don't care, you just love it and normally you won't admit to it. The Shadow Creeks, Harbourtown, something...

Even better, did you actually vote for it. For example, I consider Tobacco Road a bit of a hot mess in places. It's not my personal taste or style. But it made my Top 100 every time when I used to vote because I can't get enough of what does work there and its audacity to be different. It's the opposite of what I like, but it's a masterpiece to me. Picasso in a world dominated by Monet.

My guilty Pleasures:
World Woods (Pine Barrens) by Tom Fazio - loved playing that course
Me, myself and I - De La Soul -

[John Kirk]

IMO, many golfers thought Fazio courses were great. Much like Tom Doak did with his Confidential Guide, Tommy was an early leader in speaking out on the Internet on topics like the value of aesthetics vs course strategy. He acknowledged that Fazio excelled at the former but argued that he wasn’t so great at the latter.


It really was kind of a hot take at the time.

Tim,


Bill Coore or Tom Doak are about aesthetics just as much as Tom Fazio was. Just a different type of aesthetic and working in tandem with different philosophies on design.

aes·thet·ics/esˈTHediks/       nounnoun: aesthetics; noun: esthetics

• a set of principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of beauty, especially in art."these could definitely be some of the best wireless earbuds for those with an eye for aesthetics"
  • the branch of philosophy that deals with the principles of beauty and artistic taste."she tries to impress her audience with abstruse references to modern philosophies or theories of aesthetics"

A few years ago I shared this hot take on this subject.  My opinion is that aesthetics and strategic considerations in golf club design are indistinguishable from one another, one and the same thing.  If it looks good, then it is good.  If it looks good to begin with, but then you play the course and it doesn't play right, then it doesn't look so good anymore.  For the most part, golf courses that will be fun to play look like it.


"If it sounds good, then it is good music, and if it doesn't, then it is the other kind."
-- Duke Ellington

From Music Is My Mistress, page 455.

[mike_malone]

I doubt many would argue with the top 25 listed give or take 10 as certainly top 100 but after that there are hundreds of courses that could fill out the list.

[Peter Flory]

I wish I could ask every panelist, "what's your guilty pleasure?"

Mine in Chicagoland is Butterfield CC.  Even though they disregarded L&M and made the greens really extreme and sectioned, I still like what is there and always look forward to going. 


I guess the only other one where I'm out of step at bit with others is Medinah #2.  I really like it. 

[Mark Chaplin]

As you can imagine we are pretty happy to see Deal make a second world top 100 list. The hard work of the last 10 years is certainly paying off. We’ve invested heavily in the course with a renewed watering system, new sand scrapes which have harvested enormous amounts of sand for use on the course, quality machinery and some of the best staff in the business. Greig Easton our first deputy under James Bledge is now the course manager at Sandwich, Bledge as you know is now at Hoylake and our course manager Ben Williams is barely 30, but if you are good enough you are old enough.


I read somewhere recently a comment on the world top 100 which is very true. The top 50 pretty much place themselves, then next 150 could be put in any order and you’d have a great list.

[Ally Mcintosh]

As you can imagine we are pretty happy to see Deal make a second world top 100 list. The hard work of the last 10 years is certainly paying off. We’ve invested heavily in the course with a renewed watering system, new sand scrapes which have harvested enormous amounts of sand for use on the course, quality machinery and some of the best staff in the business. Greig Easton our first deputy under James Bledge is now the course manager at Sandwich, Bledge as you know is now at Hoylake and our course manager Ben Williams is barely 30, but if you are good enough you are old enough.


I read somewhere recently a comment on the world top 100 which is very true. The top 50 pretty much place themselves, then next 150 could be put in any order and you’d have a great list.

Glad to see Deal in there… but that last comment about Top 50 seems to get trotted out a lot lately and I think it is pretty lame to be honest. That 50 has changed a lot over the years with tastes and trends. I’d have Deal ahead of a few of them for what it’s worth.

[Tom_Doak]

I read somewhere recently a comment on the world top 100 which is very true. The top 50 pretty much place themselves, then next 150 could be put in any order and you’d have a great list.

Glad to see Deal in there… but that last comment about Top 50 seems to get trotted out a lot lately and I think it is pretty lame to be honest. That 50 has changed a lot over the years with tastes and trends. I’d have Deal ahead of a few of them for what it’s worth.

When I tried on behalf of GOLF Magazine to enlist Pete Dye to vote on the top 100 forty years ago [while I was also working for him], he told me he thought there were about forty courses that were superior to the rest, and then a whole bunch of "challengers".  He said he was proud just to have a couple of his courses accepted as being among those forty.


To Ally's point, neither of those courses of Pete's is in the top 50 today [I think], and a few of mine are.  And the courses of mine that are, are somewhat different than they were ten years ago.  It's not rocket science, that is for sure!

[Tom_Doak]

I wish I could ask every panelist, "what's your guilty pleasure?"

When our friends get together we have a guilty pleasure music night and its hilarious, but you also realize you've left some great music behind because at the time the style didn't fit your style. If I look at the list, I feel like that might be happening.
 
That's the list I would really love to see. The panelist list that one course that appears architecturally out of touch with the current beliefs. But you don't care, you just love it and normally you won't admit to it. The Shadow Creeks, Harbourtown, something...

Even better, did you actually vote for it. For example, I consider Tobacco Road a bit of a hot mess in places. It's not my personal taste or style. But it made my Top 100 every time when I used to vote because I can't get enough of what does work there and its audacity to be different. It's the opposite of what I like, but it's a masterpiece to me. Picasso in a world dominated by Monet.

Ian:


Unfortunately, the panels do promote groupthink . . . cue Jonathan Cummings to come on here and explain why some magazines scold panelists for picking statistical "outliers" [i.e. disagreeing with the status quo and voting for one of their guilty pleasures].


Personally, I have lots of guilty pleasures, all of which are on record in The Confidential Guide, but I find it tough trying to place them into the context of rankings.  For one thing, I've got a bunch of 9's on the Doak Scale and I find it pretty pointless to split hairs between them, yet the system INSISTS that I vote for some of them within the top 25 and put others in the second 25, or maybe even below that if I have too many.  I guess I am agreeing with Pete Dye about that.


I'm a fan of all the courses you named [Shadow Creek, Harbour Town, Tobacco Road] as well as offbeat places like The Himalayan, and it's hard to know how to handle those.  We voted differently on Tobacco Road; I think it is an artistic marvel but also IMO it has a bunch of real flaws and excesses that hold it back if I have to rank it. 


The Himalayan is another that is just so different to everything else, it doesn't really compare to someplace like Deal, but it's such an interesting solution to the location and conditions that I just have to stick it into the list somewhere at random to show my appreciation.  I think Lofoten Links is also in that sort of category . . . it's a wonderful PLACE but maybe not that good of a GOLF COURSE.  It's clear that there are quite a few panelists now who put a lot of value on the "wonderful place" aspect.


I know that there are many good golfers like Ally who think that a refined challenging course like Portmarnock should be rated above any of the places I've just described; I don't agree, because there are lots of refined challenging courses, but I do agree there needs to be more balance between that perspective and the aesthetic globetrotters.

[Tom_Doak]

But is the real problem that not enough raters go to see it rather than marking it down when they have seen it ? I could be wrong about that but I get the impression that a lot of these lists tend to be self-perpetuating and that a lot of raters tend to go to see the same courses.

Niall:


I think you are wrong about that; I would guess that a large number of the panelists have played Deal, since it's just down the road from an Open championship venue.


For myself, the problem is that I haven't been there since the early 1990's, and Deal is the kind of course that fades in your memory somewhat because it only has a few holes that stand out as being different.  The same could be said for Portmarnock.  I think that hurts that style of courses over time, as people's memories fade and shiny new courses come online and major renovations or major championships attract attention back to old favorites.


I think I gave Deal an 8 in The Confidential Guide and it would be silly/dishonest to go back and change that number when I haven't seen it in the interim, even though its fans have lobbied me to reconsider.  But the way the rankings are designed you can't just keep a course in the same place forever, because you're supposed to decide "where it ranks" with your vote and the field is always shifting around it.  That's why rankings are pretty stupid.  But all you've got to do is read Mark Chaplin's pride at seeing Deal make the list to see why rankings are also magnetic.

[John Handley]

I think that is a fundamental challenge with the rankings system.  How many panelists actually get out to see these courses every two years?  I'm guessing not that many.  Certainly in the past 2-3 years we've had with COVID.  I'm guilty of spending way too much time looking at the rankings and I think most on this site would agree that you could expand the top 100 to 150 or 200 and still have a list of very, very good golf courses that everyone who is a golf geek should play.  I'm less concerned with a course being ranked 30, 50 or 70 but as I look to expand my golf horizons, I want to experience as many great courses as I can simply for my enjoyment. I've played maybe 40 of the top 100 and I don't expect to ever play them all and I am certainly ok with that.  To me, that's not necessarily the point.  I want to play Deal because I've heard it's a cool place and I don't care if it's ranked 100 or 125.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Tom,


To your last two posts, I think you highlight well why a certain type of course (“refined challenge”) doesn’t fare so well in the rankings. But I also believe that the nature of that refined challenge is underrated because people are predisposed to bucket every course in to a type. Contrary to your statement that there are plenty of these courses, I could quite easily argue that the few that I rate highly offer copious amounts of strategy, just in a more subtle, less in your face fashion. Strategy in inches and feet rather than the immediately identifiable choices of a MacDonald / Raynor course (as an example). Maybe that’s why they suit the better golfers’ eye, not necessarily that they are more difficult. This type of golf never fully reveals itself to a one or two timer, regardless of skill level though.


None of the above means I get less enjoyment than others from the wild, rustic and individual courses out there - I love most of them and always get a huge kick out of playing a new adventure for the first time. But that doesn’t make them “best” for me: Perranporth was a blast but its scale doesn’t quite work for the type of golf I enjoy. The Bann course at Castlerock is similar. Mulranny on the other hand is rustic but big. It is a superstar.


In other words, we all have slightly different priorities that help us enjoy our golf. Which is a large part of why a collective ranking is faintly ridiculous.

[Niall C]

Tom


I daresay you are correct specifically about Deal but I did wonder about the generality. I mean if you have the top 100 courses and then say another 100 contenders, how many raters if any are going to visit them all over the two year period and of the ones they do visit I imagine the vast majority of courses will already be in the top 100 making it harder for the contenders to break through.


Maybe I'm being unduly critical as I've absolutely no experience of being on a ratings panel. The closest I've come to being a rater was on a car journey with Mike Whitaker. We'd just spent two days at Alwoodley as guest of Nick Leefe and were on our way to Silloth for BUDA. Perhaps as a way if distracting himself from my dodgy driving, Mike went through his rating for the course and I joined in keeping my own score. I can't recall the detail but remember once we'd totted up our individual scores thinking they were far too low and that Alwoodley was a better course than that !


Niall

[Peter Flory]

I haven't played Deal, but it looks like the greatest course on Earth to me based on pics and flyovers.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3tAaJ6fkQ0

[MClutterbuck]

Tim--


I was not posting or even viewing GCA during Tommy's days here, but agree with his thoughts as outlined in your post.


I recall back in the early 90's or so, some of the golf mags proclaiming a new era in golf architecture (led by Fazio and JWN) where there usually was a single best way to play a hole, which was obvious from the tee but difficult to execute.  The back of my mind said this was wrong...it kills the mental side of the game and that is what makes our game so different and so much fun.  Come 1995 and  yes, Sand Hills killed that new wave hopefully forever.  In recent years I have noted some very fine and different offering designed by both JWN (American Dunes in MI and Reserve at Moonlight Basin in MT) and Fazio (Santapazienza in Brazil).  IMO the final proof is The Lido...clearly brilliant even prior to its beauty growing in with the growth of fescue which will probably require another 2-3 years to happen fully.

Finally... Paul, you are the kind of person I wanted to play Santapazienza and hear from. How is it?

[Stewart Abramson]

I haven't played Deal, but it looks like the greatest course on Earth to me based on pics and flyovers.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3tAaJ6fkQ0

Thanks for the link to the video. It does show how much movement there is in the fairways but only hints at how great the greens are as well as the fantastic, fun and creative  short game options there are around the greens. Also, it doesn't adequately show the extent of the elevation changes. Regrettably, I've only played one round at Deal. Had I known how much I'd like it I would have booked a longer stay. Link to photos of all 18 holes: [size=78%]https://www.flickr.com/photos/golfcoursepix/albums/72177720311402809[/size]


 Here are a few photos of 15, 16 and 17.



Royal Cinque Ports #15 959



Royal Cinque Ports #15 960



Royal Cinque Ports #15 961


Royal
Cinque Ports #15 962



Royal Cinque Ports #15 964



Royal Cinque Ports #16 966



Royal Cinque Ports #16 968



Royal Cinque Ports #16 971



Royal Cinque Ports #16 972



Royal Cinque Ports #17



Royal Cinque Ports #17 974



Royal Cinque Ports #17 975



Royal Cinque Ports #17 976



Royal Cinque Ports #17 977



Royal Cinque Ports #17 978



Royal Cinque Ports #17 979

[Paul Rudovsky]

Finally... Paul, you are the kind of person I wanted to play Santapazienza and hear from. How is it?
MClutterbuck (sorry...don't know your first name):  I played Santapazienza back in April.  I went down there expecting to be disappointed but decided to go to see if I could re-finish the World Top 100 EVER list I had created.  At the start of 2023 I had 4 to play located in Melbourne Aus, Sao Paulo Brazil, Wherever Norway, and Shanghai China.  Played Woodlands in Feb in Melbourne...and it is as I expected...and IMO not even close to a World 100 (Darius Oliver pick...I will leave it at that0.  Next was Santyap.  I was expecting to be disappointed but was was positively surprised.  Played it only 1x but also got a long tour in a cart with one of the owners (Paulo) before playing it and during that tour Paulo explained the history of the course and their efforts.  They had just finished a multi year extensive set of alterations, but Paulo showed my both today's course and what it was like say 5 years earlier.  IMO it was not even close to a World 100 5 years ago  but it belongs today for sure.  It is big and bold and fun...and the 2 sets back tees play at very different angles than the 2 sets of front tees...making the course a big fun challenges for the good players and fun for old folks like me (terrible for the high handicap who heads to the back tees but terrible is just what that player deserves!).  Worth visiting if you can make it down there.


My last two were Lofoten and Lanhai Links...played them in June and September respectively...but that story is for another day





 Logged

[Tommy Williamsen]

The pictures of Deal make very upset that I drove past it from Sandwich to Rye.

[MClutterbuck]

Thank you Paul, great feedback. I am meaning to go at some time, specially now that I got the third good feedback.


Will send you a private message.


Marcos







Finally... Paul, you are the kind of person I wanted to play Santapazienza and hear from. How is it?
MClutterbuck (sorry...don't know your first name):  I played Santapazienza back in April.  I went down there expecting to be disappointed but decided to go to see if I could re-finish the World Top 100 EVER list I had created.  At the start of 2023 I had 4 to play located in Melbourne Aus, Sao Paulo Brazil, Wherever Norway, and Shanghai China.  Played Woodlands in Feb in Melbourne...and it is as I expected...and IMO not even close to a World 100 (Darius Oliver pick...I will leave it at that0.  Next was Santyap.  I was expecting to be disappointed but was was positively surprised.  Played it only 1x but also got a long tour in a cart with one of the owners (Paulo) before playing it and during that tour Paulo explained the history of the course and their efforts.  They had just finished a multi year extensive set of alterations, but Paulo showed my both today's course and what it was like say 5 years earlier.  IMO it was not even close to a World 100 5 years ago  but it belongs today for sure.  It is big and bold and fun...and the 2 sets back tees play at very different angles than the 2 sets of front tees...making the course a big fun challenges for the good players and fun for old folks like me (terrible for the high handicap who heads to the back tees but terrible is just what that player deserves!).  Worth visiting if you can make it down there.


My last two were Lofoten and Lanhai Links...played them in June and September respectively...but that story is for another day





 Logged

[Tom_Doak]

The pictures of Deal make very upset that I drove past it from Sandwich to Rye.

Yes, that was dumb, but skipping Rye in favor of Deal used to be the norm and that was dumb, too.

[Sean_A]

The pictures of Deal make very upset that I drove past it from Sandwich to Rye.

Yes, that was dumb, but skipping Rye in favor of Deal used to be the norm and that was dumb, too.

It’s a secret that this corner of England is the best area for links in England and possibly all of GB&I. Littlestone and Princes are overlooked as well. England doesn’t market itself well.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()