[RDecker]

I was glancing through the March issue of GOLF magazine in the grocery store the other day and I noticed that since George Pepper left they had changed the layout and added some new features... Then an interesting article caught my eye the author listed is a Hunki Yun and the topic was most overrated courses.  I thought quickly of some of the names I might find as I scanned down the page (Bay Hill, anything with Trump in the name) but to my suprise the first course listed was Seminole.  I was suprised to see it included then the other names I saw read like a GCA posters wish list. I wondered if anyone else has seen this and if there is any merit to this list or just the rumblings of a scribe trying to get noticed at a big corporate media stronghold like Time. Below is the list including it's authors comments for each course.

1. Seminole- it was all about Hogan. keyword was.
2. Pinehurst #2- fix ballmark near hole, walk 50 feet past, chip
                       back onto green: is this golf?

3. Baltusrol lower- if not within 30 minutes of USGA's HQ,
                         nobody would have heard of it.
4. Spyglass Hill- play first six holes 3 times.

5. Pebble Beach- Nine spectacular holes along the Pacific a
                        golf course does not make.
6. Sand Hills- What's the real challenge: the course or getting
                   there?
7. the Old Course- Sam Snead was right( as were Scott Hoch
                         and Lee Westwood).

8. Olympic (lake)- Beware Vertigo: sloping fairways only
                         Hitchcock could love.
9. Tie  Royal Melbourne/The Country Club- both ratings are
                          for composite layouts, which don't exist
                          except for the ranking.

I have heard other people question Spyglass' place in the rankings and even a few people will dispute Pebble's total package but the rest of these, come on.  Comments anyone.

[mrgreen]

Rdecker,

The comments, collectively, seem rooted in envy.

[A_Clay_Man]

Wow- Ain't that a shame and a sham all in one. Thats got to be hard to do. I can't wait to hear about this guys favorites  
Let's see if we can guess his favorite list.
#1 that pueblo course where huckaby takes his daughter
#2 missing links at Mequon
#3 Clive Clarkes country club of the desert
#4 Shadow Mountain
#5 Dick Daley's hidden gem   with the horse trough surrounding the green.
#6 Whispering Winds
#7 Sandpines
#8 Bushwood CC
#9 Jackson Park Muni
#10 The Mad Russian

[Dan Pohl]

Forget the comments, he got two right at least - The Olympic Club and Spyglass are both over-rated, I'm not saying bad necessarily but Olympic Lake once ranked Top 20 in the World - C'mon!!

His comments about Royal Melbourne are amiss too and though the composite course is mostly played by professionals if he'd actually been he'd have RM West alone in his top few in the world.

Pebble is a great place and has several great holes and is among the Top few courses I've played but he may be right in saying that it is actually a tad over-rated (3-4 in world??), again his comments are absurd and if it is over-rated it certainly ain't by much.

The rest is ridiculous as I'm sure many others will chime in to explain.

[brad miller]

If you don't think Seminole is in the US top 7-15 then you have not played enough great golf courses, it is hands down one of golf's great routings with many angles that add great strategic value. One needs to read AM 13 points, does Seminole fail in any?

[Jim Thomas]

I have not yet seen the article in the magazine, but the list appears more or less on point.

Balturol Lower is one of the most disappointing experiences I have had in golf.  I don't know why the USGA has held any Opens there.  The Upper course has far more charm, and its subtle breaks off the nearby mountain make for a most interesting round of golf.

Everyone I know who has played Pinehurst was disappointed, as was I.  Good course, but few people would say it's great unless they knew it already had a high rating.

Sand Hills - I thought the experience of being there was magnificent, but I thought every hole looked the same.  Not as good as nearby (400 miles) Prairie Dunes.

Seminole - No way it would be in the U.S. top 25 if it were not the club of choice for the upper class and if Hogan had not practiced there.

Old Course - Have played it several times.  Leaves me cold based solely on the merits.  But a great experience if you focus on its history.

Pebble and Olympic - Have not read the article, but I think they are both excellent courses.  Maybe the author is off base in criticizing those two courses.

Royal Melbourne - Great set of greens and bunkers.  Fairways are too wide, and there's not much interest in the course unless you are near the greens.  Very good course, but not top 10 in the world.

Country Club - Author appears on point.  Three holes from the composite course are great, but one of them is not even a real hole from the second course; is a combination of two holes.  Rest of the holes are good, but not a top 10 course.

Conclusion - Author appears to know his stuff.  Which courses does he think are underrated?  

These four courses (among others) are underrated courses in my opinion:  Yale; Dunes in Michigan; Cruden Bay; and Somerset Hills.  

[CHrisB]

Jim Thomas,

Obviously you are relatively new to this website!  If you had been around longer you'd realize that you'll have a lot of explaining to do if you are proclaiming in one post that Sand Hills, TOC, Royal Melbourne, and Seminole are among the world's most overrated courses without explaining in great architectural detail why you think so.  In 2 years participating in this discussion group, I think yours are the first negative words I've seen uttered about these courses, and the others on the list have been the subject of some debate (especially Pebble and Olympic, which you say are your favorites on the list) but have received strong support here as well.  

When you say about Pinehurst #2 "few people would say it's great unless they knew it already had a high rating", it makes me think you don't really know who you're dealing with here on GolfClubAtlas.com.  I am not necessarily among them, but many of the posters here have some of the most comprehensive knowledge of what constitues great golf architecture, for whom things like ratings are of little interest.  

Prepare for your credibility to be questioned (may be too late) unless you really start explaining yourself!

(By the way, how did you play at Seminole and Royal Melbourne?)

[John Conley]

Hunki Yun was previously the golf writer for the Orlando Sentinel.

[Slag Bandoon]

Let's see if we can guess his favorite list.
#10 The Mad Russian

!!!  #10 !!!

The layout is a masterpiece and a template for every respectable golf course built after it.  Much like the Parthenon.

[ForkaB]

ChrisB

You haven't been reading this website very closely!

A number of people have often expressed opinions similar to those of Jim Thomas's.  I personally agree with his comments on the 5 courses on that list which I have played (Pinehurst #2, TOC, Olympic, Spyglass and Pebble Beach), and have said so, many times on this site.  So have others.  These criticisms/defenses tend to cause a firestorm of righteous indignation amongst the true believers which quickly fizzles out when the heretics try to bring the arguments away from sentiment and rhetoric and as close as possible to real on the ground experiences and "facts."  I would never call it "bias"--just closed-mindedness.........

I also agree (in theory) with the criticism of the two "composite" courses (RM and TCC).

I'd also like to hear from other potential heretics who have been to those places which I have not, how much of the above criticisms of Baltusrol Lower, Sand Hills, Seminole are on the money.

[Matthew Mollica]

Rich and others,

I sort of understand where the author of the magazine piece is going with this. I've had similar discussions with mates many times. A course needn't be bad to be over-rated. It just has to be thought of in more positive terms, than is really the case. In that regard, I believe that the listing of Olympic, and even, dare I say it, Pebble, is able to be defended.

Although I've not played it, the criticism of Seminole would appear to be very flimsy. The course and club boast immesurably more than a claim as Hogan's practice range, and a playing list of loads of Fortune 500 CEOs.

The criticism of Royal Melbourne, on the grounds of either fairway width, or on consideration of the composite course in judging criteria (as opposed to East or West in isolation), is something which I simply cannot accept.

Royal Melbourne is criticised by many because it isn't within the United States. Unfamiliarity with it is no excuse to downgrade it. The facts are firstly that the composite course can be played, and is routinely played. It exists, and many historians are now uncovering details which show that Mackenzie indeed had a hand in many, if not all of the East holes making up the composite layout. Secondly, the West Course could comfortably stand in as a substitute for the composite, in the World Top Ten. It boasts a skeleton neared by so very few courses. Green complexes matched by a handful, and so many other factors, see it rightfully enjoy a place within any considered version of the permier courses on the planet.

As for fairway width, well, don't start me...

Matthew

[ForkaB]

Matthew

You are very right in that nobody (at least me) is saying that any of the course listed are in any way "bad."  Just "rated" too highly for their inherent quality.

I don't know about Seminole, and I respect the views of the people on this site that I have played with and respect that it is a great track, but I am always sceptical about how the ancillary aspects of the good and great courses (i.e. snob appeal--social or architectural) really affect our judgement.  I am sure that people can talk eloquently about specific features of Seminole (say), but I do wonder whether or not they might say similar things if the course were designed by AN Other, rather than Ross, and the membership were made up of good old swamps boys rather than Waspish Snowbirds.

I'll never criticise Royal Melbourne (until I see it, that is.....), but I do think that it (and TCC) "suffer" from the fact that people seem to want to "rate" a "course" which only rarely exists, kinda like Brigadoon.  I have no doubt from what I have read on this site that the West Course (and maybe the East?) would rate highly by itself.  If I were in charge of the ratings, I wouldn't allow "composite" courses.  And, do you think that the fact that MacKenzie's hand is evidenced there (even if through convulted sorts of archaeology, in some instances) counts for some of the course's (composite or real)appeal to "raters?"

As for "width", Jim Thomas is very wrong if he criticises RM for this and this alone.  As I said on another thread (to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen), I know width, I have played a lot of golf with width, width is a good friend of mine.

Finally, please take that chip off your shoulder regarding the statement that RM is "downgraded" just because it is in Oz and not in America.  I find it hard to believe that a course regularly in the world "Top Ten" is downgraded, and I am sure that RM would get whatever recognition that it desreves if it were more accessible to more of the world's discerning golfers.

Cheers

[TEPaul]

"You are very right in that nobody (at least me) is saying that any of the course listed are in any way "bad."  Just "rated" too highly for their inherent quality."

Rated too high for their inherent quality, huh? Rated too high? Right! The thing that's rated too high is the raters, not the courses. The thing that's rated too high is Golf Magazine.

That magazine should derate Yunki Yuk and stick to things like Dave Pelz's 199 part putting lesson and the best places in Las Vegas for golf, gambling and how to meet people in a hottub.

[Brian Phillips]

I have only played Sand Hills and TOC on the list but I have a good friend on the course with me here in Edinburgh that has played Pinehurst #2 so I will give my true opinions of the courses.

Sand Hills -  I travelled from Norway for over 50 hours to get to this baby and wasn't dissappointed.  Now, what was I most impressed with?  The course? Yes and no.  The clubhouse? No.  The food? No.  I was most impressed with the ambience of the place.  The total relaxation mode you body moved into whdn arriving there.  Is the course a great test of golf? God knows I didn't play off the tips apart from a few holes with M.Clayton which I found tough.

I don't think that the holes all blend into one and each hole did have it's own character.

Look, I'll be honest.  I had a great weekend spending time with some of my best mates and mentors discussing GCA so I think the place is great.  The course is designed well, so what more do you want?  A difficult course?  or a really enjoyable fun to play course?

TOC - Now here is a course that at the moment I cannot stand!  I have only played it twice and still can't get my head around what all the fuss is about.  You hit left with the drive you get a tougher shot to the green, if you hit right and tight you get an easier shot to the green.  Pretty boring strategy if you ask me!  The thing that impressed me last time I played were the chipping areas around the green.  They made you use your imagination.  Now, As Rich can confirm, I haven't given up on the lady yet.  I am going to play it as often as possible over the next 8 months to hopefully give an honest opinion of the place.  I don't like St.Andrews all that much as I think the town has sold it soul and the place isn't Scottish anymore just commercial.

Pinehurst #2 - My pal worked here for a year so he played mot of the courses there and he doesn't rate #2 as high as some of the other modern courses.  I will find out which ones he liked best next week.

Brian.

[ForkaB]

Tom

I missed that hot tub article.  Could you please provide a URL?

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Just do a URL search for a golf magazine called Golf Magazine or a new golf writer called Yunki Yucki who this month discovered the term "golf architecture" and promised by next month he'll check out exactly what it means.

[D. Kilfara]

Tom Paul - I disagree with many of Hunki's choices, but to make fun of his name like that is at best childish and at worst smacks of racism. Hunki and I worked together at Golf Digest for a time, and he's a very nice guy with a good sense of golf. (He's of Korean extraction and played on the Columbia golf team, if memory serves.) I'm not trying to be politically correct, here, but I'd have thought you were above this sort of thing...

Cheers,
Darren

[Jeff_Brauer]

I hate to sound harsh, but, speaking of political correctness, I don't care for Chris B.'s attempts to strong arm our Mr. Thomas into the "party line."  Mr. Thomas did all the explaining he needed to do on his opinions, based on his playing the courses, as opposed to a broad "everybody here knows" type statement.

I hope Mr. Thomas is not dissuaded from continuing his discussions based on his experience.  If we documented the forum participants and how many of these courses they have each actually played, perhaps we could take Mr. Thomas' opinions over theirs, based on him having played those courses alone, no?

Regarding Pinehurst, I was not impressed the first time I played, although it was in '79, a period when the course had lost the pine needle roughs, etc.  After playing four times, it is now among my favorites.  It is subtle, and not the knockout type resort course many expect.  Mr. Thomas, have you played it more than once?

I have heard people make comments similar to themes in that article before, on many occaisions.  

[A_Clay_Man]

Slag- I was under alot of pressure to come up with a tenth and all I could think of was the Mad ruski. Plus my out is that he could get lucky and pick one good one.

As for Hunki, I know his cousin dori.

Plus, Sand Hills repetive? No flippin way. Yes you are forced to look out over the grass laiden sand hills hole after hole with those natural blowouts cowering in the distance and then having to deal with them up close and personal is quite monotonous, NOT.

And as for our beloved Pebble, I never thought of it as having only nine holes on the ocean I only thought 3 weren't. But technically he's still wrong as none are actually literally on the ocean but thier proximity is close enough to feel that way.

[THuckaby2]

Saying courses are over-rated is easy - you just make your statement and really don't have to back it up with much... hell nearly all of the courses Hunki lists are on some top 10 in the world list, so it takes next to nothing to justify that they are "over-rated"; e.g. TOC only has two par fives, so for someone who loves par fives, voila, it's over-rated.

What's hard is defending a course you believe IS truly great.

I believe Sand Hills qualifies for that, but I have no rebuttal to Hunki (who really makes no specific critique) or to Jim Thomas, who claims all the holes look the same... I sure didn't see the holes there that way, but to each his own.  I also find nearly everything else Jim Thomas says to be pretty damn spot-on....

The point here is that we all have our own tastes.  Hunki has his, and that's cool.  Unless you really get into great detail in discussions like this, it's all just brunettes/blondes/etc.

TH

[CHrisB]

Oops!  Sorry guys--midnight posts aren't my best I guess.  I'm not trying to force any "party line" onto anyone.  All I was saying to Jim was: If you're going to throw out bold criticisms, back them up with more than just a sound bite!  Retreating...

[Tom Doak]

I haven't seen the issue yet, but I'm curious why they would have one of their editors list courses as "overrated" when GOLF Magazine's ranking of courses has them listed so high.

I would agree with most of Mr. Yun's individual criticisms, but they are very thin.  Seminole can still be a great golf course, even though some people give it more credit than it would otherwise get because of the Hogan connection.  Sand Hills does get brownie points for being so remote (Mr. Thomas is the one who said all the holes look alike, not Mr. Yun).  Pinehurst #2 does punish those people who make all their ballmarks near the hole and don't figure out what they're doing wrong, but that doesn't make it overrated.

The only "criticism" I'd argue about is the one of The Old Course because there's nothing there ... he just says it's overrated.

[Jeff_Lewis (Guest)]

I am inclined to disagree with virtually everything in the first post. There is a tiny grain of truth to his criticisms, but there are many far more glaring examples of "overrating", whatever that means. I guess the courses have to be well ranked in the magazine, or they can't really BE overrated, though.

[John_Conley]

Jeff's hitting on a point I'd like to expand.  To be overrated, you first have to be rated.  Often, a rating is affected by one's bias.  

Is Duke good this year?  Yes, for they are Top 10.  No, not in comparison to the lofty standards at Duke.

Is Creighton good this year?  No, they're GREAT!  They are Top 25 out of 320 Division I schools and enjoying their best year in history.

An "overrated" course can still be much better than an "underrated" course.

Sand Hills is not Top 30 in America from Golf Digest.  It is #1 Modern in Golfweek.  One could probably argue that it is BOTH over- and under-rated if you look at both lists.

I think Hunki is just trying to stir the pot a bit.

[Dan Kelly]

John Conley --

If you want people to take your comments seriously here, I think it's time you delete that tagline about the Gophers on the hardwood!

We heard it here first -- and last!

Dan

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()