[Patrick_Mucci]

Is a trend afoot ?

Does a restoration effort, especially a successful one insure a rise in the club's rating ?

Will other clubs see the meteoric rise that other "restored" clubs experienced, and embark on their own restoration efforts ?

Would this add value to the ranking/rating process ?

[TEPaul]

Really good restorations should add value to the courses and the rating/ranking process too.

And so in the next ten years I want to see all 2598 really well restored golf courses in the top 100 of every single magazine's rankings!

[Jonathan Cummings]

Pat - Here's a pure availability argument to your case.  In the recent years the annual ratio of courses restored to new courses opened was low.  We are seeing the opposite happen now.  With more restored courses "on the market" and less new courses being opened it stands to reason more restored courses will be available for consideration and re-evaluation on the ranking lists.  JC

[JakaB]

Pat,

I'm happy for your friends at Atlantic as their work seems to have been not for not....was that a restoration, renovation or evolution...and do you see any type of trend forming in that type of work...could it be a demodernization....

[TEPaul]

JakaB:

Your very question and the implication of it will smell like "Rees BIAS" to Pat Mucci. Is there any way you could get out the air freshener and spray it before Pat Mucci sees it and starts another multi page brouhaha against bias and favoritism? The fact that you may be a Fazio man does not make us safe from this kind of thing--you're talking about Rees Jones here and you have to be fairer than to just ask questions like that.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Shivas
Why are you bitching. Shoreacres is a damn good course, perhaps not top-30 but easily top-100. I know you love Medinah and are disapointed (#29 seems plenty high), but why take it out on poor Seth Raynor. By the time Medinah finishes its re-do it will make its move.

How does Medinah even qualify as a Classic course anyway, its been altered so many times shouldn't it be considered a Modern course?

The GW criteria: Ease and intimacy of the routing (SA's routing is world class), Inegrity of original design (another SA strength, Medinah=Modern list canidate), Natural setting/overall land plan (SA hard to beat), Interesting greens/surrounds (SA very good again), Variety and memorability par-3 (difficult to beat Raynor, #12***), par-4s (#11, #2, #4 and #10 all very good, lacks a couple long-4s), par-5s (not a strength, #1 and #18 occupy least intresting ground, #15 one of the best in the country), basic quality of condition (the condition doesn't get in the way of the architecture), landscape tree management (I understand Medinah was once treeless), walk in the park test (albeit subjective, SA is a damn good walk. Medinah a good ride?).

If you asked 10 experienced well-traveled architectural aficianados if they would rather play Medinah or Shoreacres, I'd guess the vote would go 8 to 2 in favor of SA (and that might be understated). Shouldn't the goal of these lists be to identify the best architecture, not which course is a better US Open venue.

Back to the original question. I think there is evidence that both renovation (remodeling) and restoration can help elevate a golf course. A mixed message.

[Tom Doak]

Shivas:  I don't agree with you at all about Shoreacres vs. Skokie.  Shoreacres is not just "another Raynor course."  It's a great piece of property full of ravines, and there are several great holes (4, 5, 11, 15) as a result of using those natural hazards.  Skokie has nothing like that.

Patrick:  Certainly all ratings are subject to the hype factor, and clubs which are in the middle of restoration work are hyping themselves far more than clubs which are leaving well enough alone.

Maybe I should list my consulting work as "renovations" like Rees Jones instead of keeping my name out of it ... we consult on ten of the top fifty classical courses, but it doesn't improve my score in the architect listings!

[Guest]

Tom Paul,

Based on your post, do you feel that Atlantic overcame several obstacles, including bias against Rees ?

Tom Doak,

Isn't there a difference between consulting and redesigning ?

[Tom Doak]

Yes, guest, there is.

We've done major work (rebuilding all the greens or the bunkers) at about seven of those ten courses I mentioned.  On a couple we've moved some things around, on the rest it's pretty much pure restoration work.  At a couple we've done very little, because little needed to be done.

Some architects who shall remain nameless simply recommend that every course rebuild all their bunkers ... they sell it as a restoration ... then they move the bunkers slightly closer to the greens or something, and they get credit for designing a top-100 course in GOLFWEEK.

I'm not campaigning for credit for my own work ... I think it's pretty lame trying to take credit for design work that has been in the ground for 75 years.  But whatever the standard is, it should be the same for everyone, and it's not.

[JakaB]

Shivas,

One of the things that just blows me away about the love of Shoreacres...Is how French Lick doesn't even make the top 5 public in Indiana....I think Shoreacres is high because of Raynor and then French Lick hosts a raters cup...and these guys have to turn in their reports to the guy who wrote the book on Donald Ross..and its gets dissed...it just doesn't add up....It almost defines the exclusion of bias...and I believe in bias as much as I believe in hatred and stupidity.   Where is the linear nature so common in unethical behavior...the only explanation for this random nature of results is insanity...Its out there..its beyond normal.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Dave/Shivas
Even if Raynor could have, getting a superficial view of the lake would not have been a big benefit in my book. Utilizing the most interesting land formations is what makes for good golf and an excellent routing. The course is confined to T shaped site, with the clubhouse at the bottom of the T nearest the lake. You can't see Lake Michigan at Crystal Downs (or least you couldn't when I last played it), I don't recall being disappointed in the routing as I looked out over the lake from the CD clubhouse.

There are homes (big homes) along the entire lakeshore at SA (and Crystal D.for that matter). Unless you know something I don't, it doesn't appear the lake was available for the golf course. With plenty of interesting land inland they made the right choice. Shoreacres is one of the most clever routings I've ever encountered--definitely world class. Now that I think of it I'm not aware of any old Chicago course that utilizes the lake - why is that?

I asked the question, should Medinah be considered a Classic or Modern course? Are you familar with the evolution of Medinah? Yes at the rate ANGC is removing MacKenzie and Jones's work it will be a canidate for the Modern list in no time.

Half the top 100 has undergone the remodeling that ANGC and Medinah have undergone? Are you sure?

"...what's the difference between multiple remodelings, and just one?  You're playing it TODAY, so all that matters is what you're playing NOW, not what somebody was playing 2 remodelings ago in 1972."

One of the main reasons GW created two lists was so that important classic architecture could be recognized and celebrated. One of the criteria is integrity of the original design. That criteria requires the raters do their homework, they must not only be well versed on the finer points of golf architecture, but they must know the history of the course. Seth Raynor was a great architect and SA was among is best efforts. SA ranking benefits not only from his design talents, but it also benfits from the club's preservation efforts. IMO GW's Classic ranking was designed to appeal to the afficiando.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

John C./JakaB
I'm not familar with French Lick...why is it so good? How does it compare to Broadmoor in Indy or Shoreacres for that matter?

[JakaB]

French Lick has a write up on this site you might want to look at....It has wide open fairways with famously fun original Donald Ross greens.  Its cheap and uncrowded.   It has history with a former PGA Championship won by I think Walter Hagen.   I am biased towards it now because I have spent too much time on this site and enjoy the historical significance of the greensites....the bunkers are crap...but I'm not a bunker guy...I can't walk it...but the friends I play the course with won't walk anything.   It has top 100 potential but top 5 public mojo...In my opinion it will always suffer financially so a restoration is out of the question....but I love the ability to study a pre-restoritive great...and it may be without peer in that group...Now that the work at Beverly is underway...Really if you ever come to visit...we would probably get along better with a round over there...its that kind of place.

[Guest125]

Guest/Mucci?

Bias against Rees in the rankings?  You must be kidding!
r u confusing gca.com and the rankings?  you can disagree but his courses are rated higher in the rankings than they should.  

[TEPaul]

redanman:

Let's see if you can "read in my post" what my AGENDA is?

So what is my AGENDA?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()