Doak Scale

[T_MacWood]

Matt
Its not important what we agree or disagee upon, I'm simply interested in discovering the mindset of the typical GWorld panelist. We agree aprox 60% of the time, just maybe not on this particular subject. We do agree about the merits of Skokie, and no I haven't seen the course post-Pritchard, we agree that Shoreacres might be over valued, but that's no knock. I think there is far too much emphasis placed on whether a course is top 100 or not, there are plenty of wonderful courses that are not top 100, courses that are every bit as interesting, inspiring and worthy of study. As an example look at the courses profiled on this site.

[Pete Adams]

matt: I agree that at Rich Havest the trees in the drive zone on 13 are fine and that a widening of the tee area is all that is needed to make it a fabulous hole. As far as 14 is concerned we played the tees Jerry wanted us to. I think however that even for Tiger a par 3 210 all carry over water to green 7 paces deep with no bail out long is too penal. Matt this new tee brings you in from a completely different angle than where you played it, so there is much less green to work with. Overall I think Rich Harvest is a good & interesting course. But untill changes are made, both the ones I described earlier and other ones, it will remain mostly just interesting, not great. Just my opinion.

[Matt_Ward]

Tom:

Hey, I thought we agreed upon 80% of
things -- I guess the number is dropping with each one of my posts!

Glad to see you like Skokie -- if you can get back there and see the post-Pritchard effort I think you'll really like it.

FYI -- I rate for GD not GW.

My comments were never intended to be a "knock" on Shoreacreas, but just a recognition that there are a number of dull holes within a layout that does offer quality holes. In my mine courses with a series of ordinary holes don't merit inclusion at the highest of levels. Shoreacreas is a must for Raynor fans, but it's more of a stylistic aspect that influences people who flavor that [articular form of design and sometimes look beyond any shortcomings that are clearly present.

Tom, with all due respect, I do agree that there are courses that are worthy of study and are clearly dynamic in so many ways and whether they are rated or not rated is not that important.

Trust me Tom, I do value a wide range of courses. There are many of them in my neck of the woods and across the country that I believe have so many fine elements. I do rate for GD and inclusion into the top 100 (as repugnant as that may be to some people) is part of what I do as a rater for that magazine. I can name a host of courses that I favor that are not long but strategic and classic in their design (to wit in NJ -- Hollywood, Forsgate / Banks Course, Somerset Hills, The Knoll, Atlantic City CC, etc, etc). In my mind each of the aforementioned courses is equal or better than Shoreacreas.

Pete:

You're absolutely right about Rich Harvest Links. Until the modifications are made, at least to a few of the holes in question, it's doubtful the course will be seen in a positive light by many people.

Jerry Rich did a solid job for a first time layout design. I just hope people who look at the course do not go off big time in underrating the many fine aspects of so many holes. But, we all know, that courses are often judged by what is "missing" rather than what is "present."

Just a humble opinion ...

P.S. Tom, you never mentioned if you had played a Rees Jones course that you liked. I guess your non-answer indicates there is no such course in your mind.