News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Updated top 100 lists
« on: February 10, 2003, 12:33:43 PM »
Does anybody have a clue when Golf Digest, or Golf Magazine, or whoever it is that publishes these things, will be coming out with a new one?  I think it is every two years, right?  But I'm not sure.  Is Friar's Head eligible?  Where does it fit?  Does Pac Dunes remain #11 in the U.S. or move up?  Is there any other good course that is going to get some run on these lists?  Is the situation with the greens at Muirfield or Riviera going to cause it to drop?  Does Sand Hills deserve to move up, better yet, will it???

Thoughts?  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

JDoyle

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2003, 12:56:30 PM »
The GM and GD rankings come out this year (2003).  I know that GM rankings comes out in their September issue.  Not sure what monthly issue for the GD rankings, but I think it is close to the same time.

IMHO, look for Sand Hills to rise considerably on the GD rankings.  GD tends to be more conservative in moving new courses up too quickly.  In their 2001-2002 rankings they had Sand Hills at #36.  I think with all the water cooler stories about the place the rising tide will lift in into the top 20.  Pacific Dunes will make its first apprearance this year.  Last time around only Bandon Dunes was ranked in the top 100 by GD; probably due to when the course opened.

I think Friar's Head should be ranked on both lists due to the design team being in vogue and because of the quality of the course.  I am only going by the high praise from friends who have played it.

GM currently has Sand Hills at #7....I do not think it will go any higher.

Fishers Island continues to move-up.  This is probably due to the renewed interest in Seth Raynor.  Also, the former Editor, George Pepper, was a big Fisher's fan.  It is currently at #18 with GM and #44 on GD.  Look for GD to put this course in the top 30.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Guest

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2003, 01:21:03 PM »
JDoyle,
Are you referring to Shadow Creek's slow ascent?  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

redanman

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2003, 01:24:48 PM »
GolfWeek, the one that really matters, will publish about mid march.  It comes out yearly in a special issue.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2003, 01:25:01 PM »
Mr. Doyle:

I'll believe it when I see it.

Sand Hills actually went DOWN as they increased the weighting on the arbitrary "tradition" category.  As a friend says, the design is about as traditional as they come.

G.D. used to be around Oct/Nov, but I think it was moved to the beginning of the year.

Golfweek is an annual.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Craig Claiborne

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2003, 01:42:41 PM »
Preposterous. Golfweek the only rankings that matter? They are, most certainly, the only rankings that don't matter. The scores make no sense, in the way that the scores on the categories have no affect on the overall score...and clearly Mr. Klein fudges the numbers, as was pointed out in a very entertaining thread a few months ago. And who cares when a course was built. There are some extremely classical courses that have been built in the last 15 years, yes?

At least Golf Digest has a very large, diverse group of panelists and they fully disclose their data. So, anybody who wants to can see how things come out if we discount tradition or any other criterion we don't find relevant.

And, lastly, GOLF magazine at least attempts to give us a picture of the whole world. At the end of the day, it is the most thought provoking of all the lists and probably best reflects the kind of sentiments often expressed on this site.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

redanman

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2003, 01:52:35 PM »
CC

Lighten up.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Mike Vegis @ Kiawah

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2003, 02:34:22 PM »
Golf Digest comes out mid-April in their May issue in every odd-numbered year.  Golf Magazine come out mid-August in their September issue in every odd-numbered year.  Golfweek comes out mid-March every year....  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Coral_Ridge

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2003, 02:42:13 PM »
When does the Golf Club Atlas list come out?  I'd like to see that one.  :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2003, 06:45:04 PM »
CC - I would love to debate you on your assessment of the GOLFWEEK rating panel.  I have studied, interviewed and written about the processes of all three magazines and find GOLFWEEK's approach, to a very subjective measurement, to be the most statistically defendable of the three.  You may not agree with the lists, but the numbers, training, screening, integrity and professionalism of the panel and Director are as honest as the day is long... (I'll cover my head now - JC)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

JohnH

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2003, 07:27:34 PM »
To each his own...... I pick GM because I subscribe.....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Jim Thomas

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2003, 10:13:02 PM »
Here is a related story that I saw on another CGA thread:

"Look for Nine Bridges in South Korea to make Golf Magazine's list of the top 100 courses in the world in the magazine's November issue.

Nine Bridges wants Golf Magazine panelists to visit, and it has arranged for us to fly first-class from the United States for only $300 per ticket.

I don't know much about the course yet, but is sounds very classy.  One of our panelists, Sunil Kappagodda, is putting a group together to visit Nine Bridges."  
 
 
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Golfweak

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2003, 10:23:12 PM »
Rumors persist that Golfweek panelists are frequently asked to adjust their scores after submitting their votes.

Who starts these rumors? Why, the perplexed panelists who don't understand why their votes are questioned.

Weak!!!!!!!!


« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

A_Clay_Man

Re: Updated top 100 lists
« Reply #13 on: February 11, 2003, 06:23:04 AM »
What I find weak is the addition of criterior that is outside the ropes, so to speak.

To me, OB is not part of the course and anything that is outside the confines of said course is nothing but fodder for the feel goods.

Oh yeah anonomous posters who spread BS is the weakest.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up