Kudos to Digest in dropping the bonus "tradition" category. Sometimes the waters of change can even penetrate the concrete heads of those who denied the obvious that such an inclusion was never really related to the core elements that are being evaluated -- the actual design of the courses in question.
Losing Bellerive, Point O'Woods & Salem is no big deal and a good move on the part of the raters IMHO. Dropping Desert Forest was a major omission. All of the above courses had been on the listing since 1966. Losing Wannamoisett is also a major shortcoming.
Interesting that Friar's Head is not on the listing -- likely because the total number of raters playing there was too small a sampling of what's required.
Couple of quick questions ...
Even though Sand Hills is now #12 -- a major jump up indeed from two years ago -- I still believe it's a worthy addition to the top ten.
How does Shadow Creek merit a top 20 position ?
Baltusrol / Lower is still among the top 40 courses in the USA. Really ?
One other thing -- there is no way in hell that Rich Harvest Links belongs in the top 45. It is a well conditioned layout with some interesting holes and playing angles -- but within the top 50 in America ? I mean they even have holes with silly artifical turf and trees falling over one another on a number of holes.
I salute Digest for including a top 100 public but I can't fathom how Paa-Ko Ridge -- the superb Ken Dye layout in NM is rated among the top 30 but Black Mesa -- the equally superb Baxter Spann layout just outside of Santa Fe is not even listed. I mean what gives
I even see Twin Warriors being listed among the top 50 public courses.
Can someone explain how Edgewood Tahoe and Olde Stonewall (the Pittsburgh area layout) are BOTH rated among the top 60 public courses? Please help me stop laughing ...
Let the discussion begin in earnest ...