The Kingsley Club / Digest review

[Matt_Ward]

I read with much interest the review by Ron Whitten on GolfDigest.com regarding The Kingsley Club. To paraphrase Ron -- he had the most fun in playing TKC among all the courses he played in '02.

I completely concur and am a big time fan of the course.

My question is how did the astute GD panel develeop amnesia and the course didn't even make the top ten listing for Best New Courses for '02?

I'm still scratching my head over that one.

P.S. I do concur with Ron -- the course will no doubt be a serious contender for top 100 consideration by GD, and, in my opinion, is within my top 100 courses now.

[brad_miller]

"The only thing it lacked was a water hazard" Great review with this comment aside. Now maybe Ron will look into why this great track hasn't made any of the GD lists.

Ron, would you have really included a man made
 water hazard on this property?

[Mark_Fine]

Matt,
I didn't get to this one but it is on my play list for 03.  So many courses, so little time.  
Mark

[NAF]

The Kingsley Club was certainly the best new course I played in 2002 and I had a wonderful experience there.  I don't think the course has any deficiencies because it doesnt have a water hazard.  What is has is amazing bunkering, a great routing, some lovely vistas and challenging greens.

Lets put it this way, I saw Crystal Downs on the same trip and I rather play the KC on a daily basis.  I definitely would rate it as top 100 in the World besides the GD list..It is that good.

[Mike_DeVries]

Thanks for the heads up on the review -- I hadn't seen it until someone e-mailed me about it.  And thanks for the fine compliments on the course -- I am glad that you are enjoying Kingsley.

As an update on the activities at the club, this spring they are planning to build a couple cottages -- these will be 4-bedroom (8 queen beds) units with an efficiency kitchen, large common living room, and porches.  They will be located on the ridge in the trees above the 18th hole.  

Kingsley will also be hosting the Hickory Open (open, scratch, stroke-play event with pre-1935 hickory clubs) on June 27-28, so anyone interested in that can get information at the Kingsley Club website (probably by Feb.).

Thanks again,

Mike

[Dan Kelly]

WARNING! Totally baseless speculation ahead!

Casting no aspersions whatsoever:

This review, coming at this time, has the scent of what's known, in lesser games such as football and basketball and hockey, as a "make-up call" -- when the officials call a foul or assess a penalty to make up for a tardily recognized bad call against the other team.

Speculation: The GD panel blew it -- and Mr. Whitten is trying to make up for that. More power to him, from what you guys are saying!

(I'll save you the hunt. Here's the link: http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/kingsley.html )

[Scott_Burroughs]

Dan,

I think you're onto something.  Let's see, the course isn't good enough for Top 10 Best New Private in one year, but is good enough for perahps Top 100 in the nation, any type?  Hmmmm....

According to Matt Ward (I think), supposedly TKC had enough raters see it to qualify.  How does it not make Top 10 BNP but Top 100 overall, since the same ratings method determine both Best New and Top 100?  Will the 10 BNP from last year all be Top 100 material?

[Matt_Ward]

Scott:

What Ron Whitten suggested is that he believed the course to be a contender for such possible inclusion into GD's top 100. Your other point is a fair one -- how does the group that MISSED The Kingsley Club for "best new" private then automatically GET IT for consideration for other categories?

Dan hit the nail big time -- this is classic make-up stuff. Before my head was summarily cut-off by parties left best unsaid I knew that TKC was considered for two consecutive years for "best new private." Amazing that a "new" course can be rated "new" even after there was enough panelists to rate it in the first go round. In neither case (2001 or 2002) did the course even crack the top ten -- which is a major league omission for such an esteemed assemblage of people on the GD panel. This is the same group that voted Arcadia Bluffs as the #2 best new upscale club in 2001, however, for some reason must have balked in giving TKC the kind of ratings score it most certainly deserves. I guess they missed going to the course since it's no more than 20-30 minutes away.

I salute Ron for being able to highlight the qualities of TKC but Dan is so right. Just because you get it right later on doesn't square the record of what was done initially. I will find it most interesting when a course that doesn't even rank among the top ten best new private actually climbs into the 100 Greatest. That would be something of a unique precedent because in most instances, that I am aware -- only a few courses THAT HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED as "best new" at the very top of their respective catgeories have actually had the wherewithal to take a position among the 100 Greatest.

In my mind, the course is already there and I will say this with no hint of being bashful -- if you miss TKC when in Northern Michigan and sample only the Downs and Arcadia you will be missing a big time layout of distinction.

Kudos to Mike DeVries and the entire team at TKC.  

[guest]

Maybe a few more heads will be cut off, those that played it as GD panalists but gave it poor scores

[Mike_Cirba]

guest;

Well, that's probably really the problem, wouldn't you think?

Not to individually disparage any of the 900 or so raters GD uses (some of whom are good friends), I have to wonder when Rees Jones's Briars Creek (which I haven't played, but people that I respect who have called it simply a "good course") gets Best New Private, while a course like TKC (which I hope to play this year, but which has been universally HAILED by people whose opinions I highly respect) doesn't make the Top 10.  

You have to wonder what they're basing it on?

Briars Creek









Kingsley Club

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

The pictures could not have said it any better.

Case closed.

P.S. When you eventually do get to play the course I'd be VERY much interested in your comments. Let me also mention that The Kingsley Club has faced snubbs by other major golf publications as well.

I also know some panelists who prefer TKC to playing the Downs but that's a debate that one should have over drinks at the 19th hole and not GCA.

Mike, I have not played Briar's Creek yet (hope to this year), but just like you said I also know people who have played it and have echoed the same sentiments. It is a very good course and worthy of a high position in the best new category, however, not at the level of TKC.

I'll say this again for those who care -- if you're a rater it's incumbent to find those unique layouts. TKC is a major league design and in my mind has the right stuff to be put int he same league with the rare number of other outstanding "new" courses that have opened in the last 10-15 years.

GD blew it big time -- just like the refs that ate the whistle during the Giants / Frisco game last Sunday on the phatom pass interference call.

[guest]

Mr. Cirba, where those pictures of Rees Jones's --The Bridge?

[Joel_Stewart]

I happened to speak with Ron briefly the other day and we spoke about Kingsley.  He was/is surprised as anyone that it didn't make the top 10 for best new.  I haven't played it (TKC)but was surprised Whisper Rock in Arizona didn't make the list.  He did mention that the voting (as well as the top 100 list) is extremely close often only .01 points away from each other.  I'm not sure if this is good or bad but like the Bush-Gore voting in Florida, every vote seems to be more important.

[Tyler Kearns]

After perusing through the Kingsley Club website, which features a plentiful supply of fantastic images, it is astounding that this course didn't register itself upon the Top 10 lists of 2001. The bunekring is phenomenal, and the holes appear to fit the land very nicely. The routing is quite strong, with no holes appearing forced onto the awkwardly shaped property, and the direction of the holes constantly changing. It looks great, and I can only hope to play there on day!!

Tyler Kearns

[nels]

"The only thing it lacked was a water hazard" Great review with this comment aside. Now maybe Ron will look into why this great track hasn't made any of the GD lists.

Ron, would you have really included a man made
 water hazard on this property?

As a Californian, I have been lucky enough to play the Kingsley Club five times now, twice with Mike DeVries.  Until now I didn't even realize it didn't have a water hazard.  I guess the bunkering and the routing of especially the front side, which had to be a difficult piece of land to deal with took most of my attention and appreciation.  
For Mike I hope it makes the top 100, but the list is not always a godsend for the club.  The Downs is not happy for the day that Crenshaw missed the cut in Detroit and played it for the first time, resulting in their #5 rating the following year.
nels

[Dan Pohl]

course looks interesting, great pics.... but has anyone played this course and the courses at the National Golf Club near Melbourne?

If you take a look at the driving line on the opening hole of both the Kingsley Club and the Ocean course at the National you will notice a remarkable similarity - ie the split fairway with a series of bunkers in the middle of a lower left side and higher right side. The fairway shaping and bunker positioning is the spitting image of National Ocean 1st.

Aussies who read this and have played the Ocean course have a look at the web site photo album, the similarity is incredible.
http://www.kingsleyclub.com/ or the GCA review at http://www.golfclubatlas.com/kingsley1.html

For your interest the Ocean course is a links style course which opened in 2000 to largely disappointing reviews considering the incredible site TWP were given. The first hole (Par 5) offers wonderful views of the Mornington Peninsula and Bass Strait but unfortunately features a raised green with a false front that doesn't accomodate the long running shot as it should for a hole of its length. From the look of the course tour on this clubs web site, Mr DeVries has done a wonderful job routing this course to incorporate the sites most interesting undulation, the greens look fantastic.

I'm certainly not suggesting anything untoward as far as either architect is concerned, as I know the split fairway idea has been tried (successfully too) at plenty of other courses, but no where else have I seen similarities so stark.

Has anyone else on this site played the National Ocean?

[Tom Doak]

Nels:  your information isn't completely accurate.  I played with Ben Crenshaw the first time he came up to Crystal Downs, on Thursday of the Buick Open in 1986 after his morning round there.  He went back down to Flint that night, shot 18 under par, and won the tournament that week.

I remember when High Pointe and then Stonewall were both completely overlooked in the GOLF DIGEST Best New awards, I wasn't too pleased.  But High Pointe, even when it was in good shape, always had its detractors among panelists with the GOLF DIGEST definition burned into their mind, and I'm sure Kingsley had a couple as well.  It's difficult, and it's certainly not always fair.  When you're only dealing with 10-12 votes, a couple of people really disliking the course will knock it right out of the top ten.

My instinct is that the course should have made the top ten new private courses, but then again I haven't seen the ten which beat it.  To think it will go from "overlooked" to the top 100 is a bit naive -- the top 100 is a damn sight stronger competition, and the same panelists who voted against it the first time still count.

[THuckaby2]

When you're only dealing with 10-12 votes, a couple of people really disliking the course will knock it right out of the top ten.

TD is right on here, as per usual.  The voting is so damn close and yep, when you're talking a pretty small number of people submitting ratings on any course, it truly only does take only a very few "poor" ratings to skew things.  I have no idea how the voting went and I've never been to TKC - I just wanted to say that to me TD's statement there speaks volumes.

I also can't see how a course that didn't make top 10 best new private DOES make top 100 in the country... the exact same rating data is used... that would assume every course above TKC also makes the top 100, and that to me seems hard to believe.

But we'll see...

TH

[bakerg (Guest)]

Does anyone know how tough it is to get on Kinsley?  Will a call from your club pro do the trick or do you have to know a member?  It looks like a fun way to spend a day.  

[Scott_Burroughs]

Huck,

About the courses above it being Top 100, etc., I couldn't have said it better mysel....er I did above already!    

[THuckaby2]

Whoops!  Sorry about that, Scott.  Well, great minds think alike, you know...  

TH

[Matt_Ward]

I don't doubt the logic put forward by Tom Doak but after having served as a GD panelist for 17 years it boggles the mind that such a superb layout like TKC is completely overlooked. I'm not talking about winning "Best New Private" but not even a top ten finish

Good panelists can ascertain through a wide variety of sources which courses are really "hot" for the coming season. In doing my evaluations when I rated for GD I made it a point to do my homework before venturing out the door in Clifton, NJ.

The botton line is this -- when you have too may people parading around as "panelists" it's quite likely a situation like TKC will happen again and again. Very few panelists have the wherewithal to do the kind of cross comparisons that are needed. Many of these people congregate in their own area of the country and its' a tiny fraction of people who really do go the extra mile. In rating evaluations you often get numbers from person "X' being completely independent of "person "Y' who plays a completely different course. How people even suggest numbers is at best difficult because the standards these myriad of people use is nearly impossible to figure.

I've suggested to the powers-that-be that GD return to a national rating panel and still have a regional panel. Those on the national panel would be individuals who DO criss-cross the country and are able to do the cross comparisons that are clearly needed in order to provide a sane reference point.

TKC is superb golf -- as I said before anyone treking to the upper reaches of Michigan and simply plays the Downs and Arcadia will be missing a course of tour de force distinction. The 1st hole starts in and fashion and it just from there -- one fascinating hole after another.

All the excuses can be put forward by the apologists for GD but the simple fact remains -- TKC was left out and I've played no less than 7 best new private from the 2001 list and 5 from the 2002 list and TKC is as far ahead of them as a Tiger tee shot is ahead of one from Corey Pavin!

P.S. By the way -- yes, I know how high the bar is for top 100 consideration and in my personal listing TKC is already there. It's unfortunate that some of these "raters" who went to TKC have so little understanding on quality golf arcitecture as Ron Whitten most certainly does in the review he gave the course.

[THuckaby2]

Matt:

You've made this point many times here at gca:

"The botton line is this -- when you have too may people parading around as "panelists" it's quite likely a situation like TKC will happen again and again. Very few panelists have the wherewithal to do the kind of cross comparisons that are needed. Many of these people congregate in their own area of the country and its' a tiny fraction of people who really do go the extra mile. In rating evaluations you often get numbers from person "X' being completely independent of "person "Y' who plays a completely different course. How people even suggest numbers is at best difficult because the standards these myriad of people use is nearly impossible to figure."


We believe you - that's a problem - it's not one that's ever going to be solved, as we've discussed ad nauseam, but it is a problem.  Agreed.

But couldn't an equally valid explanation re what happened with TKC be that only 10-12 panelists got to it, and 2 of them disliked the course, for whatever reason?  That's all it would take to put it outside the top 10, as TD states and you well know...

Isn't it also possible that these two just have different tastes than you?  Is it truly fair to assume that every single rater will rate TKC high enough to put it where you think it belongs?

Again, I've never been there.  From all pictures and accounts I'd guess that it did get screwed.

But there are many ways to look at golf courses, aren't there?

TH

[Buck Wolter]

While I'm sure TKC would like the 'Best New Private' moniker I think it's nice that maybe it will be kept quiet by not receiving the accolades that will drive people who won't appreciate it to make the trek. As someone who spends some time in the Traverse City area every summer I'm glad I won't have to try to fight a bunch of list junkies in trying to arrange a round.

Maybe they need a new Category -- 'Best New Private without Waterfalls' to go with the 2 categories on the Public side.

I would be interested in hearing how people think TKC compares to Arcadia Bluffs (A course that I think is as fun as Whitten thinks TKC is).

Tom Doak- Any chance you'll be active in the TC area in the near future?

[Dan Kelly]

Some wag said (or so it's been reported!) that a zebra is a horse designed by a committee.

I would add: or by a panel.

One of these magazines should do this rankings deal right, if they're going to keep doing it: Hire (yes, hire) a VERY SMALL (the smallest practicable to do the job) staff of people with an eye for architecture and the capacity to express their preferences, and send them out across the countryside in search of the Best, New; Best, Old; Best, Period.

Such a system will surely produce more-flavorful criticism (like it or not) than any system of criticism amalgamating the opinions of dozens and dozens (hundreds?) of more-or-less nameless, faceless, unaccountable "panelists."