[Brian_Gracely]

...you become a rater?

You hear all the talk about how professional golfers lives change after they win a tournament, or really change after they win a major.  But how about the day you get the call to become a rater?  

How did anyone become a rater before places like GCA let you show off your architectural knowledge?  Was it strictly word of mouth, or were there other gathering places?  Do you essentially stay a rater for life, or do they evaluate your ability to rate and bring in new blood from time to time?  

At what point do you move from the philosophy of "it'll probably never happen, but someday it would be neat to play that course, if I knew anybody, or a friend knew somebody", to the rater mentality of "I'm looking forward to playing there....soon" (even before the course has any members).  

And are there levels of raters?  After you do it a while, can you achieve Uber-Rater status, where you can basically play anywhere (including Augusta, Seminole, CPC, etc.) or are some places still just on a know-the-member-directly basis?  

I'm curious how the system works.  I don't care if anyone plays for free or any of that junk, but I'm curious how it plays out as part of the marketing aspects of a golf course / golf club.  Does it only seem to benefit the highest-end clubs (ie. Top 20, 100, etc.), or do the little guys ever get a bump from rater-word-of-mouth?  Any good examples of this?    

[Ian Andrew]

I have seen enough bad ones to hold my opinion, but there are many that care, so my comments were unfair and I have removed them.

[mike_beene]

I don't get this bashing.Hopefully it is a joke I'm missing.Otherwise that's a pretty general criticism against a group of people.

[Mike_Cirba]

Do we really need another rater-bashing, rater-envy thread?  

It really does get insulting.  I think most of us here, whether raters or not, just want to discuss golf courses and architecture and have some fun social discourse and conversation with others who share our passion.

I've spent way more money on golf since becoming a rater, but that's fine...it's a privilege and I treat it as one.  So do most of the raters I know.

 

[Gib_Papazian]

Mike,
Good point. I have erased my spew.

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

... it's a privilege and I treat it as one.  So do most of the raters I know.

I couldn't agree more, Mike.  I have never taken the position for granted for a single day.

I find the toughest part of the position is finding time to play all the new courses I am assigned.  We (GD) normally get our assignments in late May and have to get them in by August 15th.  It sounds like plenty of time, but I can't play during the week due to my work schedule and finding 5 or 6 open days on the weekends during the summer keeps getting tougher and tougher.  In addition, that also assumes that the clubs can fit me in for a round on the weekend during their peak season.  However, I make it a rule to play all the assigned new courses first before I contact any other clubs.

[Sean_A]

My impression of Brian's thread was that he was sincere in wanting information about rating.  I must confess that I too am curious.  I am not interested in who pays/plays what etc.  Just general info on how the system works.

Ciao

Sean

[Brian_Gracely]

Correct Sean, I was not trying to create a bashing session.  Since rating seems to be one of the Top 3 things discussed on this board, I was curious about the system and I figured I'd ask the guys that do it.  

This is definitely not about envy or "free access".  Everybody knows the raters play for free and every part of life has some people that have better connections than other...big deal.  

Maybe I don't really care to hear from the guys that grew up in the country club scene because they seem to have had access to great golf their whole life.  But what about the guys that grew up on dirt floors and played their childhood golf with a tree branch and a pinecone?  How did they get chosen for the assignment if the best they played was Dirt Road Muni and maybe only saw Merion on TV during the 1981 US Open?  

Was it always about evaluating architecture, or was it initially about playing great golf courses that you never imagined you'd get to play?  Or was it about being a decent player and trying to compare your game to great players from the past?  Or were you always just someone that liked to make lists and compare things?  

[Jim Nugent]

My impression of Brian's thread was that he was sincere in wanting information about rating.  I must confess that I too am curious.  I am not interested in who pays/plays what etc.  Just general info on how the system works.

Ciao

Sean

I´m curious too.  Who appoints the raters?  What kind of resume do you need?  How many courses does a rater rate each year, and who decides which ones?

[Andy Doyle]

There's obviously a lot of dispute on this site about rating courses for various lists and publications.

What about rating courses for the USGA Course and Slope Rating System?  Does anyone on here do this type of rating?

I understand that it is conducted under the auspices of the state golf associations.  I would be interested in hearing about people's experience with this type of rating.

AD

Sandbox - if this is a threadjack, I'll be happy to move it to it's own thread.

[THuckaby2]

Brian:

As is so often the case, redanman is 100% right on, and very astute at that.  It surely does depend on the individual - where he comes from, how he treated things before becoming a rater, how he comports himself, etc.

In the end, it's one of the more "over-rated" jobs one can have, pun intended.  Those who don't do it are the ones who see it as a magic card or whatever.

Now Andy brings up a GREAT question.  The far more honorable part of this is doing the legwork to determine course rating and slope.  Yes, that is done under the auspices of the local golf association, under rules promulgated by the USGA.  It is actually a good bit of work, at least 90% objective with very little personal judgment involved, and one does go to all variety of courses, not just the good ones (if he has a conscience, anyway).

Hmmmm... sounds like the other type of rating in that respect.

 

TH

ps, yes, I do both.  There are a couple others who do so as well.  John VanderBorght would be the "uber-rater" when it comes to this form...

[Andy Doyle]

Thanks, Tom.

Rating for course rating and slope does seem to be a lot of work, but it also seems like a great way to get the opportunity to really study a course (while also providing a needed service).  With all the new courses opening, course renovations, and periodic re-ratings I guess you would wind up seeing a lot of courses you wouldn't be particularly interested in, but sounds interesting.

My interest was sparked by an article I read about a guy now living in south Florida, I think, that had rated some unbelievable number of courses (something like 1,000).

AD

[THuckaby2]

That guy in Florida must do it full-time for several associations or has been doing it a LONG time.. Here in NorCal, we'll have only maybe 75 total courses rated each season (April-October)....

And most of us do 10 or so per season - some do more - the retired guys.    So it's not like it's a LOT of work.. and hell in the end it is golf - yes we do get to play the courses either before or after the rating... so don't get me wrong, I was just playing the violin a little as compared to the magazine rating.

 

But yes, it is a very good way to see a course... or at least the holes you do the rating for (generally you break into three or four-man teams and concentrate on 4-5 holes).  You do look at things quite in-depth.

In the end it is a lot of fun, I think.

TH

[Bob_Huntley]

Andy,

If truth be known, I believe that Tom Huckaby's work with the Northern California Golf Association's course rating program allocates them one or two specific holes with which to work on.


They probably play all eighteen, but do not examine the other holes with the intensity demanded of their allotted task.

Tom H., come in here and correct me if I am wrong.

Bob

[Brian_Gracely]

Bob,

Are you implying that Huckaby is often assigned Hole #1, which he views from the tee-box, and then focuses the rest of his time on Hole #19?  

[THuckaby2]

Bob - you have it generally correct - and that's what I was getting at in my last post.

The way it works is that depending on the size of the course and the number of tees to be rated (note only tees 25 yards apart get separate ratings, and we don't do far forward tees unless asked - the ladies golf association does those), one ends up doing 4-5 holes, meaning maybe 7-8 tees.

It all can change on courses with multiple tees, and there are different ways to handle it, but without getting too much into the detail, at most ratings you do break into a small team of 3-4 guys, and you do rating data for 4-5 different holes.

You then do get to play the entire course.  

One final note:  certain special courses are alloted by seniority; that is, reserved for the rating captains, the gents who arrange the outings, do most of the measuring, and do a lot more work.

A certain Mike Strantz course in Monterey got that honor last year... another one quite popular with tourists, up the road, is this year's site....

So boo-hoo for us rank and file.

 

[THuckaby2]

Bob,

Are you implying that Huckaby is often assigned Hole #1, which he views from the tee-box, and then focuses the rest of his time on Hole #19?  

At some places that is tempting.  And some of the captains do expect that out of me.  But I have yet to follow through on it....

 

[Andy Doyle]

That guy in Florida must do it full-time for several associations or has been doing it a LONG time.

Both I think.  I'll try to find the article.  I think he started out in the midwest somewhere and rated courses for many years.  After retirement he moved to Florida and has spent even more time rating.

Thanks for the insight.

AD

[THuckaby2]

No problem, Andy.

We have a few in NCGA who do darn near every rating each year... I wouldn't be surprised at all if a few of these guys aren't well over 500 in their total.  It is a nice way to spend a day.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()