For those that have played it, where would you rank it on the scale? (copied from a thread I found while searching...)
0: So contrived and unnatural, cannot recommend under any circumstances.
1: Very basic course; clear architectural malpractice and/or
poor maintenance. Avoid even if desperate for a game.
2: Mediocre course with little architectural interest, but nothing really horrible. (Play it in a scramble and drink a lot of beer).
3: About the level of the avg. course in the world.
4: Modestly interesting; with at least a couple of distinctive holes or some scenic interest. Also reserved for some very good courses which are much too short or narrow to provide sufficient challenge for low-handicappers.
5: Well above the avg. course, but the middle of this scale. A good course if in the vicinity, but not worth setting aside a day to visit.
6: A very good course, definitely worth a game, but not necessarily worth a special trip to see. It shouldn't disappoint you.
7: An excellent course, worth checking out if within 50-100 miles. You can expect sound design; interesting holes; good conditions and a pretty setting; if not necessarily anything unique to the world of golf.
8: One of the very best in the region and worth a special trip to see. Could have some drawbacks, but will make up for them with something really special.
9: Outstanding course. One of the best in the world with no weaknesses. Should see in your lifetime.
10: Nearly perfect. If you skipped even one hole you would miss something worth seeing. MUST see these courses to appreciate how good golf architecture can get.