Golf Course Rankings

[Anthony_Nysse]

While driving to Greenville, SC today, I had plenty of time to think on the road. With Golfweek's new rankings and Golf Digest's set to come out in the May issue, I wonder how important rankings have become.
  Have Mr. Klein's Golfweek and Mr. Whitten's Golf Digest ranking become too powerful? Meaning, we've all read stories about how an owner wants a "Top 100" course or a "Top 10 Best New" course which will help with any sort of marketing in gaining golfers, whether it's a private course or a resort/public. If a new course has those lofty expectations and the raters view the course differently than what the owner(s) intent is, how much does this affect the early success of a golf course? Does the course have to stay open to the public longer to build a membership? Are real estate sales less than projected? Are golfers less likely to drive out of their way to play? Just how important are rankings to the success of new golf courses when the judging is left up to raters?

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[Adrian_Stiff]

Tony- I think the answer is they are important but there are other factors that can over-ride. A lot of courses that dont make a countrys top 100 are modern corporate types that hold PGA events, because they are on TV and the facilities are good these courses do well financially/ number of rounds. In the UK the top 100 courses are primarily made up of old fashioned courses with history and some actually are happy not to have golf or are in remote positions. Taking a more general opinion of ALL golfers, features such as Lakes, striped fairways and pretty planting would get the votes over the more natural features that people from this site and the 'raters' prefer. Good art and beauty are subjective opinions whilst an objective measure of success for a new golf course could be how often the till is ringing.

[Tom_Doak]

Tony:

Personally, I think there are so many different rankings that they are starting to become meaningless.  If Mr. Trump can legitimately claim his course is #1 in California, what difference does it make where Pebble Beach and Pasatiempo are ranked?  (Even noting that the latter two both pay excessive attention to the rankings.)

I can personally attest to the fact that one's design fees can go up significantly as a result of a handful of good rankings ... or maybe they just empowered me to ask for more when the clients would always have paid.

[Garland Bayley]

One good effect of rankings is that my club gets members from other clubs when those members tolerance for the endless pursuit of rankings reaches the limit.
 

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm not sure if we can quantify the effects of the ratings on private clubs.  I do know that some public courses that do well in the best new category have raised their greens fees appreciably.

[Paul Richards]

>> If Mr. Trump can legitimately claim his course is #1 in California

Tom

(to paraphrase Wayne's World with Madonna)



And monkeys might fly outta my arse!!

[John Kavanaugh]

A ranker asking how important rankings are...interesting.  Do this experiment.  Consider Ballyneal...A great course with great owners on a great piece of land designed by a great architect with already quite a few great members.  A couple card carry raters from each magazine go out and bash the course with low scores...The question is does this change your desire to play the course or become a member yourself.  If you think yes then the rankings matter...If no then they don't.