TEPaul,
The issue isn't about Seminole's reputation or hype, it's about Seminole's rating/ranking.
The ratings/rankings follow a precise categorized format and the evaluative process addresses each of those specific categories, arriving at a numeric indicator, the results of which are based on the cummulative tally of the component analyses.
This isn't a subjective issue of someone randomly hyping Seminole, or Seminole's reputation, it's about Seminole's placement on the rating/ranking scale based on an evaluative process that's pretty detailed in its structure and precise in its calculation.
Let Coorshaw go for a week, he needs a break.
Wow! A few questions for you Patrick.
So, ratings/rankings are not about reputation and hype? They're about a precise, dispassionate evaluation of some categories of things related to golf courses?
Are all the rating processes of equal precision and accuracy in your opinion?
For your favourite, how is the evaluative process in each category normalized across the raters? Is there a precise analytic measuring scheme to ensure precision of rating the individual categories?
You're assuring us that there is no subjectivity in any rater's evaluation of any category?
Could you describe how the evaluative process is precise in it's calculation? Do you mean the adding up of the scores in the categories? Doesn't rating/ranking mean by definition categorizing things relative to others, as opposed to precise calculation?
Which rating scheme do you like best? Golf Digest? Golfweek? Golf? Is it the most precise? Is it accurate? What do precise and accurate mean to you in this context?
Since Golfwwek rates Seminole #15 and GD rates it #10, does that mean that the GD raters have over-rated it? Or did they under-rate CPC by rating it #4 relative to the Golfweek raters #1? Are the Golf raters the most clever because they came down the middle between the other two?
Are the existing raters on all the panels better qualified than the unknown friend of Michael's? How do you know?