[Michael Dugger]

there is only room for so many courses by any designer in the top 100, and Ross and Tillinghast and MacKenzie still deserve more spots than me or Bill Coore.  

Why?  Says who?  

I appreciate how you show respect to the old timers, but I don't know if I agree.

(but then again I haven't played diddly so I know nothing)

What about Strantz?  What about Gil?  

Isn't there room in there for these two?

[Andy Troeger]

Just for fun...out of Michael's 43 using only the ones I've played...

Enthusiastic YES
Kingsley Club-Mike Devries
Colorado GC-Coore & Crenshaw
Paa-Ko Ridge--Ken Dye

Not quite as enthusiastic and have not played enough of the list to be sure, but I'd certainly give these three a long look.
Lakota Canyon-Jim Engh
Lost Dunes-Tom Doak
Black Mesa-Baxter Spahn

Would make top 200 but not 100.
We Ko Pa Saguaro-Coore & Crenshaw
Arcadia Bluffs--William Henderson

Since I'm adding to the list, I would take out World Woods Pine Barrens, Double Eagle, and Desert Forest for the first three. Just my take, for what its worth.

[Michael Dugger]

Andy,

My golfing circle RAVES about Arcadia Bluffs.  

But no top 100 run from you.  How come?

[Tom_Doak]

Actually, I had no idea that you hadn't been to any of those courses, but it does explain why your ability to count (and to give many ranked courses their due) is impaired.

Friars Head was ranked much lower last time, and has deservedly moved up the list.  I hope that Sebonack shows the same resilience, but only time will tell.  Overall, I certainly can't complain about the position of my courses on the list.

As for individual designers deserving to have a spot on the list -- they only deserve it when one of their courses is deserving.  It's not about the designer, it's about the project.  I haven't seen Gil's best course, so I can't say if it's there or not.  I have seen Tobacco Road and Royal New Kent and Monterey Peninsula CC, and I didn't vote for any of those, even though I deeply respect Mike Strantz's work for its originality.

Maybe Bill Coore or I will wind up with as many courses on the list as MacKenzie or Ross by the time we're done; but as long as we still have a few more years to catch them, people are waiting to see whether the next course we do will be even better than the last, and cause it to be seen in a different light.  That's only fair.  Years ago High Pointe looked like a terrific candidate and a unique individual course -- today it wouldn't get a vote because my more recent work has eclipsed it.

[Phil_the_Author]

Michael, you quoted Tom_Doak, "there is only room for so many courses by any designer in the top 100, and Ross and Tillinghast and MacKenzie still deserve more spots than me or Bill Coore..."

And then asked "Why?  Says who?"

In Tom's case he has stated quite clearly why in a number of publications ranging from the Confidential Guide to individual magazine articles.

As far as the others who comprise the "Says who?" portion of your question, go back to the GOLF website and look up the list of those who are on the rating committee. They are the "Who."  

Since by your own words you have played very few of the courses listed and the ones you and none of the courses you are suggesting to replace many with, honestly, how can your view be given much credence?

I love golf photographs also, but they rarely convey a full sense of a hole or course. Many times features that you notice in a picture are not noticed on the course. A good example of this are trees.

In other cases, many times there are features that don't immediately jump out to someone looking at a photograph and really do when one is on the course. Again, a great example of this, quite ironically, are trees.

Trust those who play rather than what a single angle shown by a photograph shows.

[Michael Dugger]

I have seen Tobacco Road and Royal New Kent and Monterey Peninsula CC, and I didn't vote for any of those, even though I deeply respect Mike Strantz's work for its originality.

Really?  As someone who appreciates quirk, why doesn't Tobacco Road, for example, get more Doak love?  

I ask in all sincerity.  What say Tom Doak about Tobacco Road?  Is it too quirky?  Penal?  Severe?  Narrow?  

[Andy Troeger]

Michael,
Its certainly a VERY good course, so I'm not intending to bash the place at all. I have it in the top 20 on my personal list of courses played, figuring that I've played about 16 of the top 100, so its darn close.

Arcadia through 13 holes under the current routing might be a top 100 course, however, it then leaves the lake and goes back to higher ground for the most part, and I think it loses a little bit there.

Its probably important to point out that the lake does not do quite as much for me as it might most golfers. Its a cool piece of land to be sure, but I'm just as excited by a cool mountain in the distance or the trees and river at Blackwolf Run for example, and I would guess the Sand Hills area would strike a cord with me as well.

The greens are wild, which for the most part I think is cool, although the pin setter could use a little more training from my experience. Its not easy to walk, and I do think some of the flow of the course is disrupted by the abrupt switches to different parts of the property (from 7 to 8 under the current routing would be the worst offender). I could say that about most of the mountain courses I've played though, and a few of them would make it for me. For all that rambling, there's nothing BAD about the place in my opinion, I just think there's probably 100 in the USA that I'd like better.

[Michael Dugger]

I trust nobody but Slag Bandoon, RJ Daley and Tommy N. when it comes to the kind of golf courses I might like.

 

[Michael Dugger]

For all that rambling, there's nothing BAD about the place in my opinion, I just think there's probably 100 in the USA that I'd like better.

Oh really?  And just what exactly are you basing that deduction on?

Just teasin'!

[Tom_Doak]

Michael:

Tobacco Road is one of the most interesting and unusual courses I've seen.  That doesn't mean it's one of the best.  It has some great holes -- I liked all the par fives especially.  But then it fills out the card with holes that are even quirkier than the great ones, including a couple which just aren't very playable for the 10-handicapper.  Also, the contouring of the greens isn't full of great detail -- it's either big or nonexistent -- and that's a huge factor in my voting on the best courses in the world.

If the greens contouring was better, or if holes like the 15th and 16th had been replaced by something more solid and straightforward, I might have considered Tobacco Road for a top 100 course.  As it is, I'd rank Caledonia and MPCC ahead of it among Mike's courses, and neither of those has quite made the list for me, either.  (Of course, I haven't had a chance to play either of the other two, I've just walked them -- perhaps I'll change my mind someday.)

[Michael Dugger]

Tom,

Fabulous!  I know a lot of blokes around here have mentioned the "over the top" thing as well RE: Tobacco Road.

Thx

[Jim Nugent]

One thing I find interesting is that based on the Average Score, which determines the ranking, Pine Valley and Cypress Point are 8-9 points higher than the next cluster of great courses--looking at the distribution of scores, that's something akin to an order of magnitude.

Are these two courses that much better than those ranked 3-10?  

Tom, the scores don't tell you how much "better" any course is than another.  They only tell you how the raters rank them.  Number 1 could be twenty times "better" than number 100 -- or only 0.1%.  

Here's what the scores do tell us.  Over half the raters consider Pine Valley among the top 3 courses in the U.S.  (And the rest probably rate it in the top 10.)  Same with CPC.  No other course has an average that would put it in the top 10.  

I don't understand how raters can say any course is top 3, top 10, etc., unless they have played all the courses that are under consideration.  Seems like a flaw in this system.  Assigning absolute numbers would solve the problem.  

[JSlonis]

After seeing the list for the top US courses, I fail to understand how Mountain Ridge CC(D.Ross, Caldwell, NJ)does not get included.  You can make a very strong argument that it is as good or better than some of the other top NJ courses like Plainfield or Somerset Hills.  Given the fact that it wasn't included, it most certainly is underrated.  It is head and shoulders above Galloway Nat'l, #101 on the list.

If there are 100 courses better than Mountain Ridge, I need to start playing more tennis.

[JSlonis]

I want to know how Five Farms drops off the list. Has anyone played here after our changes?? The course is so good now and so much fun to play. I like it more and more each time I play it. It is a way underrated Tillie IMHO.

Five Farms is on the list.  It was ranked 80 something, down from being ranked in the 60's in 2005.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Five Farms is in at #84 US.

Michael, I don't get why you are so up in arms about this topic. This is a subjective list reflecting the opinions of a predefined group of people who have seen and played the courses that they have voted upon. You have opinions about courses you've never seen or played. The group's opinions and yours are different from one another, which isn't exactly a surprise given how there are very few absolutes when it comes to evaluating art of any form. What's the problem? From where does all of the angst come?

On a different topic, I wonder if we'll ever see a golf course list like that includes all courses above a certain rating, rather than just the Top 100 or whatever in the list. Suppose you took the GOLF list and instead included every course with a rating above 25.00 (just below the cutoff for the current Top 100), or used something akin to Rich's Michelin star system and included all courses worth at least one star. With the former, for example, you'd wind up with about 110-120 US courses this year (and who knows, maybe another 20-30 non-US courses not in the World 100) on the list; next time around, presumably you'd wind up with a few more courses on the list, and the time after that a few more courses still. This system would be more about absolute quality than relative quality, and thereby a celebration of just how much good architecture there is in the world instead of a pissing contest based around the fact that we have 10 fingers, 10 toes and a base 10 system of numeracy.

Cheers,
Darren

[Steve Lapper]

After seeing the list for the top US courses, I fail to understand how Mountain Ridge CC(D.Ross, Caldwell, NJ)does not get included.  You can make a very strong argument that it is as good or better than some of the other top NJ courses like Plainfield or Somerset Hills.  Given the fact that it wasn't included, it most certainly underrated.  It is head and shoulders above Galloway Nat'l, #101 on the list.

If there are 100 courses better than Mountain Ridge, I need to start playing more tennis.

Amen!
Only a handful the ignorant (ex-posters) would argue otherwise.Most of us who have had a chance to play it in the last few years would argue for its elevation above Somerset or Galloway. Have you been out to Plainfield of late? If not, you surely need to. The course is simply fantastic and Gil Hanse's restorative work coupled with considerable tree removal has revealed the stunning nature and scale of this Ross gem. It handily deserves the #2 spot in NJ and a place inside the top 65, displacing the likes of Cascades, Cherry Hills, Congressional, Trump, Baltusrol, Oak Hill, and Maidstone.

[Adam_Messix]

I agree with the assessment of Plainfield, it is vastly underrated and I'm not sure why.  

My question for the group would be if you gave the Golf Magazine panel, which has received a lot of respect from this group, and gave it Golf Digest's defintion of "greatness" (their scoring system using Shot Values; etc.) would the results be much different?  My guess is that the order would come out differently, it did when I tried it.

[JSlonis]

Steve,

I have played Plainfield recently.  Our state Open was held there last month.  Overall I liked it a lot, although I felt there were a few awkward holes, particularly the 18th.

Honestly, if I had a total of 10 rounds between the two courses, I may play an extra one at Mountain Ridge.

[Powell Arms]

....

On a different topic, I wonder if we'll ever see a golf course list like that includes all courses above a certain rating, rather than just the Top 100 or whatever in the list. Suppose you took the GOLF list and instead included every course with a rating above 25.00 (just below the cutoff for the current Top 100), or used something akin to Rich's Michelin star system and included all courses worth at least one star. With the former, for example, you'd wind up with about 110-120 US courses this year (and who knows, maybe another 20-30 non-US courses not in the World 100) on the list; next time around, presumably you'd wind up with a few more courses on the list, and the time after that a few more courses still. This system would be more about absolute quality than relative quality, and thereby a celebration of just how much good architecture there is in the world instead of a pissing contest based around the fact that we have 10 fingers, 10 toes and a base 10 system of numeracy.

Cheers,
Darren

I love this idea, kind of like a Zagat's Golf Guide but with a lot more information on each course, and including private courses.  

[Sean_A]

Michael:

Tobacco Road is one of the most interesting and unusual courses I've seen.  That doesn't mean it's one of the best.  It has some great holes -- I liked all the par fives especially.  But then it fills out the card with holes that are even quirkier than the great ones, including a couple which just aren't very playable for the 10-handicapper.  Also, the contouring of the greens isn't full of great detail -- it's either big or nonexistent -- and that's a huge factor in my voting on the best courses in the world.

If the greens contouring was better, or if holes like the 15th and 16th had been replaced by something more solid and straightforward, I might have considered Tobacco Road for a top 100 course.  As it is, I'd rank Caledonia and MPCC ahead of it among Mike's courses, and neither of those has quite made the list for me, either.  (Of course, I haven't had a chance to play either of the other two, I've just walked them -- perhaps I'll change my mind someday.)

I don't exactly know what a top 100 US is, but I would be quite surprised if Tobacco Road makes the cut.  Its a good course, perhaps great, but it has flaws which are too painful to overlook.  Mind you, I don't think the greens are a flaw.  I get the feeling I am not as enamoured with wild greens as some on this site.  Whats more important to me is if the green fits on the site and makes sense.  I don't like greens which just pop up all wild like from nowhere.

Ciao

[Matt_Ward]

When I reviewed Golf Mag's top 100 USA listing the issue for me wasn't much about the ones listed in the top 50 -- most of them are rather solid -- the issue is the ones that managed a second fifty position.

The following courses I have played and would not be anywhere near my top 100 USA listing ...

*Bellerive -- utterly boring RTJ layout

*Briar's Creek -- good Rees Jones design but lacks anything memorably -- frankly if Olde Kinderhook is not included I can't see this one in SC gets listed.

*Canterbury -- solid pedigree from hosting past majors and the like. Good layout but Westchester and Long Island have a few layout that can easily match it but also would not make my top 100 USA list.

* Baltursol / Upper -- I see the course as much more interesting design wise than the Big Brother Lower. There's nothing on the Upper that screams out to me as being noteworthy. Give me the likes of Black Mesa anyday -- on that subject -- how the NM layout misses out for consideration also makes me shake my head.

* Double Eagle -- Weiskopf and Moorish have done better. Gets plenty of brownie points for superior conditioning and in being in the Columbus area with other notable big time layouts.

* Black Diamond Ranch / Quarry -- I like the course and see it as one of TF's best designs. The holes outside the quarry often escape attention but I don't see the quarry holes -- save for the superb long par-4 16th as being anything that is especially noteworthy.

* Cherry Hills -- Have not been back to play the course since the improvements but unless the layout has gone through a herculean uprgade I don't see it being anything more than what Doak said about the layout in Confidential Guide.

* Hazeltine National -- Might be the big fish in Minnesota because it can host majors but the depth of the architecture is not really impressive for me. Just maintaining a public visibility has been a big plus for the layout's fanfare.

* Ridgewood / East & West -- Although I live in NJ and see the layout as being one of the state's top ten courses I don't believe the layout is that good to crack the upper echelon. It's one of those "just missed" in my book.

* Torrey Pines / South -- nuff said. Ouchhhhhhhhh !!!

* Interlachen -- lives off the past from the times of Jones win. Very little there that can compete against the high bar of other courses that have come on board recently.  

There's a few others from the 51-100 listing ...

Few other generalized comments -- WF / East is a superb layout but it gets too many points from having the name WF. A possible top 100 in my listing but no way within the top 50.

TF should have Karsten Creek listed but instead you get a beauty pageant result with Wade Hampton being listed.

Bandon Trails is another course that reaps spillover points / good feelings people have with Bandon Dunes and Pac Dunes. I like the course but the middle third is quite weak from a character standpoint for me. I would have the course as a possible top 100 layout but it's borderline from the ones I have played in the States.

Somerset Hills, Maidstone and Shoreacres are all overrated in my book and I have opined on this many times before. No doubt the defenders of each will come out of the woodwork. Fair enough. I just don't see either of them being as comprehensive and thorough from the design side. There's way too many inferior holes on each to be considered for such a high inclusion.

[Phil McDade]

Matt:

Interlachen looked pretty cool at the somewhat recent Solheim Cup there, and I noticed it's got the women back there next year for the US Open. Any specifics that make it a less-than-top-100 course? I've not played, but those who have generally view it as one of the best in Minnesota (well ahead of Hazeltine) and the equal of places like Ross' White Bear Yacht Club.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

The issue for me is NOT that Interlachen is not a good course. I concede that.

The issue is does the course belong among the top 100 in all of the USA. Just because the course has a big time fanfer in Minnesota doesn't mean that translates onto the canvass when you include all of America.

I've played a fair share of the so-called top tier courses in Minnesota and I don't see Interlachen being in the elite level. Frankly, there are a number of courses along the I-95 corridor from DC to Boston that could easily surpass what you get with Interlachen.

Too often people throw votes because of "tradition" and the fact that someone notable won there (e.g. Jones in the US Open there).

No doubt the membership is very supportive and quite proud of their layout. I don't see the overall architecture being anything more than a 6 on the Doak scale and I'm being a good bit generous on that front.

From what I hear from those in the know the work Jeff B did at Giant Ridge and Fortune Bay blows away Interlachen. I have not played either to date but my sources are quite reliable -- I trust them more than the collective "wisdom" of the Golf Mag panel.

[Joel_Stewart]

After seeing the list for the top US courses, I fail to understand how Mountain Ridge CC(D.Ross, Caldwell, NJ)does not get included.  You can make a very strong argument that it is as good or better than some of the other top NJ courses like Plainfield or Somerset Hills.  Given the fact that it wasn't included, it most certainly is underrated.  It is head and shoulders above Galloway Nat'l, #101 on the list.

If there are 100 courses better than Mountain Ridge, I need to start playing more tennis.

I have never understood this as well, and as far as I know it has never sniffed Golf Digest's list as well.  I believe someone told me that they have done some restoration work.   They have a low key approch there and don't look for panelists unlike Galloway.

[Matt_Ward]

Joel, et al:

If one were to include Mtn Ridge -- then you would need to really examine a few others in the Garden State which I would rate ahead of the West Caldwell layout.

That would include the likes of:

Essex County CC, West Orange
Montclair GC (#2 + #4 nines), West Orange
Hollywood
Forsgate / Banks
ACCC -- the restored version from Doak

Mtn Ridge is not on the same page with Plainfield in my mind. Frankly, I have never understood the fanfare Baltusrol gets but when you host majors you do get a big time bump on the awareness side of things.

Clearly, you do have a number of metro NYC courses that are quite good -- the issue is really do they merit the brightest of spotlights for a top 100 inclusion.

There's more dynamic new courses that have come forward and unfortunately have not been played by many of the panelists. Therefore, you see people staying with the same choices. Some of them are no doubt bulletproof -- while a good many others are simply staying put because of the ignorance of the people who should know better if they really took the time to travel the USA.

Give one example -- Sutton Bay is miles ahead of Mtn Ridge. Unfortunately, getting to West Caldwell, NJ is far eaiser than going to Agar, SD.

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()