[JC Jones]

10.  Augusta
9.  Harding Park
8.  Sahalee
7.  Bandon Trails
6.  The Country Club
5.  Champions Golf Club
4.  Torrey North
3.  Pinehurst 2
2.  Pebble
1.  Medinah

I wasnt surprised to see Torrey North or Sahalee in there, I am, however, surprised to see Trails and The Country Club.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JC Jones,

Pebble Beach, Pinehurst # 2 and ANGC didn't surprise you ?

[JC Jones]

Not so much on #2 and ANGC because of their modifications due to "tiger proofing" and the USGA.

I think people are generally disenfrachised w/ Pebble right now due to the $500 greens fees and the 6 hour rounds so there is general discontent.

Plus you have to make room for the iconoclasts out there so I wasnt shocked to see them in there.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Champions does not surprise ne at all.
A good golf course for sure but simply long and blah..reminds me of many courses built in the same era, it lacks any true character.
Still a good course but somewhat overated.

[jim_lewis]

JC:

I don't know what changes to #2 you are referring to. There have been only minor changes (a few tees backed up) in the past decade or so. It was probably changed less for the two Opens than any Open venue in my memory.

Jim Lewis

[Michael Ryan]

Question for the group, having never played the course...does the Country Club's inclusion on this "very unscientific" list have to do with the fact that the championship course is a composite taken from their their 27 holes?  From what I have learned talking to folks who have played it, and working with the former Tournament Director of the '99 Ryder Cup is that not only do they grab a few holes from the other nine, they actually create at least one and maybe more holes that don't exist in normal conditions.  I wonder if someone who knows the course well from watching past championships at TCC is slightly (stress very slightly) underwhelmed and that factors in to the opinion presented?

[hhuffines]

Mr. Jim, Hope youre doing well...

I am tired of Mr. Pepper's rants against #2, which has provided an excellent test for the best ams and pros
for how many years?

The "over-rated" surely does apply to some other layouts in
my Old North State.  Have you guys seen the latest in-state
rankings by Golf Digest for NC?  Wow!

[JR Potts]

Wasn't this released about 6 months ago...or do they just keep rereleasing the same list every couple of months to drum up interest and converation?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Not so much on #2 and ANGC because of their modifications due to "tiger proofing" and the USGA.

I wonder how many of those making the call have actually played ANGC recently.

Irrespective of the changes, it remains a spectacular golf course.

What modifications did the USGA make to Pinehurst # 2 ?[/color]

I think people are generally disenfrachised w/ Pebble right now due to the $500 greens fees and the 6 hour rounds so there is general discontent.

Then, why are they booked solid ?[/color]

Plus you have to make room for the iconoclasts out there so I wasnt shocked to see them in there.

I think you've hit the nail on the head with that one.

I can't see one substantive reason why anyone would think that Pinehurst # 2, Pebble Beach and Augusta are overrated as golf courses.[/color]

[Jay Flemma]

I agree.  Medinah is a big ugly dog nobody really likes.  Thank goodness for Erin Hills.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Michael Ryan,

As much as I like TCC, I've always felt that ranking the composite course was inappropriate, especially if you consider the convoluted process where by the second hole is altered from a par 4 to a par 3, the 9th and 10 holes are excluded, the 11th becomes the 9th, the 12th is excluded, the 13th becomes the 10th, the 1st and 2nd on the other nine becomes the 11th, the par 5 3rd becomes the par 4 12th, another hole becomes the 13th and then the 14th thru 18 are played.

How anyone can rank a course that's rarely played, one that's highly convoluted, is beside me.

Again, the course is a terrific golf course, I just don't know how you can rank it amongst peers when you so alter it that it's jus not a LEVEL playing/ranking field versus the other courses that are limited to 18 holes in their intended routing.

[K. Krahenbuhl]

Wasn't this released about 6 months ago...or do they just keep rereleasing the same list every couple of months to drum up interest and converation?

It was...and I'd prefer that it went away.

[Bob_Huntley]

I think people are generally disenfrachised w/ Pebble right now due to the $500 greens fees and the 6 hour rounds so there is general discontent.

Then, why are they booked solid ?[/color]

" No one goes there any more as it is too crowded."

Yogi

[Michael Ryan]

Michael Ryan,

As much as I like TCC, I've always felt that ranking the composite course was inappropriate, especially if you consider the convoluted process where by the second hole is altered from a par 4 to a par 3, the 9th and 10 holes are excluded, the 11th becomes the 9th, the 12th is excluded, the 13th becomes the 10th, the 1st and 2nd on the other nine becomes the 11th, the par 5 3rd becomes the par 4 12th, another hole becomes the 13th and then the 14th thru 18 are played.

How anyone can rank a course that's rarely played, one that's highly convoluted, is beside me.

Again, the course is a terrific golf course, I just don't know how you can rank it amongst peers when you so alter it that it's jus not a LEVEL playing/ranking field versus the other courses that are limited to 18 holes in their intended routing.

Patrick,

When one sees TCC on the rankings, are we seeing the Composite course ranked or the 27 hole complex?  I would think that since access to the composite is very limited (could be wrong here, but I think only 2 to 3 times a year do the members have events which goes over the composite) that the 27 holes are the ones being "rated".

Does that actually shortchange TCC?  If the composite course were the only 18 on the property, and the "raters" had access, would it have a more favorable ranking against other courses?

Does this hurt other courses with 27 holes, such as Ridgewood in NJ?  Does Ridgewood ask the raters to play the two specific nines that generally host their competitions?  

Just curious...

[Mike Erdmann]

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=29575;start=msg572615#msg572615

[Phil_the_Author]

I think that GOLF mag. has a severe credibility problem here. How can they publish an article that states that Pebble Beach & Pinehurst #2 are among the three MOST OVERRATED courses and then rank them as #5 & 17 IN THE WORLD just a short time later?

Seriously, is there anyone from the magazine on here who can give any sort of reasonable answer for it that doesn't contain the phrase "to sell magazines?"

[Joel_Stewart]

I found more truth in the over rated courses than the under rated courses.   Spyglass as the #1 underrated course is a real stretch.

[Mike Wagner]

JC,

Why would you say you weren't surprised to see Sahalee on the list?  Have you played it?  It's not even consistently ranked in the top 100 and it's overrated??

[Bill_McBride]

Not so much on #2 and ANGC because of their modifications due to "tiger proofing" and the USGA.

I wonder how many of those making the call have actually played ANGC recently.

Irrespective of the changes, it remains a spectacular golf course.

What modifications did the USGA make to Pinehurst # 2 ?[/color]

I think people are generally disenfrachised w/ Pebble right now due to the $500 greens fees and the 6 hour rounds so there is general discontent.

Then, why are they booked solid ?[/color]

Plus you have to make room for the iconoclasts out there so I wasnt shocked to see them in there.

I think you've hit the nail on the head with that one.

I can't see one substantive reason why anyone would think that Pinehurst # 2, Pebble Beach and Augusta are overrated as golf courses.[/color]

Patrick, assuming you played ANGC prior to all the 'tiger proofing' of recent years, and then post this lengthening, tightening and tree planting, how did you feel about these changes as they relate to the MacKenzie-Jones design intent?

And how about as they relate to your own personal experience playing the course?

[Jim Franklin]

I believe the composite course is played 6 times per year at The Country Club.

[Patrick_Mucci]

When one sees TCC on the rankings, are we seeing the Composite course ranked or the 27 hole complex?  

The composite course[/color]

I would think that since access to the composite is very limited (could be wrong here, but I think only 2 to 3 times a year do the members have events which goes over the composite) that the 27 holes are the ones being "rated".
[size=4x]
?[/color][/size]

Does that actually shortchange TCC?  

It doesn't, but, it should.[/color]

If the composite course were the only 18 on the property, and the "raters" had access, would it have a more favorable ranking against other courses ?

But it's not, and the walk from the 10th green to the 11th tee, the distance of the abandoned par 3, would be a real handicap at any other golf course[/color]

Does this hurt other courses with 27 holes, such as Ridgewood in NJ?  

It could[/color]

Does Ridgewood ask the raters to play the two specific nines that generally host their competitions ?

Ridgewood has rotated the nines that hole their competitions.
They don't use a set of particular nines, although, I favor the East-West configuration.

They've used east-west and center-west and center-east as well as a composite course from all three nines.
Noone has ever rated the composite course.[/color]  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick, assuming you played ANGC prior to all the 'tiger proofing' of recent years, and then post this lengthening, tightening and tree planting, how did you feel about these changes as they relate to the MacKenzie-Jones design intent ?

Bill, what you and others seem to forget is that the golf course didn't go from it's Mac-Jones state to its current state in one fell swoop.

ANGC has had changes on an annual basis since the inception, so, the question is invalid to a degree.

However, since you asked my opinion, I'll render it.

I would have prefered the retention of the wider fairways and the exclusion of the new plantings, but, the golf course remains wide in many areas.  Today's width is ample.
However, when compared to previous width, it's been narrowed a good deal in some areas.

The other thing you have to realize is that 99.99999999 % of the golfers who play ANGC don't have Tiger's game, hence, they rarely interface with many of the alterations.

If you look at aerial photos, you'll see that the fairways have retained a good deal of width.

While I'd prefer more width or horizontal elasticity, I'm afraid that the club is embarked on a single path, enextricably entwined with the tournament.[/color]

And how about as they relate to your own personal experience playing the course?

I'm not going to find a good deal of the trouble that Tiger does, however, if I play the forward tees it will come into play.  However, the course remains wide in comparison to its peers and I think that's forgotten by most who are critical of the changes.[/color]

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()