An Acid test for great courses....

[Kalen Braley]

I was recently thinking about the discussion on PD about which holes are the best, and where it climaxes, etc, and a thought occured to me.  So I'm just throwing this out there to see what your thoughts are and not taking sides.   

Is it valid to say that a mark of a great course is when it has widely swinging opinions over which holes are the best and greatest on the course?  That is to say, if a course has that many great holes, to even illicit such a debate in the 1st place, isn't that a solid acid test on its own to suggest a course is great?

Courses that come to mind are ANGC, Sand Hills, NGLA, CPC, PD, etc.  Sure in the case of a CPC, some will say that 16 is the "alpha male" of golf holes on that course, but even then I've seen many argue they like 15 better.  And I've followed theads on said above courses where the response to which stretch of holes was the defining climax of the course were also extremely varied.

Potential weaknesses to this method would be the case of a good course, with a superb array of good solid holes one after another, which could spark said debate.  It could be confused for a great course, simply because it has many good holes with few weak ones.

I've seen many debates in here on whether a course can be considered great if it only has a few easily identifiable great holes.  But to put that arguement to bed, shouldn't a great course be full of great holes? At this point I can't think of a better validation method than complete and utter drag down, knock out disagrement over the best holes of said course as the ultimate acid test..

Thoughts???

[Adam Clayman]

But to put that arguement to bed, shouldn't a great course be full of great holes?

Thoughts???

This appears to be a trap many fall into. Collections of 18 great holes do not always make the greatest courses.
 
CPC, Pebble, Merion surely do not qualify on every individual hole. Want to argue they aren't great?

[Tom Huckaby]

Adam:

I don't think he's saying EVERY hole need be great, but rather that these courses tend to have several holes that are great individually and that reasonable minds will differ as to which of these is the greatest.

And every example he gives works when one thinks of it that way.

I'm also struggling to think of a truly great golf course that has one clearly, universally agreed upon BEST hole.

Several mediocre or bad courses would have that for sure.  But not a great one.

Note I doubt Kalen also means this is the ONLY way to achieve greatness...

On that basis I kinda like his thoughts.

TH

[John Kavanaugh]

Kalen,

How many great courses do you think are in this country?

[Adam Clayman]

Tom, I read FULL of great holes to mean all 18. Ya know, Wardian.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,

Thanks for the clarification and yes I didn't mean for all 18 holes to be great...but I do think its important for at least several if not half of its holes to be in the "great" category.

JK,

Off the top of my head, and with my limited GCA view, I would guess no more than 15-20 courses in the US would fit in this category. Courses that come to mind are the ones already mentioned.  I would probably throw Pebble and Shinnecock in the mix as well.  (Of course PV belongs here too, forgot to mention that one in original post)

I'd have to do some more thinking to come up with a few other courses.  A few I can think of overseas would be TOC, RCD, Swinley Forest perhaps.

[John Kavanaugh]

I can easily find 500 courses that meet you criteria. 

[Kalen Braley]

I can easily find 500 courses that meet you criteria. 

Sounds great,

Lets take a look at some of your nominations..

[John Moore II]

I am not certain that a disagreement about which hole on a given course is best means the course is a great course. If one person is trying to say a certain par 5 is the best and another is trying to say a par 3 is the best, the two holes are entirely different from each other and can't really be compared. I think the mark of a great course is that the holes fit together well, use the surroundings as best as possible, and that the holes are all at least good, if not all great. I think a great course can't have a weak hole, but need not have all great holes, or even be to the point that there can be an arguement about which hole it best.

[Matt_Cohn]

I know a lot courses that are lame as heck but people disagree wildly on which is the "best" hole.

It might be, as they say, a "necessary but not sufficient" condition to determine the greatness of a course.

[Tom Huckaby]

I know a lot courses that are lame as heck but people disagree wildly on which is the "best" hole.

It might be, as they say, a "necessary but not sufficient" condition to determine the greatness of a course.

The holes themselves have to be great to begin with; then the disagreement is which of these holes is the best.

Example A:  Cypress Point:  it's pretty clear any of 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 could be called great golf holes and perhaps even some others merit that adjective.  Reasonable minds do differ as to which is the best of those holes.   THis is a great golf course.

Example B:  Santa Teresa:  there is no one single great golf hole on the course; however, there is large disagreement as to which is the "best" hole.  Some say 12, some say 16, some say 6.  In no way does this make Santa Teresa a great golf course.

Get the difference?

And Adam that was WAY too Wardian.