New Golfweek Rankings

[Matt_Ward]

Mike:

The issue for me is that Pete Dye was always a revolutionary architect -- his courses defied normal convention - the man himself said as much as when getting started in the business and making sure his way would be different from that of what RTJ was doing at that time.

Mike, I don't know the number of different Dye courses you have played. If your portfolio of his courses is a small one -- I can perfectly see why you would hold The Straits in such high regard. I didn't say it wasn't a fine course but for it be ahead of the other earlier works of Dye doesn't hold water for me. I have played a good array of Pete's courses and his work at The Golf Club and The Ocean Course, to name just two, have more compelling architecture than what The Straits provides.

Frankly, The Straits is a fill-in-the-blanks course that was overdone with a ton of bunkers -- many of which are mere set decorations with little real consequence. You also have the eye-candy of Lake Michigan and the fact that a major has already been held there with others to follow.

Mike, the reason we pick apart things on the site is to see if the different courses really hold up when rigorous anlalysis is applied. I like The Straits but not for a top ten placement.

[jim_lewis]

Matt:

When I saw you had posted, I was hoping you had responded to my post two notches up.

Jim

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

I was in Columbia, SC about 3-4 weeks ago to see my alma mater play and on my way back to Jersey I played #2. I was not impressed at all -- fortunately, I did not have to pay the full tariff. Jim, I am a huge fan of #2 and have said so many times -- PROVIDED -- the people there understand that you can't dig into people's pockets and have a product that isn't in top tier form. What's wrong with that? My God, the place is now charging nearly $400 to play and the nature of the design should reflect the core qualities that Ross articulated.

Jim, I think "value" should be thrown into the mix -- not as a prime judgement category but as a criteria to weigh. Far too often Jim the places charging the highest of prices are simply nailing those who play there because of the "reputation" element. Far too many times the conditioning and presentation are not in line with the price. In sum -- it's a bait and switch tactic.

I can understand your disagreement but believe the "value" element would be another criteria that would give people of modest means a real sense on whether or not to make the effort to play there.

[Joel Zuckerman]

I have played pretty much every Dye Course of consequence; a couple of early designs escaped my attention (people talk fondly about Radrick Farms in Michigan, which I missed) but I have visited/played all the "name" Dye Designs.

I think WS is absolutely great, as is the River Course at Kohler.  I don't feel qualified to say that it's "better", "worse," "more derivative," than the Ocean Course, Harbour Town, PD GC, etc.  I just think that it's a thrill to play, and I feel fortunate that I have played it 3 times to date.  (Including most recently with occasional DG participant and long-bomber Shane Wright)

Personally speaking, my favorite Dye designs are The Honors, The Golf Club and PD GC, but some of that assessment has to do with the club ambience as well as the actual golf courses.   WS to me is great though, on par with his other big-time resort courses.

[Matt MacIver]

No one has mentioned those famous turtle-back greens at #2 yet - aren't THEY the real reason the course is unique?  The wide fairways are no doubt important - critical? - to making it a top tier course (let's say a Doak 10), but isn't the current condition of the course enough to make it say a 9, or 8?  If so, isn't that alone enough to warrant study - price notwithstanding? 

[Adam Clayman]

Is it the term judge\judgement or the concept that stick out? Who honesly approaches their round with that focus? Just seems odd.