Next month I will have been a member of GCA for five years. I've observed how people evaluate courses, and see at least three distinct patterns. Here are four potential biases when we evaluate a golf course:
1. Regional Bias
2. Multiple Play Bias
Both how close a course is to home, and how many times a course is played, are strongly correlated with one's perception of a course's quality. Regular GCA members often cite a course in their state or metropolitan area as the best. In many cases, this may be a matter of repeat play bias. It is clear that a great golf course gets better with repeat play, as the golfer learns the subtleties and possibilities for each great golf hole, which is only revealed with multiple plays. There have been a few instances where I have been "blown away" or "floored" by my first round at a course (Riviera, Merion, but not Crystal Downs or Winged Foot), but these are far and few between, and can just as easily be attributed to my mood on that given day. I have now played Crystal Downs four times, and each new visit reveals something new and exciting. Even Pacific Dunes required a second play before I was ready to fully embrace it.
I find it hard to accept that even a veteran golf rater can accurately assess a course with one round. The trained observer can look for certain features, and a course's beauty should factor into evaluation, but how can you really know how it plays unless you play it? An evaluation by a large panel of raters, many of whom base their rating on one attempt, is a reasonable substitute.
It is heartening to see GCA members regularly cite courses near their home as among the best. There's a love for one's home, and a belief that the grass is greener in their own backyard.
3. Style Bias
Course evaluators tend to appreciate a style of golf course they are familiar with. A negative statement is closer to the truth. Evaluators tend to dislike a course style they are unfamiliar with. I see four primary styles of golf:
A. Parkland courses
B. Linksland courses
C. Desert mountain courses
D. Southern resort courses
Beyond those, there are courses which don't neatly fall into any one category, which makes places like Prairie Dunes or Cypress Point unique and special. But if you take a golfer, who only plays parkland courses, out to the windswept links or a hilly mountain layout, he is likely to be uncomfortable. The new challenges require different skills to navigate the layout.
However, my experience is different. I first experienced linksland golf in 1998, on a visit to Scotland with my father. My rounds at Royal Dornoch, followed by regular visits to Bandon Dunes, showed me that a firm, undulating course, exposed to the wind, created a more complex challenge. It was love at first sight, as my mathematical mind saw the added complexity of controlling one's ball trajectory, not to mention the mental rigor of a five foot putt in a high wind. Bandon Dunes changed my life.
Golfers are often repulsed when introduced to some aspects of golf design that we at GolfClubAtlas covet the most: the undulating green, the occasional blind shot, and the uneven lie. I believe most golfers would begin to embrace these concepts with repeat exposure.
Parkland courses are a special case. My first years playing golf were spent mostly at the Stanford University course, a wide, hilly course on oak-studded foothills, not a typical parkland design. I did not begin golf with a positive bias to this type of course. Older parkland courses generally share the following features:
A. Softer playing surfaces, with dominant, mature poa annua.
B. Large numbers of specimen (and often, non-native) trees lining the fairways.
C. Ovoid greens, lower in the front.
D. Sand and water hazards in traditional locations, some strategic and some penal.
I find it very hard to distinguish one parkland design from the next, and perceive parkland golf courses as a "dime a dozen", especially those built during the Golden Age. Up here in Portland, Oregon, the best parkland courses, such as Eugene, Portland, Royal Oaks, and Waverley, are all about the same, and require the same soft approaches and punch out recoveries. This takes us to our final bias.
4. Architectural Pedigree Bias
I find it nearly impossible to distinguish the work of top notch Golden Age architects. Most eastern parkland courses are indistinguishable to me. In my five years at the site, I have never seen the different philosophies clearly explained to me, if they truly exist. I've picked up little tidbits along the way, like Ross's affinity to route the fairway in the valley and the green on a knoll, but I could never tell you by viewing ten pictures who designed a course. The distinguishing characteristics may have disappeared, due to maintenance practices and the work of overzealous greens committees, leading to their homogenous appearance. A clear explanation of the differing philosophies, especially between Tillinghast, Ross and Flynn, would be a fine addition.
As a lifelong west coast resident, I think I can tell a MacKenzie or a Thomas/Bell from other designs, but that may be a recognition of the terrain itself, and not the architect. It would be easy to see the Sonoma Golf Club, with the oak dotted hills, and mistake the Willie Watson design for another west coast architect. Is the home state bias in play here, or is it like different dialects of the English language, with a familiarity of the local slang?
Finally, there is much discussion at GolfClubAtlas about the merits of each architect. However, I do not see a strong predisposition to applaud our favorites, or criticize others, before personally evaluating the work. As a group we have a open mind, and though many of us are loathe to offer criticism, the lack of support for new high profile designs by our favorites is an implied lack of endorsement. Our members gush over Friar's Head, while less support is given to Coore and Crenshaw's ambitious Colorado Golf Club. Some of Tom Fazio's efforts are dismissed as pedestrian, while newer projects like Pronghorn, Martis Camp and the Madison Club are given impressive reviews. I recently said I disliked Rees Jones's Sandpines, but that does not mean I won't enjoy Ocean Forest or Atlantic immensely. Robert Trent Jones Jr.'s Chambers Bay was universally embraced by the community. I say we are an open minded group, with little preconception. We want to enjoy the new golf experience, and start with a positive attitude.