Sean:
With all due respect you still don't seem to grasp it -- I have a huge appreciation for the top tier giants in golf architecture -- the Oakmonts, Pine Valley's, Shinnecock Hill's, Dunluce / Portrush, etc, etc. My love for playing such courses is no less than anyone else's.
I have said that far too often the singular focus is only on the .00001 percent of those courses on this site and elsewhere - that was the point in creating this thread -- to open up eyes and provide some helpful info. For those with the means and connections the wherewithal to play the .0001 courses comes about because such a lifestyle in experiencing such courses is not an issue -- it's an assumption. That's not the case with the vast preponderance of people who play the game and quite frankly are needed in order to grow the game to others.
I started my golf life on a place where grass grew by accident -- not by design. I have a healthy appreciation for what people play there and for the willful ignorance that exists -- no doubt many of these same people could care less about architecture in the same manner that sheep could are less where they eat grass -- so long as they eat some.
Sean, in the discussion of the courses of outstanding architecture below $100 is not some sort of "B" league team of layouts. As a parallel I give Tom Doak plenty of credit for exposing the nature of many second and thir tier layouts in "Confidential Guide" that are located in the UK and Ireland. Many people only knew about the very top tier because of the wherewithal to host Open Championships and the like. The courses under $100 are rather unique and well worth the time and effort to play them. To paraphrase your words -- they are "significant" and worthy of the time to play them. No doubt some people are simply fixated on chery-picking the courses with the greatest name value -- so be it. I just see other courses throughout the USA, and the lesser known architects, as being fully able and competent to deliver high quality golf.
You and I part company to some degree on the linkage of other items (e.g. the housing component, the degree of what walking should be about, how fast the pace of play is, etc, etc). I would not dare go so far as to say such items are esoteric but I do believe such items are further down the food chain of what constitutes the primary emphasis -- the overall grandeur of the architecture. My opinion v your opinion. That's fine. As I stated before that, for me at least, would rest on the items I mentioned previously -- to wit, the overall quality of the land itself, the complexity of the routing and the sheer array of different shotmaking challenges from drives to recovery options, green contours, the nature of the bunkering, etc, etc.
Sean, if you think Lederach is a demanding walk -- then some advice to give -- skip Bethpage Black because it's even more so a situation. Lederach is not that demanding from the sheer array of different courses I have had the opportunity to walk. I can name a number of other courses here in the USA that are walkable but may appear to be more demanding than many of the UK courses you have been accustomed to playing.
Keep in mind, you are throwing forward the British experiences you have had and that's fine -- the level of what constitutes golf in the UK and Ireland is a bit different than here in the States. I have had the pleasure in playing a good many courses across the pond and no doubt the style / temperament and overall golf experiences (those that you value) are clearly front and center. I personally believe a number of key items from the UK and Ireland should be included for many more golf courses here in the States than what we do now -- e.g., speeding up the game being the first and foremost lesson we can learn here.
Sean, just a bit of advice -- skip the pretension with the belief that "my standards higher" than anyone else's -- OK. My standards for quality golf are present in my mind and frankly I see my total listing of courses as being quite pragmatic and not fixed on a singular one best way only.
Last item on turf -- I see it as a complimentary item - not as a primary one. Sorry to hear about your chipped 6-iron but early spring in Pennsy is not prime golf time. The turf from my visit earlier this summer was much better -- no doubt it will need time to mature.
Just one last point -- the American economy is likely going to go throush some major mega adjustments -- golf will need to restructure itself to continue to be an interesting game to the masses here. The cost to play is going to be more and more of a sticking point for those to either continue or start their involvement. I said it before, and will say it again, that more focus should be on affordable options and not just a singular fixation on such a very, very small number of courses that like the Playboy centerfold analogy I mentioned on a different thread -- you can look at her but you 'll likely never touch her.
* * *
I was at Lederach last spring. The condition of the course wasn't great, but it was plenty good enough to enjoy golf. There are still areas of the course which are stoney - I have a chipped 6 iron as proof. I was only commenting that the turf isn't of the best quality - which is another issue I look at in terms of deciding how good the course is. It all adds up!