New Criteria for GD Ratings: Firm and fast is in and bunkers can be hazardous

[Paul Carey]

Attached are some quotes from a letter Ron Whitten sent to courses that may be ranked in the top 100 ratings or in the best state by state ratings.  He is notifying courses of a major change in the rating criteria.  The new focus is on firm and fast playing surfaces and that rough and hazards are allowed to be rough and hazardous.

I think the changes are great and a big step forward.  Not only it is a better way to evaluate courses I think Golf Digest’s impact on golf may move courses to a firmer and faster maintenance program.

“I thought you ought to know about a major change in one of the seven criteria used in our course evaluation”

“Earlier this year we redefined out Conditioning category.  The old definition read: “ How ould you rate the playing quality of tees, fairways and greens on the date you last played the course?”
The new definition reads: “How firm, fast and rolling were the fairways and how firm yet receptive were the greens on the day you played the course?””


“Our new definition takes the position that dry, firm turf provides the best condition for playing golf.”

“Note that our definition does not mention rough or bunkers.  Those are hazards in which no golfer should expect optimum lies.”

Your reaction?

[K. Krahenbuhl]

How does firm yet receptive work out?  Seems like a bit of a contradiction to me.

[C. Squier]

Sounds like GD is telling both courses and their own raters what is good and what isn't.  Takes a lot of the subjectivity out of the entire process.....hope we don't see stimpmeters on fairways soon.  I like firm and fast as much as anyone on the right course, but big is not always better.

[J_ Crisham]

Firm but receptive greens is what I see at a typical tour event. Firm and unreceptive is a US Open set up. Just my spin on it. Can many clubs acheive this-who knows what their budgets can afford especially in light of the tight economy.      Jack

[Dan Herrmann]

Were these factors in GolfWorld's recent "readers choice" rankings?  If so, we're DOOMED

[Rob Rigg]

Soooo all courses are supposed to play like links courses? 

I always thought links courses were firm and fast because they are sand based with fescue (for the most part) grass.

Is it even possible to get parkland courses with bent grass, tifeagle greens, or whatever, to play in a similar manner without compromising the playing surfaces?

Just curious, I am obviously not a super and I do not have a masters in turf management.

[Cory Lewis]

The new definition reads: “How firm, fast and rolling were the fairways and how firm yet receptive were the greens on the day you played the course?””

So if you happen to play the course on a day where it had been raining for several days, does that mean it gets a bad conditioning score?  Even courses that are firm and fast all year round become soft and slow when rain enters the picture at least temporarily.

[Tom_Doak]

Personally, I don't think that Golf Digest panelists should be assigning scores for conditioning at all.  A lot of them have no understanding of the subject, and can't distinguish between over-irrigation and a rainy season.  But, the new emphasis is at least better ... for the past twenty years they've just been giving higher scores to whichever course appeared to be spending the most money on maintenance.

[Matt OBrien]

I guess that means that PV will be 1 again and maybe HVCC has a chance of breaking into the top 100 with thier F&F conditions.

[John Burzynski]

Seems to me that this will all require a conditioning of GOLFERS, conditioning golfers to not require lush green Augusta like courses.  Which course will be the first to risk letting their turf go brown in exchange for a higher GD ranking?  Will golfers tolerate browner turf, or will they just complain?  My guess is that golfers will keep requiring green and lush conditions, along with soft but fast greens, and will choose to take their dollars elsewhere if they see firm, fast and browner courses.

Just a guess, but this will require a long term reconditioning of the mind of the golfer (probably only occuring when water use is regulated on a wider basis), and an annual issue of Golf Digest ratings ain't gonna change much short term.

[Ryan Chin]

I'm just glad they got rid of that horrible category: "Tradition".

[Mike_Cirba]

You'd like to believe that they didn't have to spell out the obvious, but since they apparently had to, I hope it helps.