To the 9’s

[Ian Andrew]

Below is Tom Doak’s list of 9's.

This will only be a constructive thread if you post your reasoning – so please state WHY with your choice.

What course would you argue is a 10?

Is there a course on this list that is not only not a 9 but also not an 8 either?

Winged Foot West
Oakmont
Augusta National
Seminole
The Golf Club
Oakland Hills
Prairie Dunes
Shadow Creek
San Francisco
Riviera
Pebble Beach
Casa de Campo
Royal Worlington and Newmarket
Rye
Royal Portrush
Royal County Down

[Jed Peters]

The new course at Casa de Campo (the re-done Teeth of the Dog) that was finished last year is the finest golf course in the best setting that I think I've ever played.

That said, I've never played a 10, so a 9 will work for me.

[Patrick Glynn]

Royal County Down for me. I loved the routing, the firm conditions, the variety of holes, the amazing tee shots - just the whole set up. Alan Strachan is amazing, we played 36 before the Walker Cup in 07 and I could not get over how firm the greens & surrounds were. Its funny how being on the other side of the country affecting the playing conditions (Newcastle gets a lot less annual rainfall in comparison to the west coast of Ireland)

I personally cannot see how you could not rate RCD ahead of Ballybunion. My dad (who usually disagrees with everything I say) totally agrees with me on this one. For the sake of completion I will throw out the list of 10s:

Pine Valley
St. Andrews Old Course
Ballybunion (Old)
Muirfield
Royal Dornoch
Royal Melbourne (West)
National Golf Links of America
Shinnecock Hills
Merion (East)
Pinehurst (No. 2)
Crystal Downs
Cypress Point

As an aside, didn't SFGC get a Doak 9?

[Joe Bausch]

With the recent changes at Augusta (back of the first tee moved forward seven yards, an additional 10 yards added to the front of the tee on the 450-yard seventh hole, and nearly 10 yards added to the front of the 530-yard 15th hole), it has to be a Doak 10 now, right?   

[Chip Gaskins]

Patrick you beat me to it. I totally agree with all your reasons about RCD.  Simply one of the best (if not the best) courses in the world.  I personally think we could swap out RCD for Ballybunion, a 9 for a 10.

[Sean_A]

Below is Tom Doak’s list of 9's.

This will only be a constructive thread if you post your reasoning – so please state WHY with your choice.

What course would you argue is a 10?

Is there a course on this list that is not only not a 9 but also not an 8 either?

Winged Foot West
Oakmont
Augusta National
Seminole
The Golf Club
Oakland Hills
Prairie Dunes
Shadow Creek
San Francisco
Riviera
Pebble Beach
Casa de Campo
Royal Worlington and Newmarket
Rye
Royal Portrush
Royal County Down

Ian

Looking at the list of 9s, the one that jumps out as the odd ball is Worlington.  Of course the Doak Scale is reserved for only Doak to decide what is what, but I have a hard time believing Worlington is a 7, let alone 9.  I played the course a few months back and didn't even bother posting pix on this site - that is how disappointed I was.  For sure, I will make it back, but....

Ciao

[Ian Andrew]

Riviera (Thomas)

At Riviera, George Thomas probably combined strategy and beauty as well as any architect. The golf course is a thesis on strategy and technique. Thomas consistently rewards a player for positional play, but often asks the player work to get the ball into that ideal position. There is no course quite like Riviera, where a player is continuously encouraged to hit either a draw or fade off the tee. Where the course excels further is the continuous balance back and forth so that no player has an advantage – except for the one who can work the ball both ways! Even smarter is the number of holes that call for fade from the tee and then the draw on the approach. He then turns this around with the next hole and asks for the exact opposite strategy. No player ever has the advantage at any point – including the long hitter - unless they really know how to work the ball. He expertly used a combination of Eucalyptus trees, bunkers, slopes of the greens, and the baranca to make the player shape their shots. Riviera is a remarkably well balanced test of shot-making.

Throw in the number of individually outstanding holes, a few unique ideas such as the 6th green, the options and you have one of the most remarkable pieces of golf course architecture I know.

I think it’s a 10.

[JMorgan]

Riviera (Thomas)

At Riviera, George Thomas probably combined strategy and beauty as well as any architect. The golf course is a thesis on strategy and technique. Thomas consistently rewards a player for positional play, but often asks the player work to get the ball into that ideal position. There is no course quite like Riviera, where a player is continuously encouraged to hit either a draw or fade off the tee. Where the course excels further is the continuous balance back and forth so that no player has an advantage – except for the one who can work the ball both ways! Even smarter is the number of holes that call for fade from the tee and then the draw on the approach. He then turns this around with the next hole and asks for the exact opposite strategy. No player ever has the advantage at any point – including the long hitter - unless they really know how to work the ball. He expertly used a combination of Eucalyptus trees, bunkers, slopes of the greens, and the baranca to make the player shape their shots. Riviera is a remarkably well balanced test of shot-making.

Throw in the number of individually outstanding holes, a few unique ideas such as the 6th green, the options and you have one of the most remarkable pieces of golf course architecture I know.

I think it’s a 10.

Ian, do you think one could throw out any holes at Riviera and miss something worth seeing, per the 10 Doak definition? 

I might argue that several 10s on TD's list should be 9s; and like Sean, I also believe that some of the 9s are even lower on the Doak scale when considering conditioning, length, and/or unique holes.

[Tom_Doak]

Hey, there is nothing wrong with being a 9.  Those are all excellent courses ... and happily, there would probably be a few more if I rated all the designs of the last 12 years.

Sean A:  I will admit to a bit of serendipity in placing the nine-hole Royal Worlington & Newmarket on my list of 9's.  Nevertheless, I think it is a perfect use of sixty acres and a true minimalist gem ... and it was in perfect shape back when I last played it many moons ago.  It's near the top of my list of places to return, so I hope I'm not disappointed.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Each are strong courses.  A list that is hard to argue with.  JC

[TEPaul]

Ian:

Regarding your post #6---you talk a lot about how well Thomas designed and balanced the design of Riviera by calling  for a draw on this hole and a fade on that and maybe a draw off the tee and a fade approach on the same hole.

I have no doubt he did that and being as old as I am and having grown up around my dad who was a pretty high caliber competitive amateur I am aware that was a pretty big part of the way the game was played back then but I have played a lot of competitive golf in the last 25 years or so and I see a lot of good competitive golf officiating these days and unfortunately I just don't see many real quality amateur or pros "work" the ball any more like they used to when Riviera was designed and probably for up to 50-60 years following that.

Mostly they probably don't have to today because among other changes in the game just about all the real quality players hit the ball so much higher than anyone did before. That kind of negates the need to really "work" the ball, and frankly "working" a golf ball to the degree you used to be able to is not as easy to do today, again because of changed characteristics of clubs and balls, particularly balls.

By this I do not mean that a design like Riviera's is not so good anymore or necessarily strategically diminished; it's just that the game doesn't call for the kinds of shots it once did.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Wouldn't life be better if we just defined "golf" (semantically at least and ideally according to the Rules as well) as fitting to what Ian's got in that Riviera post, and as for the rest goodbye to all that?

I vote Ganton for a Dixie, which in Doak's book doesn't even rate a 9 and which others keep cramming together with Woodhall Spa, demonstrating that Schelling wasn't just writing of Pearl Harbor but of human nature when he wrote of "a poverty of expectations."

A masterful routing over ground that is not spectacular but subtly decent, which sums up the course and highlights that in lesser hands it probably wouldn't have merited so much as a 5.  Up and down slopes, across valleys, there's a lovely rhythm to the holes and a sense of an integrated whole that is vastly more than the sum of its unspectacular parts.
Angles, including the use of bunkering.
Integration of greens with fairways (quality of green complexes) -- does any course do seamlessness better? The pitch and cant of the greens...
Relating to rhythm of the holes, the mix of holes: stern par 4s, short par 4s, easy 3s and a brutal 3 -- in a match the possibilities for holes won and lost start in earnest on 12 and don't let up.  Not a course of halves.

Detractors will note no spectacular / signature holes, how the par 5s play for the strongest players, and an 18th which is not quite up to the level of the prior 17.

Is this the best course extant that shares a border with a farm?

Mark

[Ian Andrew]

Tom,

While I see your point about how they repeat shots rather than create them - I still see courses by the possibilities that are presented to players.

I think there is still a reason why Riviera tends to reward the player with greater ability to invent shots rather than the bomber who sets out to simply overwhelm the course.

While times have changed in the way players play - some courses resist them better than others - and Riviera remains a course that rewards a shot-maker.

[Ryan Farrow]

Ian, I don't think you can sell me on Riviera being a 10, at least in its current state. Not to mention that fact that, IMO, holes 11,13, and 14 are pretty weak and really don't offer that much in terms of interest. The other 15 holes are all pretty dam impressive, more so given that it is a  fairly boring piece of property. Thomas's genius really shines at Riviera but I just don't see it as a 10.


On the other hand I would give Oakmont the nod for a 10. I just can't see how it is not a 10. I'm sure the last time Tom saw it, Oakmont probably was a 9 but the work that has been done since should clearly bring the course up a notch.

[TEPaul]

Ian:

Regarding your post #12 while I believe I'm correct that most of the really good players today can get away with and basically play a fairly one dimensional very high shot, it is not lost on me that perhaps the best player in history is most certainly one who seems most interested in creating various shots and shot shapes and differing trajectories and certainly not just when he gets in trouble.

This still relatively young man may even make a very decent golf course architect someday, and I would not expect even the likes of a Jack Nicklaus would ever say he doesn't understand what a real shot or a real value is! 

[Ari Techner]

I would agree with those above who would give RCD a 10.  The front 9 is simply inspiring and I thought the back 9 was underrated.  The "weaker stretch" of 15-18 I thought was much better than advertised.  

I would also submit that since the extensive tree clearing program Oakmont is worthy of consideration as a 10.  It is very unique to the golf world and I think if you miss even one hole you are missing something special.  The greens are as good as any in the world.  It is definitely penal off the tee but I think it is very fair and by far the best most fun to play example of a penal golf course.  

On the other side of the spectrum I think Oakland Hills has been overdone to the point that it is no longer a 9.  It has a fabulous set of greens but all the strategy is gone from the course and alot of the charm and it is now just brutal, long and hard.  

[Jim Nugent]

I think there is still a reason why Riviera tends to reward the player with greater ability to invent shots rather than the bomber who sets out to simply overwhelm the course.

For driving the ball, I wonder if that's true.  At least on the pro side.  The past few years, the winner at Riviera hit 50% or less of all fairways.  It made me think that driving accuracy didn't matter much.   

Also, the way you describe Riviera -- demanding draws off one hole, fades on another -- it sounds like the course dictates the player's strategy.  Is there mostly one way to play Riviera, in contrast to a course like TOC? 

[Mark Pearce]

Below is Tom Doak’s list of 9's.

This will only be a constructive thread if you post your reasoning – so please state WHY with your choice.

What course would you argue is a 10?

Is there a course on this list that is not only not a 9 but also not an 8 either?

Winged Foot West
Oakmont
Augusta National
Seminole
The Golf Club
Oakland Hills
Prairie Dunes
Shadow Creek
San Francisco
Riviera
Pebble Beach
Casa de Campo
Royal Worlington and Newmarket
Rye
Royal Portrush
Royal County Down

Ian

Looking at the list of 9s, the one that jumps out as the odd ball is Worlington.  Of course the Doak Scale is reserved for only Doak to decide what is what, but I have a hard time believing Worlington is a 7, let alone 9.  I played the course a few months back and didn't even bother posting pix on this site - that is how disappointed I was.  For sure, I will make it back, but....

Ciao

Coincidentally I was looking at the CG entries for England last night and the score for Worlington really stood out.  I know it gets a lot of love here but I don't get RW&N.  It's a good course, for sure, but a 9?  I don't see it.  I'd certainly think Ganton, for instance and as mentioned by Mark, is a far better course.  For that matter I'd rather play Alwoodley or Beau Desert.  I wonder if, somewhat perversely, Worlington actually scores better because it's a 9 holer?

[Sean_A]

Hey, there is nothing wrong with being a 9.  Those are all excellent courses ... and happily, there would probably be a few more if I rated all the designs of the last 12 years.

Sean A:  I will admit to a bit of serendipity in placing the nine-hole Royal Worlington & Newmarket on my list of 9's.  Nevertheless, I think it is a perfect use of sixty acres and a true minimalist gem ... and it was in perfect shape back when I last played it many moons ago.  It's near the top of my list of places to return, so I hope I'm not disappointed.

Tom

Yes, Worlington is a crafty course, but I think you may be more impressed by what could easily have been built there (meaning a very mediocre course) as is evidenced with courses up and down the country than what is there (a good course which does merit some distinction).  I am far from an expert, but I think the course maximizes what was naturally on offer and there are a few tricks in the bag that were added.  However, I fail to see how Worlington compares favourably with a few other very crafty courses (Woking comes to mind) which are nowhere near Doak 9s.  Tell me truthfully, do you see Worlington with an archie's eye or a player's eye?  This is something I often wonder about when proper experts (archies not raters) opine about courses - which hat are they wearing?

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Answering the first question, of the courses in the 9's list which I have seen or played I'd put Newcastle, Augusta and Pebble Beach in the 10's and keep Prairie Dunes, SFGC, Portrush and Rye about where they are.  I also can think of at least two courses I have played which are not on either list but which fit in the 10's better than the 9's as well as a few Doak 10's I have played which look better grouped with the 9's.  As to my "reasoning," firstly let me say that I have long been on record as saying that differentiating between the top 30-40 courses in the world is a matter of personal taste rather than analysis against any sort of reliable criteria.  That being said, if I must, here are the reasons for my three 9s who must be 10s):

--Newcastle.  As many stunning (!!! in Doak chess notation) golf holes as any course on this earth.  No merely "good" holes, including 17.  Fantastic routing, particularly 1-14.  Very good use (after recent changes) of the poorer land on which 15-18 lie.
--Augusta.  Even with added trees and semi rough one of the most challenging and alternate strategy-inducing golf courses in the world.  It's the greens, Stupid!
--Pebble Beach.  Tremendous variety of holes and more "quirk" than any other top US course.  Best combination I know of length and small greens.  One of the few top US courses which requires recovery skills as well as tee to green excellence.  The most fun course in the world that I have played.

Rich

[Andrew Bertram]

The courses that i would consider consider to be raised to 10's would be:

Oakmont- since the tree clearing, opening up of holes and the reintroduction of many bunkers into play oakmont has clearly improved to the status of great. The green structures and elevation changes make it a stunning course.

Royal County Down - hard to find a better setting for golf, each time i have played there it was hard and running and it is very difficult not to rate it a 10. A wonderful collection of strong golf holes wit great character.

SFGC - I would think of this as a 9.5 bordering on a 10. Wonderful routing and green structures. The only thing keeping from a 10 in my mind is a couple of weaker holes.

The one course i could drop to an 8 maybe 8.5 is pebble beach. I was expecting an extremely special place given the first time i played there was after a morning round at Cypress Point. Some of the inland holes in my mind are bland and while the coastal holes are just outstanding there are too many weak holes to be truly great. I know that Pebble is sometimes placed on a pedestal but i would not be strssed if i never played here again.

 

[Jim Nugent]

I also can think of at least two courses I have played which are not on either list but which fit in the 10's better than the 9's as well as a few Doak 10's I have played which look better grouped with the 9's. 

Rich, can you tell us which courses these are? 

[Rich Goodale]

Jim

I'll only admit to those I'm surest about and, thus should not be too controversial.....

10s--Birkdale and Carnoustie
9s--Old Course, NGLA and Pinehurst

Rich

[Peter Pallotta]

I don't know how to rank courses, and I assume there must be many finer courses in the world, but judging only from Mark B's post about Ganton, if I could play that golf course I wouldn't have to play any other. Excellent post, Mark - thanks.

Peter

[Sean_A]

Detractors will note no spectacular / signature holes

Mark

On the contrary, I am beginning to think that many of the best courses don't have singular stand out holes which can match up with the very best.  The strength of these courses is in how good their "worst" holes are.  Sometimes good enough that many a grand club wouldn't mind claiming them for their own.   

Ciao