[Matt_Ward]

Rob:

Some magazines or other sources of relevant info do make it a point to have the "right person ... passing through town."

The issue is that too much emphasis is placed upon plenty of the old time courses that are noteworthy but really are not at the same level of a number of the top tier new courses that have opened in the last 15-20 years.

When I hear people gush endlessly about the dead architects and that they are light years ahead of today's competition -- I smile at that time warp thinking. There are a number of superior modern courses -- beyond the likes of a Pac Dunes, or Ballyneal or others -- that get too little attention and could easily be among the best of the best.

Rob, the info sources that will be relevant in the years ahead are those that understand that without strict attention to real time info they will cease to be relevant for the more knowledgeable lover of the game. Digest and other mags need to realize that their continued standing depends upon paying close attention to what is happening because frankly other sources of info are now grabbing the attention of those who truly love this game. This site is proof positive of that.

[Rob Rigg]

Matt,

Agreed, we are living in a different age.

Not to get sidetracked, but I know I will hear/learn about new courses much faster on GCA.com because there is a network of passionate golfers passing along a ton of data in real time. This information is then quickly analyzed and debated. A decent thread has far more content than any magazine article, especially when it appears 6 months later.

It would appear that, at least on this site, more golfers are waking up to the quality of some of the modern architecture. It will be interesting to see if a GD or GW 100 best courses list ever aligns with the direction that the GCA list is obviously heading towards.

[Matt_Ward]

Rob:

Magazines and others in today's media world have to realize the "real time" universe we all live today. Information, whether accurate or less so, speeds through the system that the hype can be both a blessing and curse at the same time.

Courses that get off to a slow start can have hard time getting a "second look" unless a concerted effort is made to really explore what's present. Sometimes courses don't get that second look and as a result you see plenty of facilities now moving aggressively in the pre-course hype in orer to build attention -- even if it means the course won't actually open for several months or more -- see Old Macdonald at Bandon as one example and the pre-hype that went with Chambers Bay and Erin Hills, to name two other prominent courses which followed the same path.

Rob, to your last point, I personally believe that a number of new designs that have opened in the last 15-20 years are really not rated as high as they should be. Unfortunately, there are people on this site and elsewhere who believe that any course from the classic period of architecture still operates at or beyond the top tier layouts that have opened in the time frame I just mentioned. Candidly, more due diligence needs to happen with panelists because far too often the herd simply follows the well traveled path and doesn't recognize the talent that operates in so many ways today.

The good news is that the real time world we live can be a useful resource in changing those beliefs. We shall see ...

[Ian_L]

Just a progress report, I've put together the top 100 classic and modern courses from Golfweek Magazine.  Here they are in alphabetical order.  I'll be pretty busy for the next week and a half, so unless somebody else wants to make an international list, progress on this project may be slow for a little while.  I'll still be lurking in the forum, though, so please let me know what you think of this list.

Arcadia Bluffs
Aronimink Golf Club
Atlantic City Country Club
Atlantic Golf Club
Augusta Country Club
Augusta National Golf Club
Ballyneal
Baltimore Country Club (East)
Baltusrol Golf Club (Lower)
Baltusrol Golf Club (Upper)
Bandon Dunes
Bandon Trails 
Bayonne Golf Club
Bel-Air Country Club
Bethpage State Park (Black)
Beverly Country Club
Black Diamond Ranch (Quarry)
Black Sheep Golf Club
Black Mesa Golf Club
Blackwolf Run Golf Club (River)
Boston Golf Club
Briggs Ranch Golf Club
Brook Hollow Country Club
Brookside Country Club
Butler National Golf Club
Caledonia Golf & Fish Club
Calusa Pines Golf Club
Camargo Club
Canterbury Golf Club
Cascata
Castle Pines Golf Club
Chambers Bay
Champions Golf Club (Cypress Creek)
Cherry Hills Country Club
Chicago Golf Club
Colonial Country Club
Concession
Congressional Country Club (Blue)
Country Club of Fairfield
Creek Club
Crooked Stick Golf Clu
Crosswater at Sunriver
Crown Colony Golf Club
Crystal Downs Country Club
Cypress Point Club
Dallas National Golf Club
Desert Forest Golf Club
Double Eagle Golf Club
Dunes Club
Dunes Golf & Beach Club
East Lake Golf Club
Eastward Ho!
Ekwanok Country Club
Engineers Club
Essex County Club
Eugene Country Club
Fenway Golf Club
Fishers Island Golf Club
Flint Hills National Golf Club
Forest Creek Golf Club (North)
Forest Highlands Golf Club (Canyon)
Forest Dunes
Fox Chapel Golf Club
Franklin Hills Country Club
Friar’s Head 
Galloway National Golf Club
Garden City Golf Club
Harbour Town Golf Links
Harvester Golf Club
Hawk’s Ridge Golf Club
Hawktree Golf Club
Hazeltine National Golf Club
Hidden Creek Golf Club
Hollywood Golf Club
Holston Hills Country Club
Homestead Resort (Cascades)
Honors Course 
Huntingdon Valley Country Club
Indianwood Country Club (Old)
Interlachen Country Club
Inverness Club
Jupiter Hills Golf Club (Hills)
Kapalua Golf Club (Plantation)
Karsten Creek Golf Club
Kiawah Island Club (Cassique
Kingsley Club
Kinloch Golf Club
Kittansett Club
Lahontan Golf Club
Lake Las Vegas (SouthShore)
Lancaster Country Club
Lawsonia Golf Club (Links)
Lehigh Country Club
Links of North Dakota at Red Mike Resort
Long Cove Club
Los Angeles Country Club (North)
Lost Dunes Golf Club 
Maidstone Club
Mayacama Golf Club
Medinah Country Club (No. 3)
Merion Golf Club (East)
Milwaukee Country Club
Monterey Peninsula Country Club (Shore)
Mountain Lake Club
Muirfield Village
Musgrove Mill Golf Club
Myopia Hunt Club
National Golf Links of America
NCR Country Club (South)
Newport Country Club
Northland Country Club
Oak Hill Country Club (East)
Oak Tree Golf Club
Oakland Hills Country Club (South)
Oakmont Country Club
Ocean Course at Kiawah Island
Ocean Forest Golf Club
Old Tabby Links
Old Town Club
Old Sandwich Golf Club
Olde Farm Golf Club
Olympia Fields Country Club (North)
Olympic Club (Lake)
Paa-Ko Ridge Golf Club
Pacific Dunes
Pasatiempo Golf Club
Peachtree Golf Club
Pebble Beach Golf Links
Pete Dye Golf Club
Philadelphia Country Club (Spring Mill)
Pine Needles Country Club
Pine Valley Golf Club
Pinehurst No. 2
Piping Rock
Plainfield Country Club
Point O’Woods Country Club
Prairie Dunes Country Club
Princeville Golf Club (Prince)
Pronghorn (Fazio)
Pronghorn Club (Nicklaus)
Pumpkin Ridge Golf Club (Witch Hollow)
Quail Hollow Golf Club
Quaker Ridge Golf Club
Quintero Golf and Country Club
Ridgewood Country Club (East/West)
Riviera Country Club
Rolling Green Golf Course
Rustic Canyon Golf Course
Salem Country Club
San Francisco Golf Club
Sanctuary
Sand Hills Golf Club
Scioto Country Club
Sea Island Golf Club (Seaside)
Sebonack Golf Club
Secession Golf Club
Seminole Golf Club
Seven Canyons Golf Course
Shadow Creek Golf Club
Shinnecock Hills Golf Club
Shoal Creek Golf Course
Shoreacres Golf Club
Skokie Country Club
Somerset Hills Country Club
Southern Highlands Golf Club
Southern Hills Country Club
Spyglass Hill Golf Club
St. Louis Country Club
Sunnehanna Country Club
Sutton Bay Club
Taconic Golf Club
The Club at Black Rock
The Country Club (Composite)
The Golf Club
The Golf Club at Cuscowilla
The Minikahda Club
The Powder Horn
The Preserve
The Rim
The Stone Canyon Club
TPC at Sawgrass (Players Stadium)
Trump National Golf Club
Valhalla Golf Club
Valley Club of Montecito
Victoria National Golf Club
Wade Hampton Club
Wannamoisett Country Club
We-Ko-Pa (Saguaro)
Westchester Country Club (West)
Whippoorwill Country Club
Whisper Rock Golf Club (Upper)
Whistling Straits (Straits)
White Bear Yacht Club
Wild Horse Golf Club
Winged Foot Golf Club (East)
Winged Foot Golf Club (West)
Wolf Run
World Woods Golf Club (Pine Barrens)
Yale University Golf Course
Yeamans Hall Club

On a separate note, does anybody have a suggestion for what to name our rankings?  GolfClubAtlas should not be included.

[Sean Walsh]

Golf Course Ranking for Anoraks

[Rob Rigg]

Let's toss Pronghorn - Nicklaus and add Tetherow 

[Michael Dugger]

I'll never support a list which includes Ocean Forest....

 

[Peter Pratt]

Why no love for Pete Dye? Every one of his courses is lower on this list than on the GM list.

[Tom_Doak]

Ian:

Sorry, I missed your post at the top of this page the other day.

GOLF Magazine has gone to an online ballot, so the last printed list of challengers I have is four years old I think.  I'll post that here tomorrow.  My suggestion was just to use the list of courses they vote on as your own, or even to narrow it a bit, but it's up to you how many courses you want to keep track of.

As Matt and Rob hinted -- one of the very best things you can do is just rank all of the courses based on their average vote, and list the # of votes they received right beside each, as you have presented it.  If you take your results out to 150 or 200 places, then the reader can decide for themselves if a course which places 50th, but only has four votes, is statistically significant or not.  The magazines keep to a minimum number of votes before a course can be ranked, because they think that making their List is so prestigious, and they don't want to make a goofy selection and have it thrown back at them.

If you treat your ranking more as an ongoing process, then everyone will look at the results from a healthier perspective.

[Matt_Ward]

Gents:

Keep in mind that total vote only means more people have played a course. It doesn't mean to say that courses with less actual visits are less so but clearly if total vote is the key indicator then such courses on the beaten trail and those with previous "high name" recognition wll continue to be placed higher than those that are otherwise.

Tom D mentioned this in his last post and frankly I don't see how a consensus driven formula really shows anything of uniqueness -- save for the fact that you have people weighing in with their personal choices.

I'd much rather see the list of a given individual and then see what tpe of preferences they have -- it's more consistent and clearly not influenced by the need to provide some sort of "consensus."

[Ian_L]

I think it might be easier to keep all the courses, simply because it's better to have too many than too few, and a trimming process would just add to the difficulty of the project.  A few of the newer courses such as Rock Creek and Tetherow don't make this list, so perhaps a short nomination process is necessary?  I do agree that since this is an informal list it would be good to include courses no matter how many votes they have, and let the reader make his own decisions.

If you treat your ranking more as an ongoing process, then everyone will look at the results from a healthier perspective.

Are you suggesting posting results while the survey is still open?   The only problem I see with this is that, as others suggested earlier, some might vote down certain courses if they see them as being too high on the list.  I like your point about "a healthier perspective," though.  I look forward to seeing the GOLF Magazine list.

Matt, nobody has said that number of votes should be the key factor.  The reasoning people are getting at is that if only one person votes on a course and gives it a 10, that doesn't mean it should be at the top of a list.  However, I agree with you that less-played courses should be included anyway, as long as the reader can see how many votes each course has received.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Matt - why the resistance to this exercise?  If a course has only a few visits we are all qualified to view it accordingly.  On the other hand if 30+ "psychos"  from this site vote on a given course with reasonably low standard deviation (.75 or less) I, for one, am going to sit up and take notice where its ranking falls. 

If Ian wants to get a sense of the "quality" of his inputs (how experienced the pollers are) he can simply total the number of "ballot courses seen" for each rater.  You could go one step further and total the number of top 100 world courses seen by that rater.  This would help satisfy a concern of Matt's that courses were not being voted on by "experienced" raters.  If you want to go a little wild and really reduce this to an analytical exercise you could parametrically emphasize the weights of the experienced votes to those of the less experienced.  In the end, I think you would just be tweeking and not significantly changing the orverall rankings.

Ian - Tom D ranking numbers were originally meant to be a personal qualitative evaluation of a course.  I agree with Tom that grades between 5-10 should be the only numbers allowed for your ballot.  But it would be better if we modified Doak's numbers to make them quantitative and more related to ranking - which, after all, is the exercise's objective.

Sometime like this.

"Your vote for course X means you feel the course is...."

10 - top 10 in the world
9 - top 11-25 in the world
8 - top 26-50 in the world
7 - top 51-100 in the world
6 - top 101-200 in the world
5 - top 201-400 in the world

JC

[Ian_L]

Jonathan, I see your point about quantifying the scale we are using.  Personally, I don't really like the idea, probably because I would have a lot of trouble ranking these courses with any kind of confidence, since I haven't played any of the top 10 or many of the top 100 for that matter.  I have no idea how good the #200 course should be, since I haven't played the other 199.  I feel the Doak scale would portray a much more accurate account of my opinion of the course.  I guess it's the relative nature of your ranking system that makes me uncomfortable.  However, if most involved are leaning towards this idea, I think it should be implemented.

On a separate note, what will happen when we apply statistical policing to a course with 3 or 4 votes?  Will this create problems?  Thanks.

[Tom_Doak]

Ian:

I think you are fine with using just the Doak scale, as long as it's clear to everyone that "8" is the threshold for the top 100 in the world.  Then, it's obvious that 8, 9 and 10 are votes "for" the list in varying strengths, and 5-6-7 are votes "against" in varying degrees.

(Notice how Jonathan missed the scale by one point!)

[Tom_Doak]

I do think it's a good idea to "check" voters against the existing top 100 list (any of them!).  When I ran the GOLF Magazine panel we would list the top 100 courses from two years past at the top of the ballot ... not to create peer pressure but to say that if you want to vote for ten of the challengers as belonging to the top 100, there ought to be about ten courses among the current top 100 which you are voting OFF the list.

Lots of people want to take the easy way out and just assume that some course they haven't seen (say, Valderrama) should be out of the list to make room for their favorite.  If they've seen 95 of the top 100, maybe that's okay ... but if they've only seen 25 of them and they are giving out 50 "8" votes, then they are just deluded.  By listing the ranked courses at the top of the ballot, you give the voters an opportunity to reality-check themselves.

Of course, some will argue that this has the effect of unofficially promoting the courses which are already listed in the top 100.

[Tom_Doak]

Ian:

Now you are about to find out why running one of these polls is so complicated.

I have quickly gone through the old GOLF WORLD lists of the best courses in the UK and Ireland and the best in Continental Europe, as well as the GOLF DIGEST "Planet Golf" List of the best courses in 197 (!) countries.  If you use all those lists you get something like 250 challengers, even though realistically only 50 of those courses would ever get any serious support for the top 100 courses in the world.

I'll list them all, and put asterisks by the ones I think you should bother putting on the ballot.

[Tom_Doak]

CANADA (all *)

Banff Springs
Beacon Hall
Devil's Paintbrush
Hamilton
Highlands Links
Jasper Park
National GC of Canada
Redtail
Royal Montreal (Blue)
Shaughnessy
St. George's

CARIBBEAN / ISLANDS

Abaco Club, Bahamas *
Lyford Cay, Bahamas *
Ocean Club, Bahamas
Sandy Lane (Green Monkey) *
Mid Ocean *
Port Royal, Bermuda
Casa de Campo (Teeth of the Dog) *
Casa de Campo (Dye Fore)
Punta Espada @ Cap Cana *
Tryall, Jamaica
White Witch, Jamaica *
Dorado Beach (East), Puerto Rico *
Four Seasons, Nevis

CENTRAL AMERICA / MEXICO

Peninsula Papagayo, Costa Rica *
Cabo del Sol (Ocean) *
Club de Golf Mexico *
El Dorado, Cabo
Four Seasons Punta Mita
Guadalajara CC
Querencia

SOUTH AMERICA

Buenos Aires GC
Chapelco, Argentina
The Jockey Club (Red) *
Mar del Plata GC
Olivos GC *
Itanhanga, Brazil
Terravista, Brazil
Los Leones, Chile *
El Rincon, Colombia *
Lagos de Caujaral, Colombia *
Cantegril, Uruguay
Laguinta, Venezuela

[Tom_Doak]

AFRICA / MIDDLE EAST

Dubai Creek
Emirates GC (Wadi) *
El Jadida, Morocco
Royal Dar-es-Salaam (Red) *
Durban CC *
Fancourt (Links), S Africa *
Gary Player CC, Sun City *
Humewood, S Africa
Leopard Creek, S Africa *
Pinnacle Point, S Africa *
Royal Johannesburg (East)

ASIA

Mission Hills (Norman), China *
Pine Valley, Beijing *
Spring City (Lake), China *
Tiger Beach, China *
Delhi GC
Royal Calcutta
Bintan Lagoon (Nicklaus), Indonesia
Nirwana Bali, Indonesia *
Abiko, Japan
Hirono *
Kasumigaseki (East) *
Kawana (Fuji) *
Naruo *
Phoenix CC, Miyazaki *
Tokyo Golf Club *
Nine Bridges, Korea *
Pinx GC, Korea
Sky 72 (Nicklaus), Korea
Saujana (Palm), Malaysia
The Mines, Malaysia
Blue Canyon, Thailand *
Dalat Palace, Vietnam
Ocean Dunes, Vietnam

AUSTRALIA / NEW ZEALAND (all *)

The Australian GC
Barnbougle Dunes
Ellerston
Kingston Heath
Metropolitan GC
National GC (Moonah)
Newcastle GC
New South Wales GC
Royal Adelaide
Royal Melbourne (East)
Royal Melbourne (West)
Victoria GC
Cape Kidnappers, N.Z.
Gulf Harbour
Kauri Cliffs
Kinloch GC, Taupo
Paraparaumu Beach
Titirangi
Wairakei, N.Z.

[Matthew Hunt]

Tom, do you think the Green Monkey at Sandy Lane is good, I saw I bit on TV and wasn't really immpressed, or did I just see some bad holes?

[Rich Goodale]

Tom

Thanks for that list, but would you not agree that if you compared those courses to the "unranked" courses of GBI and the USA, very few of them would prevail?

rich

[Tom_Doak]

EUROPE (listed by country)

Murhof, Austria
Ravenstein, Belgium
Royal Zoute *
Chantilly, France *
Fontainebleau *
Les Bordes *
Morfontaine *
Golf National, France
Prince de Provence
Seignosse
Sperone, Corsica
St. Germain *
Bad Griesbach, Germany
Berliner GC
S.C. Berlin (Faldo) *
Hamburger GC *
Seddiner See
Club Zur Vahr, Bremen *
Biella, Italy *
Castelcontrubia
I Roveri
Le Querce
Milano GC
Pevero *
Villa d'Este
De Pan, Netherlands
Haagsche *
Kennemer *
Noordwijk *
Oitavos, Portgual
Penha Longa
Praia d'El Rey *
San Lorenzo *
Troia *
Vilamoura
Moscow CC, Russia
PGA Catalunya, Spain
Club de Campo Madrid *
El Saler *
Golf de Neguri
Puerta de Hierro
San Roque
Sotogrande (Old) *
Valderrama *
Barseback, Sweden
Falsterbo *
Halmstad *
Ullna
Geneva GC, Switz.
National GC, Turkey

[Matthew Hunt]

Are we allowed to vote for ones we have walked but not played?

[Tom_Doak]

Rich:

Yes, I would agree that in most cases, these courses pale in comparison to the best of the UK and USA and are unlikely to get ranked among the top 100 courses in the world. 

However, it's very easy to dismiss a few good ones that way.  It's called throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[Rich Goodale]

I fully agree, Tom, but my point was that by including so much bathwater in your top 250 we are missing all those babies in the USA and GBI that ought to be considered but do not show up on any of the lists on this thread so far.

Rich

[Matt_Ward]

Jonathan:

I salute Ian for what he is attempting to do but c'mon let's be clear shall we -- the consensus driven formulas, of whatever type they are, is rather limiting. When you have to weigh whether people voted too high or too low and other such actions you begin to have someone have to serve in the difficult role as "judge" to determine the varous motivations involved.

People can do as they wish -- I see little meaningful info coming into play because consensus results have a tendency to simply validate all of the usual suspects -- and add very little elsewhere.

Jonathan, the formula needs to bulk up on those folks who have played more and seen more. The idea of "one man / one vote" doesn't work because not all raters are equal in terms of their trips and travels to see
the wide variety of courses throughout the USA and / or the world.

There also needs to be some sort of way to highlight those courses that get so little notice because of where they are located. New York metro area courses have a tremendous built in advantage because when people visit -- they will play a Shinnecock or WF, and then add on a few others. Those "others" benefit from the spillover -- that doesn't work so well when you a solitary course with little else in and around where it's located.

One other thing -- why the base floor for ratings. It might just be that an experienced rater will give a course -- even one thought to be stellar -- a lower grade for clear reasons. No doubt that won't happen often -- but once you set "rules" or needed "guidelines" you then intercede to keep the "rogue" rater in check.

Jonathan, you suggestion about how to handle such situations is worth considering.


Rich G:

Your observations are spot on -- why clog the runways with courses that are the best of their respective country but no doubt have little real standing when a best of the world is considered. Rating need not be egalitarian / politically correct adventures.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()