[Andy Troeger]

Huck and Shiv -

GD has missed the boat on Kingsley for FAR too long. Top 20 in the state is an absolute joke. As far as Rock Creek goes, it is tough to get to and not enough people made it. I say give GW a pass. I hope enough of our guys make it there this year. I know at least two will .

Some others have commented on Pete Dye GC. It is fantastic and my favorite Pete Dye layout. 'Nuff said.

Agreed on Kingsley--we don't have any good excuse at this point. Hopefully there are more than two of us out at Rock Creek!

[Matt_Ward]

Rock Creek should have been included in the modern listing -- in my opinion.

I'm not going to tout the course as high as Shivas would like but I was very impressed with what it provides - save for the weak closer which was good but far from being the powerful closer I had hoped would be present.

I've said this previously -- of all the pure-Doak courses I have played his collection of par-4's there is truly something to witness and lies at the heart of the strength of Rock Creek.

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim and Andy, you ought to be freakin' ashamed of yourself.

As correct as each of you are, don't you have any sense of humor... or more importantly, VENGEANCE??

These GW namby-pamby can't choose between Cypress and Sand Hills wusses tore us all new asses when Kingsley didn't IMMEDIATELY vault to the top its VERY FIRST YEAR.  As one of the head wusses points out here, it was INANE.

Well... as inane as it was... what's good for the freakin' goose is good for the gander.

Thus I want no excuses.  GW is out of it's freakin' mind not to have Rock Creek way up at the top NOW!

And don't you all forget it.

Logic and reality has no place in this - have you all lost your minds?

 

[Sean_A]

I just went to the state rankings and saw that in Michigan one of my all time favourites is still hangin tough - The Gailes at #6.  Not many of the courses built in the early 90s are still highly thought of.  I think The Gailes is in truth under-valued/rated in Michigan and I prefer it to Lederach or Tobacco Road.   

Ciao

[Andy Troeger]

Huck,
I wasn't participating at the time of that Kingsley debate so it doesn't register for me with the passion that it does for you 

Problem is we still haven't corrected our mistake--I have a feeling Rock Creek might make the GolfWeek list long before Kingsley makes Golf Digest.

[Mike_Cirba]

Huck,
I wasn't participating at the time of that Kingsley debate so it doesn't register for me with the passion that it does for you 

Problem is we still haven't corrected our mistake--I have a feeling Rock Creek might make the GolfWeek list long before Kingsley makes Golf Digest.

Such realistic intellectual honesty about the validity and value of the comparative publication's ratings is indeed very refreshing here! 

[Tom Huckaby]

Sure, you're right Andy....

You're also zero fun whatsoever about this.

Same goes for you, Franklin.

As for validity and value of the comparative publications' rankings.. ask someone outside of this forum, Mike.  Make sure and tell them Golfweek exists.

 

[Matt_Ward]

To bolster indirectly what Sean mentioned -- I looked over the Modern Listing and roughly 52 of the current 100 are courses opened from 1998 onwards.

Be curious to see how many of those courses are still around in a decades time frame.

Clearly, it appears the newest opened courses catch the eye -- the bigger question is whether they can keep the eye on them in the years that follow.

[Mike_Cirba]

Clearly, it appears the newest opened courses catch the eye -- the bigger question is whether they can keep the eye on them in the years that follow.

The bigger question to me seems whether they'll still be around in the years that follow.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

In reading this thread I am a little puzzled.
If no one or an insufficeient number has seen a venue..ie..Rock creek how can you expect it to be included.
Just because Doak is the architect and the photographs look great...that is not enough to include it this year..I agree with GW.
Even though it is "probably" good enough

[Tom Huckaby]

In reading this thread I am a little puzzled.
If no one or an insufficeient number has seen a venue..ie..Rock creek how can you expect it to be included.
Just because Doak is the architect and the photographs look great...that is not enough to include it this year..I agree with GW.
Even though it is "probably" good enough

MWP - and puzzled you ought to be... as was I when all these GW folks berated GD for not including Kingsley that very first year.

Because of course, one cannot expect RC to be included... but then again, one could not expect KC to be included by GD that first year... but for some reason these guys had that expectation then..... to the extent of questioning sanity...

So, what is good for the goose is indeed good for the gander.

[Jim Franklin]

In reading this thread I am a little puzzled.
If no one or an insufficeient number has seen a venue..ie..Rock creek how can you expect it to be included.
Just because Doak is the architect and the photographs look great...that is not enough to include it this year..I agree with GW.
Even though it is "probably" good enough

MWP - and puzzled you ought to be... as was I when all these GW folks berated GD for not including Kingsley that very first year.

Because of course, one cannot expect RC to be included... but then again, one could not expect KC to be included by GD that first year... but for some reason these guys had that expectation then..... to the extent of questioning sanity...

So, what is good for the goose is indeed good for the gander.

I will agree that GD should not have received grief for not includung Kingsley the first year, but since we are waaaaaaay beyond that first year, it blows my mind. Although I will tell you I had several not course raters from my club play there and hate it. They love Sand Hills but not Kingsley. I don't get it, but they do. Anyway, GW should receive the same amount of crap for not getting Rock Creek listed as well. I really hope GD gets a fair amount of people there (15 to be exact).

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim, what's happened beyond the first year is beside the point. The aim here remains not anything but giving the goose the same crap they gave the gander.

So really the only salient portion of your post is this:

Anyway, GW should receive the same amount of crap for not getting Rock Creek listed as well.

THus I am trying to dish such out.

 

[Jim Franklin]

Dish away Huck. Using those parameters then GW deserves the heckling for not including Rock Creek.

[Tom Huckaby]

Dish away Huck. Using those parameters then GW deserves the heckling for not including Rock Creek.

...at least for a little while, until GD doesn't have it on their 2009 list either! 

I live for today.  Bite me Goose.

Sayeth the Gander.

[Jim Franklin]

Dish away Huck. Using those parameters then GW deserves the heckling for not including Rock Creek.

...at least for a little while, until GD doesn't have it on their 2009 list either! 

I know we won't have Rock Creek on our list this year, but Kingsley better be. Somehow I don't think it will not make our Top 100 (beyond me why) so let the fireworks begin in a few weeks.

[Tom Huckaby]

Franklin, you have a real problem with living in the moment.  Can't we PLEASE enjoy the greatness that is now?

If and when our magazine fails to list Kingsley again, then yes, let the fireworks begin. You just sure as hell don't have to ligh the fuse during the GW roasting BBQ.

 

[Jim Franklin]

I am just a realist.

But I can't believe RC wasn't in GW's Top 100. Amazing. Did you hear Shivas rave about the course last year? Shocking it didn't make the list. Shocking I tell you.

[Tom Huckaby]

I am just a realist.

But I can't believe RC wasn't in GW's Top 100. Amazing. Did you hear Shivas rave about the course last year? Shocking it didn't make the list. Shocking I tell you.

Now we're talking.  How in the hell did those morons omit a course that is so obviously great, such that the pre-quitting the game shivas would have pointed the plane there before all other possible sites? The only answer is imbecility, stupidity or otherwise complete lack of vision.

 

[PThomas]

Franklin, you have a real problem with living in the moment.  Can't we PLEASE enjoy the greatness that is now?

If and when our magazine fails to list Kingsley again, then yes, let the fireworks begin. You just sure as hell don't have to ligh the fuse during the GW roasting BBQ.

 

if Jim doesn't I know a few people who can Huck

[Matt_Ward]

The issue for me is that magazines now feel compelled to come out with yearly updates on courses. The reality is that a bit of time should be the norm before such announcements occur. This would minimize the possibility that certain courses would miss out in a given year because of a lack of panelists playing there.

Second, the idea that matters can change that much in a given year is not likely in most cases. In simple terms, pubs are just coming out with such issues because the "news" they provide is hoped to generate a fair share of comments / interests, advertisers, etc, etc.

When any pub has several hundred raters in tow and can't be on top of all the key courses then something is amiss. All the excuses can be thrown forward but if the key info is coming from other sources than any magazine that takes great pains to puff their chest out and proclaim themselves as the source of all key info should really begin to question their own self promotion as hot air.

Is it tough to get to Deer Lodge, MT? Sure. Is it tough to get to Marquette, MI? Sure. But to be really taken seriously a national pub needs to be ahead of any curve and not have others players outflank them with better information.

[PCCraig]

I suppose the only real "shocker" surprise I noticed last night was that Erin Hills was ranked the 5th public course in WI, behind the Irish Course at WS.

Now I have never been to Erin Hills (I hope to this summer) but considering all the talk of US Opens and how great the course is I am surprised it's not higher. Just a thought.

[John Kirk]

Encore!

Old Sandwich is rated #13 among modern courses.  Any opinions about the golf course?

[Mike_Cirba]

Encore!

Old Sandwich is rated #13 among modern courses.  Any opinions about the golf course?

John,

Two friends of mine whose opinions I value played it the day after they played Boston Golf Club and much preferred Boston.   In fact, they both called Old Sandwich a Doak "6".   

They both used to post here but those were the good old days. 

I have nothing more to offer other than I think Boston Golf Club is tremendous, so perhaps that's part of the reason for their letdown?

[PCCraig]

Encore!

Old Sandwich is rated #13 among modern courses.  Any opinions about the golf course?

John,

Two friends of mine whose opinions I value played it the day after they played Boston Golf Club and much preferred Boston.   In fact, they both called Old Sandwich a Doak "6".   

They both used to post here but those were the good old days. 

I have nothing more to offer other than I think Boston Golf Club is tremendous, so perhaps that's part of the reason for their letdown?

Mike-

I would agree with your friends. Both are very very good, but I liked Boston GC better. Just my opinion.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()