[Emil Weber]

Kevin have you been to Royal Queensland?

[Kevin Pallier]

Emil

I haven't been to RQ since Mike Clayton's redesign - hence it is not listed within my Top50. I hear some good reports about it though.

[Sean_A]

Where on the list does the quality really start to noticeably drop?

Sean

I think our Top4 are most definitely World Top100 courses. Then 5 to 20 are pretty much our 2nd Tier and so on.

The quality starts to get more "open" from say 40 onwards IMO.

I agree with Andrew - there's at least 20-30 courses in GB&I that are World Top100 quality.

Kevin & Josh

This is what I meant.  After 40 it seems as though the reason for listing a course (which is meant to be special no?) as top ... loses meaning except to make up numbers for a nice number like 50 or 100.  

Yes, there probably are 20 or 30 world class courses in GB&I, but does that mean we need a top 100 list?  I think the list would be more meaningful if it were more discerning and really got down to nuts n' bolts.  That way, perhaps there can be some sort text to accompany each course without taking up too much space.  

I always wondered why mags didn't have different categories (top 50, top 25 publics, top 10 under $50 or whatever), only one list for each year and throughout the year those courses are profiled in the mag.  It works to spread out the coverage for more courses to fit all budgets/personalcircumstances and to end the dopey idea of the top 100 coming out every year when there aren't enough changes on the landscape to warrant it.  

Ciao

[Brian Phillips]

Sean,

I would love to have a rankings system based on the construction budgets of the course when built especially on a Best New Golf Course ranking.  I have never had a budget and would love to get into a ranking table where I am not having to compete with the Normans, Nicklauses and Palmers of this world but it ain't ever going to happen...

[Andrew Summerell]

Sean, I'm not sure this would work, but many of the mags have a points system to do their lists. Maybe they could merely list those courses over a certain number of points.

If they used this system, it would be interesting to see how many complaints the mags received. Many courses (esp. pay to play) use the lists for marketing & some of those courses would be advertisers in the mags.

[Matthew Mollica]

Matty,

You are one sad SOB....do you sleep with those gadgets at night...

I can just imagine the conversations around your breakfast table with your missus....

You'd love the discussions around our breakfast table Brian.
Cathy loves Royal Sydney 

MM

[Brian Phillips]

Matty,

You are one sad SOB....do you sleep with those gadgets at night...

I can just imagine the conversations around your breakfast table with your missus....

You'd love the discussions around our breakfast table Brian.
Cathy loves Royal Sydney 

MM

At least there is someone in the family with intelligence...

Watch out for threads over the Christmas period regarding the Aussie trip.  I am going to finish the NSW thread and I will analyse the holes as you suggested.

[James Bennett]

Matty,

You are one sad SOB....do you sleep with those gadgets at night...

I can just imagine the conversations around your breakfast table with your missus....

You'd love the discussions around our breakfast table Brian.
Cathy loves Royal Sydney 

MM

Gosh, I hope she doesn't barrack for Collingwood as well!

James B

[Dieter Jones]

Kevin, I am amember at Royal Hobart. It is a pleasent place and an enjoyable club to be a member at but the course lacks strategic value. This is due partly to the layout and partly to the conditioning. Unfortunately the arrival of almost unlimited grey water 2 years back means that the course is heavily over watered IMO.

My favorite hole would probably be the par 5 13th (513m). There is a cross bunker on the left of the fairway 150m out from the green and a nicely angled green that favours an approach from the left side of the fairway. For the past couple of years the fairway on the left side (between that bunker and the green) has shifted further and further right. If you take on the cross bunker with your second (a fair carry in heavy winter conditions) to set up the best shot to the green you end up in the rough. The philosophy seems to be that it is too easy to hit the green from over there!!

 It plays way longer than its 6200m becasue there is no run for 6 months of the year (winter) and very little run for the other 6 with the watering. Most of the greens sit straight up the hole (ie longer than they are wide) and slope back to front. This sameness is another detraction.

If given to the right person (eg Mr Clayton) assuming he was allowed a less restrictive brief than given to the 1997 masterplan designers, it could avtually be made into a decent course.

[Mike_Clayton]

Dieter,

I have not played there since the 1986 Tasmanian Open. I remember it quite well - a Morcom course with all the issues of dogleg holes where the shots to the corners are too shot and the choice is an iron off the tee or a high tee shot over trees
There is no reason why it could not be at least a top 50 course - and it should be important for every capital city in the country to have at least one of those.
It is a measure of the quality of the new courses and the recent work on the older ones that neither Royal Hobart nor Tasmania are really considered top 50 courses any more. They both could be with sensible work but that will take money and committment.
Having said that the state is about to have two of the best three courses in the country - and who would have thought that five years ago?

[Jason McNamara]

Mike, I look forward to seeing your re-design plans for Royal Darwin.  :-)

[Robin Doodson]

Does anyone know why some of the panels ratings were not included after they had been submitted?

Perhaps they didn't fit with the consensus of opinion.

the list does certainly slant towards a certain camp by "coincidence" apparently.

??

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()