Top 10 Courses This Decade?

[James Boon]

Isn't Kingsbarns this decade? Also, as others have mentioned Castle Stuart certainly deserves consideration.

Cheers,

James

[Jonathan Cummings]

I've played them all.  Castle Stuart runs circles around the bottom four.  I'll see Mach Dunes next Sept.  From what I hear it may well be up there too.  JC

[Kevin Pallier]

I have only walked the course once but St Andrews Beach would be worth considering.  Some of the Aussie guys may wish to voice an opinion on this.

Ash

I like SAB but I think most of those listed in Jim's original list - that I've seen - are better than it.

[Jim Colton]

Isn't Kingsbarns this decade? Also, as others have mentioned Castle Stuart certainly deserves consideration.

Cheers,

James

James,

I have Kingsbarns opening in 1999. That's according to Golf Magazine, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right either. That's just what I using as my source of record. I think Kingsbarbs would've been 5th or 6th if it were eligible.

I'm all for adding Castle Stuart to the list. I just need some idea where to put it. You had it in your Whip It out top 25 but you only listed them alphabetically. Can you provide a peer group of say 4-5 courses in your top 25 that give an indication of where you'd put it.

Jim

[Emil Weber]

Rustic Canyon.

[John Kirk]

In the long run, I believe a course like Kinloch in Virginia will be remembered more fondly than Chambers Bay.  We'll see.

[Mac Plumart]

John...

I find those types of comments very interesting.  If you wouldn't mind, I would love to hear why you think that. 

As an FYI...I have no dog in the fight, I haven't played either course, I have no bias or pre-conceived idea of which one is better.

I simply love to hear opinions on "why" people like course X over course Y.  It is especially interesting with courses that are so highly regarded.

 

[PThomas]

NOT Arcadia Bluffs.... a poor routing and any course where there is a sign tellling me i can't/shouldnt play down an adjacent fairway loses poiints in my book

[Garland Bayley]

...
I'm all for adding Castle Stuart to the list. I just need some idea where to put it. ...

It, and Barnbougle Dunes are the only true links in the list. I would suggest it has to be at least a tie for 3rd.
Caveat. The definition of "true links" in this case is my own, and not subject to discussion.

[Roger Wolfe]

I believe serious consideration should go to Primland and Diamond Creek.  Both are shining examples of giant pockets, beautiful mountaintops, and millions of tons of sand.

[Phil_the_Author]

Kingsbarns opened for play onj July 28 in 2000...

[Matt_Ward]

What would be interesting is to have a top ten list that features varied types of design -- not just having multiple versions of the same type.

[Jud_T]

Matt,

Ok-how about Good, Bad and Indifferent.....

[Jim Colton]

Has anybody seen or played Nine Bridges in S. Korea? It was 20th on Golf Magazine's Top 50 Last 50, ahead of Sebonack, Ballyneal, Chambers Bay and Bandon Trails.

1. Sand Hills
2. Pacific Dunes
3. Whistling Straits (Straits)
4. Cape Kidnappers
5. Barnbougle Dunes
6. Friar's Head
7. Muirfield Village
8. Casa de Campo (Teeth of the Dog)
9. TPC Sawgrass (Players Stadium)
10. The Ocean Course at Kiawah Island
11. Kingsbarns
12. Bandon Dunes
13. Loch Lomond
14. The Golf Club
15. Valderrama
16. The European Club
17. Harbour Town
18. Kauri Cliffs
19. Cabo del Sol (Ocean)
20. Nine Bridges
21. Shadow Creek
22. Sebonack
23. Spyglass Hill
24. Ballyneal
25. Old Sandwich
26. The Honors Course
27. Chambers Bay
28. Calusa Pines
29. Wade Hampton
30. Waterville
31. Pete Dye Golf Club
32. Nanea
33. Bandon Trails
34. Ocean Forest
35. Desert Forest
36. Double Eagle
37. World Woods (Pine Barrens)
38. Black Diamond Ranch (Quarry)
39. Blackwolf Run (River)
40. Castle Pines
41. Hazeltine National
42. Jupiter Hills (Hills)
43. National Golf Club
44. Ellerston
45. Trump National (Old)
46. Long Cove
47. Oitavos Dunes
48. Mayacama
49. Spring City (Lake)
50. The Club at Black Rock

[Patrick Kiser]

Agree about Rustic.  A blast and a return to core values of affordable golf where creativity in shot making is rewarded.  Lots of different ways to play the holes and ... the wind is very involved.

A little surprised in not even seeing Matt mention Black Mesa.  Not for everyone but a significant course this decade I would think.

I have a soft spot for TT Rawls.  Feels and looks minimalist despite the amount of ''recycled'' earth moving.  Very fun and playable.  Fast and firm.

Mention for Barona Creek as well.  Really have good memories of my round there some time back.

 

[Matt_Ward]

Patrick:

Well said -- my feelings on Black Mesa are well known to the group and I see it as being a very influential layout for what it provides.

The key to remember is that one is speaking about the 10 BEST courses this decade.

As I said previously -- Nicklaus did a stellar job with his effort at Red Ledges but because Jack is not in the "elite" pantheon as certain other architects his work is always considered second tier stuff with very, very few exceptions.

Black Mesa, in my mind, is no less an equal to what the proponents ascribe to Rustic Canyon. In fact, I see the NM course ahead of it and as Andy mentioned previously -- I see the Santa Fe-based layout on par with the kind of incredible sensations you get from playing a place like The Kingsley Club.

The tough part is weeding out which ones cannot make a personal top 10 and for me that requires some really additional thoughts.

happy to post when i've finished thinking it through.

[Andy Troeger]

For what its worth, I'd take Black Mesa over Rustic Canyon for the "affordable course" of the decade--admittedly Rustic is a bit less costly but both are the types of courses that hopefully will make an impact on designs to come. I have to admit, the environmentally sensitive areas at Rustic bug me--they prohibit recovery on a course that otherwise promotes it. And for me, the land and setting at Black Mesa create more variety in the design than at Rustic Canyon. 

The amazing thing to me though is that even though I have Black Mesa in the top 50 in the USA, it might not be one of the top ten of the decade. It falls behind Rock Creek, Chambers Bay, and The Alotian on my list and there are some wonderful looking places that I haven't seen. Makes for interesting discussion in any case.

[James Boon]

Isn't Kingsbarns this decade? Also, as others have mentioned Castle Stuart certainly deserves consideration.

Cheers,

James

James,

I have Kingsbarns opening in 1999. That's according to Golf Magazine, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right either. That's just what I using as my source of record. I think Kingsbarbs would've been 5th or 6th if it were eligible.

I'm all for adding Castle Stuart to the list. I just need some idea where to put it. You had it in your Whip It out top 25 but you only listed them alphabetically. Can you provide a peer group of say 4-5 courses in your top 25 that give an indication of where you'd put it.

Jim

Jim,

You have Kingsbarns as 99, Philip Young above has it as, July 2000, but I'll leave it for others to decide if its a nineties or noughties course... 

I'm flattered that you read my Whip it Out Top 25 and can remember what I put in it. I can only just remember myself! As far as Castle Stuart is concerned, I would probably put it in a group with North Berwick, Brancaster and Askernish. Great fun to play, and plenty of (pseudo) old fashioned character. I think it has the potential for a promotion to the next group up of say Royal County Down and Royal Dornoch, but its a little young yet to know if it will still feel like that in time?

Cheers,

James

[Phil_the_Author]

James,

Kingsbarns officially opened for play in July of 2000. That having been said, it still is of the last decade of the 20th century; in fact the end of the first decade of the 21st century won't be until December 31st of 2010...

This "best of the decade" stuff is simply a year early...

[John Kirk]

John...

I find those types of comments very interesting.  If you wouldn't mind, I would love to hear why you think that. 

As an FYI...I have no dog in the fight, I haven't played either course, I have no bias or pre-conceived idea of which one is better.

I simply love to hear opinions on "why" people like course X over course Y.  It is especially interesting with courses that are so highly regarded.

Hi Mac,

Chambers Bay is a very enjoyable course, with especially nice par 4 holes.  In its current form, however, one never loses the sense that he is playing in a gravel quarry.  Green to tee walks such as 3-4 and 9-10 are a bit awkward.  Pace of play is always suspect there, and establishment of mature fescue surfaces has not been uniformly achieved.

Kinloch has one long green to tee walk between nines; a shuttle picks players and caddies up.  Conditioning is superb.

Both courses have distinctive traits.  Chambers Bay has the turf and contours that encourage "the ground game".  Kinloch is very wide for a parkland design, enhancing air flow around the course for bent grass cultivation.  There are only a few weeks each year where Kinloch plays firm and fast; usually it's pretty soft to keep the bent grass happy.  Both courses have a nice succession of challenges, though Kinloch is exceptional in that regard.

At the end of the day, I say Kinloch stays in top 100 lists because of the all around pleasant experience it provides.  It is a more natural setting for a course, and I would argue it is aesthetically superior.  Chambers Bay is rather unattractive in the middle of the day, and only becomes photogenic near sunrise and sunset.  Chambers Bay may have the better par 4 holes, but it's a close call even there.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

Given what you wrote ... how much does conditioning / appearance matter to you.

Would Kinloch get as much favorable love from you if it were in the same turf shape as Chambers Bay ?

[John Kirk]

Hi Matt,

I have to go run some errands, but briefly, sure, both aesthetics and conditioning matter a lot to me.  For one thing, good conditioning allow a course's architecture to shine.  The two courses have such different turf types, it's hard to even compare.  The fairways at Chambers Bay are pretty nice, but the young greens have to endure 30,000 rounds a year, so they're slow most of the time.  I don't even know how you can evaluate Chambers Bay without playing the course when the greens are fast enough to create some action.

If we base our evaluation on "strategic interest", perhaps Chambers Bay wins by a whisker, in part due to the firm fescue turf.  I like Kinloch's par 3s and par 5s better than Chambers Bay.

However, my original comment is as follows:  I believe the long-term consensus opinion will rate Kinloch above Chambers Bay.  Not my opinion, but the collective opinion.

John 

[Matt_Ward]

John:

I agree with you that "good" conditioning plays a major role in enhancing the design elements that were thought of by the architect.

Too many people on GCA -- fawn over AS in AZ but truthfully they have so utterly dismissed what sound conditioning can provide.

Curious to note how you say CB would only win by a "whisker" when the sole dimension is tied to "strategic interest."

I wonder if CB is more closely to aligned to AS and gains plenty of support because of its stellar location and because of the wild native terrain it possesses.

John, kind of confused by YOUR last comment -- you say, you see group consensus favoring Kinloch -- might that be because conditioning is more important than many here might imagine?

One final question for you -- if 100% is the totality of any course -- what percentage do you see conditioning being a part of that mixture?

[Mac Plumart]

John...

Thanks...it is always fun for me to read well thought out responses like yours.



Matt...

I've found that most people who are not overly concerned with golf course architecture are WOW'ed by conditioning and maintenance.  In the "Confidential Guide" Tom Doak says he tries to ignore the conditioning of a course and focus solely on the design and layout of a course.  However, I think that is hard for most people to do.  Furthermore, Mike Young said that aside from 1,500 people in the world, most others confuse maintenance of a golf course for architecture (or at least he said something to that effect).

So...your comments/questions are very valid.  I might even argue that you could take an average course...put some elbow grease into the thing concerning maintenance, eye catching mowing patterns, prettied up bunkers, etc AND then take a great course, let it go just a bit....and the everyday golfer would prefer to play on the first course.  

Just a few observations I've made in my brief time associated with the game.

Thanks guys!

EDIT...Matt, what course are you refering to when you say "AS in AZ"...thanks and excuse my stoopidittee.

[Garland Bayley]

Matt,

It is my understanding that only #12 at CB would have something akin to what I guess you mean by "native terrain". The rest of the course is pretty much manufactured terrain. E.g. #10 was created by mining the best sand on the property which was found there to be carted off to the other holes.

You also sound like you think CB has poor conditioning, which is simply not true.