East v West -- the continuation of the divide ...

[Matt_Ward]

I just returned from a short trek to the AZ area -- and with a few buds in tow watched the opening game of the Celts / La-la Lakers in action and a few of my long time friends who love golf passionately and have lived on the left coast for some time mentioned to me about the blatant east coast bias there is in plenty of particular instances.

The subject turned towards golf and a few of them said quite clearly that if the Missisissippi River were the diviiding line between the eastern portiion and western portion that the western portion has now the better case for quality golf.

I mentioned to them all of the classic courses and candidly (this is a well traveled group) the left coast advocates said that too many of the old time layouts that get mentioned -- specifically in Golfweek -- are there for nostaglia reasons and have little real juice to hang in there with a number of the more recent vintage courses that the west has produced over the last 25 years.

In addition, they also mentioned the rich diversity of the topography the west provides and with this year's US Open finally returning to the western portion there needs to be a better understanding -- especially with raters -- who disprpportionally reside in the east -- and especially in the northeast quadrant.

There is no absolute formula to measure this -- opinions are clearly an issue here. But I have to say that with the emergence of Bandon Dunes and the range and scale of so many other top tier layouts -- the west is far from getting its due with Digest and Golfweek prefers the old-style clubs to an excess.

My buds were shocked that I would agree with them but I did say that just because a course is old doesn't make it special. There are a number of old-time layouts in the Northeast that have milked the spotlight because of their close proximity to other more deserving courses.

The west is dotted with plenty of real estate promoted golf developments so I'm not  suggesting that all of the inclusions are worthy of natinal acclaim -- but there are many that simply go either undernoticed or underappreciated. Unfortunately, this board is loaded with people from the more ppoulated areas of the east -- again the Northeast and certain Midwest locales.

After a bit of good 19th hole discussion -- my buds and I agreed that no less than a 25% turnover of what is rated could be done in a NY minute because as the debate has proved on this site there are plenty of solid layouts that are simply held back because of concrete-induced ignorance on just what is out there now.

Comments ...

[Phil McDade]

Matt:

Some good observations. Of course, many of the more notable western courses highly thought of, by both this board and raters, are remote by any definition -- the Bandon courses, Rock Creek, Ballyneal, and Sand Hills. Even a place like Chambers Bay, while in a major metro area, is a long journey for, what, 80 percent of the country's population. Compare that to the wealth of solid courses in Westchester County, Long Island, and the greater Philadelphia area. Still, that hasn't prevented most major golf publications from recognizing the outstanding virtues of Sand Hills or PacDunes.

Is it your argument that second-tier Western courses aren't getting their due compared to second-tier Eastern courses (save us the discussion of Baltusrol Lower -- you've beat that horse into a baseball glove already...)? That a place like Manny's or Lancaster gets more due because of its ties to other Philly-area greats, compared to some of Engh's work out West?

[Bill_McBride]

This is probably your most cogent comment ever:

"My buds were shocked that I would agree with them..."

 

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

It's getting closer, but I do not think the West has leveled the playing field yet.

You are a big proponent of the Western courses, but you're also a big proponent of the NY / NJ metropolitan area.  Why don't you just try this -- try to match up your top 50 in the met area against 50 from the western US ex-California?  The east is still going to have Pinehurst, Augusta, Brookline, Merion, Pine Valley in reserve, so they ought to be able to match up against California well enough.

I think if you just compared the Northeast against the entire West of the Mississippi, the West might win that one, but I don't think you are giving any credit to any of the modern courses south of D.C. ... some of those would compare favorably with the best of Arizona and Colorado, unless scenery is that important to you.

[Sean_A]

I just returned from a short trek to the AZ area -- and with a few buds in tow watched the opening game of the Celts / La-la Lakers in action and a few of my long time friends who love golf passionately and have lived on the left coast for some time mentioned to me about the blatant east coast bias there is in plenty of particular instances.

The subject turned towards golf and a few of them said quite clearly that if the Missisissippi River were the diviiding line between the eastern portiion and western portion that the western portion has now the better case for quality golf.

I mentioned to them all of the classic courses and candidly (this is a well traveled group) the left coast advocates said that too many of the old time layouts that get mentioned -- specifically in Golfweek -- are there for nostaglia reasons and have little real juice to hang in there with a number of the more recent vintage courses that the west has produced over the last 25 years.

In addition, they also mentioned the rich diversity of the topography the west provides and with this year's US Open finally returning to the western portion there needs to be a better understanding -- especially with raters -- who disprpportionally reside in the east -- and especially in the northeast quadrant.

There is no absolute formula to measure this -- opinions are clearly an issue here. But I have to say that with the emergence of Bandon Dunes and the range and scale of so many other top tier layouts -- the west is far from getting its due with Digest and Golfweek prefers the old-style clubs to an excess.

My buds were shocked that I would agree with them but I did say that just because a course is old doesn't make it special. There are a number of old-time layouts in the Northeast that have milked the spotlight because of their close proximity to other more deserving courses.

The west is dotted with plenty of real estate promoted golf developments so I'm not  suggesting that all of the inclusions are worthy of natinal acclaim -- but there are many that simply go either undernoticed or underappreciated. Unfortunately, this board is loaded with people from the more ppoulated areas of the east -- again the Northeast and certain Midwest locales.

After a bit of good 19th hole discussion -- my buds and I agreed that no less than a 25% turnover of what is rated could be done in a NY minute because as the debate has proved on this site there are plenty of solid layouts that are simply held back because of concrete-induced ignorance on just what is out there now.

Comments ...

Be specific.  What gets chucked to make room for the Black Mesas?

Ciao

[Phil McDade]

Sean:

2:1 odds that it's Baltusrol Lower. The course is Matt's stalking horse for this debate...

[Sean_A]

Sean:

2:1 odds that it's Baltusrol Lower. The course is Matt's stalking horse for this debate...

Phil

Surely more than one course is needed to redress the issue. I would have thought we are talking at least half dozen courses.

Ciao

[Phil McDade]

Sean:

That would assume Matt's arguments involve broad characterizations backed up by several specific examples, as opposed to broad generalizations and condemnations eminating from one or two examples.

[Sean_A]

Sean:

That would assume Matt's arguments involve broad characterizations backed up by several specific examples, as opposed to broad generalizations and condemnations eminating from one or two examples.

Phil

I bet Matt has a handful of ideas brewing, though it is often akin to pulling teeth to get him to be specific.

Ciao

[Matt_Ward]

Sean:

Great comment -- you had me chuckling !

It's more than BM for sure -- but I do believe BM is one of the USA's top 100 courses -- in my book without question.

No need for the dentist though !

Phil:

Great insight on the NJ course but it's more than that. Tom D mentioned a good exercise and I can try to sort through the respective candidates and see what shakes out.

Phil, the west has more than just the usual suspects mentioned here -- Ballyneal, Sand Hills, all of the Bandon courses, Rock Creek, etc, etc.

[Sean_A]

I will guess that Matty would promote

Red Ledges and Mauna Kea.  I am assuming he thinks Rock Creek will get its propers in the future, so I am not sure about this one.  That is three, I reckon there has to be another handful in mind, but what does he ditch?  And as this is an east/west deal, I am assuming ditch from the east.  This is particularly interesting because Matty is high on Kingsley, Bayonne and likely a few other easters.

Ciao

[Phil McDade]

"Phil, the west has more than just the usual suspects mentioned here -- Ballyneal, Sand Hills, all of the Bandon courses, Rock Creek, etc, etc."

Matt:

That's the debate I'm interesting in hearing about. One can debate the virtues of Pine Valley vs. Sand Hills, or PacDunes vs. Shinnecock Hills -- that's fine. No one truly doubts any of those courses deserve mention among the very elite in the country, and preferences come down to personal taste, it seems. All have been recognized by the raters and golf mags.

[Matt_Ward]

Sean:

Yes, you raise an interesting dimension -- before mentioning the western candidates beyond the obvious ones (e.g. Sand Hills, Ballyneal) I would certainyl start by culling the eastern choices first.

There's plenty of the musky old time layouts that have been hanging around because they happen to be in a populated metro area and often times they glom the attention from the bigger and better named layout next store.

Phil:

The problem with too many people on this site is that they have actually played very little beyond the very top top tier -- sure guys have played Sand Hills and Ballyneal and the Bandon grouping but frankly the next level of courses is simply forgotten. I played Red Ledges last year in UT and it blows away so many courses. I agree with Tom H that scenery does play a role and while it's not design driven per se in terms of shot values it does add an element of enjoyment to the senses that compliments the actual goal. Red Ledges does that and so much more. I will try to provide what Tom D mentioned so that I can provide even more examples.

[Rory Connaughton]

Phil,

  Your first post interests me because many in SE PA think that places like Rolling Green, H-Val, Lehigh and Lancaster get overlooked (in relative terms) due to their proximity to the two giants in the region.  I suspect though I do not know that a survey of rater traffic at those clubs might support this theory.

[Phil McDade]

Matt:

I don't think your argument is with this discussion board; from what I can tell, they get around alot more than many raters and the golf mag crowd.

Your argument is with those folks, right? From your first post:

"...too many of the old time layouts that get mentioned -- specifically in Golfweek -- are there for nostaglia reasons..."

"...there needs to be a better understanding -- especially with raters -- who disprpportionally reside in the east -- and especially in the northeast quadrant."

"...the west is far from getting its due with Digest and Golfweek prefers the old-style clubs to an excess."

Please help me understand...

[Phil McDade]

Phil,

  Your first post interests me because many in SE PA think that places like Rolling Green, H-Val, Lehigh and Lancaster get overlooked (in relative terms) due to their proximity to the two giants in the region.  I suspect though I do not know that a survey of rater traffic at those clubs might support this theory.

Rory:

Well, on second tought, using the likes of Lancaster and Manny's may have been too obscure. But Matt for sure will argue that Baltusrol Lower (30th in latest DG ranking) and Congressional-Blue (66), and perhaps the likes of Aronimink (76), Laurel Valley (77), Maidstone (86) and maybe even Oak Hill-East (11), are part of the East Coast bias re. raters and golf mags.

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

My response is in CAPS -- simply to reply not for emotion.

I don't think your argument is with this discussion board; from what I can tell, they get around alot more than many raters and the golf mag crowd.

PHIL, THIS BOARD HAS A FEW PEOPLE WHO REALLY TRAVEL -- THE REST ARE SIMPLY COMMENTATORS WHO HAVE PLAYED A TINY SLICE AND USUALLY THE SAME ELITE NAME COURSES.

Your argument is with those folks, right? From your first post:

"...too many of the old time layouts that get mentioned -- specifically in Golfweek -- are there for nostaglia reasons..."
GOLFWEEK HAS DONE WELL IN ELEVATING A FEW COURSES OF LESSER STATURE BUT THE OLD TIME NOSTAGLIA LAYOUTS ARE WAY TOO PLENTIFUL GIVEN WHAT HAS EMERGED IN THE LAST 25 YEARS. DIGEST IS NOT EXACTLY HITTING HOME RUNS EITHER.

"...there needs to be a better understanding -- especially with raters -- who disprpportionally reside in the east -- and especially in the northeast quadrant."
TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST - I LIVE THERE TOO BUT I DON'T PROMOTE THE AREA TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHER COURSES ELSEWHERE THAT ARE LABORING IN THE SHADOWS.

"...the west is far from getting its due with Digest and Golfweek prefers the old-style clubs to an excess."
I BELIEVE THIS TOTALLY. PEOPLE DON'T SEE MUCH BEYOND THE BANDON GROUPING, SAND HILLS, BALLYNEAL, ROCK CREEK, ET AL OF THIS TYPE.

Please help me understand...


Phil -- you are spot on -- Baltusol Lower would be toast in my assessments -- I'd rather have the Upper if any did make it. Laurel Valley would be adios too -- ditto Aronimink, Maidstone and likely even OH/ East. Rory makes a good point there are other courses in the northeast that could stand a rise -- most notably HV -- I don't see Lehigh being that good for a top 100 rating. Places like Lancaster and Rolling Green are close calls. The reality is that many people on this board see development golf in the west as being low level stuff because of the housing connection. I admit there are some dogs -- but there are some real winners too. I'll elaborate further on my next post.

[JC Jones]

Matt,

Check me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Golfweek rectify your "old time nostalgic" v "modern and better" argument by separating their rankings into "Classic" and "Modern"?

[Rory Connaughton]

Phil:

  I do not doubt that it cuts both ways as you suggest.  I suspect that some of what you are referring to is a consequence of exposure to raters.  Although we don't get too many raters through (in fact I doubt we get the minimum ratings required for top 100 consideration to the extent such exists) we welcome them because we are proud of what we have and believe that it stands up well against other highly regarded courses.  I am certain that the courses you reference get a lot more traffic than H-Val, Rolling Green and the like.

Ultimately, ranked or not, there is so much good golf out there and we are lucky to get a chance to enjoy some of it!

[Jud_T]

For reference purposes-In the Golfweek Modern Top 100: 54 are East of the Mississippi, 46 West
                                   In the Golfweek Classic Top 100: 81 are East of the Mississippi, 19 West

[Phil McDade]

For reference purposes-In the Golfweek Modern Top 100: 54 are East of the Mississippi, 46 West
                                   In the Golfweek Classic Top 100: 81 are East of the Mississippi, 19 West

Jud:

You beat me to it! In glancing this morning at the overall list, I was struck by the number of highly ranked western courses compared to those in the east.

Isn't the classic vs. modern demarkation simply a matter of timing and development? Much of the country's population pre-Depression was east of the Mississippi, so presumably there was much less of a market for top-tier golf courses in the west. Presumably, if Matt's premise is correct, the current Golfweek Modern list will eventually turn into a Classic list in whatever amount of time it takes for a course to move from modern to classic, and things will even out.

Anyone know what percentage of the US population is technically east of the Mississippi? I bet it's more than 54 percent -- which would suggest that when it comes to the Modern list, the West is DIS-proportionately represented on the list (assuming quality golf roughly equates to population, which it probably doesn't, but nonetheless...)

[Matt_Ward]

Phil:

I have never understood the classic and modern distinctions that Golfweek creates. It's an arbitrary creation with some automatic cut-off point for the discussion of courses. Simply rate a top 200 and let the numbers fall where they go. Digest originally had a top 200 listing years ago when it started -- it's time to return to it because of the sheer depth of top tier layouts that have opened in the last 30 years.

JC:

The separation point you raise from Golfweek only stratifies the argument between old and new. Why the need to separate a modern from a classic listing? Is it done solely to accomodate more courses?

I'd like to see Golfweek include an overall top 100 -- in my mind, it would be skewed towards the older courses that you see in the Northeast and Midwest section.

Don't misunderstand me -- I'm not saying all of them now rated are dogs or are overrated -- but a number of them are and frankly a number of the most modern of layouts -- say those in the last 25 years is superior to many of these dinosaurs from years gone by.

Too many points are paid to courses that are either old or have hosted a major event. Neither of the two categories speaks to whether the architecture there is of compelling stuff.

[Anthony Fowler]

Anyone know what percentage of the US population is technically east of the Mississippi? I bet it's more than 54 percent -- which would suggest that when it comes to the Modern list, the West is DIS-proportionately represented on the list (assuming quality golf roughly equates to population, which it probably doesn't, but nonetheless...)

I just checked, and 61% of the county's population lives east of the Mississippi.  I imagine the percentage of golf courses is even higher given that the population imbalance has been much greater throughout history.

I think Matt raises an interesting question, but I'm not entirely convinced.  I'll be looking forward to his list of courses so that we can see how his western picks match up to the Met area.

It seems to me that if anything, East Coast courses might have a harder time competing in the rankings if they have famous neighbors.  Perhaps Charles River or Eastward Ho! would be in the top 100 if they were in Idaho.  What if Plainfield was in Utah?  Would we all be flying out to see it and calling it a top 10 course?

Conversely, would Castle Pines be ranked highly if it were in Southampton, NY?

I'm sure there are some great second tier courses that we and raters miss because they are off the beaten path.  I know a couple of Doak 6/7's in southern California (Saticoy CC and San Diego CC) that never get mentioned here or in the rankings because they are not on the radar of the golfing elite.  However, I'm sure many other courses (like Charles River and Eastward Ho!) get passed over in the rankings because the magazines can only put so many northeast courses in the top 100. 

[Matt_Ward]

Anthony:

If you placed Plainfield in UT it would likely go under the radar. Being in Jersey has allowed the course to gain from all the people tied to the area and from having hosted major events that have kept the spotlight on the course from time to time.

Anthony, there are courses in the NE that get dissed -- Eastward Ho! shold be among the top 100 now -- the problem isn't so much location of the courses -- but location of the raters and often times how such people elevate such courses because they have hosted majors and how they also benefit in being located next to legitimate big time courses -- Maidstone is one that comes to mind immediately for me. Take for example a course like Olde Kinderhook -- outside that golf hotspot of Albany, NY -- a first rate Rees Jones course but because people on this site have a bug up their butt when ANY Rees course is mentioned it gets no attention.

I'll be crafting my listing shortly.

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

I have to disagree with your last post.  If you placed Plainfield CC in Utah, it would be so much better than anything else in the Salt Lake Area that people would be going CRAZY about it and nominating it for the top 20 in America.  It's only in the Metropolitan area (or London) that a course that good can fail to generate enormous interest.