News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jim Franklin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #25 on: July 26, 2011, 02:00:28 PM »
Caves Valley is a corporate club, in great shape, greens usually close to perfect, and they treat you like a king. The course is good. They have made changes to it over the years that are not the best IMHO. Fazio was not involved in a lot of changes. I asked him about some of them when I met him and that is what he told me. BCC is better, more interesting, and more fun. BCC is a family club and is busy while Caves is a corporate deal and not crowded in the least.
Mr Hurricane

Jim Franklin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #26 on: July 26, 2011, 02:01:48 PM »
Oh and Rock Creek not listed is a total shame. I am glad Gozzer made it as well as The Alotian. Gozzer and Alotian are in another level above Caves by the way.
Mr Hurricane

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #27 on: July 26, 2011, 02:56:37 PM »
Congratulations to Jim Urbina, Gil Hanse, and Paul Cowley for getting a course in the top 100 in the world.

I am not sure if Rock Creek has not had enough panelist visits, or whether they just didn't like it that much.  Don't know if Joe Passov would tell me or not, but I'll ask.  Thanks all for giving it "the benefit of the doubt".

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #28 on: July 26, 2011, 03:17:51 PM »
The 8 Top 100 Course Newcomers:

1. Old Mac (#43 US/#74 World)
2. Gozzer Ranch (#70 US)
3. The Alotian (#76 US)
4. Caves Valley (#82 US)
5. California Golf Club of San Francisco (#97 US)
6. Castle Stuart (#56 World)
7. Diamante (Dunes) (#58 World)
8. Barnbougle Lost Farm (#82 World)

Cal Club is slightly lower than I expected, I put it on a level even with Caves Valley.  Only one US course to break into the world list which seems correct.

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #29 on: July 26, 2011, 03:20:32 PM »
Thanks Tom, and double congratulations in return!

Trying to find myself in the PNW soon to play Old Mac and the others again. Barnbougle is...well...farther out!
« Last Edit: July 26, 2011, 03:22:04 PM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #30 on: July 26, 2011, 03:31:39 PM »
Thanks Tom, and double congratulations in return!

Trying to find myself in the PNW soon to play Old Mac and the others again. Barnbougle is...well...farther out!

Congrats again Seņor Cowley.

Paul Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #31 on: July 26, 2011, 03:33:11 PM »
I am surprised that only 4 courses fell off the Top 100 World list since 2009.  Not sure why I am surprised, just thought more would have.
Paul Jones
pauljones@live.com

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #32 on: July 26, 2011, 03:45:43 PM »
Thanks Tom, and double congratulations in return!

Trying to find myself in the PNW soon to play Old Mac and the others again. Barnbougle is...well...farther out!

Congrats again Seņor Cowley.

Thanks my friend...rumer has it I might be down mid August...I think I'm ready for a tequilla or two...how about you?
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #33 on: July 26, 2011, 03:53:44 PM »
Thanks Tom, and double congratulations in return!

Trying to find myself in the PNW soon to play Old Mac and the others again. Barnbougle is...well...farther out!

Congrats again Seņor Cowley.

Thanks my friend...rumer has it I might be down mid August...I think I'm ready for a tequilla or two...how about you?

you are such a tease.  ;)

Michael George

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #34 on: July 26, 2011, 03:58:28 PM »
Tom and Jim:

What courses in the top modern courses poll on the web site are the biggest omissions from golf.com's rankings?

I would expect Kingsley Club and Rock Creek Cattle Co. would be on the top of this list.

Also, in looking at the top modern courses, I did not see Dormie Club.  I have heard great things about the course, but have not played it.  Does it deserve this type of consideration?

As always, thanks.



"First come my wife and children.  Next comes my profession--the law. Finally, and never as a life in itself, comes golf" - Bob Jones

Mark Provenzano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #35 on: July 26, 2011, 04:59:18 PM »
Surprised Gozzer got enough panelists but Rock Creek didn't...Caves Valley doesn't get talked about much on here so I guess that is a bit a surprise.

You can fly into Spokane airport and be less than an hour away from Gozzer. RCCC though is 4 hours from the airport.....and even at that distance, Spokane is still the closest major airport.

But no doubt, its more than worth the drive in my opinion.

Kalen, I thought Rock Creek was 1-1.5 hours from Missoula? Where is this 4 coming from?

Ryan,

You are correct but Missoula is only a regional airport.  You can fly into it for a reasonable price from Seattle or Portland, but coming from anywhere else, it usuallly means a layover in a major airport followed by a trip on a smaller plane that often nearly doubles the price of the trip.

For example, I went to Yahoo Travel and scoped out a trip from LAX to Spokane Int'l.  Depart on a Friday, return on a Sunday.  I was able to find a roundtrip ticket for $360 on dates about a month in advance.

Book that same trip from Lax to Missoula and that round trip is now nearly $600.... Nearly 75% more expensive. Those regional flights are super expensive because the flights are small with few passengers, but fuel costs are still high.

So when you have raters, flying on thier own coin, its now a lot more expensive just to get to that one golf course.  As opposed to flying in to Spokane where they can potentially play Gozzer Ranch, Black Rock, Idaho Club, Palouse Ridge, Circling Raven, and the Resort at CDA which are all 1 hour or less from the airport. (And perhaps they even take in Wine Valley, 2.5 hrs away)



Kalen:
I think the difference in flights is only significant from the West Coast.  From the East Coast and Chicago, I don't think you can get a direct flight to either city. 

Missoula has more service than you might expect, though it can be pricey.

http://www.flymissoula.com/Airline_and_Flight_Information/NonStop_Destinations

There aren't many more flight destinations for Spokane than Missoula, but Southwest flies to Spokane. Although they're not the always-low-price carrier they used to be, their presence certainly can cut back on the price-gouging when they compete on routes with other carriers.

http://www.spokaneairports.net/images/nonstop.jpg

Last time up there for me the OAK-GEG nonstop was $89+taxes each way. I doubt that the SFO-MSO flights (when they run) get that cheap.

Andy Troeger

Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #36 on: July 26, 2011, 07:59:12 PM »
Oh and Rock Creek not listed is a total shame. I am glad Gozzer made it as well as The Alotian. Gozzer and Alotian are in another level above Caves by the way.

Certainly agree with Rock Creek--its the best course not on the list for me. I perhaps wish The Alotian would have been added by GOLF first so that it wouldn't have caused quite the uproar when Digest made it #14! Its easily a top 100 course. Gozzer Ranch will debut pretty high next time around on the Digest list IMO, and very deservedly so.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #37 on: July 26, 2011, 09:02:43 PM »
Tom and Jim:

What courses in the top modern courses poll on the web site are the biggest omissions from golf.com's rankings?

I would expect Kingsley Club and Rock Creek Cattle Co. would be on the top of this





Why would you expect this?
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #38 on: July 27, 2011, 12:02:24 AM »
Tom and Jim:

What courses in the top modern courses poll on the web site are the biggest omissions from golf.com's rankings?

I would expect Kingsley Club and Rock Creek Cattle Co. would be on the top of this





Why would you expect this?

Because Kingsley, for whatever reason, has not been represented appropriately in the rankings to date.  See my "narrative" thread from last summer.

What I find very interesting is that Ron Whitten, in a 2002 article, considered Kingsley to be a Top 100 course and yet his own publication doesn't rate it accordingly.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

Jim Colton

Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #39 on: July 27, 2011, 12:24:40 AM »
Oh and Rock Creek not listed is a total shame. I am glad Gozzer made it as well as The Alotian. Gozzer and Alotian are in another level above Caves by the way.

Certainly agree with Rock Creek--its the best course not on the list for me. I perhaps wish The Alotian would have been added by GOLF first so that it wouldn't have caused quite the uproar when Digest made it #14! Its easily a top 100 course. Gozzer Ranch will debut pretty high next time around on the Digest list IMO, and very deservedly so.

Andy, good to see Alotian get its due, however you have to admit there's a big difference between #76 US and best course in the world since Sand Hills. Which do you think it's closer to?

Kevin Pallier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #40 on: July 27, 2011, 12:42:25 AM »
Course Newcomers:

1. Old Mac (#43 US/#74 World)
5. California Golf Club of San Francisco (#97 US)
8. Barnbougle Lost Farm (#82 World)

Having seen the above - I reckon
OM - too low on both counts
Cal Club - too low + should be on World list
LF - reasonable

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #41 on: July 27, 2011, 06:04:26 AM »
JC,

I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be there or that I don't prefer it to any number of courses on the list, just that given what they seem to like and the somewhat polarizing nature of the place I don't have my panties in a bunch because I expected them to suddenly come to their senses.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #42 on: July 27, 2011, 06:52:37 AM »
Why do folks care so much about these ratings?  You don't go through and rate all the pieces of art in a museum...

There are SO many factors that don't figure in - memories of a place, fun factor, the people, the location, the prevailing weather, etc...

Mark Bourgeois

Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #43 on: July 27, 2011, 08:03:49 AM »
Dan,

I think the main reason many people on here seem so invested in these lists is because it provides a way of escaping thoughts about death. They like lists because they don't want to die. Lists also are a way to bring order to chaos, and chaos is the enemy of those with obsessive-compulsive tendencies (which many on here have, to varying degrees). (Notice how many collect things -- scorecards, golf shirts, balls, even tees -- and keep a log of every round they've played; some even log the weather conditions present during their rounds!)

I get all of that but personally, I don't really understand these golf course lists as far as their function is supposed to be not a mere list but some sort of ordering, of ranking. I don't "get" that; the concept sort of baffles me. They seem to function as some sort of arbitrator of what's good for those who think they can't figure it out on their own, thus the marketing angles.

I do understand the concept of lists in general, though. The list is the origin of culture. It's part of the history of art and literature. What does culture want? To make infinity comprehensible. It also wants to create order -- not always, but often. And how, as a human being, does one face infinity? How does one attempt to grasp the incomprehensible? Through lists, through catalogs, through collections in museums and through encyclopedias and dictionaries. There is an allure to enumerating how many women Don Giovanni slept with: It was 2,063, at least according to Mozart's librettist, Lorenzo da Ponte. We also have completely practical lists -- the shopping list, the will, the menu -- that are also cultural achievements in their own right.

Lists bring order to chaos, help us grasp the infinite, and give us respite from thoughts about death.

Helpfully,

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #44 on: July 27, 2011, 08:19:15 AM »

You don't go through and rate all the pieces of art in a museum...


Really? I do.  Museums are really really big buildings and when I take my children I always take them to my favorite works.  I can't explain why but in St. Louis I just can't wait to see the George Caleb Bingham paintings of life on the Mississippi.  Easier to understand is why you do the Farris Bueller tour when in Chicago or soak in the building while at the Guggenheim at the expense of the art.  What is the point of going to an art museum if not to rate what you like?

I am much more comfortable rating art in a museum than art in a gallery.  Art in a gallery is far too dependent on price and peer pressure to form an unbiased opinion.  

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #45 on: July 27, 2011, 08:33:45 AM »

You don't go through and rate all the pieces of art in a museum...


Really? I do.  Museums are really really big buildings and when I take my children I always take them to my favorite works.  I can't explain why but in St. Louis I just can't wait to see the George Caleb Bingham paintings of life on the Mississippi.  Easier to understand is why you do the Farris Bueller tour when in Chicago or soak in the building while at the Guggenheim at the expense of the art.  What is the point of going to an art museum if not to rate what you like?

I am much more comfortable rating art in a museum than art in a gallery.  Art in a gallery is far too dependent on price and peer pressure to form an unbiased opinion.  

When you go to a museum you don`t have a list of the works on display and then assign ratings do you? I would think your rating consists of " I like it because......." or "I dislike it because......". Apples and oranges comparison in relation to golf courses.

Andy Troeger

Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #46 on: July 27, 2011, 08:38:50 AM »
Jim,
There is a big difference, but I think the truth is somewhere in between. I'd suggest its probably around #40 in the US, which I guess splits the gap. Its still an improvement over not being on the list at all--it will be interesting to see if GolfWeek manages to get enough guys out there to rank it next time around.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #47 on: July 27, 2011, 08:48:47 AM »


I get all of that but personally, I don't really understand these golf course lists as far as their function is supposed to be not a mere list but some sort of ordering, of ranking. I don't "get" that; the concept sort of baffles me. They seem to function as some sort of arbitrator of what's good for those who think they can't figure it out on their own, thus the marketing angles.


Even though many people don't understand it themselves, the real draw to all this is the power it affords the rater.  We can all go play wherever we want and I am sure afford the green fee to boot.  What we all don't have is that certain feeling you get when you walk in a clubhouse knowing that you have the ability to move a course either up, down or off a list.  You know it, the pro knows it, the super, members and owners all know it which is why do you have the tag so prominently displayed on your bag.  I will never forget sitting at Santa Anita waiting on our tee time when the rater I was with set down his bag.  Sadly his rater tag got caught up underneath out of site so he quickly reached down and pulled it out like a proud 17 year old on prom night.  I was happy for him because at that point in his life it was all he had.

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #48 on: July 27, 2011, 08:50:11 AM »
JC,

I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be there or that I don't prefer it to any number of courses on the list, just that given what they seem to like and the somewhat polarizing nature of the place I don't have my panties in a bunch because I expected them to suddenly come to their senses.

You do strike me as the type of guy that would wear panties.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Mag additions to Top 100 lists
« Reply #49 on: July 27, 2011, 08:53:25 AM »

You don't go through and rate all the pieces of art in a museum...


Really? I do.  Museums are really really big buildings and when I take my children I always take them to my favorite works.  I can't explain why but in St. Louis I just can't wait to see the George Caleb Bingham paintings of life on the Mississippi.  Easier to understand is why you do the Farris Bueller tour when in Chicago or soak in the building while at the Guggenheim at the expense of the art.  What is the point of going to an art museum if not to rate what you like?

I am much more comfortable rating art in a museum than art in a gallery.  Art in a gallery is far too dependent on price and peer pressure to form an unbiased opinion.  

When you go to a museum you don`t have a list of the works on display and then assign ratings do you? I would think your rating consists of " I like it because......." or "I dislike it because......". Apples and oranges comparison in relation to golf courses.

But that is how I rate golf courses.  I also see no difference between how I buy art or join golf courses.