Replacements in Golf Magazine's Top 50

[Michael George]

Michael,

I think Mountain Ridge would bump out a half a dozen to dozen courses.

Patrick:

I am sure after May, it will be added to my changes.  I am really looking forward to playing Mountain Ridge and even better, making your and other gca'ers acquitance.  Thanks again for planning the outing.

[Michael George]

I haven't played enough to know which ones to take off (I have my guesses), but I'll echo Plainfield CC and Kingsley Club as two courses that I would think should be in a top 50 US.

George:

If we limited to those that have played most of the top 100-200 courses, Tom Doak, Jim Franklin, Wayne Freeman and a few others would have a lonely conversation.  This is not designed to be a science and is only done for fun.  That is why I liked Tom doak's original post - it eliminates having 100 courses that you call top 50.

[jonathan_becker]

I fully agree with Mac about Inverness, so for another round of picks, I'll remove Inverness and Whistling Straits.  Bandon Trails and Pete Dye will take their place. 

[jkinney]

OUT-- Oak Hill & Medinah

IN   -- Desert Forest & Stone Eagle.

These two desert classics are snowbirds' marvelous escapes come winter. It's about time, IMO, that the desert country gets represented.

[George Freeman]

George:

If we limited to those that have played most of the top 100-200 courses, Tom Doak, Jim Franklin, Wayne Freeman and a few others would have a lonely conversation.  This is not designed to be a science and is only done for fun.  That is why I liked Tom doak's original post - it eliminates having 100 courses that you call top 50.

Michael - I agree.  But I was trying to avoid the "you've never played it, how can you comment/eliminate it?!" barrage.

I have played Inverness and think all three of the courses I mentioned (Plainfield, Kingsley Club, & Lawsonia) are a knotch above and more fun.  If I had to pick two more to take out (based soley on pictures, opionions of others, etc) I would probably say Baltusrol and Medinah #3.

[Kevin Pallier]

Out = Bandon Dunes, Maidstone, Quaker Ridge
In = Bandon Trails, Cal Club, Sebonack

[Ian Andrew]

Just a question:

Do you need to see all/90%/80% that are on the list before you can remove one?
I do think the more you are familiar with, the easier it is to contextualize what is not nessasarily your taste.

[Tom_Doak]

George:

If we limited to those that have played most of the top 100-200 courses, Tom Doak, Jim Franklin, Wayne Freeman and a few others would have a lonely conversation.  This is not designed to be a science and is only done for fun.  That is why I liked Tom doak's original post - it eliminates having 100 courses that you call top 50.

Michael - I agree.  But I was trying to avoid the "you've never played it, how can you comment/eliminate it?!" barrage.

I have played Inverness and think all three of the courses I mentioned (Plainfield, Kingsley Club, & Lawsonia) are a knotch above and more fun.  If I had to pick two more to take out (based soley on pictures, opionions of others, etc) I would probably say Baltusrol and Medinah #3.

The original rule I posted was simple:  you could only put in as many courses as you take out.  And it's a worthless exercise unless you limit yourself to taking out courses you have seen and played yourself.  It makes no sense to assume that the courses you haven't seen are the losers.  The whole point is that if you can't find some courses that don't belong on the list, then the courses you are nominating probably don't deserve to be that high.

[Jud_T]

Ian,

I guess technically you'd need to see all of them before removing one.  But you can certainly say that course X which is not on the list is clearly superior to course Y which is.  Also if you feel strongly that a course is a Doak 6 at it's absolute best and that nobody in their right mind would rank it higher than a Doak 7, then by definition it doesn't belong.

[Ian Andrew]

Jud,

I'll give you an example from my perspective.

I'm not a fan of Pete Dye's post Sawgrass work, but I'm not quick to dismiss it just because it's not my taste. I've found that using the other Modern style courses I have seen from the list I can contextualize what is very well done and well planned even though some of the design ideas and asthetics don't nessasarily jive with my preferences. I use this technique to try and not push a course down a list that really is a good example of that style.

[Jud_T]

Ian,

A valid point that us rank amateurs would do well to consider.  Brings up an interesting topic about how to fairly assess "dated" styles.  I'm certainly guilty of being a minimalist buttboy myself, but I'd contend that the popularity of the style has as much to do with design and playability as with aesthetics, pleasing as they may be via a contemporary sensibility.

[Michael George]

Tom:

I agree with your assumptions.  In fact, if a magazine wanted their ratings to be more accurate, they would require that their raters have played a certain percentage of the top 300 courses before even counting their votes.  That is why I value the opinions of those on this string that have seen many courses - they just have a better perspective. 

Question - Are there some courses that, while never seen in person, can be judged from repeated exposure on television and other materials?  I realize it may not be fair, but do you think you need to walk the grounds of a course before you judge it?   For instance, almost everyone on this board has seen Medinah #3 so many times on television and through pictures and videos.  If I had never played it, I think I could have told someone that I liked Bandon Trails over it. 

[Tom_Doak]

Question - Are there some courses that, while never seen in person, can be judged from repeated exposure on television and other materials?  I realize it may not be fair, but do you think you need to walk the grounds of a course before you judge it?   For instance, almost everyone on this board has seen Medinah #3 so many times on television and through pictures and videos.  If I had never played it, I think I could have told someone that I liked Bandon Trails over it. 

Your example is just an example of your own personal biases.

I could just say that I'm going to like nearly any Coore & Crenshaw course better than nearly any course in Chicago, and be right most of the time.  But, it's meaningless if I am just reinforcing my own biases.  You can only say you think Bandon Trails is better than Medinah #3 if you have studied them both.

And, by the way, the guys who have played nearly all the top 100 courses are NOT better judges than people who have played 50 or 60 of them.  The guys who have played them all are just too certain they are right, because they can count to 100.  They have forgotten that rating is still a subjective thing.

[Matthew Essig]

I am shocked how many people said they would kick out Chambers Bay first...  I found about half a dozen that would go before it... If you have played it when the greens are smooth and somewhat fast, it is a blast.... Especially when the wind starts blowing, and some the new changes are great, like the rebuilt 1st, 7th and 13th are definitely improvements!