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.


Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« on: May 10, 2012, 09:04:35 AM »
MacArther Plumart, Paul Richards and others have been bugging me long enough for this, so here it finally is. Dismal River might have to change its yardage markers now.


http://golfweek.com/news/2012/may/09/golfweeks-best-next-100-classic-courses/

http://golfweek.com/news/2012/may/09/golfweeks-best-next-100-modern-courses/



Jim Colton

Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2012, 09:15:03 AM »
Very cool to see. Thanks Brad.

Keith OHalloran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2012, 09:18:46 AM »
Looks like Doak can still move the needle. North Shore up to 142 from not ranked, pretty good.

On a course like Greenbrier, or NorthShore, when enough work is done to give attribution to a modern architect, is there any thought of moving the new iteration to modern?

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2012, 09:26:15 AM »
Brad,

124 Classic- Atlantic City CC is no longer private.

128 Modern- Quintero is no longer private.

I too like the inclusion of North Shore. There's more work to be done there.
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2012, 09:27:31 AM »
MacArther Plumart, Paul Richards and others have been bugging me long enough for this, so here it finally is

:)
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Jim Colton

Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2012, 09:27:57 AM »
Cog Hill and Sanctuary were two of the biggest droppers on the Modern side.

Brad, did you mention somewhere that you were working on a composite Top 100 list? What's the status of that?

I noticed recently that Links expanded its 100 list, but it looks like you need to be a registered user to see it (?)
« Last Edit: May 10, 2012, 09:31:57 AM by Jim Colton »

Rich Goodale

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2012, 09:31:23 AM »
I can just almost get my head around "Next 100 Modern" (e.g. Ardrossan Farms, 2027, Coore, Paul and MacWood), but "Next 100 Classic"? ???
Life is good.

Any afterlife is unlikely and/or dodgy.

Jean-Paul Parodi

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2012, 09:36:12 AM »
Interesting moves relative to last year:

Barona Creek -11 (?)

Cog Hill -28 (Ouch)

Forest Creek N +14

Stonewall Old  +9

Caledonia -14

Chechesee -12

Rustic +15

Stone Eagle +9

Tetherow -19

Erin Hills +5

Beverly +3 (threatening to get back to the promised land!)

Old Elm +12

Tamarack -19  :-\
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

Mark Saltzman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2012, 09:44:51 AM »
Dismal better get those 201 yardage plates changed up.

Mark Pritchett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #9 on: May 10, 2012, 09:46:21 AM »
Thanks for posting! 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #10 on: May 10, 2012, 09:50:51 AM »
Thanks, Brad.  Amazing to read through that list and note how many courses out of the presumed top 400 I haven't seen.

Who here has seen the most?  More than 200 out of 400?  Don't have time to add up my own right now, but I'd guess I'm around 250-275.

Niall Hay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #11 on: May 10, 2012, 09:52:26 AM »
Why is CCD listed as a Colt from 1914 if that course doesn’t exist, was moved inland and the current is strictly an Alison (C&A at least)?

125. (112) CC of Detroit

Grosse Pointe Farms, Mich. 1914

Harry S. Colt

Private

6.54


PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2012, 09:54:52 AM »
Brad,

Thanks for posting. Sorry if this has been stated before, but how many rater votes are needed to be included in the Top-100 and "next 100?"
H.P.S.

Eric Smith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2012, 09:56:00 AM »
Dismal better get those 201 yardage plates changed up.

First Dick Clark dies, now Dismal River is a Top Ranked course? Maybe the Mayans were right!

Jim Franklin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2012, 09:57:04 AM »
No Alotian is surprising. Bellerive #181 is shocking too. They just made some pretty interesting changes so I hope some GW guys can get out there.
Mr Hurricane

Niall Hay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2012, 09:58:40 AM »
Brad,

Thanks for posting. Sorry if this has been stated before, but how many rater votes are needed to be included in the Top-100 and "next 100?"

Good question.

Bruce Wellmon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2012, 10:01:52 AM »
Since I played high school golf at Carolina Golf Club in Charlotte (many, many years ago) it brings a smile to my face to see them so highly regarded.

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2012, 10:08:41 AM »
Old Elm +12

Anyone played Old Elm recently?  I played it last summer and it was pretty darn good.  But was told they are continuing a rennovation program that might last another year or two.  I was told to come back again when it was done and I'd be even more impressed.

Can't wait to see it again...it is really a nice place.
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2012, 10:22:32 AM »
Old Elm +12

Anyone played Old Elm recently?  I played it last summer and it was pretty darn good.  But was told they are continuing a rennovation program that might last another year or two.  I was told to come back again when it was done and I'd be even more impressed.

Can't wait to see it again...it is really a nice place.

It's nice to see Old Elm getting a little more exposure as it's a really under-the-radar golf course. It's extremely fun and a real throw back. I've been lucky enough to be able to play there quite a bit thanks to a friend who's a member. I haven't been there since last summer, but the renovation work that I've seen revolves mostly around expanding greens, restoring playing angles, and removing a few trees. If there is a more extensive plan I haven't seen it. I'll be down in the area for a wedding this July and will lookout for any additional changes.
H.P.S.

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #19 on: May 10, 2012, 10:31:34 AM »
Tom Doak: quick count yields 275 on my part:
                        -90 Classic
                        -85 Modern
                        -46 Next Classic
                        -49 Next Modern

Jim Colton: I'm never going to do a composite list; someone can do the quick math on it but it mushes up styles and the point of the Classic/Modern dichotomy for me to do that

Takes 15 votes to make the Top-100
Takes 12 votes to make the Next-100

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #20 on: May 10, 2012, 10:32:48 AM »
Takes 15 votes to make the Top-100
Takes 12 votes to make the Next-100

Thanks Brad.
H.P.S.

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #21 on: May 10, 2012, 10:36:40 AM »
I've only seen 47 of the top 400.  More than 2/3 are from the respective Top 100 lists.  The lesson is that there's probably a lot of interesting courses, better value and easier access in the Next 100 lists....
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

Jim Colton

Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2012, 10:48:08 AM »
Tom Doak: quick count yields 275 on my part:
                        -90 Classic
                        -85 Modern
                        -46 Next Classic
                        -49 Next Modern

Jim Colton: I'm never going to do a composite list; someone can do the quick math on it but it mushes up styles and the point of the Classic/Modern dichotomy for me to do that

Takes 15 votes to make the Top-100
Takes 12 votes to make the Next-100

Thanks Brad. I understand the challenges, but I am just delusional or did you say somewhere that you were working on a combo list? Edit: found this on the !!!!!!!! thread: "We're also working on a new top-100 rating of the top-100 ratings. "
« Last Edit: May 10, 2012, 10:50:28 AM by Jim Colton »

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2012, 10:49:55 AM »
While Belvedere is charming, I don't see it in the same league as Lookout Mountain, Idle Hour, French Lick Hill, Mid Pines and LuLu - courses ranked behind it that I've played.  I'd put in on par with Fircrest.  

Am I missing something at Belvedere?  I found the first nine rather pedestrian with the exception of nice subtleties in the greens.

Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Next-100 Classic and Next-100 Modern posted
« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2012, 10:57:28 AM »
Jim Colton: I am sure you are quoting me out of context. I was being ironic there, as I am reasonably sure I also wrote that such an effort was akin to a book I once saw, "A Bibliography of Indian Bibliographies" that contained nothing but lists of good lists of books about the Indian Subcontinent. So I was playing with that and suggesting I could do a top-100 rating of all top-100 ratings."