[Anthony Butler]

Just came up in my Facebook feed this morning... Sandbelt takes a big hit:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/golf-courses/2009-05/100greatestinternational_golfcourses

Royal Melbourne No. 22???

[Mark Saltzman]

Anthony, that was the link to the 2009 list.

Here's the 2012 list: http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/2012-05/100-best-golf-courses-outside-us

[astavrides]

Hilarious. Loch Lomond better than Royal Melbourne West. Another pointless list.

In the 2012 list, RMW is #2 and Loch Lomand is #45

[Tom_Doak]

Wow, according to that list I've built two golf courses better than Ballybunion or Teeth of the Dog.

I should make one of those kissy-face emoticons, but I think the one is probably more appropriate.

Their methodology for putting the list is not entirely clear, but it seems that they take the rankings of their sister publications for each different country or region, and then take two from Column A and three from Column B and one from C and so forth.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Hilarious. Loch Lomond better than Royal Melbourne West. Another pointless list.

In the 2012 list, RMW is #2 and Loch Lomand is #45

Yes. President's Cup for RMW - Loch Lomond no longer holding the Scottish Open.

Events such as those have little effect because most ballots are taken before events like the Pres Cup are staged.

[David_Tepper]

I am pretty sure that list is compiled by Planet Golf (Darius Oliver).

Upon further review of www.planetgolfusa.com, I could be mistaken. Here is the Planet Golf World 100, which includes the U.S.

http://www.planetgolfusa.com/index.php?id=55

[David Davis]

I have to say I'm not impressed with this list too much either, although never have been or paid much attention to it. I'm always happy to see my home club rising up the list as I'm sure all of us are but I don't care that much.

There are quite a few French courses on there and fairly high up. I kind of doubt that's correct. Also not sure about the SA courses, while they are nice are they in the top? I guess that's the question. I do wonder if they have actually played the courses. I know when UK's Golf World publication rated the best of continental Europe they didn't even get the cities right where the courses were located in The Netherlands and there were just too many mistakes to take it serious.

I'm going to have to agree with a few of the others and say it's an irrelevant list.

Besides we all know that the top 1000 courses in the world are in the US anyway. 

[Mark Chaplin]

I always find it amusing that Rye, Swinley Forest, Machrihanish and St George's Hill always appear in these world top 100 lists yet my club always appears above them in the Golf World GB&I top 100.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think the way Tom is suggesting is how they compile this list.

Because it tises in with the exact order from the Golf Digest Ireland list of November last year.

[Sean_A]

Looking at this list, Porthcawl is a shoe in top 100 world.  I would like someone positive about the course to support that claim.  Its time we had a ding dong.

Ciao 

[Jud_T]

Nice to see Portmarnock and Carnoustie getting some love.  Pretty hard to swallow 25 courses better than Ballybunion anywhere; not to be top 10 outside the U.S. is a bit silly.

[Anthony Butler]

Anthony, that was the link to the 2009 list.

Here's the 2012 list: http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/2012-05/100-best-golf-courses-outside-us

You are correct, although the mistake lies with Golf Digest's Social Media Manager, as the link was copied from their Facebook feed.

Golf Digest doesn't state their 2012 rankings are from Planet Golf in the article, yet the tab in the browser says, GD-Planet Golf...

Comparing the 2009 and 2012 list, the inconsistency is maddening... You can perhaps understand Royal Melbourne fall in the 2009 rankings, as work was being done in preparation for the President's Cup, plus the drought/irrigation issues.... or NSW falling 16 spots in 2012 due to a number of holes being out of commission while the survey was being compiled. .. On the other hand, a several other courses where no substantial changes have been made or conditioning issues recorded, rise and fall 20 places in the order from list to list. When you go to the Planet Golf site and extract the non-US courses, it doesn't come close to matching up... Ballybunion is the 5th ranked International Course on the Planet Golf list, but 26th on the GD list...

If the clerical methodology for putting together these international lists is close to what Tom Doak described... maybe the publications should make sure the interns aren't drinking while completing their duties.

[Robert Thompson]

Positive about Porthcawl? I know Ian Andrew and I both thought it should be 50 spots higher on the world list when we played it, though I also know neither of us was that keen on your beloved Pennard! But I'd take a round at either of them today!

I thought Porthcawl was exceptional -- especially a handful of holes on the back and front with nothing nearing a clunker.


 

Looking at this list, Porthcawl is a shoe in top 100 world.  I would like someone positive about the course to support that claim.  Its time we had a ding dong.

Ciao 

[Garland Bayley]

Wow, according to that list I've built two golf courses better than Ballybunion or Teeth of the Dog.

I should make one of those kissy-face emoticons, but I think the one is probably more appropriate.

Their methodology for putting the list is not entirely clear, but it seems that they take the rankings of their sister publications for each different country or region, and then take two from Column A and three from Column B and one from C and so forth.

Mark up two more Doak 10s for Tom! Way to go Tom!

[Greg Beaulieu]

Well, at least they have come to their senses and dropped Fox Harb'r from their list. It never should have made the 2009 version. I expect a few journalist junkets probably contributed to the 2009 placement.

[Sean_A]

Positive about Porthcawl? I know Ian Andrew and I both thought it should be 50 spots higher on the world list when we played it, though I also know neither of us was that keen on your beloved Pennard! But I'd take a round at either of them today!

I thought Porthcawl was exceptional -- especially a handful of holes on the back and front with nothing nearing a clunker.


 

Looking at this list, Porthcawl is a shoe in top 100 world.  I would like someone positive about the course to support that claim.  Its time we had a ding dong.

Ciao  

No clunkers, but little daring in the design and no originality/unique qualities.  It could be argued that what little daring there is to ill effect - I am thinking of #s 5 and to some extent the value of the 15th is reduced because #16 (a very odd hole that doesn't quite work) follows.  To me, a course lacking in "pulled off" originality and/or unique qualities has to be outstanding in how solid it is to be great.  While Porthcawl is very good and holes of particular note are #s 10, 14 & 15(?), it is certainly missing that certain something which makes a course exceptional.  That however, doesn't mean it can't be top 100 in the world - I wouldn't know if they are all exceptional courses.

I can say I used to believe Porthcawl was better than Pennard until earlier this year.  My last visit to Pennard confirmed to me that these two are very much in the same class of quality (both shy of great) - albeit in very different ways as Pennard oozes with originality, uniqueness and dare I say that bouncy quality - making it my clear choice as to which I prefer.

Ciao      

[Ulrich Mayring]

The whole concept of that list is just crazy.

There are 100 great golf courses in the UK. Leaving any of them out to get an Arabian desert job in or some Asian obscurity is completely unfair to either side. These are fine golf courses in their own right, so please don't overburden them with placeing next to a timeless UK classic.

What's next? Top 20 Wine Countries in Africa?

Ulrich

[Bill_McBride]

Positive about Porthcawl? I know Ian Andrew and I both thought it should be 50 spots higher on the world list when we played it, though I also know neither of us was that keen on your beloved Pennard! But I'd take a round at either of them today!

I thought Porthcawl was exceptional -- especially a handful of holes on the back and front with nothing nearing a clunker.


 

Looking at this list, Porthcawl is a shoe in top 100 world.  I would like someone positive about the course to support that claim.  Its time we had a ding dong.

Ciao 

I thought two par 5's, 8 and 12?, were pretty flat and hum drum.   Otherwise I fully agree.  And seeing the ocean from every hole?  Priceless.......

[Ally Mcintosh]

Positive about Porthcawl? I know Ian Andrew and I both thought it should be 50 spots higher on the world list when we played it, though I also know neither of us was that keen on your beloved Pennard! But I'd take a round at either of them today!

I thought Porthcawl was exceptional -- especially a handful of holes on the back and front with nothing nearing a clunker.


 

Looking at this list, Porthcawl is a shoe in top 100 world.  I would like someone positive about the course to support that claim.  Its time we had a ding dong.

Ciao  

No clunkers, but little daring in the design and no originality/unique qualities.  It could be argued that what little daring there is to ill effect - I am thinking of #s 5 and to some extent the value of the 15th is reduced because #16 (a very odd hole that doesn't quite work) follows.  To me, a course lacking in "pulled off" originality and/or unique qualities has to be outstanding in how solid it is to be great.  While Porthcawl is very good and holes of particular note are #s 10, 14 & 15(?), it is certainly missing that certain something which makes a course exceptional.  That however, doesn't mean it can't be top 100 in the world - I wouldn't know if they are all exceptional courses.

I can say I used to believe Porthcawl was better than Pennard until earlier this year.  My last visit to Pennard confirmed to me that these two are very much in the same class of quality (both shy of great) - albeit in very different ways as Pennard oozes with originality, uniqueness and dare I say that bouncy quality - making it my clear choice as to which I prefer.

Ciao      

OK Sean... You know I rated Porthcawl very highly so I'll bite... I rate different holes than you do, thought the design was anything but humdrum and that there was enormous variety... I agree with you on 16 not quite working and being similar to 15 reduces its impact but I also believe it is nothing that couldn't be sorted out immediately by removing the right hand fairway bunker...

The first is a gentle opener and without being a great hole, its seaside setting provides you with everything you could want from an opener... 2, 3 & 4 are world class, the green complex on 2 set by the ocean with a diagonal roll in the fairway just short on the approach making it one of my favourite green sites anywhere... 3 follows suit but has its little daring in the placement of the fairway bunker that you have to hit blind over to get the best line in... The par-3 fourth just has a great long, narrow, undulating green... Simpson by the looks of it; and only bettered by the par-3 11th and 14th, three crackers in all (though I care less for the ultra short inland 7th it also provides something different and a host of fun putts)...

I think we disagree on what "daring" is and we've had this conversation before regards "controversial" features.... 5 to me is not daring... It is as likely a function of running out of space with the routing (necessitated by getting to the higher ground) hence the green placed by the OOB wall... Still it is unique and all the more welcome for it....

6 is just a classic and wonderful sweeping dogleg par-4, flat, perfectly strategic and encouraging of the running game. A change in style with more heathland qualities.... 8 a decent reachable par-5 that brings the approach hazards in to play... 9 a great par-4 with a fantastic undulating drive, fairway hazard and most notably a sloped green with a big false front... 10 gives the thrill of a big elevated tee-shot towards the sea from the higher ground to lower... Both the par-5's - 12 and 17 could be seen as slight negatives because they are similar with fully blind drives up and over ridges... But I really liked David Williams resited / redesigned 12th green... 13 again is something unique and daring because of the wonderful hazard placements short of the green past the landing zone and slightly hidden... 15 has the cracking cross-hazard... and 18 has that great downhill approach towards the sea to a front to back severly sloping green over great broken ground...

Put all that with the sea visible from all holes, excellent bunker placement and possibly the oldest original wooden clubhouse still standing and you have a beauty in my opinion... Lets also not forget that the turf was wonderful and the maintenance regime kept the course pristine.

Porthcawl usually rates around 40 in GB&I... At least 10 places too low in my opinion (and from what I've seen)...

[Mark_F]

It could be argued that what little daring there is to ill effect - I am thinking of #s 5

Sean,

What's wrong with 5?  It's of a length that the flat belly can get home in two in the right conditions, but only if they take the tight, daring line along the left near the OOB.  Bail right, and you have an uphill pitch over a bunker toward the OOB.  Not a great hole, but not bad, and very different from the other par fives. 

[Sean_A]

Ally

To be clear, I don't believe Porthcawl to be humdrum - this conversation wouldn't take place if it weren't a very good golf course.

I too like the 2nd, but to play devil's advocate, three holes running in the same direction (and to some degree feel very similar) throttles the excellence of the hole - still not a bad start considering the 3 hole march.  In any case, I wouldn't say 3 and 4 are all-world.  #4 is very fine though. On the general point of the par 3s, yes, as a set I agree they are very good with the 7th dragging the group down a bit.  On the other hand, the par 5s are very wanting.  They have a field-like quality to them which is off-putting - and are probably over-used as transitions holes concerning elevation change.  I am surprised a par 3 wasn't used for this purpose to balance out the changes between the 3s, 4s and 5s.  Though again, I agree concerning the new 12th green - very good improvement.  

While I think the use of elevation change and wind is very good, the property reminds me of Dornoch, yet I don't believe Porthcawl pulls it off as well.  Two totally different approaches to the split level property with Porthcawl going up and down much more often.  Even so, chuck in a drivable par 4 (maybe re-jig the 10th or 6th or both?), muck with the 5s a bit (biggest problem) and find a way to break up the similarly aimed tee shots for 1-3 and Porthcawl would be every bit the course Dornoch is.  As it is now, Porthcawl is just shy of great, but again I don't know what this really means in terms of world top 100.  I do think Deal tops Porthcawl and it is often ranked not far from Porthcawl in GB&I - but for some reason (I don't think Welsh representation plays a part in this) this similar ranking is carried forward in terms of world ranking. Interestingly, in the wonderful unofficial GCA.com rankings both (and Pennard) are every close - hovering not far over 100. I think this is a reasonable outcome no matter which order one chooses. Also interesting is that I currently place Porthcawl between 30-40 in GB&I, but I haven't seen some significant courses.  So it could be as low as 40-50 GB&I.  We aren't that far off our rankings.  Perhaps its a matter of me having higher standards for greatness - tee hee.

Ciao

[Michael Whitaker]

I don't usually comment on these lists because every man (or publication) has a right to his opinion. But, I have played 36 of the courses on this list and hardly any of them are near the position I would place them. RCD at #1 is a no brainer, but after that nothing much makes since.

I agree with Chappers... IMO Deal is as good or better than 25% of the courses on this list, to be conservative.

I enjoyed playing Porthcawl in the Buda, but I don't get the ranking either.

Golf Magazine seems to be fixed on difficulty... difficult does not equate to great.

[Michael Whitaker]

Wow, according to that list I've built two golf courses better than Ballybunion or Teeth of the Dog.

I should make one of those kissy-face emoticons, but I think the one is probably more appropriate.

Their methodology for putting the list is not entirely clear, but it seems that they take the rankings of their sister publications for each different country or region, and then take two from Column A and three from Column B and one from C and so forth.

Tom - Barnbougle Dunes can hold its own against all comers. I'm surprised it is not ranked higher.

[Mark Chaplin]

So Queenwood and St Andrews New and Jubilee are world top 100 but not GB&I top 100!!

[Dustin Knight]

Lake Karrinyup well ahead of Royal Adelaide  !!!!!!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()