obscenity ?
Reading about the attempts to order/rank architecture/courses vis a vis a numerical exercise seems like an attempt to identify the quality or relative value of architecture in order to help those who don't have a sense of what constitutes outstanding architectural value/s.
It seems as if the numerical exercise is an attempt to produce an index for those who "don't get it"
Does one have to consult those indices in order to determine if the course they just played has architectural merit, and to what degree, relative to a course they played last week, last month or last year ?
Seems to me that you may not be able to define and/or numerically evaluate good architecture, but, you know it when you see it.
Does one need to know or understand the numerical evaluation of the course before teeing off on the first tee or after walking off the 18th green at Pebble Beach, Bandon, or Bethpage Black ?
Which do you prefer, the visceral or numerical evaluation ?
Does Potter Stewart's comment on obscenity, apply to architecture, or do most golfers need a numerical index to identify the relative value and quality of architecture/courses ?
Or, ...........