"Cut the guy some slack. That's a damned good list. He lists ten and people criticize him for leaving off X,Y & Z. There's room for only 10. lf he you asked him for twenty you'd get the answer you are looking for."
Brad:
And in that statement of yours lies the very reason why, in my opinion, the entire ranking process of golf courses, the way it's done, sucks! Too many people are unhappy about the results, too few understand the inherent fallacy in it all, and from the perspective of particular courses it can result in the detrimental architecturally speaking, in the long run too.
Rich Goodale's "Michelin star system" is a far better way to evaluate architecture, as the down-side of 1-10, 1-20, 1-50 or 1-100 numerical competition is not nearly so great!