[Ran Morrissett]

Brother John graced me with the maroon edition of The Confidential Guide in 1994 for Christmas. Quickly thereafter, I spun into a tizzy over Tom's grades for MuirFIELD, Westward Ho!, Royal Aberdeen, St. Michaels, SFGC, et al. Some of his grades were too high, some too low - what was he thinking?! In those pre-internet, Guttenberg press days, I sent him ....gasp ....a letter (remember those?). Though Tom likely regrets it now, he kindly responded and ... here we are!
 
So .... where did I screw-up in Volume 1 or 2? And more importantly why? I ask in part because we are writing Volume 3 and for ~1/4 of the courses, I am on the ratings fence. What should be the final determinant? I'm curious about what you have to say and what I might glean. Please be as specific as possible.
 
If you and I differ by 1 point, no big deal, that gets swept under the two reasonable people blah blah blah carpet. But, a two grade separation is a glaring difference on Tom's exponential scale. Such variance can occur for many reasons, the most obvious being not seeing a course after a significant restoration. For instance, Masa gave Mid-Pines a 4 (not having seen Kyle's work) while Tom and I rated it 7. That's straightforward. That would apply for me at SFGC - I haven't seen any of Tom's work there.
 
Other reasons exist too. We each enjoy pet likes/dislikes, biases, etc. which helps keep the Discussion Group so lively. Bill S. has made it clear that he rates (berates!) Alotian a 5, largely because it is cart ball and he doesn't think much of the greens which he feels are very similar. I understand his first point (though I walked plenty of holes tee to green) but we differ strongly about the greens. When I played, they were firm, blazingly fast and crazy fun. For instance, after the round, we putted on the 18th – the direct line to the hole was ~30 feet but the best way to get close was to putt away from the hole to point x from where it would be gravity fed to the hole completing a broad arc nearly 60 feet. Elsewhere on the course, I found some very appealing opportunities to use tight short grass just off the putting surface to bank/deaden approach shots, and have the ball then creep onto the putting surface and toward the hole. I love shots that slowly unfold with time. Combine this short game interest with a gorgeous setting undiluted by outside disturbances, and Bill and I are off by 2. So be it.
 
My ex claims that I fail to embrace constructive criticism; this post is yet another instance of her being wrong and me being right!     
 
So have at it: what courses in Volume 1 & 2 do you really like or dislike much more than me and why?
 
Best,
 
One of Golf's Most Beloved Piñatas

[Michael Moore]

What should be the final determinant?

If you must quantify golf courses, err on the high side.

[Niall C]

Now there's a challenge. I now know what I'll be doing this evening. Sitting down with the CG Vol 1 marking Ran's report card.


Niall

[Sean_A]

Ran

In general, I tend to disagree with you concerning big name/championship courses.  However, most of the time your colleagues are in your corner.  I put some of this differential down to me hedging my bets a bit because I haven't seen so many of the world's great courses.  I also put some of the differential down to you lot being too deferential to sacred cows.  Where I do seem to get traction is with the following

RND - I would give it a 5 (maybe 6 if generous) and you give it an 8.  Your colleagues all score it below you, but not as low as my 5. For mine, there are too many average holes which can be found on any run of the mill links 5...certainly far too many of this sort for an 8 to own. Still, I will make an effort to return some time because I may have been too hard on the rush holes.

Hillside - I would give it a 5 and you give it a 7.  Honestly, I think you were bamboozled by dunes.  Alarm bells sound anytime a back nine running through the dunes as does Hillside's is outshined by a front nine on inferior terrain.  The treatment of the dunes is an embarrassment to design.  Your colleagues seem to agree with me. I gave up returning to see what I missed...life is too short. 

Addington - Perhaps the design is a 7 (at best), but this is one case where the consistently poor maintenance and presentation of the course seriously let the side down so badly that the enjoyment of the design is seriously hampered.  You give it a lofty 8 and I can't see my way past a 6.  The more I play Addy the more the course annoys me. 

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ran,

Bought it, read it, enjoyed it.  To be honest, I didn't really look at the ratings too hard.  It seems like most fit into a similar 5-6-7 mode, which I guess you would expect, and the gourmet guide was most interesting.

I actually felt the whole premise of the book is now somewhat dated, as you mentioned, more oriented to the pre internet days.  I came away with the feeling of "Golfclubatlas.com gives me a hundred more opinions of as many courses as I care to mention, with even more detailed discussion". 

You have sort of spoiled us!

[Mark Pavy]

  For instance, after the round, we putted on the 18th – the direct line to the hole was ~30 feet but the best way to get close was to putt away from the hole to point x from where it would be gravity fed to the hole completing a broad arc nearly 60 feet. Elsewhere on the course, I found some very appealing opportunities to use tight short grass just off the putting surface to bank/deaden approach shots, and have the ball then creep onto the putting surface and toward the hole. I love shots that slowly unfold with time. 
 

I think we're all addicted to dopamine.

[jeffwarne]

I would be less interested in a Confidential groupthink
 (meaning I value the 4 different opinions and wouldn't want to see them all line up exactly-especially since you may have seen them at different times in different forms)
Always interesting to see the different scores/opinions and one will get more out of the book if he considers the sources of each opinion


I have questioned Tom about his "6's" for some boring six sets of tees American signature courses and his 4's for a few charming links courses which simply lack modern length (which is virtually irrelevant for 90% of the play either type of course gets)

[Ran Morrissett]

Jeff,

Interesting point! Blunt criticism and acclaim is certainly more abundant and public today. No surprise but I still suggest that TD’s experience and observational skills are beyond ordinary so that what he says (and how he says it) make TCG a vital read.

Sean,

Hillside - You may be correct; I downgrade MPCC Shore because it appears to me that the fairways were hit too hard with a dozer. To my eye, MPCC was over-sculpted for its environment. I haven't been to Hillside since 1991 so I might judge it differently today. Nonetheless, three points: 1) I like the front better than most. The 5th and 9th holes would be in my top 5 holes on the course, for instance. 2) dunes + no homes + wind + sandy soil + fescue = something way better than the fare offered by ~98% of all courses, no matter the country. 3) It is in a ‘tough’ neighborhood – imagine the raves it would receive if it was along the North Carolina coast.

Westward Ho! -  Weaknesses: the first and last two holes are over flat, uninteresting land. Strengths: Holes 4 through 11 plus 16 are about as a good as the game offers. Additionally, the course has a nearly unmatched diversity of hazards and an exalted history that includes the rearing of some great champions. I actually admire the presentation (what others might call conditioning).  At Westward Ho!, you frequently can't distinguish the course from its environs. I LOVE THAT.  No wonder that I haven't spent much time in places like Palm Springs and Arizona where the holes appear alien to their environment. Some see RND as a pasture; so be it. I am steadfast in my admiration!

Addington – I actually thought I had given it a 7 but see otherwise. However, like Bethpage and Yale (at least how they were in the 1980s), the design is so over the top awesome (the stretch from 2 thru 17 is so different, so supreme!) that I have ALWAYS given it a pass on conditioning. I understand how others might not. I played golf with the Aussie legend Tom Ramsey in 1998 and he said ‘…poor conditioning was inexcusable in this day and age.’ That's even more true today. Then again, see my thoughts above re: what constitutes ‘ideal’ conditioning.

Sean, as a total aside, after Dad and I left your beloved Burnham & Berrow, I rated it a Morrissett B, the equivalent of a low Doak 5.  In deference to the power of your words + photographs + our conversations, my TCG grade was 6 and I would have given it a 6+ if so allowed. So to Jeff’s point, GolfClubAtlas.com has a persistent impact thanks to people like you.

Best,

[J_ Crisham]

Ran,   Your view on Alotian is spot on. The greens are outstanding- the site was a tough one and I believe Fazio got the best available course from it. I always walk but it just wasn't doable at Alotian. Still a great place to spend a few days IMO.

[Tom_Doak]

Ran:


Interested to see where this goes.


If it gets slow, perhaps I will print your letter from 1995, which I found in my files last year, along with other letters of feedback regarding the book.  It includes your rankings of courses back then.  Remember which course you put at #100?

[Niall C]

This sounds as though its getting very close to blackmail. Should be interesting !


Niall

[Sean_A]

Ran

I too like Hillside's front 9, that is partly what makes the back 9 so disappointing.  Yes, I often wonder how the 2nd and 3rd tier GB&I links would be treated in the US. 

There is certainly an Atlantic divide where Burnham is concerned.  For some reason (and it can't be tv) Brits regard B&B much higher than do Yanks.  For me, the only thing it lacks is width, but that is a common problem these days.

My only recourse where RND is concerned is to revisit.  However, I shant go back to Addington unless I hear it is making progress or it is convenient and cheap.  I don't dwell on conditioning/presentation very much, but it is clear that there is a serious problem holding the course back.

Moving onto the USA South

I find it hard to grasp your admiration for Pine Needles.  When I first saw the course after the renovation I thought Mid-Pines was better and now I think Mid Pines is significantly better and just barely a 7 (when generous).  I just don't see PN as its equal...its strikes me as a course lost in its location.  Your colleagues must chalk up the high score to homerism 

To be honest, I have to question Masa's 4 for Mid Pines more than anything.  Did he actually leave the parking lot 

Ciao

[Jud_T]

Ran,


Generally, I'd say you suffer from a bit of Grade Inflation syndrome.  Of course this means you're probably more of a glass-half full kind of guy, which is not, in and of itself, a bad way to go through life.


1.  Ballybunion Cashen 5- I get the feeling that everyone, yourself included, didn't know how the hell to score this place and all pencils gravitated to the 5 in the middle.  I'd give it a 0.  The course should have either never been built, or they should blow it up and start over IMO.  When the caddies all go to get carts (for themselves!) before heading out it's generally not a good sign.  Severe isn't a strong enough word here for anyone over a 10 in a normal Bally breeze.  Sitting next to the classic Old Course makes it seem even worse, if that's even possible.  I'd play 10 out of 10 rounds at the bar in the clubhouse over playing this goat track again.


2.  Waterville 8-  This one may be quibbling.  Most here would probably give the course a 7.  My general skepticism of wanna-be tournament owners as well as a couple of mediocre holes and questionable water features lead me to think Tom got it right with a 6 here.  Furthermore, the place is not exactly easy to get to and although a beautiful drive and a great drinking town, I wouldn't encourage travelers to make the trek just to see this track, which your rating certainly does.  I'd much rather urge folks to stay an extra day in Lahinch, for instance.


3. We-Ko Pa Saguaro 8-  Another one where most would say you're off by 1 at most here.  While a "better" piece of property, I'd take the more natural look and better bunkering (and prices!) at Talking Stick North 6 out of 10 times. Masa and Darius nailed it with a 6 IMO.


4.  Riviera 9- I know it's a classic etc...I'll only give it the 8 it deserves when they dig up that noxious weed they're currently playing on.  Till then I'll stick with Darius' 7.

[Peter Pallotta]

I find this thread vaguely fascinating. Conceptually, I can't wrap my head around the need for personal opinions regarding subjective matters of taste having to be re-visited in this way, and scrutinized by the collective.

I would've thought a more more appropriate thread would've been: "I am Ran and You are Not - Deal with It!" -- i.e. a celebration of one man's *experience* with the great and not so great courses of the world, and a testament to that man's high standing amongst us that we're all interested in reading about that experience.

But the above assumes (and takes at face value the oft-stated belief around here) that there are no fundamental rules and essential principles and objective standards in regards to quality golf course architecture -- such that  any attempt at a collective/consensus "rating" is essentially a misguided one. 

Perhaps I have been misinformed about that belief, or perhaps many are of two minds about it?

 

[Matt Kardash]

The actual rating s are the least interesting thing about the book. I don't pay too much attention to them.

[Tom_Doak]

The actual rating s are the least interesting thing about the book. I don't pay too much attention to them.

If true, mission accomplished!

[Andrew Simpson]

Ran, you have to go with what you think and feel, I've not even looked for the full guide on the Doak scale  but it just that, the DOAK scale. Even to Tom it has it vagaries, ie if there is an abundance of quality courses you might have an abundance of quality in one area so the 100mile or 2hr drive thing is out the window.
Jud_T dismisses Ballybunion Cashen as a goat track and would stay in the bar, perhaps that is shows a dependence on drink not golf! Even as a hardened Scot where drink is at the top of my list, I'd happily play Cashen with good company or alone without playing for the "named course" elitism and saying I'll only play a Doak 15!
I'm not a golf snob, perhaps because I've played all my golf locally on Dornoch, Tain, Brora, Nairn and the southern Scottish courses etc but probably because of that I enjoy a Resort course when I visit the US because of the condition and presentation. They can be outstanding in my eyes and the design/layout slightly unnatural, yet where many on here put so much weight on presentation they dismiss great natural courses without "names" because they are not up to the "Old" course next door or the condition is not perfect!
It's a golf course, it shouldn't be 100% ALL the time. Get over it. (sorry but rant over)

[jeffwarne]

Ran,


Generally, I'd say you suffer from a bit of Grade Inflation syndrome.  Of course this means you're probably more of a glass-half full kind of guy, which is not, in and of itself, a bad way to go through life.


1.  Ballybunion Cashen 5- I get the feeling that everyone, yourself included, didn't know how the hell to score this place and all pencils gravitated to the 5 in the middle.  I'd give it a 0.  The course should have either never been built, or they should blow it up and start over IMO.  When the caddies all go to get carts (for themselves!) before heading out it's generally not a good sign.  Severe isn't a strong enough word here for anyone over a 10 in a normal Bally breeze.  Sitting next to the classic Old Course makes it seem even worse, if that's even possible.  I'd play 10 out of 10 rounds at the bar in the clubhouse over playing this goat track again.


2.  Waterville 8-  This one may be quibbling.  Most here would probably give the course a 7.  My general skepticism of wanna-be tournament owners as well as a couple of mediocre holes and questionable water features lead me to think Tom got it right with a 6 here.  Furthermore, the place is not exactly easy to get to and although a beautiful drive and a great drinking town, I wouldn't encourage travelers to make the trek just to see this track, which your rating certainly does.  I'd much rather urge folks to stay an extra day in Lahinch, for instance.


3. We-Ko Pa Saguaro 8-  Another one where most would say you're off by 1 at most here.  While a "better" piece of property, I'd take the more natural look and better bunkering (and prices!) at Talking Stick North 6 out of 10 times. Masa and Darius nailed it with a 6 IMO.


4.  Riviera 9- I know it's a classic etc...I'll only give it the 8 it deserves when they dig up that noxious weed they're currently playing on.  Till then I'll stick with Darius' 7.

Jud
Where are the questionable water features on the current Waterville layout?
The bay on 2,3? or the ocean on 18?
Tom gave it a six because no doubt he saw an older version.
I've always had a soft spot for Waterville as it was my month long introduction to links golf and I went back to the redo expecting/rooting to not like it.

It is excellent. 7 for me perhaps even an 8 for some, though it didn't make my top 25


I'd also say the Cashen is quite enjoyable and is definitely not a 0.
Could it have been better? Who knows but it has some very fun shots.
That said, I'd say 5 is a bit high.
I'd leave the bar but maybe I'd take a couple with me

[Andrew Simpson]

The actual rating s are the least interesting thing about the book. I don't pay too much attention to them.

If true, mission accomplished!

And the most important word is in the title,,, "GUIDE"
Not the Gospel,
Not the Law
Not the Result
Not the Fact,,,
just a guide!

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes, Tom's book is pretty much like "The Guide to Good Housekeeping". The tip about removing red wine stains from a linen shirt using just plain salt and a gentle dabbing motion had the internet buzzing for months!!

  

[Daniel Jones]

The actual rating s are the least interesting thing about the book. I don't pay too much attention to them.

Couldn't agree more... For me it's about the descriptions and courses that never would have registered on my radar. Plus seeing a local course I detest make the "Most Schizophrenic" list, and a closing stretch of holes referred to as the "crescendo of A Day in the Life."

[Andrew Simpson]

Yes, Tom's book is pretty much like "The Guide to Good Housekeeping". The tip about removing red wine stains from a linen shirt using just plain salt and a gentle dabbing motion had the internet buzzing for months!!

 

Tom, Larry David, whatever!
What was the ranking for the Black Swan Club?

[Jason Topp]

We Ko Pa Saguaro - I prefer the 6 given by the others rather than the 8 you gave.  I think the course suffers in comparison to other Coore/Crenshaw courses because (1) the four short par 4's do not do much in the way of temptation.  Instead, I think they generally just call for a layup; (2) The course has too much width in my view given the relatively light winds in Arizona.  One can take the "aggressive" line and still have 45 yards of fairway; (3) the split fairway par five does not work very well in my view - the right side is very narrow and I would be unlikely to choose that route in stroke play; and (4) the use of so many short par 4's and so many corresponding long par 4's eliminates the meat and potatoes middle par 4's that are too abundant on other courses but almost absent here.  I love playing without houses but do not think the holes are of the quality the duo has created elsewhere.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Yes, Tom's book is pretty much like "The Guide to Good Housekeeping". The tip about removing red wine stains from a linen shirt using just plain salt and a gentle dabbing motion had the internet buzzing for months!!

 

Dear Ran
RE the Constructive Criticism. It really wouldn't hurt to have a 'like' button.

[Carl Rogers]

The actual rating s are the least interesting thing about the book. I don't pay too much attention to them.

If true, mission accomplished!

Agreed, with all the many things one can say about a course, the final number is the least important.
Concerning the few courses that I have played, mostly in the Sandhills, that are reviewed, I find it more interesting what is not said than what is said.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()