Why doesn't Victoria National...

[Jim Franklin]

make it into the Golfweek Top 100? I played there again the other day and it is my favorite Fazio course. It is difficult, yet fun, and aesthetics are awesome. I have played upwards of 50 Fazio courses and VN is the best. I am not sure off hand how many of his make the GW top 100, but this is a glaring omission. Thoughts from the GW rater camp?

[Michael Moore]

Because there are a hundred courses better than it.


(Sorry, just read an absolutely fascinating and quite damning article on the ratings process http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/02/whos-to-judge).

[Jim Franklin]

Because there are a hundred courses better than it.

And you are smoking crack if there are 100 courses better than VN.

[Phil McDade]

Because there are a hundred courses better than it.

And you are smoking crack if there are 100 courses better than VN.

Really? Crack? Hyperbole, perhaps -- but Mr. Moore's been around, and I'm guessing he can name 3 or 4 in Maine alone that he might rate better than Victoria National.


I  have not played it, so I can't offer a judgement. But it has a reputation as being overly penal, pretty one-dimensional, and ill-suited for those who play at most anything over a 10.

[Michael Moore]

I have not been around. I was just more fired up than usual about ratings tautology because of that great article, in which the panelists for the San Pellegrino 50 Best are referred to as "a world order of Care Bears, and this under the cynical gaze of a sparkling water."

[Kalen Braley]

Jimmy F has also been around too, I can assure you of that... 
 
In all seriousness, if he thinks it should be top 100, I put a lot of stock in his words because he's seen and played just about everything at the top with the exception of ANGC if memory serves me right.

[Jim Franklin]

I have not been around. I was just more fired up than usual about ratings tautology because of that great article, in which the panelists for the San Pellegrino 50 Best are referred to as "a world order of Care Bears, and this under the cynical gaze of a sparkling water."

I did not read the article, but will. I do not know how other services are rated. I have played over 1000 courses and VN is in my top 20. I recently played with another guy that has played over 800 courses and he too has it in his top 20. It is certainly not an easy course, but it gives you plenty of room to drive the ball. There are some forced carries, but a lot of great courses have forced carries.

I don't have anyone paying for my travel or rooms when I play these places. I love playing new golf courses which is what drives my passion. Does that make me a "Care Bear?"

[Jim Franklin]

Jimmy F has also been around too, I can assure you of that... 
 
In all seriousness, if he thinks it should be top 100, I put a lot of stock in his words because he's seen and played just about everything at the top with the exception of ANGC if memory serves me right.

Good memory. Too bad that hasn't changed.

[Michael George]

I also would trust Mr. Franklin's judgment on golf courses.  His opinions have often been proven right after I play the course.  I need to get to Victoria National, but I have heard from others that it and Wade Hampton are Fazio's best.   I also need to get to Rock Creek to see if he is right about it being top 20 in the US. 


Now Mr. Franklin's judgment on college football teams and his golf attire are unquestionably suspect.  No doubt.

[Kalen Braley]

Jim,
 
Just out of curiosity...where would you put Fazio's Gozzer Ranch on the Fazio list?  Top 10?
 
P.S.  I too would agree on RCCC, it is indeed the real deal!!

[George Pazin]

What is the playable width like? How much can you miss it left and right and still play the ball (not fairway, just play)? That's generally what defines playable for me personally.



Have you played the two World Woods courses, Jim? If so, how would you compare VN to them?

[Mark Saltzman]

Because there are a hundred courses better than it.

And you are smoking crack if there are 100 courses better than VN.

Really? Crack? Hyperbole, perhaps -- but Mr. Moore's been around, and I'm guessing he can name 3 or 4 in Maine alone that he might rate better than Victoria National.


I  have not played it, so I can't offer a judgement. But it has a reputation as being overly penal, pretty one-dimensional, and ill-suited for those who play at most anything over a 10.

Does every great golf course have to have an abundance of width? Is width required to avoid a course being labelled one dimensional? 

[Tom_Doak]

Does every great golf course have to have an abundance of width? Is width required to avoid a course being labelled one dimensional?

Certainly not.  But, then again, how many places are you going to reserve among the top 100 for courses that are only playable for single-digit handicappers [and only enjoyable for 5-handicaps or less] ?  There are a lot of courses that compete for those spots -- everywhere from Carnoustie to Pine Valley to Butler National to Red Ledges to Pikewood National.  How many of them do we want?

[George Pazin]

Does every great golf course have to have an abundance of width? Is width required to avoid a course being labelled one dimensional?

Yes.


 

[George Pazin]

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, my question to Jim about width is an honest to goodness actual question, not a criticism disguised as a question. Haven't played it, haven't seen VN beyond what I've seen on Golf Channel. JK does tend to favor courses that require one to hit it straight, so I'm just curious.

[Mark Saltzman]

Does every great golf course have to have an abundance of width? Is width required to avoid a course being labelled one dimensional?

Certainly not.  But, then again, how many places are you going to reserve among the top 100 for courses that are only playable for single-digit handicappers [and only enjoyable for 5-handicaps or less] ?  There are a lot of courses that compete for those spots -- everywhere from Carnoustie to Pine Valley to Butler National to Red Ledges to Pikewood National.  How many of them do we want?

Tom, it's hard to say how many of them we want, but I guess I've already become a bit jaded from reading this site.  How many times do I have to read that great courses have, fun, quirk, width, wild greens and anything else can only be enjoyed by a 'stick' or a 'cartballer' or someone with no knowledge of GCA.  Sure, my preference is for the type of course loved by most GCAers but I have no problem acknowledging that a course like Congressional is an excellent test of golf, with nice variety in its par-4s, many challenging, tiered greens and rolling land and that it is great at what it's trying to be [not that that means Congo is necessarily a top-100 course but more importantly that, as a hard, narrow, rarely forgiving course it shouldn't be excluded from consideration].


If there isn't a place for Victoria National on a list of the 100 greatest modern courses in the country, then I think it should be made clear to the public that the list on offer is really the 100 greatest modern courses, which are dominated by a groupthink that believe hard equals bad. 


For what it's worth, I've played some 50-60 Tom Fazio designs and also have VN as my number 1

[Nigel Islam]

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, my question to Jim about width is an honest to goodness actual question, not a criticism disguised as a question. Haven't played it, haven't seen VN beyond what I've seen on Golf Channel. JK does tend to favor courses that require one to hit it straight, so I'm just curious.

I will tackle that question George. Victoria does have fairly wide fairways, but the nature of the course built on strip mines means that if you venture off the fairway it might be in the native or wet. It has become much softer in recent years though. There are two holes that I would consider borderline, 15 and 16. 16 is a par 3 that is very scenic, but very easy to lose that shot into the water left or right. 15 is a par 5 through the woods into a lower area. The layup is a very tight shot due to a native grassed mound right and a fairway that feeds into water on the left. 5 is another par 3 that it's pretty easy to lose your shot. There are a lot of mid to higher handicaps that play there.

[Jim Franklin]

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, my question to Jim about width is an honest to goodness actual question, not a criticism disguised as a question. Haven't played it, haven't seen VN beyond what I've seen on Golf Channel. JK does tend to favor courses that require one to hit it straight, so I'm just curious.

I will tackle that question George. Victoria does have fairly wide fairways, but the nature of the course built on strip mines means that if you venture off the fairway it might be in the native or wet. It has become much softer in recent years though. There are two holes that I would consider borderline, 15 and 16. 16 is a par 3 that is very scenic, but very easy to lose that shot into the water left or right. 15 is a par 5 through the woods into a lower area. The layup is a very tight shot due to a native grassed mound right and a fairway that feeds into water on the left. 5 is another par 3 that it's pretty easy to lose your shot. There are a lot of mid to higher handicaps that play there.

Nigel is right.

Pine Valley has decent driving corridors but if you miss, you are in deep doo-doo. Very similar to VN. I agree we do not want too many penal courses in the top 100, but I would rather play VN over any of the courses Tom mentioned. I would much prefer a fun course, but if I have to play a penal course, VN is a solid choice.

And Kalen, Gozzer falls at #2 on my Fazio list. And it is a close second.

[Jimmy Chandler]

I would rather play VN over any of the courses Tom mentioned.

Over Pine Valley?

[Joel_Stewart]

I would rather play VN over any of the courses Tom mentioned.

Over Pine Valley?

LOL. Fazio is trying to sterilize Pine Valley to look like a Fazio course but that's a battle thankfully he'll lose.


Jim,  Have you played Shady Canyon in Irvine?  I'm playing there next week on the recommendation of a few people saying it's one of Fazio better courses.

[Jim Franklin]

I would rather play VN over any of the courses Tom mentioned.

Over Pine Valley?

LOL. Fazio is trying to sterilize Pine Valley to look like a Fazio course but that's a battle thankfully he'll lose.


Jim,  Have you played Shady Canyon in Irvine?  I'm playing there next week on the recommendation of a few people saying it's one of Fazio better courses.

No Joel, I have not. I would be interested in your thoughts.

And Jimmy C, I was referring to Butler, Pikewood (which I really like too), and Red Ledges. And even Carnoustie. Although if I was playing Carnoustie, that means I would also be playing Muirfield and TOC which would make it better.

[Jim Franklin]

So why are the Golfweek raters on this site afraid of opining about VN not being in the Top 100? PM me if you don't want the info public.

[Josh Tarble]

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, my question to Jim about width is an honest to goodness actual question, not a criticism disguised as a question. Haven't played it, haven't seen VN beyond what I've seen on Golf Channel. JK does tend to favor courses that require one to hit it straight, so I'm just curious.

I will tackle that question George. Victoria does have fairly wide fairways, but the nature of the course built on strip mines means that if you venture off the fairway it might be in the native or wet. It has become much softer in recent years though. There are two holes that I would consider borderline, 15 and 16. 16 is a par 3 that is very scenic, but very easy to lose that shot into the water left or right. 15 is a par 5 through the woods into a lower area. The layup is a very tight shot due to a native grassed mound right and a fairway that feeds into water on the left. 5 is another par 3 that it's pretty easy to lose your shot. There are a lot of mid to higher handicaps that play there.

Nigel,
How would you compare Victoria to Wolf Run?

[Jud_T]

Does every great golf course have to have an abundance of width? Is width required to avoid a course being labelled one dimensional?

Certainly not.  But, then again, how many places are you going to reserve among the top 100 for courses that are only playable for single-digit handicappers [and only enjoyable for 5-handicaps or less] ?  There are a lot of courses that compete for those spots -- everywhere from Carnoustie to Pine Valley to Butler National to Red Ledges to Pikewood National.  How many of them do we want?

This is exactly why trying to force one list of completely different types of courses is ultimately a fool's errand.  It's like saying Jackson Pollack is better than Raphael or Cecil Taylor is better than the Beatles.  You end up with everyone getting their panties in a bunch over a fruit salad that was just thrown together with some artificial criteria created to impart an aura of statistical significance.  I know what type of courses I'm interested in and if VN is ranked #1 with a bullet I'll still have zero interest in playing it.


P.S.  I actually found Carnoustie much more playable than a place like Butler National, even if the course record at both was secure before I teed off...

[BCowan]

make it into the Golfweek Top 100? I played there again the other day and it is my favorite Fazio course. It is difficult, yet fun, and aesthetics are awesome. I have played upwards of 50 Fazio courses and VN is the best. I am not sure off hand how many of his make the GW top 100, but this is a glaring omission. Thoughts from the GW rater camp?

Jim,

   You really didn't make a case in your opening post why VN should be in the top 100 and or why it's Fazio's best course.  Fun, Aesthetics, and awesome are rather weak arguments.