Kalen:
Well, I'm in Sean's camp on this one. The local 9-hole muni that's 2 minutes from my home I'll play almost anytime, because it has several holes and greens of interest -- not on the order of a Lawsonia or Milwaukee CC, of course, but interesting and challenging to play. But there are several courses within an easy drive of my house -- < 30 minutes-drive -- that I just don't play anymore, because once was enough; they just aren't very good at all, even at rates oftentimes under $30 for 18 holes. (One of the cheapest courses in my neck of the woods I simply won't play -- it's just not any good.)
Unless you're living in a truly remote area of the country, most of us have some choices, and those choices always (at least in my experience and those of my golfing friends) involve some calculus of time, money, convenience, "value," and who you might be playing with that day. I don't think University Ridge -- a course I referenced earlier in this thread -- is that great of a course, but it has some good holes, and it's usually in very good shape, and I'll play it with friends or as part of an outing.
But I'd rather play at my favorite "value" course in Wisconsin, which is two hours from my home and thus involves a full-day commitment. And that course gets at some of the things that I think Jason was trying to address that go beyond value -- does the course meet certain benchmarks, or criteria, for spending X amount of dollars and X amount of time playing?
One other question that comes to mind is: Should your personal favorite course necessarily equate to what you think is the best course you've played? It's perhaps a take off on Jud's view that a $20 pizza actually does trump the $80 steak -- not just in terms of value, but actual merit.