A great course is a great course
a great course qualified for any format/reason, isn't
I agree.
First, define what makes a great match play course. I argue a good definition is a course which yields the most "hole wins", where two players of similar ability, on average, post a dissimilar hole score the most times. This results in the most exciting and volatile matches, with the greatest likelihood of a "big comeback". In theory, this course has holes with a larger standard deviation in scores, and an average score halfway between integers (3.5, 4.5, etc.).
An argument can also be made for a course that rarely separates two players of similar ability, often yielding a close match decided in the final few holes. In theory, this course has holes with a small standard deviation in scores, and an average hole score of close to par.
One problem with the first approach is the increased advantage a player playing well, over an opponent who brings his "B-" game to the match. This would lead to short, non-competitive matches. Similarly, the "neutral" course may not sufficiently separate the hot player from the cold player.
Regardless, the primary issue is the sliding scale of difficulty for players of differing ability. As a 4-5 handicapper, I will average about 3.5 on a difficult par 3, and 3.0 on short or easy par 3s. Two examples:
#5 at Pumpkin Ridge: Witch Hollow - 187 yards over water - 3.6 average
#2 at Kingsley - 130-150 yards with severe penalty for missing green - 3.4 average
I average 4.0 on easy par 4s and about 4.5 on medium-difficult par 4s. Think a relatively easy 450 yard hole, a 390 yard hole with significant challenges, or even a little 310 yard bastard hole with trouble everywhere, are examples of 4.5 holes for me.
I average 4.9 - 5.0 on easy par 5s, and about 5.5 on long or difficult par 5s. A scratch or better player has a huge advantage over me on these holes. I estimate a scratch player beats me by perhaps .25 - .5 strokes on par 5s, but only .1 - .2 on par 3 holes.
Enough about me. The point is that average scores and scoring deviations differ dramatically for players with varying abilities, and any attempt to maximize or minimize scoring deviation seems futile. A course that maximizes scoring deviation will be too tricky and too demoralizing, while a course that minimizes scoring deviation lacks sufficient intrigue. A grand variety of golf holes works best, and one's enjoyment of golf is mostly correlated to the quality and variety of the shots required, regardless of match or stroke play.