[Ira Fishman]

The thread about ranking courses using the GD criteria prompts me to suggest that there might be a fun and instructive alternative to the multiple annual rankings.  Why not have a Hall of Fame for Golf Courses structured in ways analogous to other sports Halls of Fame:


1. Courses are eligible only have they have been in existence for a defined period of time to minimize recency bias (20-25 years).
2. A knowledgeable panel of architects and golfers who have played a very large number of courses vote on election.
3. Acknowledgement that such voting is inherently subjective, but because a course could be elected only if it receives a super majority (75%) of the votes, different viewpoints, philosophies, etc balance out to at least some meaningful extent.


Each year we then could have a great debate on which should get in, which did, which should not, and which did not.  It would even be interesting to see if on the first vote, the panel adopts the philosophy of the first vote for the Baseball Hall of Fame--a larger number of inductees because of the build up of history, but still really difficult to get the necessary votes.


I know that there is a Golf Hole Hall of Fame but courses strike me as a more interesting topic.


Thoughts?


Ira

[Steve Lang]

Ira,

I'd suggest using the "Courses by Country" listing as a starting point for a first vote... by gca folks

[Garland Bayley]

I think a large number of people would nominate St. Andrews Old Course, even though it is not in Courses by Country.

[Forrest Richardson]

http://golfholehalloffame.org

[Garland Bayley]

No indication on the website of who is doing the golf hole hall of fame?

Black Mesa has lots of holes better than 16, and 16 is in the hall of fame?
It seems to me that the strategy for 16 is hit the fairway with the tee shot, advance the ball far enough that you can reach in three, and make sure your third reaches, otherwise you are going to get to try again. No charm at all as far as I am concerned.

[Forrest Richardson]

It was started by a consortium of GCA enthusiasts. I was one of the bunch. Unfortunately not many holes get nominated. Or, not nearly as many as were nominated 5+ years ago. If you want to be on the panel, submit a CV to me and it goes around until a majority of the panelists sign off.

[Garland Bayley]

It was started by a consortium of GCA enthusiasts. I was one of the bunch. Unfortunately not many holes get nominated. Or, not nearly as many as were nominated 5+ years ago. If you want to be on the panel, submit a CV to me and it goes around until a majority of the panelists sign off.

Maybe you need a better press agent. I didn't know about it until now.

As to the golf course hall of fame, perhaps major championship venues would be a better list to make nominations from than Ran's courses by country. Some of Ran's courses by country only have fame here.

[Jim Nugent]

Ira, here is how Golf Magazine describes its raters and rating process, for its World's Best 100 courses list:

"GOLF Magazine's biennial Top 100 Courses in the World Rankings are determined by a 100-strong international panel whose members include major-championship winners, architects, journalists and a cadre of connoisseurs who have played all of the world's top 100 courses. Panelists evaluate a ballot of 493 courses. Although there are no set-in-stone criteria they must follow, we have confidence in their sense of what constitutes "greatness" in a course."

i.e. sounds like GM does most of what you are suggesting. 

[Jim Nugent]

btw, in GM's most recent rankings (2015), Tom has four of the world's top 100, C&C also have four, and Paul Cowley has one. 

[Ira Fishman]

Jim,


Thanks.  I find the rankings fun if only because of the debates that they provoke.  But my thought was to have a variation on the annual ranking lists given that we have so many of them.  Under a Hall of Fame structure, once a course is elected, it comes off the ballot.  The annual debate would then be over who should get in or who did not get in that did, etc.  I also think that the super-majority vote for election to a Hall of Fame would take away some of the negatives of slight numerical differences in the annual top courses lists.


Ira

[Garland Bayley]

Ira, here is how Golf Magazine describes its raters and rating process, for its World's Best 100 courses list:

"GOLF Magazine's biennial Top 100 Courses in the World Rankings are determined by a 100-strong international panel whose members include major-championship winners, architects, journalists and a cadre of connoisseurs who have played all of the world's top 100 courses. Panelists evaluate a ballot of 493 courses. Although there are no set-in-stone criteria they must follow, we have confidence in their sense of what constitutes "greatness" in a course."

i.e. sounds like GM does most of what you are suggesting.

Hall of Fame suggests something different to me than just greatness. For example, North Berwick may not make the greatest lists, but it certainly has fame.

[Terry Lavin]

Fuhgeddaboudit.

[Peter Pallotta]

Fuhgeddaboudit.

Ira - I don't know you well enough to know if you need a translation of that or not, but in case you do I offer my own understanding of the many legitimately possible translations:

1. Forget about it.
2. Give it up - it's not worth your time.
3. Stop bothering me, will ya - it's not worth my time.
4. F--k. Talk about a beat that would sap anyone's...
5. Are you kidding me? Are you *kidding* me? You gotta be kidding me   

[Ira Fishman]

Change is hard; embrace of new ideas takes time. But it only is golf, and the Earth will continue to turn. In meantime, we will continue to debate and dispute all of the ordinal rankings produced by magazines.


Ira

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()