For Raters & Rankers...and Interested Parties

[Sean_A]

Sean - and you're right too. Do I imagine that, like you, I might find my initial affection & appreciation for a course like Reigate Heath grow and grow after multiple plays? Yes. But I think that says more about Reigate Heath (and about how the few/most notable GB&I courses have gotten the majority of visitors & press) than it does about either you/me or the efficacy of multiple plays. As I noted earlier, there's no course I've ever played 5 or 10 times that I've learned to like more or less over multiple plays --probably because none are as good a course as Reigate Heath to begin with.
P

Pietro

Sure, Reigate is Reigate.  I have said all along, most of the time, its people that change rather than the courses.  I couldn't say for sure, but I probably had a period in my life when I wouldn't have looked at Reigate twice.  This makes me think I need to see Gullane 3 again because I remember being impressed (I actually thought, if yardage wasn't such a huge factor today...(read technology which generates the need) it was architecturally the most sound of the three courses.  For some reason, I have not been compelled to go back.  Maybe I just had too many other courses I wanted to see first.  Strange that. Rest assured, I will be going back to Reigate Heath...and Alnmouth Village.

Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

It seems one of the things missing in this discussion is relative time frame.  And if i'm wrong Tom D can correct me.

But how many of those courses, where he changed his opinion was it something along the lines of "I saw it in my late teens, early 20s and when i went back 10, 15, 20 years later I thought different"

Because this sort of thing happens to everyone with just about any topic.  Work preferences, types of food they like, taste in women, political opinions, religious beliefs, etc, etc.

Play a course 10 times over 2-3 years and your opinion won't likely change much.  Play it once or twice and then play it few times more 20 years later....

[Tom_Doak]

It seems one of the things missing in this discussion is relative time frame.  And if i'm wrong Tom D can correct me.

But how many of those courses, where he changed his opinion was it something along the lines of "I saw it in my late teens, early 20s and when i went back 10, 15, 20 years later I thought different"

Because this sort of thing happens to everyone with just about any topic.  Work preferences, types of food they like, taste in women, political opinions, religious beliefs, etc, etc.

Play a course 10 times over 2-3 years and your opinion won't likely change much.  Play it once or twice and then play it few times more 20 years later....

Kalen:


Yes, I agree.  When I was in my early twenties and checking off all the best courses in the world at a furious pace, it was easy to dismiss some of the others I saw.  I did find quite a few courses I thought were very underrated, and touted them loudly, but if they didn't get to that level I was pretty quick to write them off.  [I also didn't want to be the "boy who cried wolf" over every links I saw, like a friend of mine.]


Now that I've seen most of the top 250 or 500, I don't think about the rankings nearly as much, and I can enjoy courses like Kilspindie or Gullane 3 for what they are . . . and I realize how most places in the world would be lucky to have a course like them.  If Traverse City had a course like Kilspindie, instead of the difficult high-end resort courses we have, we'd be way better off.

[Ira Fishman]

Quite glad that you mention Kilspindie. We are playing there for the first time this year, thanks to the input of many on this board.


Ira

[MCirba]

All,

My comments about "snobbery" probably harken back to a more contentious time here on GolfClubAtlas where pages of Ran's website were cluttered with arguments from a few about how one couldn't properly rate a course, or even offer a valid opinion without having played a course multiple times in every kind of weather and time of year imaginable.   Of course, that extended to the idea that one couldn't comment on the value of architecture simply from a photograph, even though plenty of obviously fabulous and/or gawdawful photos were quite self evident prima facie.

I would never extend that characterization to someone who was interested in diving deep into a particular golfing pool of their own choosing, immersing themselves in every rich texture, angle, and fabric a course had to offer, and there is a valid argument to selection of quality (repeated plays) versus quantity (playing a lot of courses once or thrice).   

For those who believe one's opinion can markedly change on a particular course, especially over the course of significant time, one need look no further than one Robert Tyre Jones and The Old Course for Exhibit A.   

[John Kavanaugh]

I think we can all agree that every rater knows within .5 points exactly what they are going to give a course before they ever set foot on property. It's the nature if the beast. In that vein repeated plays really are unnecessary.


As a matter of fact I ran through my thoughts on Harbour Town as if I were a rater and there is no way I would have adjusted my score up one full point. I would have simply rated the course too high to begin with figuring that I must have missed something. That's a good thing, isn't it?

[James Brown]

I think we can all agree that every rater knows within .5 points exactly what they are going to give a course before they ever set foot on property. It's the nature if the beast. In that vein repeated plays really are unnecessary.


As a matter of fact I ran through my thoughts on Harbour Town as if I were a rater and there is no way I would have adjusted my score up one full point. I would have simply rated the course too high to begin with figuring that I must have missed something. That's a good thing, isn't it?

 It sure I would agree,  As a rather, you know where it stands going in but I have changed my mind lots of times. 

[James Reader]

Interesting take from one of GOLF.com’s raters (“among the most respected and well-traveled course evaluators in the game” apparently) on which is the most overrated course in their top 100 and why:


“Augusta National…. There are no long views or mountain backdrops, no ocean, no rivers.”


 

[Tom_Doak]

I think we can all agree that every rater knows within .5 points exactly what they are going to give a course before they ever set foot on property. It's the nature if the beast. In that vein repeated plays really are unnecessary.

That's why I am enjoying going to see courses in odd places that haven't been covered thoroughly.  There's no telling what I might find.

[John Kavanaugh]

And why I like to remain ignorant. I'm going to play one of the finest courses in the world next week and can't tell you a thing about it. Since I have already declared it one of the finest in the world I doubt that my mind will change much after the 72 hole.

[Daryl David]

Interesting take from one of GOLF.com’s raters (“among the most respected and well-traveled course evaluators in the game” apparently) on which is the most overrated course in their top 100 and why:


“Augusta National…. There are no long views or mountain backdrops, no ocean, no rivers.”


 

I also enjoyed reading one of those “most respected and well traveled course evaluators” describe how underrated Royal County Louth is. The folks at Baltry better gear up for all the logo and signage changes.

[Lou_Duran]

I also enjoyed reading one of those “most respected and well traveled course evaluators” describe how underrated Royal County Louth is. The folks at Baltry better gear up for all the logo and signage changes.

And how is that a bad thing?


RCL hardly flies under the radar. 

[Daryl David]

I also enjoyed reading one of those “most respected and well traveled course evaluators” describe how underrated Royal County Louth is. The folks at Baltry better gear up for all the logo and signage changes.

And how is that a bad thing?


RCL hardly flies under the radar.

RCL???

[Lou_Duran]

Royal County Louth

[Richard Fisher]

At the risk of missing an in-joke and seeming terribly po-faced, there is no such institution.

Royal County Down, Newcastle (1889)

or

County Louth, Baltray (1892)

are the two relevant clubs, neither of which is remotely under-the-radar, unless hosting the Irish Open is seen as a secretive act. But, as I say, apologies if I am taking something at face value that is isn't meant to be so taken.

[James Reader]

I think Daryl’s point is simply that there is no such club as Royal County Louth.

[Lou_Duran]

I think Daryl’s point is simply that there is no such club as Royal County Louth.

Oops!


I was replying by quoting his own thread, not catching the apparent attempt at reducing his "evaluator" down to size and being clever.  Sly fellow that Daryl.


Two of us attempted to play CL a couple of years ago but our member contact's schedule did not work with ours.  My son is playing there later this month and I'll ask him to pick me up an RCL logoed item.

[Daryl David]

I think Daryl’s point is simply that there is no such club as Royal County Louth.

Oops!


I was replying by quoting his own thread, not catching the apparent attempt at reducing his "evaluator" down to size and being clever.  Sly fellow that Daryl.


Two of us attempted to play CL a couple of years ago but our member contact's schedule did not work with ours.  My son is playing there later this month and I'll ask him to pick me up an RCL logoed item.

Hard to point out irony on a message board.  Probably should be first duty for a highly respected course evaluator is to get the name of the course correct.

[Neil Regan]

I also enjoyed reading one of those “most respected and well traveled course evaluators” describe how underrated Royal County Louth is. The folks at Baltry better gear up for all the logo and signage changes.

Hard to point out irony on a message board.  Probably should be first duty for a highly respected course evaluator is to get the name of the course correct.

Sometimes irony is not bold.