[JC Jones]

Does every list have to be for every one?  In a discussion about the disparity of Rye in the UK rankings vs Rye in the GOLF Magazine rankings, Simon Holt makes this interesting point:

What I would say about this list is that given the panel listed in the print version of the magazine, it's a pretty learned group with one obvious exception.  When you are asking Tom Doak, Gil Hanse, Jim Urbina, Kye Goalby, Ian Andrew, Brian Curley, Mike Keiser, Don Mahaffey, DMK, Frank Pont, Dana Fry, Robin Hiseman and no doubt names I'm not remembering.....it's slightly different from asking Jack who sits at the bar at Normaltown GC in middle England who reckons he knows a thing or two about GCA because he's played the Belfry once before.  That's harsh on anyone who gives their time to the UK magazine lists as there are some very knowledgable golfers out there, but you know what I'm getting at.

Firstly, I have been vocal in recent days about the conflicts inherent in having a panel with so many people that are financially invested in the game of golf, and frankly, having their work or the courses they own or are affiliated with appearing in a publication ranking that will no doubt be used to sell/market future business.  Simon raises a great point, however, in saying that it does also so happen to be that many of these same people including some of the people he listed above, also are among the most travelled and learned in the golf architecture realm.  So, perhaps its fine that this panel is comprised of these people and that this set of rankings serves as a representation of the opinions of the globally travelled, well studied, cognoscenti if you will.

Does every list need to be this way?  Simon also brings up a more standard golfer that frankly represents a significantly higher number of golfers than the couple of hundred nerds around here (I'd even wager 90+% of the golfers).  Shouldn't there also be a Top 100 list that reflects the tastes, opinions, values and interests of the "retail golfer" (to borrow a term from Mr. Keiser) that we all know to exist? 

Edited for font size issues.

[Peter Pallotta]

Yes, there should be such a list -- but compiled by the same group of panelists responsible for GOLF's Top 100 list.
It would give them a chance to let their hair down, and take off the pressure of always being 'right'. 
Who knows what deep insights & relaxed honesty might emerge if well-traveled and experienced panelists were freed from the burden of rating (and the even heavier burden of ranking) the 'greats', and focused on the 'popular' and/or prosaic instead.
Tasked with visiting, playing, and rating/ranking only golf courses that are *not* in the Top 100, there'd be no past consensus to conform to, no top architects to try to please, no name developers or private clubs/club members to worry about offending.
They'd be like kids in a candy store -- just knowledgeable golfers discovering both the strengths & weaknesses, the joys and pitfalls,  of the kinds of courses that average golfers tend to play the most. 
Of course, you might have to *pay* them to go and play such courses , or at least find some way to overcome their hesitancy about/distaste for the task -- but maybe an appeal could be made to their better natures, i.e. highlighting the invaluable service they could provide to the countless average golfers among us who would benefit from their views about which 'popular' courses are also the 'best' courses.
P

[Tom_Doak]

When I went to the UK in 1982, there really wasn't a ranking of the courses there to tell me where to go.  I had to use all kinds of other sources: 


1.  Looking up the courses Bernard Darwin had written up in 1910, to see what had happened to them
2.  Seeing the courses that had hosted championships back in the day, but no longer
3.  Searching out courses by noted designers [Colt, Simpson, Fowler, Abercromby, Braid, etc.]
4.  Going back to the golf magazines of the 1920's and seeing what holes and courses they talked about.  A list of the favorite holes of Sir Ernest Holderness [Amateur Champion in 1922 and 1924] included Dornoch, Pennard and St. Enodoc . . . that was the first mention I'd seen of the last two.
5.  Most of all, wherever I was, I would ask the local pro and the people I played with what other courses I should see in the area.


Today, guys will drive right past Gullane and Kilspindie and even Deal, and all the way out to Machirhanish instead, just to get to the next course that made the list.  [And don't get me wrong; Machrihanish is a lovely spot.]


I guess my problem with the lists [like with all sports halls-of-fame] is the arbitrary cutoff:  you're either in or you're out, so then people start making up all kinds of silly rules to decide where the line should fall.  [And, of course, whether they are one of the Important People who gets to decide who's in and who's out.]  Whereas in reality, everything exists on a continuum:  no, Gullane and Kilspindie are not one of the top 100 courses in the world, but they are full of great golf and a blast to play. 


I just did my list of my ten favorite rounds of 2019, and my round at Kilspindie was #1, ahead of Muirfield, Crystal Downs, and Tara Iti, among other places.  Some of that was the company, for sure, and a beautiful day to boot . . . but some of it was pure relief at not having to worry about how I should vote on it, leaving the strict imperative TO GO OUT AND PLAY.  And you can enjoy the hell out of that experience at many, many more than 100 courses.

[JC Jones]

When I went to the UK in 1982, there really wasn't a ranking of the courses there to tell me where to go.  I had to use all kinds of other sources: 


1.  Looking up the courses Bernard Darwin had written up in 1910, to see what had happened to them
2.  Seeing the courses that had hosted championships back in the day, but no longer
3.  Searching out courses by noted designers [Colt, Simpson, Fowler, Abercromby, Braid, etc.]
4.  Going back to the golf magazines of the 1920's and seeing what holes and courses they talked about.  A list of the favorite holes of Sir Ernest Holderness [Amateur Champion in 1922 and 1924] included Dornoch, Pennard and St. Enodoc . . . that was the first mention I'd seen of the last two.
5.  Most of all, wherever I was, I would ask the local pro and the people I played with what other courses I should see in the area.


Today, guys will drive right past Gullane and Kilspindie and even Deal, and all the way out to Machirhanish instead, just to get to the next course that made the list.  [And don't get me wrong; Machrihanish is a lovely spot.]


I guess my problem with the lists [like with all sports halls-of-fame] is the arbitrary cutoff:  you're either in or you're out, so then people start making up all kinds of silly rules to decide where the line should fall.  [And, of course, whether they are one of the Important People who gets to decide who's in and who's out.]  Whereas in reality, everything exists on a continuum:  no, Gullane and Kilspindie are not one of the top 100 courses in the world, but they are full of great golf and a blast to play. 


I just did my list of my ten favorite rounds of 2019, and my round at Kilspindie was #1, ahead of Muirfield, Crystal Downs, and Tara Iti, among other places.  Some of that was the company, for sure, and a beautiful day to boot . . . but some of it was pure relief at not having to worry about how I should vote on it, leaving the strict imperative TO GO OUT AND PLAY.  And you can enjoy the hell out of that experience at many, many more than 100 courses.

I agree.  And it also brings up another question Simon's post raises: most of the GOLF Magazine panel is US based and they believe Rye to be Top 100.  The UK panel likely has a lot more experience playing the depth of courses in the UK that arent on the GOLF list and maybe, to them, Rye isnt Top 100 world worthy as compared to others.  On David Davis's Top 100 courses site I think Rye is somewhere around 25 in England and 50 in GB&I.  Considering there are 50 US courses on the GOLF Magazine list, that would have Rye outside the Top 100 world.

Edited to add this: my point is I agree that the Top 100 lists are limiting and self circulating. 

Great, you've caused me to derail my own thread.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,

Agreed whole heartedly.  I've found many a handful of hidden gems over the years that would never make it within 20 miles of these kinds of lists, that were a blast to play.

P.S.  Maybe your next book can be a bunch of lesser courses and Titled "Just Go out and F$%^&* Play"! 

[Tom_Doak]

P.S.  Maybe your next book can be a bunch of lesser courses and Titled "Just Go out and F$%^&* Play"! 

When we eventually finish volume 4 of The Confidential Guide, for Europe and Africa, there will be more than 500 courses profiled, and only four or five of them are in this ranking!  So maybe I will have a sub-title for it.

[Ally Mcintosh]

To be honest, whilst the GOLF panel are certainly a bunch of learned - and often likeminded - contributors, when it comes to UK rankings, I might tend to listen more to those who play links golf every week of the year (a few of who are admittedly on the GOLF panel).


The Niall Carlton’s and Mark Chaplin’s and Richard Fisher’s of the world have grown up on the links and really get what it’s about. It is in their soul. That makes a big difference I reckon.

[Tom_Doak]

Word of mouth (from someone whose tastes align with your own) is always tge best source of recommendations.  The Confidential Guide was, originally at least, word of mouth straight from me.


However, many/most local rankings of golf courses are horribly skewed, mostly no doubt due to the influence of advertisers, and sometimes an editor with an axe to grind. 


In South Africa, for example, Durban Country Club is ranked the 17th best course in the country, behind a bunch of resort and housing-development courses.  Most of the rankings I've seen in Europe and Asia are no better.  But then, don't forget that back in its early days, GOLFWEEK produced a reader poll that had Seminole tenth in the state, behind such places as the Bloomingdale Golfers Club.  I think somebody was stuffing the ballot box!

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom - here's an idea that would do us all a favour and provide your next book: you pick 3 other people you most think really know good golf and set off on a 3 year project to play popular courses not in the Top 100 in the US, either public or private -- and then tell us which ones are best.
(Think of all the instagram posts and podcasts that could be generated over those three years as you visit various courses...but never reveal the results until the end!)
Thank you in advance for the consideration you will give this time consuming and thankless task -- because it would indeed be a great resource for many.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Word of mouth (from someone whose tastes align with your own) is always tge best source of recommendations.  The Confidential Guide was, originally at least, word of mouth straight from me.


However, many/most local rankings of golf courses are horribly skewed, mostly no doubt due to the influence of advertisers, and sometimes an editor with an axe to grind. 


In South Africa, for example, Durban Country Club is ranked the 17th best course in the country, behind a bunch of resort and housing-development courses.  Most of the rankings I've seen in Europe and Asia are no better.  But then, don't forget that back in its early days, GOLFWEEK produced a reader poll that had Seminole tenth in the state, behind such places as the Bloomingdale Golfers Club.  I think somebody was stuffing the ballot box!

This may be the case elsewhere. But it certainly wasn’t originally the case with the Golf World GB&I rankings (that were full of architects, administrators, great amateur golfers etc...). Or the Irish rankings that I know definitely aren’t skewed by advertising.


The former took a strange turn, however. Plus the latter taught me that even with a small panel, the intent gets very diluted.


That said, there is something very interesting in how the knowledgeable local golfers rank the courses in GB&I versus how the visitors rank them. There’s quite a difference in certain courses.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()