News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #175 on: December 13, 2019, 06:56:00 PM »
JC,


What’s you’re impression from TV, Royal Melbourne closer to Top 3 or Top 30?
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #176 on: December 13, 2019, 06:59:50 PM »
JC,


What’s you’re impression from TV, Royal Melbourne closer to Top 3 or Top 30?


Closer to Top 3.  What prompted the discussion was a text expressing surprise at his thoughts on RM after watching the coverage the last couple of days.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #177 on: December 13, 2019, 07:04:22 PM »
Royal Melbourne West is at #7.  After watching the Presidents Cup, maybe its to low.  Thoughts.


We are required to vote for a top three in the GOLF Magazine polling . . . if you don't, you can only vote for seven courses in the top ten.  [It's a strange system.]


I voted for Royal Melbourne in the top three.


Or, you could believe JC's anonymous friend.  After all, he or she has seen almost as many of the top 100 as I have.


Im curious to know your other two as that would explain more of why Royal Melbourne was top 3 than anything else.  Id wager the Old Course was also one of your top 3.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #178 on: December 13, 2019, 07:39:36 PM »

Im curious to know your other two as that would explain more of why Royal Melbourne was top 3 than anything else.  Id wager the Old Course was also one of your top 3.


Correct, although I doubt you'd have found anyone to take the other side of that wager.


I'm honestly not 100% sure what the third course was, since I don't really have a top three.  I think it was The National Golf Links of America, though it might have been Sand Hills.  Those are the four courses that do the best at engaging every class of player.


When I used to run the balloting for GOLF Magazine, the late Peter Thomson would only vote for two courses in the top ten: The Old Course and Royal Melbourne .  Which is interesting because he won five Open Championships, but never at The Old Course.

William_G

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #179 on: December 13, 2019, 07:56:17 PM »
Royal Melbourne West is at #7.  After watching the Presidents Cup, maybe its to low.  Thoughts.


I have been on here for a long time. My personal view is that this is the LEAST contentious course in the history of GCA.com.

Everyone - pros, hacks and in between seem to love that course...


I was speaking with a friend of mine last night who has seen roughly 90% of the current GOLF world 100 and has seen probably 20 courses in Australia along with a bunch of unranked courses all over the globe.  In his opinion, Royal Melbourne is not a top 10 course, maybe not top 30.  He wont come on here and make the argument himself so its moot to try and discuss it but I really wish he would.
Whistleblower much? LOL
It's all about the golf!

jkinney

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Magazine Top 100 World List - thanks, Ran
« Reply #180 on: January 08, 2020, 06:25:28 PM »
Wonderful discussion on GM's world top 100.... I agree firmly to the changes in the new rankings at the top that  (1) SHGC finally busted through the long held USA top three of PV, CP & ANGC by displacing ANGC, that (2) TOC moved up as far as it did and that (3) NGLA moved up in lockstep with SHGC.