Feature Interview with Jonathan Cummings

[Ran Morrissett]

https://golfclubatlas.com/feature-interview/feature-interview-with-jonathan-cummings/

This month’s Feature Interview is with long-time friend, Jonathan Cummings, who was one of the earliest participants on GCA.com. His new book, The Rating Game, discusses the history of magazine course ratings. Like me, Jonathan sees ratings as a big positive because they stimulate the conversation on golf course architecture like nothing else. Given his statistician background, he believes that an ideal exists for rating courses, one that reduces the statistical component to allow the subjective part to shine through as unfettered as possible.

Quixotic or not, Jonathan speaks from a position of knowledge as well as from the heart. That’s important – the idea that the human component can be taken away from ratings seems absurd to me. You can list as many categories as you want as ticklers to remind people of architectural components but ultimately, Jonathan states that the transparency of process and who is voting is what matters. I couldn’t agree more.

His book is available on Amazon (click here). It’s the first of its kind and every rater will enjoy the historical backdrop he provides as well as its statistical nature. It’s also an ideal primer for novice raters. Course ratings are here to stay and the more you understand them, the better. Jonathan’s world-wide travels lend credence to his measured words and substantiate his analyses and arguments. He’s the perfect host for this narrative, a wily veteran who has seen it all, passionately believes in the sport and the importance of ratings, and proffers ways to make both better.

Characteristically humble, he says he did it for selfish reasons but he did the subject proud and the sport a service.

Have a great 4th!

Best,

[Tommy Williamsen]

Interesting interview. It is easy to pick up that he rates for GW.

[Tim Martin]

I enjoyed the interview which led to a purchase of Jon’s book.

[Jay Mickle]

An excellent book whether a rater or a golfer wanting a better understanding of the the rating process. Great insight into the entire process from rater observations to the statistical machinations that ultimately determine  the magazine ratings.

[Steve Lang]

That picture of Rick, John, and Mike from 2004 at the Lake Louise lunch really takes me back to some great GCA outing memories.  I can hear Jon's voice reading the interview and am not surprised he's created a view of the Ratings Game!


Looking forward to getting my copy.  Good luck Jon!

[Ronald Montesano]

Good thing that Jonathan is not the czar of all raters. Having four lists from one outfit to consider, would really do golf course architecture a disservice. I'd add a fifth list: whoever pays the most to be listed, gets the highest ranking. I would then use the money to fund younger-golfers-as-raters, the ones not so well-heeled, with less free time. They would value the experience tremendously.


Having started off on such a nasty note, it wasn't until the 20th question that I had any beef with Jonathan Cummings. That's a 95% success rate, which is my world, is spectacular. This is a marvelous addition to the Feature Interview section of the site. I'm glad to know that so many will purchase the book. I hope that they contribute their opinion on it to this or concurrent threads.

[William_G]

great stuff


love me some Gamble Sands

[William_G]

Good thing that Jonathan is not the czar of all raters. Having four lists from one outfit to consider, would really do golf course architecture a disservice. I'd add a fifth list: whoever pays the most to be listed, gets the highest ranking. I would then use the money to fund younger-golfers-as-raters, the ones not so well-heeled, with less free time. They would value the experience tremendously.


Having started off on such a nasty note, it wasn't until the 20th question that I had any beef with Jonathan Cummings. That's a 95% success rate, which is my world, is spectacular. This is a marvelous addition to the Feature Interview section of the site. I'm glad to know that so many will purchase the book. I hope that they contribute their opinion on it to this or concurrent threads.

reminds me of the golden rule of not typing anything if you don't have anything good to say, 7 sins much/


cheers

[Kevin_Reilly]

JC's answer to #12 (preferring to play alone when rating a course, and not with a member) was interesting to read after #9...he serves as "club ambassador" for visiting raters at his home club.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Kevin - you are right.  A little perplexing to insist to rate by myself but act as monitor to others.  If it helps at all when I host I make sure to mention features that I think stand out around my home course but I never ask them what they think.  I try to play a relaxed round with the guest but in the end they may feel as uncomfortable playing with a member host as I feel playing as a rater guest with another member.  JC

[Niall C]

Good thing that Jonathan is not the czar of all raters. Having four lists from one outfit to consider, would really do golf course architecture a disservice. I'd add a fifth list: whoever pays the most to be listed, gets the highest ranking. I would then use the money to fund younger-golfers-as-raters, the ones not so well-heeled, with less free time. They would value the experience tremendously.


Having started off on such a nasty note, it wasn't until the 20th question that I had any beef with Jonathan Cummings. That's a 95% success rate, which is my world, is spectacular. This is a marvelous addition to the Feature Interview section of the site. I'm glad to know that so many will purchase the book. I hope that they contribute their opinion on it to this or concurrent threads.

reminds me of the golden rule of not typing anything if you don't have anything good to say, 7 sins much/


cheers

William

In fairness to RoMo he at least tends to write proper sentences about golf course architecture. Also his comments bring to mind not so much the saying about having nothing good to say, but instead a reminder that this discussion board is a place for frank and honest discussion.

Ran/Jonathan

Thanks for the interview.

Niall

[Tommy Williamsen]

I just finished reading the book. It is balanced critique of the various ranking systems with a fascinating history of the ranking system.

[Tim Martin]

I enjoyed the book and it was informative to have Jon drill down on the methodology of each rating source and it’s  development over the years.

[Evan Fleisher]

Great interview and with the book now in-hand I'm anxiously awaiting the time to get through it.