Golfweek Best Modern

[Anthony_Nysse]

Came out yesterday. Maybe I missed seeing it already posted...


Best modern golf courses: Golfweek’s top U.S. courses built after 1960 (usatoday.com)

[Jim Hoak]

I've always liked the Golfweek differential between Classic and Modern courses.  But the dividing line has been 1960 for many years.  1960 is getting to be ancient history.  Time to move the line to 1970--or even 1980?
Or--maybe if they are trying to make the differential between Golden Age and later, the dividing year needs to be 1945?
And I am always perplexed by courses that are complete redos--like MPCC Shore, where the entire course was redone and totally rerouted, but not MPCC Dunes where it was more of an update, but no routing change.  And, should there be a difference between a restoration and a renovation?
My head can't grasp it all!

[MCirba]

I always felt it should be 1950 because a lot of modern golf courses (as we know them based on heavy equipment and earthmoving) were built in the 50s post WWII.

[Jason Topp]

Although I was on the panel for ten years, I did not realize Whistling Straits and Shadow Creek were top 10. 


It is interesting to see my club, Windsong Farm, slowly fall from just in the top 100 to 140 today.  Not sure whether (1) tastes have changed, (2) enough courses have been added in the intervening time to drop it or (3) the margin in that part of the list is so tight that normal variation is enough to explain the change. 


Spring Hill seems to have disappeared from the list.  While I personally agree with that change, I believe it was at one time top 100.  I wonder if they are not getting enough votes to qualify for the list? 

[John Kavanaugh]

Nice to see that Golfweek continues to insult the intelligence of the traveling golfer. Doak went to great pains to make sure the courses were Red and White. The architect is named for every course.


All I wanted for years was for the Golfweek list to become as irrelevant as it has. It should feel better than this.

[Tim Martin]

All I wanted for years was for the Golfweek list to become as irrelevant as it has. It should feel better than this.

[Mike Wagner]

Came out yesterday. Maybe I missed seeing it already posted...


Best modern golf courses: Golfweek’s top U.S. courses built after 1960 (usatoday.com)

Is there no editorial work done here or is it all "score" of the raters?

[Philip Caccamise]

Came out yesterday. Maybe I missed seeing it already posted...


Best modern golf courses: Golfweek’s top U.S. courses built after 1960 (usatoday.com)

Is there no editorial work done here or is it all "score" of the raters?

Score of the raters.

[Peter Flory]

I've always liked the Golfweek differential between Classic and Modern courses.  But the dividing line has been 1960 for many years.  1960 is getting to be ancient history.  Time to move the line to 1970--or even 1980?
Or--maybe if they are trying to make the differential between Golden Age and later, the dividing year needs to be 1945?
And I am always perplexed by courses that are complete redos--like MPCC Shore, where the entire course was redone and totally rerouted, but not MPCC Dunes where it was more of an update, but no routing change.  And, should there be a difference between a restoration and a renovation?
My head can't grasp it all!

There is definitely a lot of gray area where some elements of classic courses are kept- say where most of the routing is intact, but there are new holes and a new style.  The upcoming Medinah #3 seems like it will be tough to tie to an era. 

[jeffwarne]

I guess they had to find a way to break the 150 way tie for 51st amongst all the Doak 6's......

[Peter Pallotta]

I guess they had to find a way to break the 150 way tie for 51st amongst all the Doak 6's.

I'll never again need any more explanation than this!

[Tommy Williamsen]

Every list has some head scratchers. This one is no exception.

[John Kavanaugh]

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=golfweek&_trksid=p2380057.m4084.l1313


Golfweek rater shirts. Love the “only worn once” sales pitch. So many punch lines.

[Tim Martin]

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=golfweek&_trksid=p2380057.m4084.l1313


Golfweek rater shirts. Love the “only worn once” sales pitch. So many punch lines.

“Slight sweat stain on left arm pit but lovingly cared for.” Who is buying used polos online!?

[Mike Worth]

For spots 150+, I couldn’t help myself in drawing an analogy to the men’s NCAA basketball tournament. You know, the part where they analyze and over analyze the LAST 4 in/LAST 4 Out. It’s at that point in the bracket that you really can’t tell the difference between the teams because they all have glaring weaknesses mixed with sporadic greatness. 


You could make a case for some of those teams (and others) being on the list and the same teams being left out.


So this relates to the golf course rankings because it’s really hard to tell the difference between a lot of the clubs ranked 150+  I mean, what’s the difference between those clubs except the number of times a rater played their course? 


Related, is there a list of clubs ranked 201-225 just for curiosity sake?

[Jason Thurman]

Came out yesterday. Maybe I missed seeing it already posted...


Best modern golf courses: Golfweek’s top U.S. courses built after 1960 (usatoday.com)

Is there no editorial work done here or is it all "score" of the raters?

Score of the raters.

Only scores that don't fall outside the approved margin of consensus though, right?

[Mike Wagner]

Every list has some head scratchers. This one is no exception.

Worse than head scratchers. This one disqualifies all reasonable credibility. JK got his wish.

[Philip Caccamise]

Came out yesterday. Maybe I missed seeing it already posted...


Best modern golf courses: Golfweek’s top U.S. courses built after 1960 (usatoday.com)

Is there no editorial work done here or is it all "score" of the raters?

Score of the raters.

Only scores that don't fall outside the approved margin of consensus though, right?

Yes, I believe there is a review of any score that is way outside the range, like if someone gave TOC a 4.

[MCirba]

Which do folks think are head scratchers?

[John Foley]

Too High
#10 Shadow Creek#27 Whispering Pines
#32 Manele
#81 Secession


Too Low
#37 Streamsong Red
#52 Chambers Bay
#135 Stone Eagle
#151 Dormie
#167 Chechessee


Pretty shocked those last three are that low.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Way too high:
Shadow Creek
Pikewood
Manele
RTJ
Arcadia Bluffs
Mossy Oaks
Spring Island


Don’t belong on the list:
Sweetens
Frederica
Champion Hills
Cliffs Vineyard
Keswick

[corey miller]

Ballyneal being top 5 is a lot closer to my thinking as it was in the 30's when I played it and any match play I did with any course not named Sand Hills (20 years ago) was a Ballyneal walkover. 

[John Kavanaugh]

Way too high:
Shadow Creek
Pikewood
Manele
RTJ
Arcadia Bluffs
Mossy Oaks
Spring Island


Don’t belong on the list:
Sweetens
Frederica
Champion Hills
Cliffs Vineyard
Keswick

a


Tommy,


You are too old to get Sweetens. It’s like the Watusi was for your parents. A cultural revolution that you can’t take your eyes off of.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OcQQi9vbZZE

[John Kavanaugh]

The simplicity and sheer joy they are having is so uplifting


The first comment from the Watusi video sums up people watching at Sweetens.

[Mike Wagner]

Which do folks think are head scratchers?

Shadow and Estancia are beyond head scratchers. Not saying they are bad courses. The only criteria (and this was stolen from someone related to Ran) I use to compare golf courses is really simple .. "which one would I rather play?"  Who here would rather play Estancia than MPCC, Spyglass .. or just about any other course on the list?