[THuckaby2]

Paul:

I think the key here is that these tradition ought to just be a "positive", and never a negative.  Hell no, no course in Ireland should ever be downgraded for lack of hosting major pro championships... but isn't there a certain feel that Portrush Dunluce has that Portstewart never will, due to the former hosting the only open outside of England and Scotland?

I felt it... it mattered to me when playing Dunluce....

So this is no negative on Portstewart, just a little added positive for Portrush....  I didn't sit there on the wonderful front nine at Portstewart wishing the pros could tackle it, that's for sure...

I know, in "rankings" it works out as a negative for those who don't get the positive (gee, that is odd but hopefully makes sense).  Well, rankings are inherently stupid and are taken way too seriously.  

TH

[Carlyle Rood]

Chris, Paul:

I've consistently argued that historic championship play on courses is important.  I think all other things being equal, then the course that hosted championship play deserves some additional consideration.

Paul tried to suggest that I think Scottish courses are inherently superior because they have hosted historic championships.  (And he most certainly suggested that Scottish courses deserve no special consideration because they did host historic championships.)  I never suggested that.  I merely suggested that the previous championship play is inherently important and should be recognized.

Even if Paul doesn't think historical events are relevant or applicable to his experience while playing a golf course, it is still likely that Paul is a healthy, normal adult person.  He's just exercising his preferences and they're perfectly reasonable and valid.  I just don't share them.

Carlyle

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

Rankings are inherently relative, it can't just be a positive factor.

There have been hundreds of threads on Irish courses on GCA and not once have I read that Dunluce has a quality over the other courses simply because it hosted a single Open Champ.  In fact, this so called, professional tournament "tradition" factor, has never been cited as something lacking at places like BB or RCD.  Nobody gives a hoot!

Same could be said for Australia too.

[THuckaby2]

Just two different ways to look at this, Paul.  Please believe me, I don't find anything missing from ANY course that hasn't hosted a tournament.  I could give a crap.  And I only used Portrush because it's a convenient example... NO, no one ever said it had anything "over" other courses just because it hosted an Open.  Nevertheless, the feeling is there and ought to "count."  Look at this as a tiny part of a large equation, is it ought to be....

In any case, as Carlyle Rood says in other threads, I really believe most golfers just DO get a certain feeling at courses where the greats have played, walking in their footsteps... To say this doesn't "count" seems silly to me.  

I know, this whole ranking and rating thing is inherently relative, so if a course doesn't have this, it is missing some "points."

That doesn't mean it's necessarily missing any qualities it ough to have though, if that makes sense... go back to my Portstewart example.

And also go back to my statement that the whole ranking thing is inherently stupid.

Of course, one could also say that places like Ballybunion and RCD have SO much going for them, it more than makes up for anything "missing" in this context... just look at it this way.

TH

[Paul_Turner]

If it's inherently stupid then why bother being a ranker?

[THuckaby2]

Because it's fun, because I believe it does have some worth, because it allows me to play more golf, there are a ton of reasons.

By saying it's inherently stupid, I mean how seriously people take it.  The concept of ranking courses is not stupid at all, people get a lot ought of it.  GD has much stupidity to its methodology, but so do the other magazines.  There is no perfect way to do this.

I am trying to take this lightly, Paul.  I would suggest perhaps you do the same?  

TH

ps - I am sure as hell not a "ranker" - man that carries some vile connotations!  

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

You obviously take these rankings and being a "ranker" very seriously and personally, otherwise you wouldn't defend them so passionately.

Plenty of threads have shown how inflential this bogus traditon factor is, in the final standings.
 
I still maintain that virtually noone plays Dunluce thinking about Faulkner's victory in the 50s.  It's of miniscule consequence and any half decent oberver should be able to see that Dunluce is just a superior course to Portstewart.

Does anyone miss this traditon factor when playing in Ireland, Oz, The Continent??

[THuckaby2]

Paul:

My apologies if you find I am "passionately" defending all this. Please believe me, I have a big smile on my face each time I type anything on the subject, as I understand the absurdity of how seriously people take it.  What I do try to do is clarify misconceptions about this process, of which there are many, and also try to get Matt Ward to understand that man does not live by architecture alone.  Given he includes "conditioning' as a factor in his ratings of courses for Jersey Golfer, I believe I am slowly but surely winning him over.  

Re Dunluce, when I went in 1998, my entire group noted the "Open" there, perhaps because each caddie told some or another story about it, or at least mentioned it.... Yes, this is not the best example, it isn't that big of a deal, but it does exist.

And again, for the third time, this takes nothing away from any other course anywhere.  It's just a cool positive.

The smile is still there, but it's becoming more difficult.  

TH

ps - take this for what it's worth, but several in my group preferred Portstewart to Dunluce, Faulkner be damned.  These guys are real golfers, hey they also like a lot of cartball monstrosities, but their opinions are no less valid than anyone else's.

[Paul_Turner]

And again, for the third time, this takes nothing away from any other course anywhere.  It's just a cool positive.

The smile is still there, but it's becoming more difficult.  

TH

ps - take this for what it's worth, but several in my group preferred Portstewart to Dunluce, Faulkner be damned.  These guys are real golfers, hey they also like a lot of cartball monstrosities, but their opinions are no less valid than anyone else's.

Tom

By using that traditon criterion to help rank courses you are taking something away from many, many courses.

I certainly don't believe that everyone's opinions have the same validity.  On another thread, you made a general criticism of the comments made by the Joe Publics for the GD "Places to Play" book, how can you reconcile this with:

"These guys are real golfers, hey they also like a lot of cartball monstrosities, but their opinions are no less valid than anyone else's." ?

Just posing questions.

[THuckaby2]

Paul:

First of all, GD doesn't rank international courses - only US.  So what relevance does this have?

Secondly, every opinion is valid, without a doubt.  A lot of the comments on "Places to Play" just show that the people submitting "evaluations" to that are looking at different things than I would care about, and FOR SURE different than what most people in this discussion care about... Nevertheless, blanket assumptions like "Portrush is definitely better than Portstewart" are never going to be true, because while it is for some people, it isn't for others.  That's all I meant.

Am I off trial yet?

I guess I'm just asking questions also.  Still smiling, too.  I hope you are as well.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()