Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Zack Molnar on November 22, 2011, 05:24:11 PM
-
I was reading back through some recent threads and I ran across this talking about how NGLA was nowhere to be seen in the rankings in the early 80s: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,49287.0.html
It got me thinking about what are the NGLA's of the 80's in current times? Could be courses that have fallen out of the spotlight and just need a little work to get back to the top, or courses that are just out of the limelight but will soon be getting there.
Thoughts?
-
I think the course most likely to see a big resurgence in rankings is Yale - due to better conditioning and increased popularity of MacDonald/Raynor. Every person that has played it says it is better than its rankings.
A modern courses that I could see getting better ranked (into the top 100) is Erin Hills (the Open being there).
-
I think there are some older courses in the Philadelphia area that are taken for granted. Rolling Green comes to mind. It gets some props here but not nationally as the Women's Open was back in 1976 and nothing since. It is a bit short for a mens event but has had some work done recently to update it. You could look at a number of Flynn courses around the area for more semi-forgotten gems, like Lehigh or Atlantic City. I think the exposure that Aronimink gathered from their tour event the past two years is an example of the fact that these courses are there, just not being seen on TV. I would like to see Rolling Green get another shot of exposure and it might jump up quite a few spots. These courses are not going to go to the national top 10 list but should be more respected than they are.
-
Ballyneal - yes, I'm serious.
Hardly anyone outside of the GCA and GCA lurker world has heard of it.
I'm going to have completely blind faith and hope the other stuff works out. WHEN it does, Ballyneal will continue to rise.
-
From what I've seen, the most underrated / least well-known that should receive greater recognition:
In the US: Old Town Club
In Canada: Lookout Point; Kawartha
-
From what I've seen, the most underrated / least well-known that should receive greater recognition:
In the US: Old Town Club
In Canada: Lookout Point; Kawartha
+1 on Lookout Point... Although the last 4 holes are rather pedestrian...
-
In the absence of Matt Ward, and although it's been discussed extensively elsewhere, aside from statistical distribution noise and the love/hate of scorecard pencil pushing rater scum, I defy anyone to make a cogent argument why Kingsley should not be in the top 100 in both Golf Magazine and Digest.
-
From what I've seen, the most underrated / least well-known that should receive greater recognition:
In the US: Old Town Club
In Canada: Lookout Point; Kawartha
+1 on Lookout Point... Although the last 4 holes are rather pedestrian...
17 has a new tee and is a tough mother of a hole now. And you should see where they're putting a new tee in on 16...wayyyy back by 15 green.
18 has a really difficult green-- I was told too wild if they get the greens really running.
I wonder what Ian Andrew thinks of the centerline tree on 15?
-
I'll throw out two. Greywalls and Rustic Canyon.
-
I think there are 2 different questions being answered here.
(1) The one posed was what courses could be making a rise up the rankings (regardless of reason); and
(2) The other being answered here more often is what courses deserve to be higher in the rankings.
I answered #1.
In answer to #2, based on what I have read and seen in pictures, I would think the following should be ranked higher - Yale, Eastward Ho, Kingsley, Baltimore CC and Brookside.
-
From what I've seen, the most underrated / least well-known that should receive greater recognition:
In the US: Old Town Club
In Canada: Lookout Point; Kawartha
+1 on Lookout Point... Although the last 4 holes are rather pedestrian...
17 has a new tee and is a tough mother of a hole now. And you should see where they're putting a new tee in on 16...wayyyy back by 15 green.
18 has a really difficult green-- I was told too wild if they get the greens really running.
I wonder what Ian Andrew thinks of the centerline tree on 15?
I played the course 2 weeks ago and I did see the new tees. 18 is a short hole with a great greensite. I should have quantified my comments to reflect that I found I hit the same 2 cliubs (3H -PW) for the last 4 holes. Granted that will change with the new tees. I enjoyed the course quite a bit, especially the par 5 7th - not overly long but a fantastic approach and green...
-
I think the course most likely to see a big resurgence in rankings is Yale - due to better conditioning and increased popularity of MacDonald/Raynor. Every person that has played it says it is better than its rankings.
Other old courses that I understand by many are not properly appreciated in the rankings, but unlikely to change much, are:
Eastward Ho
Lancaster
Sleepy Hollow
A modern courses that I could see getting better ranked (into the top 100) is Erin Hills (the Open being there).
I think Sleepy Hollow is to much mishmash of styles. Some spectacular holes and some not so ones. It being in the Met section might help but the quality isn't there all 18 IMHO. Certainly the spectacular ones are top notch.
Dan
-
I defy anyone to make a cogent argument why Kingsley should not be in the top 100 in both Golf Magazine and Digest.
The turf at Kingsley is the best non seaside ground I've ever played golf on.
That being said, after two stiff Manhattans, this is my opinion:
#1 absolutely sucks--up-down-up-down-up
#2 absolutely sucks- fly an approach to an unstoppable green to a pin placement cut tight
#3,4,5, pretty good holes
#6 Horrible approach, unless you live for uphill chips
#7 One of the worst tee shots in golf, unless you love hitting a good shot and winding up in trees or behind them.
#8 I like this hole
#9 Hit and hope
I like the back except the approach to #15.
Perhaps it does belong in the top 100. I've played a lot worse, I'm just not ready to swallow the Kool Aid.
-
I love Kingsley and agree its easily a top 100 course. I also think Black Mesa and Wolf Run are woefully underrated.
I do have one friend who I consider knowledgeable who criticized Kingsley because too many holes were too severe in terms of the slopes leading balls away from greens. There are admittdly a lot of holes where the difference between a good shot and a ball rolling away is pretty small. I'm ok with that, but I can also see how its not for everyone.
-
[+1 on Lookout Point... Although the last 4 holes are rather pedestrian...
Don,
The old finish was from the 15th and then to the 7th, 8th and 9th.
The other nine finished five, four, short four. The 16th and 17th were one super long five, the 18th was a dogleg right to a green set in a bowl, and the final hole played from the edge of the current 8th over the valley to the current practice green!
The run of shotish fours has always been the criticism, although as of this year the 17th is now 429 from the back tee.
I wonder what Ian Andrew thinks of the centerline tree on 15?
I hate it
-
Yale - easily in my top 25 - don't understand the lack of love for this great course
Essex County - my favourite Ross - I think people have simply not seen it.
-
I don't have a lot of experience with these courses yet, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Cleveland area golf is under-rated.
Also, Renaissance is under-rated.
Rock Creek is over-looked by some of the rating entities. (I think only Golfweek ranks it right now).
Royal Melbourne appears to be under-appreciated (but I haven't played it/them). Even though it is highly rated. Is Augusta rated higher than Royal Melbourne?
And you all know I think Dismal is under-rated.
Oh yeah...Chinese courses are surely over-looked right now. This may take time for enough people to get out there to check these courses out, however.
-
I think the University of Michigan course is set to rise in the future. I would think it should have a great shot at making top 100 classic. I can't see any discernible difference in quality between it and Yeamans Hall - and I think its better than Rolling Green and Pine Needles.
Ciao
-
Mark, 100% agree that Kawartha sets the golf standard in Canada for being overlooked/underrated, with Lookout not too far behind. Some others in Canada would include Blackhawk, Wolf Creek, St. Thomas, Mt Bruno, Cherry Hill, Mad River, Maple Downs, Sarnia, Montebello, Lakeview.
I also think Toronto Golf is underrated, and the best Colt course in Canada.
Stateside: Eastward Ho!, Indianwood Old, Chechessee Creek, Crag Burn, Monroe, Irondequoit, Columbia, Winchester.
Re: tree on 15 at Lookout...it's gotta go.
-
When I think of the two Canadian Niagara Travis courses, my experience is so woefully one-sided that my opinion must be discarded. That said, the tree clearing that Mother Nature and Ian Andrew wrought, along with the bunker work that Mr. Andrew achieved took a course filled with apparently-flat, deceptively-undulating holes and unbelievable greens (plus a secret) from nice members course to would you look at that?! That would be Cherry Hill.
I've played Lookout Point once, so I can't recall all the holes, much less give an opinion on them. A course that gave us Marlene Stewart Streit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlene_Streit) however, clearly has the teeth and the bone structure of lore. I think that the LP property is much more interesting than the CH one, which would place it ahead at the start of the race. If one were to have the good fortune to play both courses in a day (manageable, about 45 minutes apart), said one would be forever enchanted by what Walter J. Travis could bring to turf.
-
Along the I-90, from Buffalo to Albany
Stafford (near Batavia)
CCR and Monroe (Rochester)
Bellevue (Syracuse)
Yahnundasis (New Hartford)
Mohawk (Schenectady)
Are these NGLA level? No. Are they ODG courses...uh huh. Do they adhere to classic principles...jess.
-
Along the I-90, from Buffalo to Albany
Stafford (near Batavia, NY)
CCR and Monroe (Rochester, NY)
Bellevue (Syracuse)
Yahnundasis (Rome, NY)
Are these NGLA level? No. Are they ODG courses...uh huh. Do they adhere to classic principles...jess.
How does Mohawk Golf Club compare to these? Have you played many of the other Capital District courses.
Dan
-
Amended...sometimes I forget my most recent girlfriend's name.
-
I defy anyone to make a cogent argument why Kingsley should not be in the top 100 in both Golf Magazine and Digest.
The turf at Kingsley is the best non seaside ground I've ever played golf on.
That being said, after two stiff Manhattans, this is my opinion:
#1 absolutely sucks--up-down-up-down-up
Really? A tougher opener than I'd like but many love this hole. Typically it's hackers like me who whine about not being able to carry the hill and get the turbo boost rather than sticks like yourself. Besides, it's only up-down-up. ;)
#2 absolutely sucks- fly an approach to an unstoppable green to a pin placement cut tight
Well apparently you disagree with our fearless leader: "Perhaps the finest short one-shotter built since World War II". Granted, I think it's the toughest hole on the course, but isn't that kind of cool for a 150 yd. hole for a change?. If one plays the hole properly and lands the ball on the front of the green and aims for the center and not the pin, it's perfectly playable. Take your 3 and get on with it. Getting greedy will cost you more than one stroke in most instances, which really pisses off the scorecard and pencil set.
#3,4,5, pretty good holes
#6 Horrible approach, unless you live for uphill chips
Seriously? One of the more fun shots on the course IMO if you know to play it over the front right bunker and use the slope.
#7 One of the worst tee shots in golf, unless you love hitting a good shot and winding up in trees or behind them.
As discussed on another thread, you either played the wrong tees or the wrong club. It's a 3 shot hole for anyone who's not an aspiring tour player and needs to be played as such. It's not as if there isn't enough fairway out there. Can you really reach the furthest trees from the tips? Must have had your wheaties (or can't play a fade ;))
#8 I like this hole
#9 Hit and hope
Perhaps, but what a green site! And there's a huge difference between hitting and hoping to the inside or the outside of the elbow. Besides I thought you could hit a 135 yard wedge into a garbage can in your sleep ;D
I like the back except the approach to #15.
Who said you had to be on in reg? Also discussed extensively elsewhere. A very cool man-made green and satisfying up and down.
Perhaps it does belong in the top 100. I've played a lot worse, I'm just not ready to swallow the Kool Aid.
I'd make the market on how many times you've played the course 1-2 based on your comments, and perhaps that's part of the problem with the raters. At a member's club like this that takes more than a few plays to get your head around slam-bam thank you mam bedpost notching types may come away scratching their heads.
-
Jud,
I don't really buy the 1-2 plays argument. I loved it the first time around, and playing it more would probably strengthen that position. Its not a course where people walk away thinking it was "ok," in most cases, and those that dislike the quirk won't like it any better after more plays because its still going to be quirky. I could see #2 and #9 irritating a lot of golfers--those two are too severe at least in spots IMO, but close enough (and fun enough) that I smiled and move on. Well...I didn't smile at #2 but I got aggressive and paid the price and would play the whole differently next time.
The good thing is that the guys who didn't like it the first time won't go back and re-rate it, while the guys that did like it probably will, so at least using the Digest format where ratings expire, its bound to continue to go up.
-
Andy,
Valid point, but knowing how to play the quirk and not have it blow a hole in your scorecard makes a big difference, and that takes a while for most players.
-
Yahnundasis -- good call, technically in New Hartford and much closer to Utica than Rome.
However, in Rome, I would add Teugega to the list.
Also, a good call on Rolling Green. Just a great course. And if we're discussing Philly courses that get overlooked on a national stage, add Gulph Mills to the list.
-
umm...Canterbury.
How many other courses have hosted every men's rotating major...one I think. After playing MVGC (#19 and is a fantastic place), comparably Canterbury should be no lower then 70-75 (and I'm being very cautious with that). It's on a couple lists but has fallen from the almighty GD rankings in the past few.
The course is pure, it's got the history, it's tough, hosts majors, if they could only hire a quality Assistant Pro....maybe then they could make it back in.
-
Mac:
Once again, you would be right (about the Cleveland area). I think Cleveland suffers from the same issues as Detroit. In Detroit, Oakland Hills dominates the scene because of his tournament history. In Cleveland, Firestone does the same.
However, in northeast Ohio, there are great golf courses that I think are better than the notorious venues. Below are my top 5 in northeast Ohio:
1. Brookside - a great Ross design - it edges out the rest due to the amazing greens. It is a beautiful rolling property.
2. Country Club (PP) - a Flynn design - if I had to belong to one club in northeast Ohio, this would be it. Great all around place.
3. Kirtland - a great Alison design. Again, a great piece of property with Alison bunkers. Ran's review of the course is spot on.
4. Canterbury - a Strong design - probably the best test of golf of the top 4. Tree lined course. Ran's review is again a good reference.
5. Firestone South - RTJ design - a great test of golf with great green complexes. However, little to no strategic design and boring routing. You definitely should play it if given the chance. Your reaction will be great golf course, just not that fun.
-
umm...Canterbury.
How many other courses have hosted every men's rotating major...one I think. After playing MVGC (#19 and is a fantastic place), comparably Canterbury should be no lower then 70-75 (and I'm being very cautious with that). It's on a couple lists but has fallen from the almighty GD rankings in the past few.
The course is pure, it's got the history, it's tough, hosts majors, if they could only hire a quality Assistant Pro....maybe then they could make it back in.
I agree with most of those comments about Canterbury, but would like to add one. The golf course keeps its Golden Age charm and when it's firm and fast it is tremendous. The use of the topography is great, as Ran stated in the writeup, one struggles to think how the property could have yeilded a better design.
And yes Joe there is one other course that has hosted all 5 (US Open, OGA, Sr. US Open, Sr. PGA, US Am)of the mens rotating US Majors: Oak Hill.
Quality Assistant Pro? Hmm... I'll let my awards and head to head match play record do the talking!
-
Mac:
Once again, you would be right (about the Cleveland area). I think Cleveland suffers from the same issues as Detroit. In Detroit, Oakland Hills dominates the scene because of his tournament history. In Cleveland, Firestone does the same.
However, in northeast Ohio, there are great golf courses that I think are better than the notorious venues. Below are my top 5 in northeast Ohio:
1. Brookside - a great Ross design - it edges out the rest due to the amazing greens. It is a beautiful rolling property. Best Ross in Ohio, including Scioto and Inverness.
2. Kirtland - a great Alison design - it is very difficult for me not to name Kirtland first as the back 9 is just spectacular (so are 7-9 on the front). Again, a great piece of property with Alison bunkers. Ran's review of the course is spot on. Also, only MV, The Golf Club, Camargo and Brookside beat it in my Ohio rankings.
3. Country Club (PP) - a Flynn design - if I had to belong to one club in northeast Ohio, this would be it. Great all around place. Right behind Kirtland in my Ohio rankings.
4. Canterbury - a Strong design - probably the best test of golf of the top 4. Tree lined course. Ran's review is again a good reference. I rank it with Scioto and Inverness in my Ohio rankings.
5. Firestone South - RTJ design - a great test of golf with great green complexes. However, little to no strategic design and very boring routing. You definitely should play it if given the chance. Your reaction will be great golf course, just not that fun.
Michael - I agree 100%. Cleveland golf is very underrrated, as is the city itself. Maybe the great tracks in Columbus impact this?
-
Bill - you certainly beat Joe as a gca poster - runaway ;D
-
I think the University of Michigan course is set to rise in the future. I would think it should have a great shot at making top 100 classic. I can't see any discernible difference in quality between it and Yeamans Hall - and I think its better than Rolling Green and Pine Needles.
Ciao
why Sean? is someone going to be working on it? SOme good stuff there but a lot of blandness too, imho
-
I think the University of Michigan course is set to rise in the future. I would think it should have a great shot at making top 100 classic. I can't see any discernible difference in quality between it and Yeamans Hall - and I think its better than Rolling Green and Pine Needles.
Ciao
why Sean? is someone going to be working on it? SOme good stuff there but a lot of blandness too, imho
Paul
I disagree. The only parts of the course which I think could be considered bland are #1 and 15, & 17. However,
#1 has a good green and its exciting to try and reach the green in two.
#15 has a good green.
#17 is problematic - probably because of the 15-17 stretch as much as anything.
Devries is meant to be doing some work to the course, but I am guessing the course won't be improved that much. I bet the publicity boosts the course. I doubt it will make top 100 classic, but I think its also better than these in the second 100:
Belvedere
Point O'Woods
CC of Detroit
Mid Pines
Oakland Hills North
LuLu
Merion West
Ciao
-
Devries is meant to be doing some work to the course, but I am guessing the course won't be improved that much.
Ye of little faith! ;)
-
I don't know how the U of M golf course is going to improve that much. It is still next door to that sewage plant ;)
Also, cars will still be parked on it 7 days a year (and who knows what else U of M fans do on that wonderful turf).
-
Andy,
Valid point, but knowing how to play the quirk and not have it blow a hole in your scorecard makes a big difference, and that takes a while for most players.
Jud,
That's logical and I want to believe it, but other than perhaps Bobby Jones and St. Andrews I'm not familiar with many examples of golfers going to a course, hating it, and then changing their mind later. Perhaps its because they are not forced to go back, but I'm not convinced that most of them would remain open-minded enough to change their mind. They might soften their opinion, but I just don't see radical change being all that likely. Perhaps I'm the closed-minded one, because I can't give any personal examples where I've changed my mind significantly on repeat plays. If I have, its usually a negative reaction.
And lets face it, part of what makes Kingsley great is that its designed to be controversial and bold. I played Tobacco Road with the same fellow recently and he didn't care for it and I loved it (although not as much as Kingsley). I actually thought he would like Kingsley when I recommended it to him, but based on further knowledge of his preferences I don't think he'd change his mind on repeat visits.
-
Another one that'll get its due eventually is Pikewood National. I don't think it will debut as high as The Alotian did this time on the Digest list, but top 50 would not surprise me next time around. And its deserving of a spot around #40-50 IMO.
Both of those are deserving of making the GW Modern listing.
And while it gets credit here, Dormie Club is another that deserves a spot on those lists once it gets enough ratings. Mac's mention of Rock Creek is another good one.
-
Andy,
OK first impressions do matter in the matters of love and GCA. FYI- Mike has said that the course wasn't designed to be intentionally controversial. He simply used the admittedly severe land forms to the best of his ability.
-
I'd make the market on how many times you've played the course 1-2 based on your comments, and perhaps that's part of the problem with the raters.
I've played it once and I am not a rater.
At a member's club like this that takes more than a few plays to get your head around slam-bam thank you mam bedpost notching types may come away scratching their heads.
Jud, I don't whether you are:1. Insulting me for my comments (more likely) or 2. Inviting me to play it again to change my opinion.
You are not going to change my mind, and my opinion is less likely to change because your comments make me not feel welcome to play your course again.
I belong to Wolf Run in Zionsville. It has two holes I think are really stupid. #9 and #13. There are other areas I am not fond of. Regardless I'm not going to come to the defense of all negative comments about the course, and certainly not say nasty things about said person. That being said, I thing Wolf Run is wonderful and a great test of one's ability.
You wrote some decent responses to my critique. I don't understand why you went off on the other stuff. Keep it civil.
There is a reason both courses are not in the top 100.
-
Steve,
No offense intended. I wasn't referring to you specifically and certainly don't put you in the bedpost notching camp. Bad attempt at humor perhaps. You are always welcome to join me at Kingsley.
-
Jud,
I believe that. But he certainly didn't shy away from features that would be controversial. That's what makes it good IMO.
Steve,
FWIW, I think Wolf Run should be in the top 30 nationally. I think I'm a bit of an outlier on that too, but I liked #9 and #13. Both are exceptionally difficult, but so's the rest of the course. #16 might be my favorite short par three not located on the Monterey Peninsula. Its perhaps the most fun "super-hard" course I've played.
-
That being said, after two stiff Manhattans, this is my opinion:
#1 absolutely sucks--up-down-up-down-up
#2 absolutely sucks- fly an approach to an unstoppable green to a pin placement cut tight
#3,4,5, pretty good holes
#6 Horrible approach, unless you live for uphill chips
#7 One of the worst tee shots in golf, unless you love hitting a good shot and winding up in trees or behind them.
#8 I like this hole
#9 Hit and hope
I like the back except the approach to #15.
Steve - i dont have an issue with your opinion of the holes even though i dont agree with many of them. Based on your follow up comment about playing the course once I do disagree with some of your comments that seem like broad sweeping generalizations that are more likely what you saw happen with one foursome on a one time basis.
#1 - Interested in more detail on your thoughts on #1. Up and down doesn't seem to do your strong opinion justice. I know some people that aren't in love with the hole but never heard someone with a strong enough opinion to say it sucks.
#2 - it isnt a pin seeker hole for sure but shots hold on that green in all but the windiest and firmest conditions. I've seen players of many abilities land and hold the green. I get that it is severe and some don't like it but your characterization of the hole is not realistic.
#6 - I don't understand the uphill chip comment. To be chipping you would likely need to have driven the ball through the neck. If so, great shot but the resulting chip wouldn't be all that uphill. Guessing you
Meant something more like an uphill pitch, though if you find the left side of the fairway it isn't all that uphill.
#7 - I dispute that good shots end up behind the trees here. Shots that the golfer thinks are well played and well struck may end up behind the trees if the golfer isn't given good advice or doesn't understand where to play the shot but I think the result you mentioned dictates that it was not a good shot. I have seen what I'd guess to be a pretty good percentage of tee shots hit the fairway here, again other than on the most extreme windy and firm days. I've seen scratch and low handicappers do it from the tips or the blues and ive seen mid handicappers do it with regularity from the blue tees - with both drivers and hybrids. Once you get off to a good start from the tee in that hole it is a blast to play. One of my favs on the front nine.
#9 - from the majority of the tees it is not hit and hope. From the tips of the south tees, it is hit and hope for me but I have a reasonable shot at par from every other tee on that hole to just about ever pin.
#15 - alot of people take issue with this one, so the comment doesn't surprise me and i dont have a problem with some taking issue with it. I like it alot and think it works fine give the surrounding hole on the back nine. But the appreciation for stronger players with multiple plays once they hit the GIR or card that birdie or par.
While, as Jud said, it is certainly a members course and one comes to love all the holes if one enjoys that style of golf, I do think that one or two rounds is enough to know if you are going to love it. I was enamoured after one time around and it gets better with each play. So it is likely that you'd never grow to love it if it isn't your style, but I'd love to see you around the course and have the debate while we play it!
-
umm...Canterbury.
How many other courses have hosted every men's rotating major...one I think. After playing MVGC (#19 and is a fantastic place), comparably Canterbury should be no lower then 70-75 (and I'm being very cautious with that). It's on a couple lists but has fallen from the almighty GD rankings in the past few.
The course is pure, it's got the history, it's tough, hosts majors, if they could only hire a quality Assistant Pro....maybe then they could make it back in.
I agree with most of those comments about Canterbury, but would like to add one. The golf course keeps its Golden Age charm and when it's firm and fast it is tremendous. The use of the topography is great, as Ran stated in the writeup, one struggles to think how the property could have yeilded a better design.
And yes Joe there is one other course that has hosted all 5 (US Open, OGA, Sr. US Open, Sr. PGA, US Am)of the mens rotating US Majors: Oak Hill.
Quality Assistant Pro? Hmm... I'll let my awards and head to head match play record do the talking!
Bill...I agree. It oozes Golden Age charm. And the turf was an absolute mind blower for me. Wonderful to strike the ball off of...wonderful to bump and run...great greens...great and almost seamless transition from fairway to green.
Great course...under-rated. IMO. Although it did jump a bit in the Golfweek ratings last year.
-
umm...Canterbury.
How many other courses have hosted every men's rotating major...one I think. After playing MVGC (#19 and is a fantastic place), comparably Canterbury should be no lower then 70-75 (and I'm being very cautious with that). It's on a couple lists but has fallen from the almighty GD rankings in the past few.
The course is pure, it's got the history, it's tough, hosts majors, if they could only hire a quality Assistant Pro....maybe then they could make it back in.
As late as 1999 Canterbury was still top 100 World per Golf Magazine, having peaked at 71 in 1987.
If you are fishing for candidates from past lists, here's a compilation of the 100 World lists of Golf Magazine from 1983 onward, based on some work that Ran posted (from a gentleman in Japan).
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US#gid=1 (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqVfI8kT3-pLdFc4TEd2dHhXbXRBT2U4bW1kbi02dnc&hl=en_US#gid=1)
-
CC of D--will it / should it move up in the rankings?