I was recently thinking about the discussion on PD about which holes are the best, and where it climaxes, etc, and a thought occured to me. So I'm just throwing this out there to see what your thoughts are and not taking sides.
Is it valid to say that a mark of a great course is when it has widely swinging opinions over which holes are the best and greatest on the course? That is to say, if a course has that many great holes, to even illicit such a debate in the 1st place, isn't that a solid acid test on its own to suggest a course is great?
Courses that come to mind are ANGC, Sand Hills, NGLA, CPC, PD, etc. Sure in the case of a CPC, some will say that 16 is the "alpha male" of golf holes on that course, but even then I've seen many argue they like 15 better. And I've followed theads on said above courses where the response to which stretch of holes was the defining climax of the course were also extremely varied.
Potential weaknesses to this method would be the case of a good course, with a superb array of good solid holes one after another, which could spark said debate. It could be confused for a great course, simply because it has many good holes with few weak ones.
I've seen many debates in here on whether a course can be considered great if it only has a few easily identifiable great holes. But to put that arguement to bed, shouldn't a great course be full of great holes? At this point I can't think of a better validation method than complete and utter drag down, knock out disagrement over the best holes of said course as the ultimate acid test..
Thoughts???