Who is qualified to rate golf courses?

[Craig Sweet]

Matt, please try and understand this....the poster on GCA represent less than 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of one percent of all golfers. And they proabbly represent about  50% of those golfers that actually understand, consider, and have the knowledge to appreciate the architecture behind the course they just played.

So, they read a list and the list says Sand Hills is better (rated higher) than Chambers Bay....do you seriously think that has much to do with where they will play their next round of golf....or more importantly, where they will spend their dollars on a golf weekend with the boys or the wife?

People base their golfing decisions on a handful of things....Access....cost....distance from home...if they have a friend that has played it and liked it, that helps, if its in good condition, that helps, if the course looks good on the web site, that helps.  I doubt for the average golfer the opinion of a rater figures into their decision.

[Matt_Ward]

Craig:

Maybe I'm failing to penetrate the clouds that are swirling around your head -- if my previous statements have not helped please allow me to try once again.

I have no illusion that Joe Sixpacks of the golf world represent the main frame players -- so what is so earth shattering in that comment? The issue is that those who really love golf do want info on top tier layouts -- many of these people have to depend upon some info source(s) in order to differentiate the bad from the so-so and the ones further up the food chain.

GCA does that -- even for the tiny populace here. Frankly, GD did that for a number of years but it's far less so in the last 5-10 years.

Craig -- let me help your own misunderstanding -- the issue isn't that the average person will play a high number of rounds at average or even below venues -- the issue is when they want to search out for something more the ratings -- beyond the always unreliable word of mouth statements -- can lend some addiitional credibility.

Craig, I'll say this again -- if rating s were completelky ineffectual then mags would not place them and waste valuable space in their respective pubs. People do read them and they do influence where people play. You may think it's very small but I can tell you this from my experiences the ratings are used by the courses as a gold plate endorsement -- even when they are no longer rated the courses still use them as a way to bolster their case. For you and your group that means little -- but I can tell you this check out the vast number of outside rounds played at Old Works in Anaconda -- the place has done very well by outside play not connected to the immediate region -- the reason that is so is because of the ratings which put the place on the map in the first place.

Something to ponder.

[Michael Whitaker]

question for you is, what kind of whisky shall we have in our bags at Belvedere?

If you haven't tried Red Breast Irish whiskey, you've done yourself a great disservice.

Pete - My son gave me a bottle of Red Breast for Christmas... OUTSTANDING!!!

[Pete Lavallee]

Mike,

To stay on topic, rated #1 Irish Whiskey by no less than GCA'er Jack Marr; good stuff indeed!

[Mike Hendren]

Deleted.