I started playing golf in the spring of '99. Coming from an art and design background, I was immediately drawn to the design side of golf. However, I came to the realization was that I had no idea what made a golf course, "good" in terms of architecture.
I read articles in magazines and whatnot - but (as I explained in the Golf Tips thread) I could find little that explained the 'why' in useful ways such as the one on Riviera, presented by Mr. Fortson.
But I wonder, could a true hack - someone really new to the game - really appreciate the architecture anyway? I'm starting to think not. It seems to me that a person really needs to develop a game Not necessarily a great one, but I think you need to get to the point of using some sense of strategy before anything about architecture is going to mean much.
Let's go a level beyond that. What about people who can hit the ball, but really don't pay much attention to strategy? Let's say the many players who play a handful of times a year and shoot a career best, 89? Is it possible that they don't think deeply enough about the game to ever see much difference beyond the aesthetic qualities, services, conditions, price and amenities?
That's the one thing I can say which I believe was really helpful about golf course rankings - at least to me:
They told me that golf courses are not all created equal - and when I couldn't see the difference right away myself, they suggested to me that there was a language there that I couldn't understand - and that got me to searching. It was the rankings that led me to buying my first books about GCA (Mackenzie, Tillinghast, Doak) And they were hard to come by. It was the rankings and a desire to understand what separated number 1 from number 59, that led me to finding this website.
Still, so much of what many of you gurus here say is a mystery to me - Like a kid reading "grown up books", I'm reading "up" much of the time when I sit here.
You've taught me that all ranking are not created equal - that the rankings are worthy of debate, scrutiny and that they certainly don't represent any absolutes. But I must at least credit them for feeding my early sparks of interest.
Is this blasphemy? Should I feel dirty?