Geographical bias in course ratings

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I read the first few pages of the the ratings thread and felt an obvious point had been missed--courses are getting higher rankings when more raters play.  This being the case, there are 56 US courses and 19 from Liverpool north and Ireland in the World 100.  Personally, I think the UK is still under represented.  However, most grossly underrated is Australia--Metropolitan, Victoria, Peninsula, Long Island, and probably Commonwealth ( in spite of the posts that have pointed out its downfall) are better than a few of the lower ranked US courses.  I would guess that Saint Andrews Beach was not yet eligable.

[Tom_Doak]

Robert:

I don't have any geographical bias against Australian courses -- I've got a few on my own ballot of the top 100 in the world -- but Metropolitan and Victoria have never quite made the grade for me, and Commonwealth has been knocked off by their own tinkering.

Not to say Metro and Victoria aren't very good, but there are great courses in lots of other places, too.  I think some people secretly WANT there to be some sort of quota of courses from different areas [i.e. the Sand Belt deserves more than two courses on the list], but each course has to stand on its own merits.  I do believe Metropolitan is better than a couple of the courses listed in the top 100, but then again I wouldn't rate it ahead of Rye, St. George's Hill, or several others which didn't make the list, either.

St. Andrews Beach was probably "eligible" for the rankings but I don't think enough panelists have seen it yet to rate it one way or the other.  Heck, last I heard it still was not officially "open" even though they've been playing it for several months.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

Though this is in the extreme splitting hairs category, but I am certain that Sand Hills is still not ranked highly enough.  I played 54 holes this past Tues. and Wed. followed by a round at Wild Horse.  I think if more raters play Sand Hills it will be 1-3 with Royal Melbourne and Pine Valley--my new top 3.  In addition, I thought of an association--Wild Horse is to Sand Hills as Fenway is to Winged Foot West ( I rate Fenway slightly better than East).  Both of these should be in the US 100.  One of the members from my NY club stated about Wild Horse--"could you imagine how people would flock to this place if it were out East!"  Both members of my club thought Sand Hills was the best course they had ever played--they have done our Hamptons clubs, Pebble, and Scotland and Ireland.

[David_Elvins]

I read the first few pages of the the ratings thread and felt an obvious point had been missed--courses are getting higher rankings when more raters play.  This being the case, there are 56 US courses and 19 from Liverpool north and Ireland in the World 100.  Personally, I think the UK is still under represented.  However, most grossly underrated is Australia--Metropolitan, Victoria, Peninsula, Long Island, and probably Commonwealth ( in spite of the posts that have pointed out its downfall) are better than a few of the lower ranked US courses.  I would guess that Saint Andrews Beach was not yet eligable.

Robert,
Without having seen many of the courses outside of Australia, my gut reaction is that the Australian courses that are in the Top 100 (other than Barnbougle) are rated very generously in the latest rankings.  What do you think of the ratings?  Do you think that KH at 20, NSW in the 30s, and Royal Adelaide in the 50s are generous rankings?

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I was using Australia as an example because it is a really lengthy trip.  I have a feeling that there are a couple of courses in Ireland that are left out because the roads are such a pain that the trip is truely driving hell!

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

I might have an Australian bias.  I was blown away by the courses.  One of my Nationwide tour buddies who's played Adelaide before, but had to miss this year, thinks its the best course they play by far every year.  

[Joel_Stewart]

I read the first few pages of the the ratings thread

What happened to that thread/post on ratings?   Why did Ran take it down?

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think there is a general bias in the ratings game. there are very few who see a wide range of interenational courses. There are really only a small number who see courses all over the US. It is obvious there will be a certain amount of unintentional regional bias . There is alwasy some intentional promotion of area courses or agenda driven bias which to me is unprofessional but also unavoidable.

[Tom_Doak]

Tiger:

The essential bias in any list is that practically every panelist who has not seen all 100 of the top 100 courses tends to choose too many for inclusion on the list.  If you've seen 40 of the top 100 courses, and vote for 50 of those you have seen to be included, there is a bit of "grade inflation" which often tends to help the courses in your own region.

However, in the GOLF Magazine rankings, the regional bias did not used to be especially strong.  I used to run a check of votes by region, and American panelists tended to rate more British courses among the top 100 than the Brits themselves; while European panelists tended to rate more American courses highly; and those who had traveled extensively to far-flung places were always trying to include a couple more of those on the list (though none of them could agree which course belonged).  Maybe this is changing, as it's been several years since I got to see all the results.

[John_Conley]

One of my Nationwide tour buddies who's played Adelaide before, but had to miss this year, thinks its the best course they play by far every year.  

Yeah, and they are playing so many world-class designs.

The old joke used to be that they play the 3rd best course in each city for PGA Tour events.  With all the new places that have opened and the TPC-ization of venues I'm guessing it's more like 6th best.

One thing about the World Top 100... not often is a professional tour stopping by for a week.

[Steve Pozaric]

I think this is something you see in Intra-state rankings as well.  For example, right across the river from St. Louis are some great courses in Illinois.  However, they don't crack the GD top 25 IL courses.  Almost all the IL courses are around Chicago.

[A_Clay_Man]

Almost all the IL courses are around Chicago.

I do believe this says a mouthful. GREAT Chicago area golf, on a global scale, is almost non-existent.

[James Bennett]

I might have an Australian bias.  I was blown away by the courses.  One of my Nationwide tour buddies who's played Adelaide before, but had to miss this year, thinks its the best course they play by far every year.  

Robert

The Adelaide Nationwide Event (Jacobs Creek) was shifted from Kooyonga to Royal Adelaide this year.  Your tour buddy has experienced Kooyonga - a great member's course (essentially one set of mens tees) with fantastic greens complexes.  Greens typically set up firm and fast, with outstanding conditioning (firm, not overwatered fairways).  Great ground movement and tree-lined.  

The event was played at Royal Adelaide this year - a great test of golf (from the back tees), a great member's course (from a forward set of tees) and beginner's course (in line with macKenzie's principles), a great history.  More of a links feel (less trees) than Kooyonga.  Excellent records of club history on display, and perhaps even firmer/fast conditions than Kooyonga.  Certainly wider corridors between the trees.

If you or your tour buddy is thinking of coming 'down under' in February 2006, please IM me.  If he thought Kooyonga was good, Royal Adelaide is another point or so up on the Doak scale.

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

My tour buddy has played Australian tour events over the years, earning full exemption on 3 events in 1998.  Indeed he did play the Kooyonga course last year.  He also played Adelaide with other players because he thought so highly of the course.  It is true that the Nationwide tour does not always play the best courses in the cities, but they often play the best courses in outings during tournament weeks.  When Philly had an event, another buddy played Pine Valley with two other players and a member.  

[Big Pete]

Gents
I think for a course to be rated in the top 50 in the world it must have more than a few elements of greatness , with the top few consistently great .
In Australia we are blessed with a climate , and terrain which allows for year round golf and plenty of suitable sites . In the sand belt , the Mornington peninsula , Adelaide , and the developing west we have regions with multiple options that are really good . But how many are really great? Even the mighty RM which is in my personal top 5 has a number of less than great holes in both courses . KH , RA , and NSW all have the spectacular , and architecturally strong contributions together with the good rather than great making up the numbers...

So given our remoteness , and lack of population relatively , I think Australia is well represented .

How many courses would you rate as consistently great?
I have not played PV , Cypress , or Merion , but surely they would go close?
Pebble isn't
Sand Hills , Pacific dunes are , in my opinion!

[James Bennett]

My tour buddy has played Australian tour events over the years, earning full exemption on 3 events in 1998.  Indeed he did play the Kooyonga course last year.  He also played Adelaide with other players because he thought so highly of the course.  It is true that the Nationwide tour does not always play the best courses in the cities, but they often play the best courses in outings during tournament weeks.  When Philly had an event, another buddy played Pine Valley with two other players and a member.  

Thanks Robert

I hope your buddy had a good time at the restaurants and the beaches as well.

[Philippe Binette]

I don't know if distance would effect Barnbougle Dunes. Right now it was 50th outside the US... (it's probably better than that but raters didn't have time to go there yet...

Just a question (and I hate to ask it but...) How would you compare Barnbougle Dunes to Pacific Dunes or Sand Hills...

I'm not trying to point out which is the best or worst but are they close as far as a golf experience...

Could we ever imagine the world no 1 course not being an American course...

[Lou_Duran]

"Could we ever imagine the world no 1 course not being an American course... "  Phillippe B.

Why not?  It should be very obvious that Americans can be very self-critical.  There is no reason to believe that the best in anything could be produced or located elsewhere.  Americans demonstrate their understanding of this fact everyday by purchasing Japanese and German automobiles, French wines, Cuban cigars, and Russian caviar.

Golf in particular is of foreign derivation, and most golfers here who care about its history and tradition are not ethnocentric.  We understand that our greatest courses are most often inspired by the links of the UK and are adaptations of proven design features.

Having said all this, the breadth and depth of quality gca in the U.S. is unsurpassed elsewhere.  It amazes me how many quality golf courses there are all over the country.  Just in the Houston area alone, there are probably 20 excellent courses where a young golfer could develop his game to the highest levels.

As to geographical bias, I do think that the South and Southwest of the U.S. do get the short end of the stick.  Perhaps not the courses in the top 20 to 30, but some thereafter.  The absence of oceans and sandbelts may be a part of it, but perhaps weather and the lack of exposure also have a bearing.    

[Andy Levett]

"Could we ever imagine the world no 1 course not being an American course... "  Phillippe B.

Why not?  It should be very obvious that Americans can be very self-critical.

Having said all this, the breadth and depth of quality gca in the U.S. is unsurpassed elsewhere.  

Really?

Disclaimer: Ratings are a laugh, a game worth playing but not to be taken too seriously.

But...  is there any other serious golfing nation in the world other than the  USA where clay courses in too hot/cold/both  climates, which require similar maintenance input as prize flowers to survive,  attain such lofty heights in the rankings?

I'm sure they're fine courses, just like the scores of extant inland courses by Colt, MacK etc in GB & I that no-one has ever heard of and nobody would consider ranking because the same quality of work by the same people was in evidence on finer sites.

Leaving aside a few trendy tracks by Murcan archies or their acolytes  which may or may not  slip off the rankings in years to come, every single course in the Golf World  (UK) GB & I top 100 is built on sand. Golf is a fine game whatever the grounds but really, anything other than sand is second best.

After so many replies, I'm surprised there's not one stating the greatest geographical bias of all is towards the US of A and clay.