Along the lines of the municipal reviews, I would love to see what Ran has to say about Wintonbury Hills. (Even more intriguing would be a comparison to Gillette Ridge to follow up on Ron Whitten's article in which he gave Gillette the nod.)
I couldn't find any sort of mission statement that directs the selection of these courses for review. Do the courses need to be examples of great architecture?
If not, I'd like to see some reviews of controversial courses or a course that tried but failed. Given Ran's broad exposure to courses all over the world, I'd like to his take—from an architecture stanpoint, not conditioning—on why a course is bad. Pereferably a high profile or hyped layout that, on paper, should have been a success but due to poor routing, design choices, mounding, boring greens, poorly placed harzards, repetitious holes, etc., just doesn't work.