What makes some one a qualified rater?

[Anthony Gray]

  ?

[Kalen Braley]

According to Golf Digest,

You just need to be a good player!! 

[John Kavanaugh]

According to Golf Digest,

You just need to be a good player!! 

JC Jones has disproven that urban myth.

[Kalen Braley]

According to Golf Digest,

You just need to be a good player!!  

JC Jones has disproven that urban myth.

I've never played with him, but I'm sure a few have snuck in the back door when no one was looking.  

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I thought according to Digest you just had to pull the political line and approve of big money courses being ranked in the top 20 as newbies

[Lou_Duran]

According to Golf Digest,

You just need to be a good player!! 

JC Jones has disproven that urban myth.

I partnered with JC at the Dixie Cup in Aiken and he carried me.  By far the best mid-handicap non-gambler I've played with in a long time.  It is my understanding that GD has a mid single-digit handicap max for new raters.  JC easily has that potential.

Regarding qualifications, though I am not a national rater, I am told by some that keeping a low profile is a big factor.  Also, realizing that the wheel doesn't need re-inventing (enthusiastic and often well-meaning offers of suggestions to perfect an imperfectible process) is not always appreciated.  

[Lou_Duran]

I thought according to Digest you just had to pull the political line and approve of big money courses being ranked in the top 20 as newbies

How about hitting the ball a mile?  Your buddy from Phoenix was most impressive (a bit discouraging actually, considering he was no spring chicken himself)!

[Anthony Gray]

According to Golf Digest,

You just need to be a good player!! 

JC Jones has disproven that urban myth.

  I caddied for him and he sucks.

  Anthony

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I agree Lou..but fortunately it is the still the score in the box at the end of the day that matters......

[Ulrich Mayring]

I have read a rater's manual, where it was practically recommended that raters don't play the course. It said that the only reason you are playing it is to conceal you are a rater. But you shouldn't play your normal game, you should try to hit it into bunkers, leave yourself long putts etc. so you can test as many aspects of the course as possible.

Number one qualification was therefore a willingness to put your own ego aside and have a strong desire to help the golf community at large.

Ulrich

[Mac Plumart]

Besides being "one of the finest minds in golf"  , I'd say a bare bones minimum might be...

a passion for golf architecture;
an education on the core principles of golf architecture;
a willingness to travel;
a willingness to see different types of courses;
a lack of self-centeredness on a golf course.

[Kalen Braley]

Besides being "one of the finest minds in golf"  , I'd say a bare bones minimum might be...

a passion for golf architecture;
an education on the core principles of golf architecture;
a willingness to travel;
a willingness to see different types of courses;
a lack of self-centeredness on a golf course.

Ahh cmon Mac,

What you mean to say was....

"A passion for Doak or C&C golf courses"
"A willingness to travel to Doak or C&C courses"
"A willingness to see different Doak or C&C courses"
"A lack of like for any other courses...except Doak or C&C"

 

[Terry Lavin]

C'mon. It's all about access whoring. No golf skill required (GW anyway) and it helps to like the courses that your publisher likes while dissing those he is churlish about.

[Greg Tallman]

honestly i wouls say:

1. Competent player - i do not see how a 28 handicap can determine great design}
2. Well traveled - if you haven't seen enough you cannot rate what is great
3. Focused - one who is not swayed by boat trips, private jets, $10,000 bottles of wine, designers name and EYE CANDY... etc
4. Objective - one who can recognize greatness from someone they do ot necessarily like as a designer

AND


ORANGE PANTS!

[Carl Rogers]

I started a similarly titled thread a few months back. 

I immediately concluded that I was not qualified to be a rater (me... building architect, mid single digit handicapper, life long self taught golfer) because an individual would have to travel the world ... Au, NZ UK etc and be of independent means (no need for a regular job, no family etc). 

In my view, there are maybe 15 qualified golf course raters in the world.

It is very clear to me that many raters are in a formulaic rut.

[Anthony Gray]

honestly i wouls say:

1. Competent player - i do not see how a 28 handicap can determine great design}
2. Well traveled - if you haven't seen enough you cannot rate what is great
3. Focused - one who is not swayed by boat trips, private jets, $10,000 bottles of wine, designers name and EYE CANDY... etc
4. Objective - one who can recognize greatness from someone they do ot necessarily like as a designer

AND


ORANGE PANTS!

  I agree with all of this but the EYE CANDY. Eye candy and aesthics are all part of the feel of the course. The course should dress the part just like the orange panted golfer. Also the night life around the course should be considered. Is there sufficent fun or do you need to bring your own.

  Anthony