While the tours didn't exist 100 years ago, hasn't it always been the case that most courses were measured against the best players? Sure, pros still went where the money was on offer, but the courses which became famous are those which the best players played. I think pro/top am validation is sought because it always has been the case to one degree or another.
That said, this is back when "championship course" meant something more than a minimum yardage requirement. It was also a time when top player validation was simply one source of validation...writers, people in powerful golf administration positions and architects were also sources of validation. In a word, validation sources were more balanced than today.
One good thing today is there are so many great courses that will never host pros that punters can use social media and sites like this to validate courses.
Ciao
Sean,
completely throwing out the infrastructure, lodging, location criteria,
why is it that such greats that you highlight-
Kington, Aiken Golf Club, Palmetto, Aberdovey, Pennard, Swinley, Northwest (which I'm selecting for you as I know you will love)
or many of the wonderful compact gems you enjoy...
will never host professional events?
I think Aberdovey and Pennard have hosted very low level pro events...regional/sectional stuff. I think two things are at play...one...these are old courses...why would they suddenly become relavant to pros? Two...too short except in Swinley's case...they could care less.
Ciao