1) the proportionality viewpoint is a poor one. The idea that CB Macdonald or Alister Mackenzie know more about golf and golf architecture than Bill Coore or Tom Doak is fiddlesticks. I am a proponent for improvement through experience and learning. Humans get better at MOST things over time. That they *wouldn’t* get better at making golf courses seems off to me.
2) I also don’t buy the patina and survival concepts. If we had the technology to plop a person down on the bottom end of the fairway on #2 at Ballyneal and then magically teleport them immediately to the 3rd fairway at Machrihanish, I’d bet cash money that the votes for which one is oldest would be dead split. Heck, I’ll go one farther. Do the same exercise with 3 at NGLA and 16 at Old Macdonald.
The fact that golf course enthusiasts and raters can somehow wave a magic wand and totally dismiss the age and reputation of a golf course is wishful thinking. Consensus over time penalizes modern works.
Consensus (and in this thread the List courses that make the debate) IS Time -
or at least Time is its parent; and as a word or concept, Modern is just Time's most recent birth...of course this latest child can't/won't be said to be the equal of its older brother (Consensus)...Consensus has already gone through puberty, gone to school, graduated, got a job, has their own family, and has done everything to good effect. It's name is "Pine Valley" at birth, but over time, down on the street, we call it Consensus (maybe "Connie")...and we might start calling the younger brother too, once he's gone out and done some stuff.
1. While there are a plethora of things human beings get better at, the Arts/the Making doesn't seem like one to me...are we painting any better than Renaissance masters or even the Impressionists just a century ago? Is anyone doing better than Bach or Mozart or Gershwin or the Beatles? How about construction building or facility? It might take le$$ time to build a gleaming office tower or SoFi stadium but are any of these better than the great medieval cathedrals? Maybe the hot term is "better" but that should demonstrate its all subjective...I reserve "better" for myself...if many agree, there's a consensus but it doesn't mean anything, even commercially...
When I first encountered this Board in 2005, the ethos was so diametrically opposed to all this list geshrie...the "consensus" for several seasons was that Lists were almost purely a commercial consideration, and if you really want to evaluate/enjoy architecture you hadn't seen and put it in context of what you HAVE seen, you went to the "consensus" of individual expert voices and thus inured the "consensus" of time honored voices flowing from the investigation...you prolly didn't read Dick Wilson or Desmond Muirhead or even Pete Dye, you read Thomas or CBM or Ross or Wind...
I don't know how things got where every 10th thread is about it...just eat your spinach, and live 150 years and wait, Ballyneal may surpass Pine Valley in the consensus of 2125 rankings... but it probably won't be upon a static set measurables, just like it isn't now.