I would have to say that the most powerful statement from the recent Digest ratings is the inclusion of no less than 14 Tom Fazio layouts in the top 100.

Clearly, raters have made a statement in their preference for what he creates. The list includes ...

* indicates new addition

#17 Wade Hampton
#20 Shadow Creek
#21 Victoria National
#35 Butler National (co-credit w Uncle George)
#43 Flint Hills*
#52 Sand Ridge* (previously rated in top 100)
#54 The Quarry at LaQuinta
#65 Dallas National
#76 The Estancia
#78 Sage Valley*
#83 The Preserve*
#85 Black Diamond (Quarry)
#90 Hudson National*
#92 Galloway National*

For those who have not seen the latest Digest issue there is a full article by Ron Whitten that itemizes his thoughts on the nature of why Fazio has been so successful in terms of the layouts that get rated by Digest raters. It is certainly worth reading.

In my own mind, Fazio has very few layouts that really strike me as outstanding -- worthy of inclusion. Two of my personal favorites aren't among the top 100 by Digest -- Glenwild in Park City, UT and Karsten Creek in OK, although KC is rated among the top 100 public.

Fazio has built a clear "brand" that strikes certain ratings panels in very clear ways. I believe his formula though is one that has repeated itself in a number of instances (my portfolio of played TF courses is 55+) and I have to wonder how Digest raters -- generally low handicap types who favor more demanding layouts -- would ascribe such a high value when so many of TF layouts are clear beauty contests that rarely go beyond the surface level.

Be curious to the comments of others -- for those who are anti-TF 100% of the time please spare your fire since little will be gained in the discussion.

Jim Fazio (Is that Tom Fazio's son ?) has the same number of courses in the top 100 as Coore and Crenshaw.

    Yes, Fazio does have a wealth of "good" courses on the list this year.  I am definately a fan of the kind of architecture Doak, C&C, Hanse, and DeVries are doing, but if we forget about what Fazio has done to some great classical courses, and just look at his original work, albeit it is not the style most of us prefer, it's pretty darn good.

     Just wondering if anyone has been up to Spring Hill Golf Club in Wayzata, Minnesota.  This track definately has some potential.  Once it matures and the course settles, it will be another Fazio course in contention.  It has great greens, they just changed the sand to a more playable type, and they have a US Open qualifier in 2006.  A great course started by a great group of people. I thank you for the time I was able to spend with them.  One of the best manicured in the Midwest.

     Pictures to come later!!
 
   

Jim Fazio also designed "The Country Club of the Poconos at Big Ridge" on almost 1000 acres and 12 MILES of cartpaths near Marshalls Creek, PA.

It's the worst course on the planet, considering that he was unable to find a single good golf hole on land that inhabits half the Pocono region.

I'm sorry but I can't see how 14 of fazio course should be ranked in the top 100 Greatest maybe the top 100 modern but not the greatest. I guess if you build enough crap that somebody will like it. I hope that this is due to politics and that people really don't think that many of his courses should be ranked that high.

I personally don't care about rankings any more but it makes me sad when raters tell the public that these courses are great when they really are not. I also feel that raters should not recieve any special treatment from golf courses when it comes free greens fees, free meals, and etc. I'm sorry but they should pay, no matter who they are.

Also traditon is what made this great game and to say that it is no longer important is a mistake. Tell me what Fazio has done to have a impact on this game? Yeah, he has ruined several old classic courses. I'm sorry but there can not be enough importance said about the Golden age of golf course design. While things are changing today it is sad that we are letting things get out of control. Call me old fashion, but as Bob Seger said about Music " It just ain't got the same soul"

Don't get me wrong there are modern architects that do build top 100 courses. But they are not building over 10 courses a year which is most likely why they don't recieve as much credit because they take their time and put their heart and soul into it.  

Matt,

I'll defend the GD raters preference for Fazio courses in this regard: perhaps GD's rating panel represents a broad spectrum of golfers. After all, the beauty thing really is appreciated by the vast majority of people playing the game.

I'm fine with a publication like Golf Digest coming from that point of view.......as long as it is not my only source of information about what is worth sampling in the world of golf architecture.

It's fine with me that GD might not include or think highly of a place like Friars Head. Those panelists can take whatever point of view they want. It is one publication, one source of information about golf courses......certainly not anything that will dictate my limited travel schedule.

He gives you alot of eye candy off the tee, and very ordinary green/bunker complex's. While you could initially say wow when standing on the tee, by the time you get to the green, look around, you say to yourself...I'd don't get it, did he get lazy or not care that the rest of the hole not match up with the beauty of the tee?

Cary,

You can do better...we already like you and your beautiful wife so who are you trying to impress with this useless and insulting comment.  Please give some specific examples of courses you feel fit this model....and I seriously doubt if they are any of the above 14..

Guys ... guys ... guys ...

You've ALL missed my original point -- Digest prides itself on having low handicap golfers on their pane. The Digest raters tend to favor more demanding courses (e.g. Bethpage Black, Medinah #3, etc, etc).

But the TF style couse is not about difficulty or exacting details with strategic impulses throughout the round. It's about creating eye candy beauty. I have to wonder if all those supposed low handicap golfers were seduced by the TF "brand" name layouts that includes no less than 14 of his designs.

Frankly, I don't see how half of them even remotely touch the top 100 and I am certainly not one of those 100% dedicated anti-TF ranters.

Matt Ward:

It hasn't been my experience that low handicap players are any different than the average Joe.

Both seemed to be taken in by beautiful surroundings. Neither seems to have that much interest in golf architecture.

If I recall correctly, someone like Tom Huckaby has said it many times: not that many people are really all that into golf architecture, period.

Funny thing. I once met a fellow who told me he was a rater for Golf Digest who asked me:

"What's a Redan?"

A few observations.  I think I've only played one TF course, Pelican Hill - Ocean about 15 years ago, and I don't remember much.  So I can't comment on his work.  As a result of my friends here, though, I don't seek them out to play.  I would like to play Victoria National or Wade Hampton someday.  They seem to be two of his best.

Today's Masters broadcast got me thinking about how a Tom Fazio course plays for the pros.  Although I have little data to support this theory, my hypothesis is a Tom Fazio course does not separate the best players from the worst by a wide margin; in other words, they have a small standard scoring deviation.  The last two years at Mirasol, the scores were very close at the top, a one stroke victory for Todd Hamilton, and three way playoff this year.  Augusta looks similar to me this year.  Nobody's really low, everybody's packed in there real close.  Long hitters and medium hitters seem to be equally represented near the top.  At Augusta there seem to be two types of pin positions, ones that yield a lot of birdies, and others that don't yield any.  At 6:30 EST there were no birdies on 16, 17, or 18.

To summarize, does Fazio build courses (and greens) that yield two kinds of holes, very possible birdie or hard par?  Do his courses separate the best players from the field?

Also, there are two architects who are regularly referred to as having a formulaic approach to design, Tom Fazio and Seth Raynor.  Is Tom Fazio the modern-day Seth Raynor?  One is loved and one is severely criticized here.  Like nearly everyone here, I find the Raynor designs discussed here to be fascinating.  

I have not played any on this Fazio list. I am curious to hear how World Woods PB, the best Fazio course that I have played, stacks up against this list?

Thanks

Pine Barrens is Fazio's second best work in FL. The first is John's Island West. How this course continually escapes the rankings, is a mystery.

Scott:

Good question ...

I'd place WW / PB very highly -- somewhere in the top 20% of the 55+ TF courses I have personally played.

The best TF courses I liked immensely include the following ...

Dallas National
Glenwild
Karsten Creek
Galloway National
Black Diamond (Quarry)

I don't see how Wade Hampton gets thaaaaat high of a placement -- ditto Shadow Creek.

I would place WW / PB in the same vein with Victoria National. Personally I would not have VN where Digest places it but I would still include it among my personal top 100 in the USA. WW / PB is a very well done layout -- like it said it belies the pro-forma TF design that is often overloaded with elements that usually are at the periphery rather than the core. The setting and juxtaposition of the holes are also a bit beyond the "happy meal" routings that often are the norm with TF layouts.

What amazes me about TF is that there are clear instances when his work is clearly outstanding and where there is substance beyond all the surface level eye-candy and pristine turf examples one hears mentioned on GCA. I just have to wonder why the consistency isn't there.

Goes to show that design is a details oriented business. Pumping out golf courses in such a fast fashion can preclude such a situation from happening.