Carlyle:  What other course would you have in there?  I can't think of one that's even close.

Lou and Matt:  I know you're going to say Dallas National, but it's not ten minutes old yet.  So let's not bother with that discussion now, since I haven't seen it yet.  Any other candidates, or was DIGEST's last list correct at the time of publication?

Maybe it's because raters think that hills mean good golf design? We don't have many "Top rated " courses but we've got a lot of top rated golfers. I wonder how that happened?

Maybe it's because raters don't like really long flat courses that have a lot of wind? How many hills have I seen at St. Andrews?

Maybe it's because the PGA doesn't have a clue holding so many tournaments in Texas every year? I know, it's that big Texas oil money.

Maybe it's because it's Jan. 11th and I'm going out to play in another hour, and you're not?

  Texsport

P.S. And here I thought that so many folks on this site felt that the raters were full of it anyway.

Carlyle,

Alaska is two and one half times the size of Texas.

What top 100 course can they claim ?

It's not about size, it's about historical and current population centers.

Wow, I almost believed Pat for a second there, and then he threw in the comment about current population centers.  Are Dallas / Ft.Worth, Houston, San Antonio, Austin not big enough to build decent courses?  Maybe this is a great example of the argument about location being a HUGE factor in the ranking of a course.  Considering the winds and firmness of ground in parts of Texas, why hasn't somebody pulled a Macdonald and replicated TOC in Texas and created a Top100 course?

I am a bit confussed as well. I will say there are plenty of courses in Texas and I mean plenty that are better than anything at Reynolds Plantation other than Cuscowilla. The whole top 100 creates such subjective analysis that I am not sure about the top 100. I mean there are courses like Seminole, Cypress, Pacific Dunes, Sand Hills etc that are so special they belong in their own class. I almost feel there is a top 40 or so then the next 300 to 500 are almost interchangable. Texas would be well represented in a larger list. There is a bravado about Texas that does not seem to think it matter what others think and maybe the promotion is not what you find other places. I might add that bravado does not extend to college football these days lol

Tom D:

Common -- let's be a bit fair now. You're the guy with Pac Dunes and it's included among the best in the nation after only being opened for such a short time -- why can't Dallas National also make such a claim?

I've said this before -- I would put Dallas National and Glenwild (Park City, UT) as among the best 3-4 TF designs I have played. Clearly, Dallas National is eons beyond what others call themselves as "golf courses" in the Lone Star State. Dallas National also goes beyond being just the best in Texas -- it's clearly a top 100 course and if Colonial is included then it most certainly makes the grade very comfortably.

Tiger B:

The physical size of a state and the amount of courses that inhabit the landscape are immaterial and completely irrelevant to what constitutes superior golf course architecture. If one had a contest for the state with the most "worst" golf courses you can be sure that the Lone Star State would even surpass the state I love so much -- Florida.

P.S. You do make a point about the "interchangeable" aspect of courses. Let me also point out there are literally numerous solid candidates in the Northeast and Mideast that get far tooooooooooooo little attention. Plenty of focus sometimes develops in the ratings game to those courses that are "new" and happen to be locales few have ever been to.

I have taken people from around the country to a number of low key courses / clubs in New Jersey and the reaction has usually been very surprised that such courses consistently fly below the radar screen (e.g. Hollywood, Forsgate, Montclair, etc, etc).

Let's not forget the bulk of Texas has some of the most blah looking non-descript land one can imagine. In my opinion -- quality land is what elevates the nature of the great golf courses -- of course, in tandem with the superior architecture produced on such canvases. The exception? Visit Dallas National and you will see why people like Lou Duran and I speak so highly of it.

Let me also point out that clearly there is the possibility of future "great" courses being built there. But, given the track record and the natural obstacles one encounters the prognosis isn't that promising IMHO.

Texans generally have an ego to match the size of their state but on the golf meter the results are closer to pip squeak than jumbo.

Tiger:

There's a H-U-G-E difference between "solid" (your word) and courses that merit top 100 status as the best in the business. Your intial focus was the Top 100 -- not just courses that are solid. Dallas National meets that threshold in my book -- the rest of the courses -- including Colonial -- doesn't.

I'll say this again -- you might be surprised as to how many superior courses are rarely played, let alone discussed, here on GCA from the Northeast and Mideast. They have the land, the routing and the compelling architecture but are often lumped into high profile areas and don't get much notice / recognition.

Florida has plenty of golf -- it's akin to fast food places -- sad to say but that doesn't add up to cuisine in my book. Maybe for others it does.

You can push the editors of the golf magazines to rate the best practice facilities -- that might be the ticket for many Florida courses -- ditto Texas because the actual course architecture isn't that noteworthy in most of the instances.

P.S. I have only played sparingly in Louisana -- I get very nervous when courses are literally b-e-l-o-w sea level!

P.S. Plus -- Although it requires a bit of a trek I would thoroughly recommend playing Doak's new layout in Lubbock --The Rawls Course -- the wind you referred to is clearly an issue when playing there.

Tom Doak:

You asked about other courses listed by GD in their top 100 that would not be worthy candidates. I'll give that some thought and post later -- possibly on another thread.

After giving it some thought -- I agree that there is some level in which the maximum superior architecture begins to level off -- I don't know if I would put the number at 40 but it does raise a valid point that while a course may be a top 100 it may not be among the ultimate "must play" layouts.

Tom Ross,

What were the populations of those cities in 1900, 1920 and 1940 ?  And how many golf courses were built in those cities from 1900 to 1940 ?

Their population growth tended to be much more spread out geographically rather then centered in cities and their immediate suburbs, such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago and other cities.

The Dallas/Fort Worth airport alone is the size of Manhattan.

Carlyle:  What other course would you have in there?  I can't think of one that's even close.

I'm not familiar with any of the courses in Texas.  I just thought it was remarkable that a top-tier course hasn't been produced in a state that possesses so many courses and so many talented players.

The following is Golf Digest's ranking of the top Texas courses, with Colonial being the only Top 100 U.S. Course:

1. Colonial C.C., Fort Worth [1] *
2. Brook Hollow C.C., Dallas [4] *
3. Whispering Pines G.C., Trinity [2]*
4. Champions G.C. (Cypress Creek), Houston [3] *
5. The C. at Carlton Woods, The Woodlands *
6. Briggs Ranch G.C., San Antonio *
7. Preston Trail G.C., Dallas [6] *
8. Shadow Hawk G.C., Richmond [5] *
9. River Oaks C.C., Houston [11] *
10. Royal Oaks C.C., Houston *
11. Crown Colony C.C., Lufkin [9]*
12. Horseshoe Bay Resort & C.C. (Ram Rock) [10]*
13. Barton Creek C.C. (Fazio Foothills), Austin [7] *«
14. The Tribute G.C., The Colony *«
15. Austin C.C. [18]*
16. Champions G.C. (Jackrabbit), Houston *
17. The C. at Comanche Trace Ranch, Kerrville *
18. Deerwood C., Kingwood *
19. Pine Dunes Resort & G.C., Frankston *«
20. The Tradition Cse. at Cypresswood, Spring [15] *«
21. The Quarry G.C., San Antonio [13] *«
22. La Cantera G.C. (Palmer), San Antonio *«
23. Hill Country G.C., S. Antonio *«
24. Barton Creek C.C. (Fazio Canyons), Austin [12] *«
25. Meadowbrook Farms G.C., Katy [17] *«

Key:
* walking permitted
« public access

Mike the original is great fun. I have not played the Palmer as yet though.

 

Hey Y'all... its going to be 70°F today and tomorrow in Houston, so go talk amongst yourselves about ink words on glossy paper whose purpose is to make money ..  I'm going out for some field work at Memorial Park lunch.. and tomorrow afternoon for 27 at the WCC..

Who really gives a hoot about ranking courses that are either 1) antiques, 2) private and singular in nature, or 3) so expensive that with out complimentary passes, or vacation type economics, folks would only play once..

Golf is alive and thriving down here, its a year round sport or game or what-ever you wish to call it.. that we actually have the opportunity to play in a wide variety of weather conditions, not just 3 dozen times scattered during the spring, summer, and fall.  

If it helps your self esteem to associate with greatness that you can't enjoy, then go for it.. If you have priviledge, great for you.. but give me a break about TX gca.. it ain't Philly, it ain't LI, we didn't have the glaciers carving things up into valleys and depositing tons of sand and rock debris in hilly morraines etc.. give me the hundred odd public access courses and 200 privates within 50 miles of downtown Houston..  and let me play.  

The new stuff only gets better down here, and at least we have new stuff.

Pat Mucci, here's Houston's population data..

year    USrank   population

1900       85         44633
1910       68         78800  
1920       45        138276    
1930       26        292352  
1940       21        384514  
1950       14        596163  
1960        7        938219  
1970        6       1232802
1980        5       1595138
1990        4       1630553
2000        4     ~1953631 with SMSA ~ 4MM folks

p.s. yes I feel better now
p.s.s.  Other census data for the Pop hypothesis

values in 1000's
Cities   Dal   FW   DFW   NYC   Newk      Philly
1920   159   106   265   5620   415   1824
1930   260   163   423   6930   442   1951
1940   295   178   473   7455   430   1931
1950   434   279   713   7892   437   2072
1960   679   356   1035   7782   405   2003
1970   844   393   1237   7896   382   1949
1980   904   385   1289   7072   329   1688
1990   1007   448   1455   7323   275   1586
1996   1053   480   1533   7381   269   1478

Bob,

Several times.  It is a very nice course- an inland Harbour Town with much better topography- and a perennial on the Dallas Morning News's annual list of the best Texas courses (included at #1 in the past).

It is a TX top 10 in my book, several notches below Dallas National, and more of a peer golf-wise to Colonial CC.  When the course is running fast, it can be a lot of fun.  An equal # of 3s, 4s, and 5s on the back is unusual but it works well in terms of variety and use of the land.

Even though it is in east Texas, the course no longer has a tranquil, rural feeling about it.  The residential development around it was poorly planned, and the mix of housing and proximity to the course detracts from the golf experience.  The clubhouse area has the feel sometimes of a strip (retail) center.

Crown Colony is probably Devlin & von Hagge's best work, and a course I always enjoy playing.  Pine Dunes, an hour+ further west near Frankfort, is a course which I like as much, and the setting is superior.

Bob, I will second Lou's assessment of Crown Colony. He and I played there together once. The only negative is the residental developement. Much like Whispering Pines, it is a very solid golf course.  Whispering Pines has a far superior feel, due to the lack of developement. I would drive up there any weekend to play. Both are very good courses and about 45 minutes apart.