Adam -

If Matt thinks course ratings can be objective, then he ought to be proud of the comparison. But I don't know if that is something Matt actually believes.

Bob

Bob:

"Cateris paribus"??

"Sui generis"??

Are you, by any chance, and in the premises, a lawyer??

Tom -

What a ridiculous assumption. Why just this morning I said to Betsy, "Mutatis mutandi, scrambling eggs at home for breakfast would as fun as going out."

She responded, "Well, ok, but such views are subject to the reductio ad absurdum that we never go out for breakfast again."

I said that my views about breakfast this morning were pure dicta with no precendential significance.

Relieved, she started cooking the eggs. So you see, that's just how we talk here at home.

Bob



 

They have a distinctly Latin flavor.

"The debates between Crane, Behr and Mackenzie were the most vicious in the history of gca."

No they weren't. They weren't even half as vicious as WayneM and JayF's debate on here today or even my own debates (and Wayne's) with Moriartless and MacWoodenhead.  

Agreed. Man, that's ugly.

Bob

Crane's Ideal Course:

1.  #1 Pine Valley without trees and with improved contour in front of and on green.
2.  #10 National "with slight improvements"
3.  #3 Kittansett lengthened a bit
4.  #16 Pine Valley with green and fairway visible, new diagonal bunker in front
5.  #14 Myopia drive with #10 Essex second shot
6.  #4 Essex without trees and new sand hazards
7.  #12 Merion with natural sand dunes instead of trees
8.  #12 Pine Valley
9.  #4 Brae Burn without OOB, trees, and with enlarged bunkers
10.#13 Country Club
11.#17 National
12.#1 Essex
13.#3 Pine Valley
14.#16 Pinehurst 2
15.#9 Kernwood
16.#4 Lido
17.#17 Pine Valley
18.#5 Myopia
= 6604 yards

JMorgan:

The hole I really don't quite understand is Myopia's 5th as the ideal course's 18th.

That particular hole was sort of an everlasting problem in the mind of Myopia's Herbert Leeds and it seems that in the opinion of most everyone the hole on that course that really shines is the 4th, particularly its green and surrounds.

The present fairway bunkering on the 5th however (and combined with the green bunkering) is very good and very strategic and certainly would've been a whole lot more so back when Crane made that list.

JM, TE, Bob
thanks for that. When he brings together his 'ideal course' Crane seems to be about one thing; when he formulates a system by which to rank ALL courses, about another. Unfortunately, I couldn't find again the long article where he describes his point system (but if I remember, he scores just about every element you can imagine). Here's something related, and self explanatory:

Joshua Crane is one of America's keenest students of golf as a game—from the technique of playing to the rating of golf courses by a point system which he developed and first outlined in GOLF ILLUSTRATED. Mr. Crane recently completed a tour of Scotch courses—with which he is thoroughly familiar—solely for the purpose of rating. The first complete rating—Sunningdale—appeared in the previous issue. In The Field of London recently, Mr. Crane summarized the ratings of fourteen courses abroad as follows:

Muirfield – 86.5
Gleneagles  - 84.6
Prince's – 83.8
Troon - 83
St. George's – 82.1
Hoylake – 81.5
Walton Heath -80.5
Sunningdale – 80.1
Turnberry – 79.9
Royal Cinque Ports  - 79.1
Prestwick – 78.7
Westward Ho! – 75.3
North Berwick – 72.6
St. Andrews – 71.8

When Mr. Charles Ambrose, of London, discovered St. Andrews at the tail-end of the list be took exception, and told Mr. Crane what he thought of him in a letter to London Golf Illustrated. Mr. Crane saw the Ambrose letter and replied; then Harold Hilton wrote an editorial and Mr. Ambrose an article, and some more letters followed. St. Andrews, of course, has a sentimental halo that the golf world deeply respects and reveres. Somehow—to the sentimentalist at any rate—the footrule seems out of place there. The point involved, however, is that Mr. Crane is solely interested in working out a system by which all golf courses can be rated. This he is conscientiously doing. He is seeking facts for the information of those interested. Instead of publishing Mr. Crane's detailed rating of St. Andrews, as was planned for this issue, we have secured his views of the reception accorded his ratings and other data of interest.—Editor.

Peter,

Quickly, here's the break down:

Two divisions:
1. Design & Layout 1000 points
Tee 40
Rough 80
Fairway 250
Traps 140
Greens 250
Parallel holes 20
Visibility 200
Distance 20

2. Condition & Upkeep 1000 points
Tee 80
Rough 130
Fairway 300
Traps 100
Greens 300
Parallel holes 10
Caddies 50
Surroundings 30

Got to run, but I'll add my commentary/responses later ... wanted to get this in for your discussion.

If I remember correctly, Crane also specified the sand used at Myopia for all bunkers.  

Summer teeth?

Rich - I think I went out once with your caddy's niece.

Bob

Bob

Was she an ex-coal miner too?

Rich